Covid restrictions to end on 19th July

[big_rig]

I think you have his position exactly right.

Shapps will be fully aware that making the 17:44 service mandatory but the 15:44 voluntary would be completely unworkable.

In reality, the government's position means that operators have been empowered to continue to require masks as a blanket restriction as this will be easier to manage operationally and allow them to appease the pressure to keep social distancing measures from unions and the likes of Andy Burnham etc, whilst ensuring that any backlash is deflected locally and not towards the Government.

Sadly I think this sounds like the case, doesn't it. All the examples various players (Shapps, Khan, Burnham) come up with are ridiculous. The SoS was going on about eating a sandwich with a mask half off being silly (you can do this already), Johnson was saying something about if you were sat in an empty carriage at midnight for hours you could take it off, and the Mayors are insisting that every train is full of desperately ill and vulnerable people going to cancer appointments at all hours of the day. Then mixing up guidance with conditions of carriage, operators doing X but not Y, easyJet saying you must...it'll be 'interesting' to see what they come up with..!

 

[DelayRepay]

In terms of masks in workplaces (which obviously includes public transport, shops etc), I wonder how much businesses will be guided by their (perceived) responsibilities under health and safety legislation, and how much influence their insurers will have.

It is common in workplaces to have certain procedures that seem to add no value other than to comply with 'elf and safety'. Until now it's not been much of an issue as the measures have been defined by the government, but in the new world I can see a lot of firms mandating certain measures so that they can defend any future legal claims on the basis they did everything reasonably possible.

 

[Watershed]

Sadly I think this sounds like the case, doesn't it. All the examples various players (Shapps, Khan, Burnham) come up with are ridiculous. The SoS was going on about eating a sandwich with a mask half off being silly (you can do this already), Johnson was saying something about if you were sat in an empty carriage at midnight for hours you could take it off, and the Mayors are insisting that every train is full of desperately ill and vulnerable people going to cancer appointments at all hours of the day. Then mixing up guidance with conditions of carriage, operators doing X but not Y, easyJet saying you must...it'll be 'interesting' to see what they come up with..!

In reality this will just be formalising and 'legitimising' what has long gone on.

Go on a busy, crowded service and you will find a greater percentage of people wearing masks and trying to sit apart from others (in many cases standing instead of sitting near someone, as if that's better!).

Go on a quiet service with people sat far apart, and lots of people will either take their masks off entirely, be "eating/drinking" for their whole journey or simply use them as chin warmers.

I don't think any of that will change instantly on 19 July.

 

[Philip]

I don't doubt the effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing severe disease against covid, but I think the number of cases we currently have shows that this isn't just some 'typical respiratory seasonal virus like flu' as some seem to portray it; we don't get this number of cases of flu in summer, at least with the level of immunity we have now built up over 18 months through infection and vaccines. The media have gone over the top with the scaremongering at times, but the virulence of this is clearly on another scale to flu.

 

[big_rig]

In reality this will just be formalising and 'legitimising' what has long gone on.

Go on a busy, crowded service and you will find a greater percentage of people wearing masks and trying to sit apart from others (in many cases standing instead of sitting near someone, as if that's better!).

Go on a quiet service with people sat far apart, and lots of people will either take their masks off entirely, be "eating/drinking" for their whole journey or simply use them as chin warmers.

I don't think any of that will change instantly on 19 July.

The Independent is now quoting Shapps as being "very relaxed" if masks are made mandatory on the tube. But he is also quoted in the same breath as saying "we are shifting to this next phase where people use common sense and personal responsibility." It is all nonsense and I don't see what is going to change on the 19th from the current situation. Masks are enforced by law at all times at the moment, they will continue to be enforced at all times by a different law in a few weeks time. It will be a big shift to being all about common sense and not mandating things, but also about being relaxed for Sadiq Khan to mandate them until kingdom come.

Minister ‘very relaxed’ if masks remain mandatory on London Tube

‘On a crowded Underground train it may feel right to wear a face covering for the next period’ – transport secretary, Grant Shapps

www.independent.co.uk

"The transport secretary, Grant Shapps, has said he would be “very relaxed” if the London mayor mandated the use of masks on public transport in the capital from 19 July, when the obligation to wear a face covering on public transport is lifted in England."

