• Dear Guest, and welcome to RailUK Forums. Our non-railway discussion forums are currently restricted until members have five or more posts, and you will not be able to make a new thread or reply to an existing one in this section until you have made five or more posts elsewhere on the forum.

Businesses in England that will still restrict entry (via face masks) after July 19th

Status
Not open for further replies.

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,150
Location
Central Belt
I see that Uber is refusing to carry people without masks.
coop are “strongly encouraging“
spoons are not expecting people to wear them.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

bengley

Established Member
Joined
18 May 2008
Messages
1,607
I see that Uber is refusing to carry people without masks.
coop are “strongly encouraging“
spoons are not expecting people to wear them.
I've used Uber a few times and not had a driver request me don a mask. Most of them wear theirs under their noses anyway!
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,150
Location
Central Belt
I've used Uber a few times and not had a driver request me don a mask. Most of them wear theirs under their noses anyway!
Fair enough. The ranks are odd as it depends on the driver. They get pissed of when you just get out and in the one behind. But hey if they refuse business that is their problem.
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
3,148
I've used Uber a few times and not had a driver request me don a mask. Most of them wear theirs under their noses anyway!
I thought they'd brought in some feature where you have to take a selfie to prove you're masked? I haven't used Uber for ages so I don't really know. The last time I tried to get one was at Paddington, but I couldn't work out where they wanted me to stand to be picked up, so I cancelled it and got one of the many black cabs at the rank. It turned out to be cheaper than the Uber!
 

TUC

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2010
Messages
2,485
I thought they'd brought in some feature where you have to take a selfie to prove you're masked? I haven't used Uber for ages so I don't really know. The last time I tried to get one was at Paddington, but I couldn't work out where they wanted me to stand to be picked up, so I cancelled it and got one of the many black cabs at the rank. It turned out to be cheaper than the Uber!
How would that work? People would put a mask on when the Uber arrived. They wouldn't be standing in the street wearing one.
 

tspaul26

Member
Joined
9 Jun 2016
Messages
752
That’s what I thought, so they’re making up the £100 fine then, that or they’re going to illegally “fine” people.

I spoke to TfGM at 1715 this evening to a contact there that is known to me and being most guarded in his reply, all he would say that there had been an internal meeting in which the legal view of a fine was on the agenda. I put it to him it would have been better had the meeting taken place prior to TfGM putting the matter in print on their weekly update email.

I checked on the TfGM website this morning and there is now a new section that states the following:-

Roadmap out of lockdown - 19 July changes

The move to step 4 of the government's Roadmap to Recovery on 19 July does not mean the risk from Coronavirus has disappeared. People are encouraged to use public transport, particularly at quieter times, but to help each other safe using the Metrolink network, bus stations or transport interchanges in Greater Manchester, where they must still wear a face covering unless exempt. In addition, passengers travelling on buses and trains in Greater Manchester are expected to wear a face covering unless exempt.
Metrolink is a slightly odd one in that:
  1. The requirement to where a face covering is parasitic on “applicable law” and “Government guidelines” - once the national regulations go then there is nothing for the conditions to bite on.
  2. The £100 “fine” is actually a contractual penalty charge so of somewhat dubious legality anyway, but once the national requirements go then it is difficult to envisage how one could breach the face covering condition in such a way as to trigger payment.
  3. All of this is subject to unspecified “exemptions”.
Interestingly, compliance with the conditions of carriage is a Byelaw requirement so non-compliance with the conditions also then triggers a potential Byelaw offence.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,100
Location
Yorkshire
I see that Uber is refusing to carry people without masks.
Do you have a source for this?

Taken literally, they risk legal action if so

A disabled woman assisted by Kester Disability Rights has been paid £7,000 in compensation by a service provider who refused her access to a service because she was unable to wear a face mask....
 

43066

On Moderation
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
2,626
Location
London
I see that Uber is refusing to carry people without masks.
coop are “strongly encouraging“
spoons are not expecting people to wear them.

