Berlin The date is set, but not the details: According to the decision of the Prime Ministers’ Conference on Wednesday, all “profound” corona measures should be dropped on March 20th. However, the federal and state governments left open which rules should remain possible afterwards. Because the ideas differ widely – especially in the parties of the traffic light coalition.
According to the federal-state decision, these should create a legal basis for further measures by March 19. What this should look like, however, is disputed after the summit meeting. While the SPD and the Greens advocate continuing to allow as many measures as possible, the Liberals are calling for a minimum of restrictions.
“It is conceivable for us to make regulations that allow the mask requirement to be extended,” says Christian Dürr, leader of the FDP parliamentary group. “But after the vast majority of people have adhered to a large number of corona requirements for over two years, I see it as a duty and task of politicians to withdraw restrictions if they no longer serve to fight the virus.”
Some liberals would prefer to forgo all measures. Bundestag Vice President Wolfgang Kubicki (FDP) let it be known that the mask requirement must also be lifted. According to the parliamentary group, new measures should only be made possible again when they are actually needed – for example, when the pandemic situation worsens again. Then Parliament would be able to react quickly.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
SPD and Greens, on the other hand, see the measures as a kind of “sani box in the trunk”, as Berlin’s Governing Mayor Franziska Giffey (SPD) put it on Wednesday after the summit meeting. Federal Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach (SPD) also drummed before the meeting for “larger corona cutlery” for the federal states.
Dahmen: “The virus doesn’t care about our calendar”
And the health expert Janosch Dahmen urged the Greens to take further necessary protective measures. “The current situation allows relaxation, but no carelessness. A trend reversal is possible at any time,” Dahmen told the German Press Agency on Thursday. “The virus doesn’t care about our calendar.” The countries need a flexible catalog of measures for spring if the situation worsens.
Dahmen explained that regional corona outbreaks require a wide range of instruments. “The mask requirement alone is not enough for this.” Access restrictions would then also have to be able to be reactivated quickly.
Overall, it is right to ensure planning and perspective with a step-by-step plan. Parameters such as the hospitalization rate or the number of beds that can be operated remained decisive for the implementation of the planned opening steps.
At the summit, however, the country heads and Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) could not agree on a common path. The chairman of the conference of prime ministers, North Rhine-Westphalia’s head of government Hendrik Wüst (CDU), said after the meeting: “All countries agree that we need basic protection beyond the beginning of spring to secure the openings.”
Expert: All measures can be dropped by the end of April
However, Chancellor Scholz would not have supported a catalog of measures approved by all Prime Ministers. These included the obligation to wear masks, distance rules, hygiene concepts, tests and at least the possibility of providing for testing and verification obligations in areas that are particularly at risk.
However, Wüst emphasized that Scholz had promised to work in the traffic light coalition for the country ideas. The Social Democrat assured that his coalition agreed that there must be basic protection.
Opinions also differ widely on possible future rules for mobile working after the planned end of the home office obligation on March 19. The head of the German Trade Union Confederation (DGB), Reiner Hoffmann, demanded clear rules from the government for the “home office of the future”.
The general manager of the employers’ association BDA, Steffen Kampeter, opposed “fixing rules”. It is unclear exactly how things will continue – Hubertus Heil’s (SPD) Ministry of Labor initially only generally emphasized the need for basic protection in the world of work.
Experts advocate a minimum of measures. “This definitely includes the obligation to wear masks in local public transport and indoors, but also to keep your distance,” said Timo Ulrichs, epidemiologist at the Chair for Global Health at the Akkon University in Berlin, the Handelsblatt. “This means that there are two essential prerequisites for making it more difficult for the virus to be passed on, even in times of low incidence.” Countries such as Great Britain and Denmark have shown that an end to all measures in the sense of a Freedom Day does not make sense.
Markus Scholz, an epidemiologist at the University of Leipzig, believes it is necessary to “finally lift the mask requirement and the distance rules indoors,” he told the Handelsblatt. “In addition, prophylactic testing in schools should be maintained until the number of cases is really low.”
By the end of April there would be so few new infections “that the remaining measures could then be omitted”. But you have to be prepared for a new wave in the fall. “You should be well prepared for this, for example with a new vaccination campaign or with a suitable step-by-step plan for reintroducing measures,” said epidemiologist Scholz.
Concern about facility-related vaccination requirements
After the federal-state conference, there is also ambiguity in the facility-related compulsory vaccination. Three minutes of the federal-state decision on Wednesday relate to this point. From March 15, only staff who have been vaccinated or have recovered will be allowed to work in clinics, medical practices or care facilities.
But the Union-led states of Bavaria, Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt complain that there are still no practicable and uniform nationwide rules for enforcement, for example with regard to the consequences under labor law for those who are not vaccinated. “The requests for help from the many independent providers of facilities in the health and care sector and the criticism of the design were not taken seriously,” said Saxony’s Prime Minister Michael Kretschmer (CDU).
Care providers fear staff shortages if unvaccinated employees are no longer allowed to enter facilities or are banned from working. The health authorities should decide on this.
Steffen Scheuer, an employment law expert at Baker McKenzie, knows that they have a certain amount of discretion. “It is hardly to be expected that under the pressure of the nursing shortage, they will issue a tough ban on employment, especially for people who were recently celebrated as heroes of our society for their self-sacrificing work in hospitals and nursing facilities,” said Scheuer. There is a risk of a great deal of bureaucracy and a “wave of indignation without any measurable practical added value”.
Individual federal states such as Rhineland-Palatinate have now issued their own rules. The health authorities there will contact employees without proof of vaccination and give them two weeks to provide proof.
If they don’t do this, a fine of 500 euros should usually be imposed and then a ban on entering the facility should be issued. However, employers are not obliged to release unvaccinated employees immediately on March 15.
Bavaria, Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt expect clarification from the federal government
However, Bavaria, Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt still expect clear clarification from the federal government on implementation. The handout published by the Ministry of Health could “at best be a first step”, said Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder (CSU).
The paper now has 24 pages and now also contains a passage on the consequences under labor law for employees who do not present proof of vaccination. Until a decision is made by the health authorities, those affected should continue to be employed, it says.
If an activity or entry ban is issued, “the right to remuneration should generally not apply,” writes the Ministry of Health. As a last resort, dismissal can also be considered if the employee has initially been warned. Ultimately, however, the labor courts would have to decide on disputes.
According to a survey by the Central Institute of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (ZI) among 11,000 resident doctors and psychotherapists, 30 percent of practices fear restrictions due to the facility-related compulsory vaccination. “It is most likely to affect Saxony, Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt, which are already suffering from a shortage of skilled workers,” said ZI boss Dominik Stillfried to the Handelsblatt.
“But even in other federal states, many can no longer understand the benefits of compulsory vaccination.” Overall, however, the vaccination rate is high. 94 percent of the doctors in private practice are vaccinated and at least 81 percent of the psychotherapists. The vaccination rates among non-medical practice employees are similarly high.
More: Federal-state decision: In three steps back to normality