Asked by Labour’s Ben Bradshaw for his response if Sadiq Khan wanted to implement a condition of carriage requiring face coverings.

“I’m very relaxed about that. The most important thing … is to reassure people that it is safe to travel, which it is."

On the other hand mind Johnson is having a go at Starmer in PMQs (I am reminded why I never, ever watch this) for saying that the only difference Starmer can come up with between them is that Labour want to mandate masks on the tube and Johnson doesn't. So hoepfully that's something!

 

[Yew]

I don't doubt the effectiveness of the vaccines in preventing severe disease against covid, but I think the number of cases we currently have shows that this isn't just some 'typical respiratory seasonal virus like flu' as some seem to portray it; we don't get this number of cases of flu in summer, at least with the level of immunity we have now built up over 18 months through infection and vaccines. The media have gone over the top with the scaremongering at times, but the virulence of this is clearly on another scale to flu.

We don’t usually bother counting them…

 

[WelshBluebird]

It is common in workplaces to have certain procedures that seem to add no value other than to comply with 'elf and safety' keep workers safe and ensure companies don't exploit employees by expecting them to work in unsafe ways / environments.

Fixed that for you.
Now, sure some companies go overboard, but health and safety rules are there to specifically keep workers safe and if a particular workplace has a rule that seems odd or unnecessary, it is usually a sign that someone has managed to injure themselves in that way before and injury to someone else in the same method has been identified as a likely concern.

Until now it's not been much of an issue as the measures have been defined by the government,

I'd be amazed if the government don't offer guidance for this. They have done so throughout the pandemic and the company I worked for has been fairly busy over periods of the the last 15 months going through that advice to work out what is needed to be done. I (and the company I work for) fully expect there to be some guidelines in place for reopening - what those are who knows but I'd imagine it will likely be around things like air flow, people going home if they have symptoms etc.

so that they can defend any future legal claims on the basis they did everything reasonably possible.

There is no such requirement to do "everything possible" though. You can never "do everything possible" in regards to preventing injury or ill health caused at work. What you can do is identify clear risks and mitigate against them. If a company has done that, then nobody will win a case against them for not doing everything possible. And if the government does put out advice for workplaces, then as long as companies follow that advice, again there is no way anyone will win a case against that.

 

[Dent]

I think the number of cases we currently have shows that this isn't just some 'typical respiratory seasonal virus like flu' as some seem to portray it; we don't get this number of cases of flu in summer, at least with the level of immunity we have now built up over 18 months through infection and vaccines.

How do you know this? Are around a million perfectly healthy people tested for flu every day?

 

[yorkie]

Yes you can get them at the moment but you couldn't at the height of the pandemic and if there is a sudden surge in demand from people at high risk with the ending of restrictions the same may apply.

I doubt there will be a sudden surge in demand, but right now that's a hypothetical argument.

Extremely Vulnerable were defined by the shielding program and included a variety of conditions and expect it may well make sense for most of these people to get FFP3 masks...

The definition is largely based on the situation as of a year ago, before we didn't have a vaccine. Now we do, the vast majority of people who are classified as "extremely vulnerable" will by now have excellent immunity against Sars-CoV-2.

There can't be large numbers of people who are unable to mount an adaptive or innate immune response against coronaviruses, given the fact we already have four commonly circulating human Coronaviruses which we live with, in a state of endemic equilibrium.

Operators will still also have to follow the Equalities Act, which was the origin of most of the existing exemptions in the current regulations....

They do, but I am aware of some transport operators who choose to break the law. Until someone takes them to court, they will continue to get away with it.

So, I’ll ask again, if FFP3 masks aren’t available/too expensive/don’t fit (delete as appropriate), what is your proposed solution?

I think we can safely say by now that no viable solution will be forthcoming; everyone is going to have to accept that Sars-CoV-2 is becoming the 5th endemic human Coronavirus, which we have to live with, whether we like it or not.

 

[jumble]

Don’t you just love the condescending comment “have you forgotten your mask”.

Yes after a year of continuous bombardment of sanctimonious **** I’ve just forgotten all about....

No because if the person has genuinely forgotten then they can say thanks not be embarrassed at all

 

[43066]

I think we can safely say by now that no viable solution will be forthcoming; everyone is going to have to accept that Sars-CoV-2 is becoming the 5th endemic human Coronavirus, which we have to live with, whether we like it or not.