Do you have a source for this?

Taken literally, they risk legal action if so


Official Uber policy (viewable on their website) as clarified when I emailed them at the start of the pandemic, is that drivers and passengers are required to wear masks, and if a passenger doesn’t wear one the driver is entitled not to take them. If you’re exempt they ask that you notify the driver in advance via the app - but in practice this makes it more difficult to get a ride, and is inconvenient.

I’ve taken the approach that I simply hail them and board without a mask - obviously the driver has the choice to turn me away if they wish - surprise surprise that hasn’t happened yet over a few dozen rides.
 

43066

On Moderation
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
2,626
Location
London
Uber’s official policy can be found at this link:


To help protect the health and safety of everyone, face coverings or masks are mandatory for anyone riding or driving with Uber. This is subject to the exemption set out below.

If you are riding with Uber and your driver arrives without a face covering, you can cancel your ride. Similarly, if you are driving with Uber and a rider is not wearing a face covering, you have the right to cancel the ride. Anyone who is required to wear a face covering and repeatedly fails to do so will permanently lose their access to the Uber platform.



Exemptions from face coverings

If a user is required by law to wear a face covering while on trip, they must do so. If a user is exempt from the legal requirement, they are exempt from Uber’s requirement to wear a face covering. This exemption is generally where it is not appropriate to wear one due to mitigating circumstances such as their age, medical condition and/or disability. This may include:



What to do if you are exempt

If a rider or driver is exempt from this requirement, they should explain before pick up via the app and/or at pick up that they are exempt based on Government guidance.
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,150
Location
Central Belt
Do you have a source for this?

Taken literally, they risk legal action if so

I will take a look through the Welwyn Hatfield times. A driver wrote in to the letters page. They said if people can’t wear a mask for 15 minutes they have bigger health problems so shouldn’t be out. It could be just a bad eggs view but “I have the backing of Uber”. Uber didn’t exactly say this, they said it is up to individual drivers.
 

43066

On Moderation
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
2,626
Location
London
I will take a look through the Welwyn Hatfield times. A driver wrote in to the letters page. They said if people can’t wear a mask for 15 minutes they have bigger health problems so shouldn’t be out. It could be just a bad eggs view but “I have the backing of Uber”. Uber didn’t exactly say this, they said it is up to individual drivers.

Oh dear! Perhaps it’s time for that driver to look for another line of work…
 

alxndr

Member
Joined
3 Apr 2015
Messages
952
Sorry to hear that.

It sounds like with the extreme anxiety that mask wearing causes, you have a really good reason to not wear a mask at all so could claim an exemption. As an autistic person I struggle with hypersensitive skin and I get extremely anxious with a mask. (Also I get a nasty rash, probably not unrelated as anxiety can do strange things). Anxiety/deep fear is a really powerful thing and not to be underestimated in how rotten it makes one feel and how ill one can be with it.
I'm fortunate enough to have found a brand of face-covering that doesn't bother me too much, as long as it's not already too hot for me as I massively struggle with the heat. It certainly causes much less concern than having to face the prospect of disclosing that I have an exemption. While I might happily say that I'm autistic on here, it's not something that I'm wholly comfortable with disclosing in daily life (for now at least). My issue with face-coverings has always mostly centered around getting it wrong, and all the routines that I've used up until now getting thrown into disarray.

So far as the transmission benefits go, I suggest you need to do a bit of research around the whole thing of Respiratory Protective Equipment (RPE). The HSE (health & safety executive) website has some good guides- thing is, RPE is a very specific category of safety equipment and when you start to understand what must be done to make a mask (RPE) effective at preventing small particles passing through then you start to realise how pointless the "face coverings" are. The HSE has done loads of detailed research and trials at their Health & Safety Laboratory over the past 20 years or so, this is what the guidance is based on. It's important for jobs like asbestos removal and anything with silica dust (all much bigger particles than a virus even one in small droplets). Understanding RPE use is part of what I've done for a living for a few years so can PM you some references if you would like. (Probably why "face coverings" are actually NOT classified as PPE a if they were we'd be into RPE standards needing to be applied ;) ).

