But you do have to acknowledge that ‘the rules’, such as they are, are not really based on scientific fact. The rules we have today were rushed through by a certain politician who wanted to deflect attention away from other things - though being honest, it’s a shame he didn’t wait as we now have a war going off and I’m sure plenty couldn’t have been hidden by that. There’s no reason, other than appealing to base-level politics, why we couldn’t have continued to encourage mask-wearing or made a sensible challenge to the culture of presenteeism at work. A lot of jobs *can* be done at home (not all, that’s true) but if someone has a streaming cold but still feels they can work why not say ‘you know what, it’s more sensible that you stay at home rather than spreading this on your commute and around your office’. We’ve seen that the hygiene and distancing actions over the past couple of years have reduced things like flu and norovirus significantly, which surely is a good thing?
It really saddens me to see how binary the discussion about WFH has become. We’re still in a pandemic and it’s been a frightening and grief-filled time for many, many people. Not everyone is back to normal and not everyone is going to be able to feel normal overnight just because a politician says a disease is done with - 194 people still died yesterday with covid, and something like 45k people are ill with covid today who weren’t a week ago. Ultimately, living with covid is going to have to happen but that does mean accepting that people will continue to die - we should recognise that for those people where that’s already happened, or for those people living with higher risks, that’s still a scary thought. I also think that people can often say things like that in the abstract, but will probably feel quite differently when it’s their kids, partners, parents. Yes, we have to live with covid but it’s a big shift in mindset given how safe we’ve been from disease for most of our lifetimes.