Agreed. I think that has been obvious since last year!

The question is how much more damage will be done by these ineffective and highly damaging restrictions before certain people finally accept that.

 

[yorksrob]

I suppose its not the end of the world if masks remain mandated on some short,locally managed services, so long as longer distance services aren't included.

Also they need to not be compulsory on platforms as well.

 

[Crossover]

For me personally, should masks be removed from legislation, I am not certain I will wear one, though I'd veer on the side of not as things currently stand.

When I was at my worst in terms of anxiety a few years ago, I become hyper-aware of various things including illness and gained a serious aversion to becoming so (as irrational as it may seem, looking in). It is not a good place to be and I refuse to let the Government messaging beat me into submission on the matter in seeing everyone as a walking "bomb". Sadly, I think it has "worked" in some quarters

I suppose its not the end of the world if masks remain mandated on some short,locally managed services, so long as longer distance services aren't included.

The problem is where do you draw the line? For example, should it be that if I catch the 14:09 TPE service from Dewsbury to Leeds, I must wear a mask because it is a short distance service (Huddersfield to Leeds all stops) but if I catch the 14:27 service between the same two stations, it isn't required as the service is long distance (Liverpool to Newcastle)?

 

[yorksrob]

For me personally, should masks be removed from legislation, I am not certain I will wear one, though I'd veer on the side of not as things currently stand.

When I was at my worst in terms of anxiety a few years ago, I become hyper-aware of various things including illness and gained a serious aversion to becoming so (as irrational as it may seem, looking in). It is not a good place to be and I refuse to let the Government messaging beat me into submission on the matter in seeing everyone as a walking "bomb". Sadly, I think it has "worked" in some quarters



The problem is where do you draw the line? For example, should it be that if I catch the 14:09 TPE service from Dewsbury to Leeds, I must wear a mask because it is a short distance service (Huddersfield to Leeds all stops) but if I catch the 14:27 service between the same two stations, it isn't required as the service is long distance (Liverpool to Newcastle)?

Persoonally I'd leave it to trams and LU.

 

[Watershed]

Persoonally I'd leave it to trams and LU.

Any approach with different rules on different operators is going to cause inconsistency and lead to illogical outcomes.

Why should you have to wear a mask if the next train from Gunnersbury to Richmond is an Underground service, as opposed to an Overground service?

And why should masks be compulsory if you're travelling nearly 1.5 hours on the Central line from West Ruislip to Epping, but not on the Greenford or Romford-Upminster shuttle?

 

[yorksrob]

Any approach with different rules on different operators is going to cause inconsistency and lead to illogical outcomes.

Why should you have to wear a mask if the next train from Gunnersbury to Richmond is an Underground service, as opposed to an Overground service?

And why should masks be compulsory if you're travelling nearly 1.5 hours on the Central line from West Ruislip to Epping, but not on the Greenford or Romford-Upminster shuttle?

It's more that it would satisfy the respective Mayors without affecting me too much.

 

[DelayRepay]

Fixed that for you.
Now, sure some companies go overboard, but health and safety rules are there to specifically keep workers safe and if a particular workplace has a rule that seems odd or unnecessary, it is usually a sign that someone has managed to injure themselves in that way before and injury to someone else in the same method has been identified as a likely concern.

I disagree. Most H&S rules are in place for a very good reason, but there are some that don't appear to serve any purpose and have probably been implemented by someone without a proper risk assessment. This is what we've also seen with some of the Covid rules over the last year or so - implemented with the best of intentions I am sure, but not actually mitigating any real risk.

I'd be amazed if the government don't offer guidance for this. They have done so throughout the pandemic and the company I worked for has been fairly busy over periods of the the last 15 months going through that advice to work out what is needed to be done. I (and the company I work for) fully expect there to be some guidelines in place for reopening - what those are who knows but I'd imagine it will likely be around things like air flow, people going home if they have symptoms etc.

I think the difference is that it will all be guidance, whereas at the moment it is a mixture of guidance and law. My hope is that the guidance covers the things you highlight, which are sensible and proportionate measures. I hope that the guidance doesn't carry forward a lot of the existing rules and guidelines around distancing, masks, putting workers into 'bubbles' etc. My own workplace switched off the coffee machine and claimed it was due to government guidelines (I do not know if this is true or if someone was being over enthusiastic).