Then a bit of a digression into the minutes from SP-IM and in parallel recognising that most scientists are neurotypicals with the social-status orientation and liquid truth that most neurotypicals exhibit.

Followed by a bit of statistical learning, and how the different things we do are likely to make us die (or not).

That's a suggested trot through underlying facts; with a bit of autistic "special interest" focus you can slowly assemble the picture from the bottom up and suddenly the world is a bit easier to understand and the fear levels subside.
I've already done some reading into RPE and what is required to provide protection against viruses. I know that most face-coverings are not of the required construction, aren't correctly worn, etc, but I'm not of the mindset that they do absolutely nothing. Maybe not a tangible amount, but at the bare minimum, they prevent people spitting over you as they're speaking, which is nice to avoid, virus or no virus. And as said before, I do think they have a benefit as a reminder that it's still worth being careful (and that alone is why I think they're worth keeping around).

It's not fear of the virus that makes me wear a mask, it's a fear of getting it wrong. Might not be a rational fear, I know that there's absolutely no risk of me getting or spreading, a virus on an empty platform, but that logical knowledge clashes with the fact that there are both written rules, and unwritten ones, and figuring out the path to tread between them.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
2,710
Location
London
Heathrow Express will apparently be mandating masks. So 2/3 companies at Paddington will, while GWR won’t. All trains leaving Heathrow will - highly convoluted!

 

NorthOxonian

Established Member
Joined
5 Jul 2018
Messages
1,227
Location
Oxford/Newcastle
Heathrow Express will apparently be mandating masks. So 2/3 companies at Paddington will, while GWR won’t. All trains leaving Heathrow will - highly convoluted!

All trains leaving Heathrow will, but the buses will be a mixture - mandatory on TfL, strongly encouraged on Reading Buses, and rather more weakly encouraged on First (indeed their advice even includes the phrase "Please remember that not everyone may wish to wear a mask", presumably to head off any mask vigilantes).
 

TUC

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2010
Messages
2,485
I will take a look through the Welwyn Hatfield times. A driver wrote in to the letters page. They said if people can’t wear a mask for 15 minutes they have bigger health problems so shouldn’t be out. It could be just a bad eggs view but “I have the backing of Uber”. Uber didn’t exactly say this, they said it is up to individual drivers.
'If people can’t wear a mask for 15 minutes they have bigger health problems so shouldn’t be out.'

Anyone willing to bet it's those who claim to want to 'follow the science' who say such unscientific nonsense?
 

bengley

Established Member
Joined
18 May 2008
Messages
1,607
I think people assume those unable to wear masks are not able to do so because of breathing problems.

Small minded people who can't use their brains before they speak!
 

John Luxton

Member
Joined
23 Nov 2014
Messages
388
Face nappies not required on Merseyrail COVID-19 Travel Advice (merseyrail.org) from Monday :D

Apparently according to local press reports MetroMayor Steve Rotherham has admitted he cannot mandate masks on anything other than the Mersey Ferries and on the Ferry Landing Stages.

So ferry passengers travelling in the open air have to wear masks but those on the Merseyrail underground do not!

Interestingly from what I have seen on the Red Funnel Ferries web site throughout the pandemic passengers travelling on the open decks have never had to wear face masks.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
3,084
I don't really understand what you're driving at with that first question. The reason why I'm so concerned about this is fear - I hate the sight of people wearing masks. It makes me feel like I'm living in a horror move, and I feel completely disconcerted around these faceless people. As I say, I've tried many different things over the last year to try and shake that feeling, but I can't. It is just something I can't tolerate, unfortunately. I have nothing against those who wear them as people, it's purely out of dislike for the mask - and that feeling of extreme unease around those with covered faces is why I care about the personal decisions of others. I completely understand that this can't be a dictatorship and people can't be compelled to not wear masks just because it makes others uncomfortable. But this is purely about my personal feelings - I can't really help them.

