As the government sets out its phased exit strategy from lockdown, Michael Barrett, professor of biochemical parasitology at the University of Glasgow's Institute of Infection, Immunity, and Inflammation, returns to give an update on how the situation is evolving and how the future of work may look.

In his last analysis for Investec in February, Professor Barrett foresaw the coronavirus had the potential to become a global pandemic. He also warned asymptomatic carriers of the virus could aid transmission. Joined by Philip Shaw, chief economist at Investec, they analysed the current shape of the outbreak, the global race to find a vaccine, the economic implications, and suggest what a new normal might look like for Britain's employers and workforce.

The impact of the outbreak has been devastating on victims and their families, while businesses and global supply chains have been disrupted on an unprecedented scale. However, Professor Barrett believes social distancing has been an effective tool in getting the disease under control and preventing an even more damaging scenario.

"The lockdown has had a drastic impact on the economy and societies, but it has unambiguously brought the incidence of the disease to a level where, if it can be sustained, according to the laws of epidemiology, it disappears," says Professor Barrett.

By suppressing infection levels, the disease's so-called R0 (its rate of reproduction) has dropped below one. This means the virus is transmitted from one person to fewer than one other person. This has two potential outcomes, according to Professor Barrett: extinction or, in this case, endemicity, where the virus keeps infecting people but at nothing like the levels previously seen. Covid-19 could turn into a variant of a common cold in populations over time.

"What seems probable is that we are going to see higher unemployment on top of the number of furloughed workers, which now stands at 6.3 million. Sadly, a number of businesses probably will not make it through the crisis."

On the economics front, analysis has moved from the short-term picture to the longer term. Investec Chief Economist Philip Shaw says while he expects some long-term scarring to the economy, he believes there is reason to be positive.

In terms of the depth of the economic contraction, the epicentre in most countries, including the UK, should be the second quarter. In terms of the shape of the recovery, there has been debate around whether the economy is looking at a U-shaped trajectory. However, according to Shaw, this seems unrealistically pessimistic.

"We think as the government begins to reopen various sectors, there will be a recovery in the pace of activity. We are looking at a sharp rebound in the economy on the basis that we begin unwinding restrictions, perhaps from late May, early June. Our figures for the third quarter is a rebound of 31%.

"What seems probable is that we are going to see higher unemployment on top of the number of furloughed workers, which now stands at 6.3 million. Sadly, a number of businesses probably will not make it through the crisis."

This effect will dampen long-term demand, believes Shaw. He envisages a sharp rebound in gross domestic product growth before things begin to slow down. "In terms of the size of the economy, looking at the level of GDP, we do not think we are going to return to where we were at the end of 2019 by the end of next year."

"The good news – and this is a positive takeaway from the crisis – is we have seen what industry and entrepreneurs can do when the government is helpful and there is a degree of regulation," says Shaw.

"Over the coming months, we are going to see some ingenious ways of organising offices to develop systems where we do not risk contaminating each other in the way we have to-date. This means balancing work and health considerations."

While the virus outdoors is less problematic, as fresh air breezes diminish the possibility of transmission, indoors remains a potentially dangerous environment until immunity is established. Therefore, Professor Barrett says businesses and engineers need to start thinking creatively about future workflows and workspace design.

"People thinking about designing offices in the future and engineers will need to consider whether you can create safer airflows in offices, that will minimise the volume of the virus in the air and diminish contamination.

"Airflow is crucial to suppressing the virus. For example, a business could consider getting employees walking around a building in just one direction, having one door to exit by, and one door to enter by. This simple measure will reduce the prevalence of the virus."

This is what the professor is currently doing in his Glasgow laboratory, where his team also wear masks and exercise ultra hand and surface hygiene.

Professor Barret envisages we may see the reorganisation of offices. This may entail smaller open-plan spaces, but he believes we can adapt.

A critical trade-off will be between maintaining distance between employees to protect their health and allowing staff to work closely enough to complete business processes that require closer interaction.

"Over the coming months, we are going to see some ingenious ways of organising offices to develop systems where we do not risk contaminating each other in the way we have to-date. This means balancing work and health considerations."

He says the evidence is that beyond two metres indoors, gravity will take most viral particles towards the ground and beyond the respiratory tract of the person next to you.

A critical trade-off will be between maintaining distance between employees to protect their health and allowing staff to work closely enough to complete business processes that require closer interaction. At what point could we say that the risk of reducing social distancing to one metre is worth taking to ease the impediment to activity? This decision should be based on the level of immunity we have achieved and the R factor.

Professor Barrett also advocates the wearing of masks as he says the evidence is extremely strong that somebody who is unknowingly infected, perhaps asymptomatic, will breathe out far fewer viral particles that can get to somebody else if they are wearing a mask.

"I know people do not like the idea of wearing masks, and we would not have to wear them forever. We just need to get the incidence of the disease to very low levels to decrease the risk.

"Beyond the two-metre social distancing rule or masks, in the workplace, there is a whole gamut of different approaches to suppress the risk of infection. But it is not just keeping a distance from each other that is important. It is keeping a distance from viruses, which one person may be secreting, and anything we can do to diminish that should be considered."