Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE HSE HAS updated its online advice for close contacts of confirmed Covid-19 cases who received a booster vaccine to fall in line with what was advised by public health experts last month.
The advice also applies to people with a confirmed Covid infection since 1 December.
The discrepancy was previously highlighted by The Journal’s coronavirus newsletter.
Since 14 January, when major changes to the rules were introduced, boosted close contacts have not been required to fully restrict their movements (defined, essentially, as staying at home and not meeting with others).
Before the rules were changed public health officials on NPHET noted in a letter to the government that this advice was underpinned with a requirement to act with caution in a number of specified settings.
However, authorities faced criticism for not placing more of a focus on this fine print, including that most of this additional advice was omitted from the HSE.ie close contacts advice section, except a requirement to use antigen tests and wear a high-grade mask.
Immunologist Professor Christine Loscher told The Journal’s coronavirus newsletter last month there had been a ‘real dropping of the ball’.
She said a focus on not having to restrict your movements draws attention away from the fact that some level of careful behaviour is required.
The advice was contained in a letter to government from the chief medical officer on 11 January, was accepted by the Minister for Health and came into effect three days later.
The letter stated although there was no need to restrict movements fully, boosted close contacts should:
However, until at least 28 January, HSE.ie included just the advice to wear a high-grade mask for 10 days and the existing requirement to take three antigen tests over seven days.
Since then, the HSE website has been updated to include a ‘protect others’ section, advising boosted close contacts – as well as close contacts who had a confirmed Covid infection since 1 December - to:
In addition to the three required antigen tests over seven days, it also advised the boosted close contacts to take a self-test test before:
Anyone with a recent confirmed infection is not currently required to take an antigen test in these situations.
Close contacts in other situations are still required to restrict their movements.
The HSE press office previously said that ‘all the required measures are outlined on the HSE website, which is continuously updated in response to policy changes and public feedback’.
At the time of writing, the advice for close contacts to work from home does not appear on gov.ie, despite appearing in both the chief medical officer’s letter and now on HSE.ie.
The current advice is due to remain in place until at least 28 February.
The National Public Health Emergency Team (NPHET) are set to meet on 17 February to discuss mask guidelines.
The HSE’s chief clinical officer Dr Colm Henry said he doesn’t forsee any changes in guidelines over the coming weeks.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
“Keep the recovery going”
TDs: Wahey, we get a €5k pay rise!
Health workers: Where’s our pay rise?
Fine Gael: Well, we haven’t recovered that much now…
@Franklin Roosevelt: the economy has recovered very significantly since the 2007 implosion , I know that’s not popular acknowledge here but it is true
@Franklin Roosevelt: apologies hadn’t read comment properly
Maybe a.silly statement but ” voluntary organisations” funded by hse . What makes it voluntary if the workers are being paid ?
@Chris Tobin: as far as i know that title entitles them to legally receive charitable donations. So the HSE funding isn’t 100% of their income.
@Stephen Foster: voluntary only in name for tax reasons so
@Chris Tobin: They are service providers to the HSE who would have to do the support and rehab work they do. Section 39 groups as is mentioned in the article.
Please check out the difference before statements that quiet simply are wrong and uninformed.
The HSE pay for the staffing of them to do the work, the charitable donations are used directly to help the clients more than they could if only relying on HSE funding
I honestly wish people would learn more about the section 39 groups before commenting . The misunderstanding above are frightening.
Funding was cut, wages were cut, so as not to affect the clients IE me and other disabled people who rely on these groups.
The charitable donations go in special activities or training for the clients.
The group that help me received a 64% increase in requests for support and had a 15% cut in funding.
DO THE MATH.
Are these people employees of the HSE though? It doesn’t sound like it as they are section 39 companies who receive funding from the HSE as they are effectively charities or do charity classified work. SIPTU are looking for the HSE to increase grants to these designated charity organisations it seems so that they can be used to fund salary increases. This is comparing apples with oranges surely. I’m not sure how this is comparable with PS pay increases.
@Sean @114: hse funded ” voluntary organisations” so
@Chris Tobin: they are providing funds. They are not the employer and there is no obligation on HSE to provide more funds for salaries as it is not the employer. SIPTU comparing apples to oranges here. The gripe is with the employer surely.
@Sean @114: No you have it wrong completely. Not surprising as a lot of people do. It would take too long to explain. Section 39 groups do work for the HSE and they are paid like any other service provider. The wages were cut in line with the PS wages and what they are asking for is parity.
@Gary Kearney: The HSE provide recurring grants for these agencies but are not a direct employer of their employees. You will find none of them on the HSE payroll.
@Alan McCartney: But this came up in 2014 relating to top-up payments.
The HSE engaged with “section 39 organisations regarding their obligations under their service agreements with it not to pay or subsidise salaries, expenses or other benefits which exceeded those normally paid in the public service.”
If their pay was capped then, they’re saying it would be fair to match it with HSE wages now.
@Alan McCartney: correct, not the employer. They may ‘subsidise’ section 39 agencies but they do not employ these staff. At least that was always my understanding. If they were let go would they receive a P45 from the HSE employer registered company? I don’t believe so.
@Fiona Fitzgerald: yes obligations under an agreement which sees funding received from the HSE. They set guidelines that certain payments should not exceed those in line with their own. It makes sense to do so. Nowhere would it make sense to agree to pay ‘increases’ for non employees.
@Alan McCartney: and they can match it all they want from current funding levels.
When the inefficiencies are gone from the health service and some savings made, review pay and apply where possible.
The amount of €uros wasted on administration for administration sake is what cripples the guys of the budget.
SIPTU won’t hear tell of it because our affects their income.
You’d cringe at the salaries the top table are paid in these unions. Jack O’ Connor is on €149k folks.
@Murph: examples please.
Sack them all and get the army to take over.
@Peter Barlow: What, march into nursing homes and help them all into clean uniforms? Shout out their medication in relays?
@Peter Barlow: I hope none of your family ever need these services.
have your say