Face coverings compulsory on public transport in England from 15 June

[bspahh]

The press release and press conference from yesterday said that Regulations will be introduced under the Public Health Act. Just as good, because, as I and others pointed out over the last week, that is pretty much the only way it will be enforceable by the police across all public transport modes, and certainly the only way a financial penalty or fine can be imposed.

The New Legislation page for Friday June 12th is https://www.legislation.gov.uk/new/uksi/2020-06-12

It links to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/588/contents/made has "The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2020"

That is a link to "Original (As made)", but it doesn't mention public transport

 

[furlong]

I'm looking forward to seeing how creative people get with the loose term face covering. I'm currently considering drilling two eye holes in a bucket and wearing on my head. It would cover my nose and mouth so there for is classed as a face covering!

Try a balaclava where only the eyes show - that's an exceptionally good "face covering" and may be more comfortable than a muzzle. If enough people choose to comply with this by wearing balaclavas, that'll help with the government's message that public transport is a scary place people should be avoiding. As a positive side-effect it would also improve your privacy while travelling. And maybe the government would want to get back to normal as soon as possible so it can use its CCTV surveillance again.

 

[Mintona]

Raise it with your manager and H&S rep in the first instance, explain that it causes you issues seeing through your glasses and makes you feel dizzy, and if going on from that you think you're being asked to do something which puts you in serious and imminent danger (which not being able to see, and having your head spinning, then being told to work around moving trains, electrification, stairs etc is reasonably likely to mean) you can stop the job and invoke Worksafe.

Yeah I’m probably going to have to do that. I have a scarf too which I will wear if I really must, but the mask itself is just too uncomfortable.

800321 is now wearing masks

 

[AM9]

I thought the government owed allegiance to the citizens after all they pay they wages so the are the bosses.

What has that got to do with the price of eggs?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Hand the phone over to the customer? No chance I would touch it! Handling phones multiple other people have used is a much bigger risk than walking past someone who isn’t wearing a muzzle.

Makes me wonder what the ultimate goal is here. Is it controlling the spread of the virus, or is it controlling and oppressing the population?

This

In my opinion, it is controlling and oppressing the public under a "divide and rule" scheme. Creating divisions within society and opplying "rule" for non-compliance

 

[Mojo]

The New Legislation page for Friday June 12th is https://www.legislation.gov.uk/new/uksi/2020-06-12

It links to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/588/contents/made has "The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No. 4) Regulations 2020"

That is a link to "Original (As made)", but it doesn't mention public transport

I think everyone knows
this now, hence the discussions!

 

[arbeia]

So in theory if I travel to Edinburgh from tomorrow, I can remove the compulsory face covering when the train reaches the Scottish/English border and the reverse in the opposite direction?

 

[Huntergreed]

So in theory if I travel to Edinburgh from tomorrow, I can remove the compulsory face covering when the train reaches the Scottish/English border and the reverse in the opposite direction?

From a purely legal perspective I imagine this is the case, as face coverings are only “recommended” in Scotland as opposed to mandated in England.

I imagine there’ll be some insistent staff and passengers who demand the covering remains on throughout.

How bizarre has this become when legally we are required to put a scarf around our mouth and nose and then remove it when we cross into a different devolved administration. It’s ridiculous that the government didn’t even try to discuss this with the other nations concerned and quite frankly it’s shown who the government really care about “The Not So United Kingdom of England”

 

[317 forever]

The conductors will not pass through the passenger saloon except in emergency situations or should say a pass com need resetting. They will not challenge anyone for not wearing masks and trains must not be delayed at any time for that reason.

As it is, if someone is sitting in a carriage on their own, there would seem little need for them to wear the mask until they get up and head to the toilet, exit or wherever.

 

[island]

A similar issue is likely to present itself on the Enterprise service.

 

[dk1]

As it is, if someone is sitting in a carriage on their own, there would seem little need for them to wear the mask until they get up and head to the toilet, exit or wherever.

Exactly & you can take them off to eat or drink. I'm sure there will be a few super keen conductors who check the saloon cctv & make announcements in the same way they tell the passenger with red shoes in coach C to remove your feet from the seats immediately.

 

[Llanigraham]

Exactly & you can take them off to eat or drink. I'm sure there will be a few super keen conductors who check the saloon cctv & make announcements in the same way they tell the passenger with red shoes in coach C to remove your feet from the seats immediately.

They are not able to monitor the in-coach CCTV. There are no moniters, it just goes to "tape" (memory if you want to be pedantic)

 

[dk1]

They are not able to monitor the in-coach CCTV. There are no moniters, it just goes to "tape" (memory if you want to be pedantic)

No full cctv is available at all times for conductors to monitor in the rear cab of our fleet & very good it is too. As a driver we only have access when stationary unless it's a pass com activation.

 

[Llanigraham]

No full cctv is available at all times for conductors to monitor in the rear cab of our fleet & very good it is too. As a driver we only have access when stationary unless it's a pass com activation.

Well it certainly isn't available on the trains around here.

 

[dk1]

Well it certainly isn't available on the trains around here.

Just wait until you get a nice shiny new fleet like us

 

[AM9]

... How bizarre has this become when legally we are required to put a scarf around our mouth and nose and then remove it when we cross into a different devolved administration. ...

Who or what says that a face covering must be removed when you "cross into a different devolved administration"? Unless the wearer is just being childish.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Who or what says that a face covering must be removed when you "cross into a different devolved administration"? Unless the wearer is just being childish.

