04-21-2021, 02:21 PM
(04-21-2021, 01:42 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(04-21-2021, 11:44 AM)tomh009 Wrote: Well ... I was under the impression that workplace outbreaks only covered maybe 10-20% of the cases. However, that was based on trying to interpret the data on their dashboard, and it doesn't break the data out in this way, so it looks like it may have been a bad assumption.
I do wish they would publish this data regularly. (The percentages above seem to be based on only 32 cases, however!)
I mean, this has been the narrative I've heard for a while, both locally and broadly.
The fact that it is only based on 32 cases probably speaks to the failure of our government more than anything--certainly it is going to be too few to make any judgement on WHICH workplaces are most risky.
But it comes as little surprise to me, it is part of the amplified inequities in our society.
It makes sense, it's not shocking. It's just disappointing that it's been a guessing game this long because they have not published data.
But that data, as small a sample as it is, really says the paid sick days are crucial.