There is no such requirement to do "everything possible" though. You can never "do everything possible" in regards to preventing injury or ill health caused at work. What you can do is identify clear risks and mitigate against them. If a company has done that, then nobody will win a case against them for not doing everything possible. And if the government does put out advice for workplaces, then as long as companies follow that advice, again there is no way anyone will win a case against that.

Where you have quoted me, you missed a word out. I said "everything reasonably possible" which I think is the standard a court would apply. When you add that word back in, I think we actually agree.

 

[notlob.divad]

You are right, especially given that modern buildings are designed to conserve energy. Anyone opening a window to let the fresh air in during winter 2019 would have been considered out of their mind.

It's tricky, but not impossible. With the benefit of hindsight, some of the money spent on plastic screens and track and trace and so on might have been better spent making adaptations to buildings to improve ventilation.

The problem is that most cheap domestic and commercial air conditioning systems are based on recycling the air. With fluids controlling the heat flows via external radiators.

Top of the range systems have an air to air heat exchanger where the stale air is expelled with fresh brought in. They can be both highly efficient whilst still allowing proper ventilation. However they require a high capital expenditure, so are overlooked by the majority of developers.

 

[jumble]

Grant Shapps has just said to the transport committee that he will fully support train and tube operators in mandating the wearing of masks as a condition of carriage beyond 19th July. He says that whilst the Government's position is to move from law to guidance and common sense in most circumstances, he believes there are locations such as busy train and tube lines where it will be "entirely reasonable" to expect continued mask wearing and he is happy for individual operators to enforce this on their own terms, on a company by company basis

Any approach with different rules on different operators is going to cause inconsistency and lead to illogical outcomes.

Why should you have to wear a mask if the next train from Gunnersbury to Richmond is an Underground service, as opposed to an Overground service?

And why should masks be compulsory if you're travelling nearly 1.5 hours on the Central line from West Ruislip to Epping, but not on the Greenford or Romford-Upminster shuttle?

Indeed or many other examples which are worse Chiltern Harrow to Amersham as TFL is not involved except owning the tracks as opposed to Metropolitan line
Since at the moment no one is doing any kind of serious mask enforcement on TFL I doubt this will be a problem in reality.
As we have established TFL will not be able to enforce this, only BTP

 

[AlterEgo]

Indeed or many other examples which are worse Chiltern Harrow to Amersham as TFL is not involved except owning the tracks as opposed to Metropolitan line
Since at the moment no one is doing any kind of serious mask enforcement on TFL I doubt this will be a problem in reality.
As we have established TFL will not be able to enforce this, only BTP

The BTP’s enforcement power will be very limited given it won’t actually be illegal. They might be able to remove you for causing a nuisance but that’s about it.

 

[Domh245]

The problem is that most cheap domestic and commercial air conditioning systems are based on recycling the air. With fluids controlling the heat flows via external radiators.

Top of the range systems have an air to air heat exchanger where the stale air is expelled with fresh brought in. They can be both highly efficient whilst still allowing proper ventilation. However they require a high capital expenditure, so are overlooked by the majority of developers.

There are many different ways to "skin a cat" when it comes to HVAC, each with their own benefits/drawbacks. It really ought to be separated into the two constituent parts: fresh air supply/extract, and heating/air-conditioning. Even on "higher end" and larger systems, the air conditioning is often separated from the air supply - especially as air turnover is relatively low and bears little relation to heating/cooling demand

There are also many more ways of doing heat recovery than simple air-air heat exchangers. Thermal wheels (rotating honeycomb meshes) are a favourite as they're the most efficient, but at the moment are recommended to be completely bypassed. The 'ideal' heat recovery at the moment (or other situations where you want to completely isolate inlet & exhaust) are 'runarounds' - with a coil in the exhaust to absorb heat from that airstream, and a coil in the fresh-air side to release the heat into that stream (+ a pump to move the heat exchange liquid of choice from one to other) - quite common in hospitals and other biological buildings AIUI.

You can get relatively cheap MVHRs though - this one is ~£250, though you get what you pay for - only two fan speeds and relatively low throughput.

