I would be interested to know if anybody else is having this raised in their workplaces and if you are looking at purchasing some, and if so from where? — Steffan St Clair-Newman
.From 1 December businesses that choose to use rapid antigen tests for surveillance testing will be able to directly source approved tests from the following authorised suppliers (all are nasal swabs):
Roche Diagnostics NZ Ltd
Abbott Rapid Diagnostics
Pantonic Health (Australia) or Arrotex Pharmaceuticals (NZ) Limited
EBOS Group Ltd.
Businesses need to pay for rapid antigen tests themselves.
From 15 December, if you don’t want to buy tests directly from these authorised suppliers you’ll be able to buy them from a local distributor. The Ministry of Health is currently working through the details of supply.
The Ministry of Health recommends that businesses trial different tests before committing to buying one in bulk as there are differences in processes — Business.govt.nz
From 1 December businesses that choose to use rapid antigen tests for surveillance testing will be able to directly source approved tests from the following authorised suppliers (all are nasal swabs): — Business.govt.nz
I am also seeing situations where we are somewhat playing chicken with determining how Covid risks will be managed in the long term, especially considering what part the vaccination plays in the wider scheme - to a point where effective planning is being sidelined until someone blinks and calls for the site to be "vaccination only" (even though both sides know that going vaccinated only is not really a viable option as it will have significant impacts on the sites being able to actually be staffed and operated).Due to the current climate of having a shortage of skilled staff, this would result in a stand down for specific staff members. For small to medium business, this is not sustainable position, as many cannot afford to keep on staff that are not fulfilling their job description and doing the job they were hired for. — TracyRichardson
Yes this would be a good use case in my opinion - speaking from personal experience when instead of being booked in for a doctor's consult to get my yearly hay fever medication I was booked for a Covid test because I had a runny nose, sneezing and itchy eyes... you know typical hay fever symptoms which I had literally just told them! Although whilst frustrating I can't really fault them for the precaution.it seems the rapid antigen testing is most useful when someone is symptomatic in the workplace, and it could be asthma, allergies, a cold, etc or covid. The test will help to rule out covid and provide reassurance. (acknowledging that sick people need to stay home of course) — Jane
I was under the impression that all PCR Covid testing was free of charge (link), are you paying $160 per test to a private lab to speed up the turnaround for the results or something else?We are also stuck with paying for non vaccinated staff to do their non government funded tests ($160!) for their travel. Shame the RAT wouldn't help, as the result needs to come from a lab. — Yonny Yeung
If that's $20 per test, then that's costing over $200k per year to test all 120+ workers every 3 days! Given the concerns with the accuracy, false positives, etc. of the testing is that cost really worth it or could that money be better spent in preventative measures instead?Not a cheap exercise! — Yonny Yeung
No, the government isn't paying for travel or monitor related tests (e.g. in and out of NZ or travel on Air NZ when they are not fully vaccinated or as a company's monitor programme). Air NZ requires this to be completed before they are allowed onboard if they are not already have My Vaccine Pass. linkI was under the impression that all PCR Covid testing was free of charge (link), are you paying $160 per test to a private lab to speed up the turnaround for the results or something else? — MattD2
The benefits of rapid antigen screening are relative to the amount of disease that is present in a population (prevalence), with greater benefit from settings with high prevalence. At low levels of prevalence, the risk of having a false-positive test results will exceed the public health benefit. — MoH Interim Guidance Framework for the Provision of Rapid Antigen Screening for COVID-19 in Clinical and NonClinical Settings
For a while... to me there still is a a lot of confusion within the MoH! Just look at the various (changing) definitions of a Casual Plus Contact!For a while it was a bit confusing as different MOH advice seemed to contradict itself. — Chris Anderson
If you are interested in workplace health & safety in New Zealand, then this is the discussion forum for you.