As to that last point, there are some countries which are far less aggressive about them and where far fewer people seem to be pushing to make them the new normal for all eternity. It isn't something I'd just rush into, but the prospect of living in a masked society scares me so much that I would uproot everything to move to a society that wasn't masked.
I wasn't driving at anything, I just don't think that a response of "I don't like it" really answers questions.
But now you have explained, I have an understanding of your thought process and can appreciate your position a bit better :) I genuinely hope you can overcome this fear because I suspect it is going to be very difficult to avoid situations where you encounter people wearing them for the foreseeable future - at least with things that I am fearful of I can generally avoid them (barring when a pesky spider appears in the bathtub ;) )

If people wish to continue to wear masks after next week, that's entirely up to them. But if businesses are to "encourage" their use through endless posters, a barrage of announcements, and maybe a hi-viz wearing employee at the door, then this is where the line between choice & mandate by guilt blurs.

@Watershed mentions the comparison between religious doctrine and mask wearing. For some its just a means to an end, for others the mask has moved from something that might ot might not help to a symbol of safety, and that their absence on others signals instant danger. I see this all the time, from people leaping into roads to avoid passing an unmasked pedestrian through to people exchanging angry glares, comments and even outright confrontation. Masks have become for some not an option but an obligation, and in some eyes a cause of anger when masks are not used.

The government should be advising business to choose if they want to allow masks wearing, not the other way around. We all know what awaits us next week. The announcement in Tesco's blares out "We invite you all to wear you mask for your good, and the safety of all those in our stores.", and dozens of people behind masks turn to those without and glare at them as if they were some murderer or terrorist. One eventually pipes up and confronts someone, voices raise, tempers fray, and eventually someone takes a swing. Rinse and repeat. After all we have been through, more angst and anger is the last thing we need.

I will not be wearing masks next week, I will respect those who do so long as they repsect my decision and don't treat me like some leper.
Can't really disagree with any of this. I do think businesses need to be very careful about their approach from next week - in fact I think that if any announcements need to be made it should be more along the lines of "remember that mask wearing is a personal choice so please respect everyone's choice"

You completely miss the point but this isn't the place for that debate.
I'm not sure I have to be honest. All that I have done is made a reasonable and rational request for everyone to respect the personal choice of other people in the same way we do with other personal choices we all make!
You forget Sweden. If I worked from home, I'd move there if I could. But again thread isn't the place to debate this further.
I did say "most countries" not all ;) :D

Also, you should be very careful about responding to people's point of view and then stating "this isn't the place for that debate". Those sort of 'I'm going to respond and then shut you down' type responses are very Boris / Conservative MP like ;) :lol:
 
Last edited:

TPO

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2018
Messages
123
I'm fortunate enough to have found a brand of face-covering that doesn't bother me too much, as long as it's not already too hot for me as I massively struggle with the heat. It certainly causes much less concern than having to face the prospect of disclosing that I have an exemption. While I might happily say that I'm autistic on here, it's not something that I'm wholly comfortable with disclosing in daily life (for now at least). My issue with face-coverings has always mostly centered around getting it wrong, and all the routines that I've used up until now getting thrown into disarray.


I've already done some reading into RPE and what is required to provide protection against viruses. I know that most face-coverings are not of the required construction, aren't correctly worn, etc, but I'm not of the mindset that they do absolutely nothing. Maybe not a tangible amount, but at the bare minimum, they prevent people spitting over you as they're speaking, which is nice to avoid, virus or no virus. And as said before, I do think they have a benefit as a reminder that it's still worth being careful (and that alone is why I think they're worth keeping around).

It's not fear of the virus that makes me wear a mask, it's a fear of getting it wrong. Might not be a rational fear, I know that there's absolutely no risk of me getting or spreading, a virus on an empty platform, but that logical knowledge clashes with the fact that there are both written rules, and unwritten ones, and figuring out the path to tread between them.