 

[jumble]

The BTP’s enforcement power will be very limited given it won’t actually be illegal. They might be able to remove you for causing a nuisance but that’s about it.

Good luck to them removing someone who claims to be exempt for being a nuisance and the complaints that would generate

 

[Drogba11CFC]

Zerocommonsensezoe is in full Violet Elizabeth Bott mode, claiming that she can get Poundshop SAGE to get the restrictions reinstated and that she always gets what she wants.

This is in addition to comparing herself to Rosa Parks and claiming that if your business doesn't enforce masks and social distancing, zen your name vill also go on ze list.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

For me personally, should masks be removed from legislation, I am not certain I will wear one, though I'd veer on the side of not as things currently stand.

When I was at my worst in terms of anxiety a few years ago, I become hyper-aware of various things including illness and gained a serious aversion to becoming so (as irrational as it may seem, looking in). It is not a good place to be and I refuse to let the Government messaging beat me into submission on the matter in seeing everyone as a walking "bomb". Sadly, I think it has "worked" in some quarters



The problem is where do you draw the line? For example, should it be that if I catch the 14:09 TPE service from Dewsbury to Leeds, I must wear a mask because it is a short distance service (Huddersfield to Leeds all stops) but if I catch the 14:27 service between the same two stations, it isn't required as the service is long distance (Liverpool to Newcastle)?

The The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings on Public Transport) (England) Regulations 2020 which mandate face masks on public transport will be revoked along with majority of all other Covid regulations. An operator will have to amend there condition of carriage so in case of the main line that would be the National Conditions of Carriage as im not sure individual operators have specific ones so it would be come a system wide requirement. We know TfL want to continue it as well so you can see this coming.

As to how it will be enforced im not clear as i don't know under what legal powers the condition of carriage are enabled now and enforced other than BTP are usually involved.

Main issue will be staff will continue to stay out of passenger areas unless they have to I suspect which is understandable. My take is we will have a level of compliance we are seeing now and a zero intervention from staff or BTP where non compliance occurs.

 

[notlob.divad]

This is in addition to comparing herself to Rosa Parks and claiming that if your business doesn't enforce masks and social distancing, zen your name vill also go on ze list.

Sounds just like the flip side of many on here who are saying they will boycott anywhere that does ask them to continue wearing a mask.

The only thing we learn from this is that you cannot please all of the people all of the time.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Grant Shapps... ...is happy for individual operators to enforce this on their own terms, on a company by company basis.

That is a recipe for chaos and confusion.

Consistency is the key.

 

[Philip]

How do you know this? Are around a million perfectly healthy people tested for flu every day?

Flu isn't as catchy as covid is, this was scientifically confirmed very early on in the pandemic and is backed up by the number of cases we're seeing now even amongst a 50-70% immune population.

Aa for face coverings, perhaps a far eastern approach would be sensible going forward; no legal or company rules enforcing them, but a responsibility on people to wear them if they're travelling on busy trains and buses or shopping whilst feeling mildly rough (ie. coughing and sneezing a lot, cold or mild 'fluey' symptoms).

 

[Dent]

Flu isn't as catchy as covid is, this was scientifically confirmed very early on in the pandemic and is backed up by the number of cases we're seeing now even amongst a 70% immune population.

"The number of cases we're seeing" doesn't back up any comparison with flu, since there is not the same level of testing for flu so nothing to compare the numbers to.

Also, "very early on in the pandemic" was before anyone was vaccinated, so a fundamentally different situation to now.

 

[westv]

Aa for face coverings, perhaps a far eastern approach would be sensible going forward; no legal or company rules enforcing them, but a responsibility on people to wear them if they're travelling on busy trains and buses or shopping whilst feeling mildly rough (ie. coughing and sneezing a lot, cold or mild 'fluey' symptoms).

I'd be happier if people just used a tissue or their hand if they really have to.
Don't those in the far east think having a good sniff when wearing a mask is good manners rather than blowing your nose? No thank you.

 

[MikeWM]

I'd be happier if people just used a tissue or their hand if they really have to.

Same here. There is a reason that the previous - far superior - advice was 'catch it, bin it, kill it', as opposed to 'catch it and then secure it tightly over your face for the next hour or two.'