Why is temperature measurement good practice when it only gives an indication at a given time?
Temperature is an interesting measure, not so much when it’s negative but more so when it’s positive.
If a person doesn’t have temperature (no fever), we don’t know if he/she has COVID-19 or not but with all the other preventive measures in place, it can be assumed that the likelihood of being infected is less.
If a person has a temperature (fever), we still don’t know if he/she has COVID-19 but it is then more likely as compared to if there was no fever. So the temperature simply provides more information that will make it easier for an employer to recommend a course of action such as advise to stay at home and/or do testing and/or enter self-quarantine.
Should we generalize the temperature measurement of employees at the entrance to the company?
Local regulations will address this in some instances. If local regulations do not demand this, then company decisions need to be made in the context of local regulations surrounding individual privacy protection. In some instances, public health benefits (andfor example in contexts of declarationss of a “state of emergency”) will outweigh or change the balance of public interest vs. personal privacy.
What about building group immunity?
Group immunity occurs when at least 60% / 70% of population is immune (naturally or via immunization). Unfortunately, due to virulence of the COVID-19, aiming for group immunity at this point in time (that is to say prior to a vaccine being available) implies a very significant number of people will be hospitalized and/or die in this process. As long of an effective vaccine remains out of reach, group immunity cannot be reached without unacceptably high harms to society (and to some employees of the company).
Would you recommend wearing disposable gloves by all employees in the office space?
Gloves can sometimes make sense if people are manipulating many “external” objects from outside the company (e.g. in the case of a logistic platform or opening mail, etc.). For the employees working in administrative sector, regularly washing hands (e.g. hourly) and using one’s own keyboard, etc., (and not touching the face) should suffice. Furthermore, use of gloves doesn’t protect the person from touching his / her face and being contaminated.
Once it will be allowed to travel again between countries, would you still recommend to avoid travelling for business and replace them as much as possible by video conference?
Yes. The distribution of disease is different between countries, so a travel to a country where the dissemination of the virus is higher will generate a risk for the person to either be sick in a foreign country or not being able to return to his / her home country without requiring self-quarantine to prevent transmission. Similar discussions may be considered concerning travel between cities and/or regions within a given country.
How to practically adapt the workstation when returning to work?
Work stations should allow for a distance of at least 1 meter between workers, preferably more. This differs for people working in a manufactory or in administrative departments. Each person should have individual equipment (keyboard, mouse, etc.). Desks should be cleaned regularly and only be used by one person. To find more on this topic:
World Health Organization: Getting your workplace ready for COVID-19 factsheetFor companies whose activity allows it, do you recommend the continuation of telework beyond the official dates fixed by the governments?
Yes. In order to minimize the number of people potentially exposed to the virus through use of public transportation, it is advised that telework should be extended beyond such official dates. It remains important to be sensitive to various personalities and capacity to adapt to such measures. An individual risk-benefit assessment (depression, demotivation vs. productivity, decreased risk of exposure to virus) balance should be sought in order to define groups of people that will be prioritized to go back to the physical office.
Should employees be gradually asked to come back to the company by sub-categories, based on their relative capacity to telework?
A gradual return to work is advisable. Not all employees should return at once. Even as the percentage of employees who have returned to the office increase, recall that this is not “one direction” meaning that, depending on what is happening in the broader environment, there may be need for employees to “return to home” for telework. This may be very dynamic. Thus a prioritization is needed for different subgroups, and decisions need to be flexible over time.
Does it make sense to have employees and their family members go for COVID-19 preventive testing?
No. The tests nowadays are not very helpful for this situation. Testing at one point in time will not change what preventive measures should be taken as infection can just as easily occur after testing. For people already showing antibodies (from newer “serology testing”), it is still unknown how many antibodies are needed to be protective, nor how long such protection will last.
Has the employer an obligation to provide the masks to his/her employees?
The term obligation relates to a specific legislation on a matter. An employer is obliged to take measures necessary in order to protect the employees yet if, for example, there is a national shortage of masks then the employer cannot be responsible for that lack of masks. Hence, due to such variability in the capacity for an employer to implement the measure, it’s unlikely that there will truly be such an obligation imposed.