Fair enough, your choice. Totally respect that. You have your own logic and made the decision which works for you (at the moment- if your logic changes or you learn more it's fine to reassess the decision).

The rules thing. These days I take a very simple approach. If the neurotypicals who have loads of unspoken rules cannot be bothered to explicitly explain them to me then they cannot moan or complain when I don't follow them. I don't apologise for being what I am- I explain politely and invite the other party to accommodate my disability. In the same way that a blind person cannot be expected to comply with a list of written rules that they cannot read because they cannot see, you cannot expect me to comply with a list of undefined/undescribed rules that I am unable to perceive. With this approach I find people in customer service type situations are generally very helpful because I can explain to them how they can help me, so they feel happy to know how to help and not be confused by the non-standard body language and phrasing I am (apparently) presenting. Similarly, I have my own business and mostly this no-nonsense contractual and very transparent approach goes down well with customers as they get me in to do a specific technical task, not play organisational politics.

Interestingly, legal things are often very clearly written (once you get the hang of the legal language) and so worth going straight to the legislation. First rule of legislation: start with the "definitions" section as that is really important. Then build understanding via guidance and legal precedents- again the judgements (especially the older ones) are frequently well-written. Which makes compliance easier as I know what really are rules- must be followed- and what is guidance- nice to have but can make hyper-social NTs twitchy if not followed. (I've been fortunate enough in the past to have formal training on "handling people" so I can generally avoid confrontation and in worst case extract myself albeit the latter leaves me shaky and with cognitive overload so best avoided, I have also learned to pick my battles and not go batting purely on a principle when instead I can avoid the situation).

The masks thing. I have several sensory "differences" as an autistic person. I am hyper-sensitive to sound and touch. Clothes are a nightmare- I make my own these days so I can wear something of a fabric and style/cut that does not use up all my mental bandwidth in tolerating it for a few hours, and I have to launder in a specific manner. It's both a mental overload and a physical skin rashes issue. Masks cause me big problems, even when made up in the fabrics I best tolerate and kept clean in my usual regime. I can manage only a few minutes at best wearing them and even then I wheeze/pant and get very anxious- and large cognitive load to hold in check takes all my bandwidth so I get confused and disorientated after a short time.

I am disappointed in the scientists advising the govt due to their allowing their emotions to get in the way of the scientific method; however I am equally not surprised because I recognise the NTs behave in a particular way (the book "The Field Guide to Earthlings: An autistic/Asperger view of neurotypical behavior" is a really good explanation written by an autistic person and full of dry autistic humour).

The maskivism and the quasi-lockdowns are nothing to do with logic or risk and everything to do with emotions. The ground will shift as soon as the inconvenience level outweighs the emotions, probably when furlough payments and rent holidays stop and the sunny weather which makes ping-hunting so popular goes away.

At least I hope so; a similarly emotive rather than risk-based response has held UK nuclear power back for decades. The key for shifting NT emotions is I think making the consequences of a decision- or hiding from a decision- real (which is why on the nuclear power thing I would have everyone on smart meters and then those who espouse renewables only and no nuclear, cut them off when we get a winter blocking high. I guarantee that within a couple of years we'd have popular support for nuclear power and/or more gas-fired power stations).

TPO
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,100
Location
Yorkshire
Also, you should be very careful about responding to people's point of view and then stating "this isn't the place for that debate". Those sort of 'I'm going to respond and then shut you down' type responses are very Boris / Conservative MP like ;) :lol:
Not at all. I'm just saying this thread isn't the right place.

I've made a new one here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...erings-and-the-mandating-of-their-use.219985/

I hope we can now dedicate this thread to discussing Businesses in England that will still restrict entry (via face masks) after July 19th

But I will point out that some of the examples posted here (e.g. Waterstones) are merely advising it, not restricting entry, so please can people be careful when posting in this thread to avoid confusion.
 

