Let me put a more fundamental question back to you: do you believe its the right of any enterprise to be allowed to place the public at risk and their own workers? That's what's happening here...and they're receiving subsidies to do so.
Businesses have to bend to doing what's best for the whole of the society they exist within. That's what they shoud have to do, but, of course, we have a government who encourages them to do the opposite. And they take advanatage of that.
I have zero sympathy or empathy with these sectors...not in a pandemic I dont. If it's a choice between keeping less people infected and seeing their businesses opening, I'm going with the former, with bells on.
Doesn’t this fall on the government and not the industry as a whole or the individual businesses that comprise it? Businesses have been given the green light to open- are you saying they should take a moral stance and remain closed, which without financial aid would probably result in permanent closure and loss of employment for many?
To directly answer your question; of course I don’t think any business should operate when there’s a chance to put the staff or customers at harm. But that question is too open and broad. I know this isn’t what you’re saying, but that question could be interpreted and applied to so many different places of work. For example, when I was 11 I had a minor crash at a go kart circuit. There were safeguards in place to protect people as best they can, but someone bumped into me and that was that. Should all go karting establishments be closed because there will always be a small risk to the public no matter how much safe guarding takes place? Look at Alton towers- admittedly it’s not often but when accidents occur at places like this closure never appears to be truly on the cards.
Now of course this is slightly different as places which previously would have basically zero risk to the staff or public now have extra risk due to coronavirus, I concede that and accept it completely. Also you’re not only taking the risk onto yourself, it’s the possibility to harm others which is different from the examples I gave. But my original point was and is that if there is no financial support for these businesses to remain closed, what course of action do you suggest they take? What course of action should each individual member of staff take?
I already partly know your answer as I’ve seen it written before, loss of earnings can not compare with loss of life. I mean, I can’t really argue with that can I? I honestly just don’t think these businesses have been left with any choice if they wish to survive.
www.theguardian.com