As has been stated several times: There is still no law (or regulation) which requires a face covering on public transport anyway. You can't take off what you do not have to wear in the first place

 

[AM9]

As has been stated several times: There is still no law (or regulation) which requires a face covering on public transport anyway. You can't take off what you do not have to wear in the first place

It wasn't me that said: " How bizarre has this become when legally we are required to put a scarf around our mouth and nose and then remove it when we cross into a different devolved administration. ". See post #1058, and note that the sentence is in the present tense.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

It wasn't me that said: " How bizarre has this become when legally we are required to put a scarf around our mouth and nose and then remove it when we cross into a different devolved administration. ". See post #1058, and note that the sentence is in the present tense.

Indeed, it would have been better to have said 'are able to remove it' rather than 'then remove it'.

A problem of the UK becoming devolved. I'm sure there are many international borders where something is legal (or legally required) in one country but then illegal (or not legally required) immediately across the border. An immediate example being possession/consumption of alcohol.

I don't entirely understand the reaction to mask wearing. I had a bit of an 'oh now it's getting ridiculous, especially after 10 weeks' moment, but then I thought, is it such a massive imposition? - as long as a reasonable level of transmission risk remains.

I follow the progress of the new Standard Gauge Railway in Kenya. All of the people (trackside, workshop, platform, office, on train) in the many photographs for the past 10 weeks are wearing proper surgical type masks - not scarfs. At press conferences the mask is lowered to speak, everyone else in the room - including senior politicians, are masked. Perhaps our leaders need to start masking up? Perhaps police toting semi-automatic weapons makes a difference in attitude! A recent TV news piece on the refurbishment of a long out-of-use metre gauge line has (literally, honest!) the man from Del Monte doing his piece to camera without removing his mask.

Part of my initial negative reaction was simply because I do not own any scarves or masks and had not seen any masks for sale in Tesco - my weekly activity for the past 10 exciting weeks! Simpy solved by a trip to Amazon - the two-week delay between announcement and introduction being a suitable gap to allow that to happen. £2.99 for 10, £6.99 for 50, delivered in a couple of days.

 

[Ianno87]

Those with 'breathing difficulties' and very young children. Whatever encompasses 'breathing difficulties' is anyone's guess right now.

Is there a definition of "very young"? I could imagine my not-quite-4 year old not being very willing (though I'll probably avoid taking him on public transport whilst masks are mandatory)

 

[lkpridgeon]

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/592/contents/made seems to have been published now.

Reasonable excuse
4. For the purposes of regulation 3(1), the circumstances in which a person (“P”) has a
reasonable excuse include those where—
(a) P cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering—
(i) because of any physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability (within the
meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010(g)), or
(ii) without severe distress;
(b) P is travelling with, or providing assistance to, another person (“B”) and B relies on lip
reading to communicate with P;
(c) P removes their face covering to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to
themselves or others;
(d) P is travelling to avoid injury, or to escape a risk of harm, and does not have a face
covering with them;
(e) if it is reasonably necessary for P to eat or drink, P removes their face covering to eat or
drink;
(f) P has to remove their face covering to take medication;
(g) a relevant person requests that P remove their face covering.

 

[yorksrob]

So it does let you eat or drink !

 

[lkpridgeon]

And it applies from the time of boarding not when you enter the premises.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/592/contents/made seems to have been published now.

So they have introduced a new SI rather than attach it to the existing one. Is there a similar one for 'Wearing of Face Coverings at Hospitals' and Wearing etc at High Street Shops.

Review after six months, expiry after 12.

 

[NorthOxonian]

So they have introduced a new SI rather than attach it to the existing one. Is there a similar one for 'Wearing of Face Coverings at Hospitals' and Wearing etc at High Street Shops.

Review after six months, expiry after 12.

That's public transport done for then - if this has to be in place for six months minimum and more likely a year, then we'll be having masks long after most distancing has gone. That's going to lead to a long-term stigma against public transport as being inherently dirty.

 

[Bikeman78]

Is there a definition of "very young"? I could imagine my not-quite-4 year old not being very willing (though I'll probably avoid taking him on public transport whilst masks are mandatory)

Under 11 I think. Can't remember where I read that though.

 

[Llanigraham]

That's public transport done for then - if this has to be in place for six months minimum and more likely a year, then we'll be having masks long after most distancing has gone. That's going to lead to a long-term stigma against public transport as being inherently dirty.

You fail to understand legislation.
It means that this item of legislation exists for a MAXIMUM of that time, and at any time within those 6 months can be extended or rescinded.

 

[greatkingrat]

That's public transport done for then - if this has to be in place for six months minimum and more likely a year, then we'll be having masks long after most distancing has gone. That's going to lead to a long-term stigma against public transport as being inherently dirty.

It's just there will be an automatic review after six months. There is nothing stopping the government removing the regulations next week or next month if they so wish.

 

[Weekender]

It's just there will be an automatic review after six months. There is nothing stopping the government removing the regulations next week or next month if they so wish.

although it is much more likely in 12 months time it will then be renewed for a further 12 months

 

[NorthOxonian]

It's just there will be an automatic review after six months. There is nothing stopping the government removing the regulations next week or next month if they so wish.

Ah, I didn't quite realise. I just hope they don't use that automatic figure as a default timeline and review this carefully in a couple of months. If pollution and congestion start rising beyond pre-lockdown levels then we need to promote a return to public transport and masks prevent that.