The_Train

Established Member
Joined
2 Jun 2018
Messages
3,084
Not at all. I'm just saying this thread isn't the right place.

I've made a new one here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...erings-and-the-mandating-of-their-use.219985/

I hope we can now dedicate this thread to discussing Businesses in England that will still restrict entry (via face masks) after July 19th

But I will point out that some of the examples posted here (e.g. Waterstones) are merely advising it, not restricting entry, so please can people be careful when posting in this thread to avoid confusion.
It was very much said in jest (I tried to make use of emoji's to show this :D )
 

johncrossley

Member
Joined
30 Mar 2021
Messages
678
Location
London
Someone who is on a London bus forum forwarded this to me, regarding drivers' instructions from the 19th. (Sorry no link as it was just forwarded on to me).

1626536884477.png

Changes on London's buses — from 19 July 2021

Following Government guidance, the following will apply from 19 July:

Customers will be encouraged to give each other as much space as possible over the coming weeks to replace current social distancing messages.

Face coverings will still be required for travel on TfL services, as part of our Conditions of Carriage, and new posters will appear across the network.

You are asked to no longer use current pre-recorded announcements: 1 (social distancing), 2 (bus full) and 3 (face coverings). These will either change or be removed at the earliest opportunity.

• Please continue to use the pre-loaded SMS messages to report - Fare evasion (number 5), Heavy loadings (number 11) and Face covering non-compliance (number 12)
• Customers will once again be able to sit in all seats (including rear facing seats that face other seats)
• Customers will be allowed to stand within the bus (except on the upper deck of double deck buses, as usual)
• If you feel it is safe to do so, politely remind anyone not wearing a face covering, as they get on, that they should wear one at all times for travel on TfL services. Do not stop customers from travelling or delay the service due to non-compliance — use your SMS message (as above)
• Remember some customers will be exempt, so do not insist on it if someone says they cannot wear a face covering
• The blue notices about social distancing and face coverings, positioned by the front entrance and wheelchair area, will remain for now.

At busy times, please:
• Continue to play the seats upstairs announcement (position 4), on double deck buses, to encourage customers to use all available seats:
Seats are available on the upper deck
 
Last edited:

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
2,827
At no point have I suggested any such thing. My objection is to the government's abdication of responsibility and to the conflicting messages that are unnecessarily complicating the issue.
What conflicting messages?
 

Crossover

Established Member
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Messages
8,831
Location
Yorkshire
I don’t think it has been reported here (apologies if it has) but Stourbridge Shuttle are continuing mandating masks from Monday
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,100
Location
Yorkshire
I don’t think it has been reported here (apologies if it has) but Stourbridge Shuttle are continuing mandating masks from Monday
But that's operated by West Midlands Trains isn't it? It can't be mandated by any legal or contractual means so I don't see how they can refuse carriage to anyone.
 

Dave91131

Member
Joined
13 Jun 2018
Messages
437
But that's operated by West Midlands Trains isn't it? It can't be mandated by any legal or contractual means so I don't see how they can refuse carriage to anyone.

A quick Google search suggests it's operated by PMOL (Pre Metro Operations Limited).
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
55,100
Location
Yorkshire
The Train Operating Company (TOC) deemed to be operating the service is West Midlands Trains (WMT) which operates the West Midlands franchise and is part of the National Rail network.

They can sub-contract any part of that work out but it doesn't change the facts.

As far as the passenger is concerned, they are travelling with WMT.

They have no legal right to mandate face coverings and I see no evidence of any contractual right either.
 

43066

On Moderation
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
2,626
Location
London
They have no legal right to mandate face coverings and I see no evidence of any contractual right either.
Legally speaking any company and any person can do whatever they aren’t expressly prohibited from doing.

That is a good principle, in my view, and supposedly a well established principle of U.K. law. At least until the Coronavirus Act 2020 was passed…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top