COVID-19 Outbreak Information Updates (Reboot) [over 150.000,000 US cases (est.), 6,422,520 US hospitilizations, 1,148,691 US deaths.] (6 Viewers)

[St. Widge]

As far as i know that is correct. Came from our labor attorney.

I'm no labor attorney, but my understanding is that HIPAA prohibits the release of the names of employees that test positive. I know that my office does not announce the names of people who test positive and they have consulted with labor lawyers.

 

[Saint_Ward]

Is anyone familiar with HIPPA laws and employers releasing names of someone who tested positive? It's been released that someone at one of our locations has tested positive, but they said they can't release the name because of HIPPA laws. Kinda pisses me off considering I went to that office this morning and no one said a damn thing. They "disinfected the office".

What Employers Need to Know About HIPAA

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to affect everyday business operations across the country, employers are confronting a variety of issues on how to handle these disruptions. The intent of this

www.natlawreview.com

 

[faceman]

I'm no labor attorney, but my understanding is that HIPAA prohibits the release of the names of employees that test positive. I know that my office does not announce the names of people who test positive and they have consulted with labor lawyers.

In your work it's known as attorney/ client privilege. It's the same with medical. Trust this old manager

 

[brandon8283]

Those of you who had been banned from the original thread feel free to participate in this new thread.

I got bounced waaaaaay back for a somewhat political post that had been far surpassed in recent weeks in terms of vitriol.

Glad I'm getting a second chance. There's been quite a few times where I've had relevant information to share relative to school districts in Mississippi that I've not been able to share.

 

[Saint_Ward]

Well, Puerto Rico is a potential hot spot now. I've got some older relatives there.

hasn't shown up else where yet...

 

[Tapxe]

Just found out someone was positive in the office room where I work. No name was released, but it appears it has spread to the person sitting right next to him who was in for several more days. I'm starting to feel unwell and it's been 13 days since that person was there. No disinfecting was done, no notification of possible infection for 13 days.

I'm not happy atm. Is this something which would be negligence?

 

[Saint_Ward]

Regarding PR...

from the AP. https://apnews.com/e21fe791cbf84319ec72c0927a65b39b

But the numbers include both molecular swab tests for current infections and serological tests for antibodies, and independent health experts complained that some of the results date back as far as April, so they don’t provide an accurate picture of the current situation.

“We keep watching the virus through a rearview mirror,” Puerto Rico epidemiologist Roberta Lugo told The Associated Press, adding that the government keeps taking decisions based on faulty and incomplete data.

 

[DaveXA]

hasn't shown up else where yet...

It think BNO uses several different sources. Not entirely sure where they got the number, but they've put out some pretty reliable Covid numbers as far as i know.

 

[DaveXA]

Regarding PR...

from the AP. https://apnews.com/e21fe791cbf84319ec72c0927a65b39b

Now that makes some sense. I guess the question would be where do you put those new numbers? On the date of the testing or when the results are determined, or something else?

 

[faceman]

Just found out someone was positive in the office room where I work. No name was released, but it appears it has spread to the person sitting right next to him who was in for several more days. I'm starting to feel unwell and it's been 13 days since that person was there. No disinfecting was done, no notification of possible infection for 13 days.

I'm not happy atm. Is this something which would be negligence?

What's insidious about this disease is a carrier can be asymptomatic for up to two weeks and spreading it without knowing. Jmho, but
negligence would be hard to prove if the person who spread it showed no symptoms

 

[Tapxe]

What's insidious about this disease is a carrier can be asymptomatic for up to two weeks and spreading it without knowing. Jmho, but
negligence would be hard to prove if the person who spread it showed no symptoms

They've been out since 26th of June so something was obviously up. Could have at least let us know someone was possibly ill and let us go back to full time wfh.

 

[Goatman Saint]

We can’t even bounce someone if they have a fever. We simply have to let them go through the line with a statement that we need to rescan your temperature later, as in after everyone leaves so they will not be publicly identifiable and then we refer them to HR because under California law at least, we cannot send someone home. HR can encourage them to go home, but we cannot send them home.

 

[faceman]

They've been out since 26th of June so something was obviously up. Could have at least let us know someone was possibly ill and let us go back to full time wfh.

I understand your anger, but an employer cannot release an employees medical condition.

 

[Tapxe]

I understand your anger, but an employer cannot release an employees medical condition.

I understand that, but they can protect other workers. No names needed to be involved, but the potential exposure should have set off alarms to remove other people from the area.

 

[DavidM]

Just found out someone was positive in the office room where I work. No name was released, but it appears it has spread to the person sitting right next to him who was in for several more days. I'm starting to feel unwell and it's been 13 days since that person was there. No disinfecting was done, no notification of possible infection for 13 days.

I'm not happy atm. Is this something which would be negligence?

I think this is a relatable real world problem to the members here, but it's tough without straying into governmental policy, as well as employer policy, and personal mitigation compliance, so I'll limit my comments to say I expect this sort of situation to play out for a lot more people, exacerbated by the following circumstances.

Supplemental unemployment is running out soon, and I note that only to mark the end of July as a time to keep an eye on, where both the health and economic emergencies could begin to worsen beyond current rates. Assuming a new supplemental relief package isn't passed, people will either be forced back into unsafe working environments as jobs become available, escalating spread, or remain unemployed and/or underfunded, worsening economic numbers.