UK face coverings discussion

bramling · 25 Jul 2020

Bletchleyite said:
I think it (the whole thing, including masks) is likely to last 1-2 years in common with the Spanish Flu of 1918. Obviously a vaccine or effective treatment provides an earlier get-out, though.

There’s no way masks will last that long. Myself and colleagues are sick of it in our work setting already, with all the trouble it’s causing, and quite simply it won’t be tolerated for that length of time. I suspect it’ll be something which fizzles out in time, like the lockdown did. That’s if events don’t overtake - the level of incorrect mask use must be cause for some concern.

RailUK Forums

AdamWW · 25 Jul 2020

Mugby said:
I certainly don't support the idea that masks are a means of reducing the spread because when this thing started, we were told that the virus wasn't airborne, it was touch transmitted. Since then, to my certain knowledge, the 'experts' have changed there minds about masks at least four times, if not more.

I don't remember being told that it wasn't airborne.

And yes, the experts (why quotes round it?) have "changed their minds", if you mean by that changing their views as more evidence has come in. Would you prefer it if scientists blindly followed their first view in the face of contradictory evidence that emerges later?

LAX54 · 25 Jul 2020

Huntergreed said:
It's utterly disgraceful and shameful how those who are genuinely exempt from mask-wearing are being treated, and I would argue discriminated against, for something that's completely out of their control (some of them quite literally, as disability is a protected characteristic in the UK). I do think however this highlights one of the issues that we currently have as a country.

We've got to the point where the general public perception is 'if it's not COVID, it doesn't matter', and as a society we are, quite literally, willing to discriminate against those who are the have a genuine, fully valid reason for not being able to wear a mask. The fact that, as a society, we are willing to do this to introduce a law which has no scientific basis and is entirely political which has been introduced through improper use of emergency powers is really worrying and whilst many people say 'this is for the greater good', please try and think about how you would feel if you were exempt and were, quite literally, encouraged to receive abuse from the public according to the police.

It's not right. Until we have strong supporting evidence I'll remain convinced that this law is unjustified, but NOTHING gives anyone permission to question someone's medical history, make them feel ashamed for it, or try and guilt-trip them into doing something which could make them potentially do something which is dangerous to them (wear a mask) and, quite frankly, the way this law is being handled and the comments from the police surrounding this right are simply disgraceful and shocking.

Our local Budgens has a bisign outside advsing that masks...MUST be worn, otherwise no entry

yorkie · 25 Jul 2020

LAX54 said:
Our local Budgens has a bisign outside advsing that masks...MUST be worn, otherwise no entry

They have to allow people who are covered by exemptions to enter.

I like the Northern posters that ask people to be considerate of others; that's the way to do it (rare that I credit Northern, but it's due in this case); incidentally the station I saw this poster yesterday is perhaps the most apt for this discussion on the Northern network

Ken H · 25 Jul 2020

This is really depressing

All this coronavirus law has been brought in under statutory instruments (SI)
That bypasses the normal scrutiny of law by the commons and lords.
And the mask SI was brought in the day the commons went into recess for the summer.
There again the useless 650 morons in the commons would just have nodded it through.
(An SI can be brought in by a minister. It has to be 'laid before parliament' and i think can be challenged by MP's, but they rarely are. They are designed to make minor changes to the law, not to bring in a whole raft of new legislation. They are very common.)

I have mild breathing difficulties - enough to alarm an anaesthetist before a recent operation. So I wont be wearing a muzzle, and will use my inhaler as badge of exemption to a shopworker or policeman. Its nothing to do with anyone else.
no plans to go on a bus or a train.

Bantamzen · 25 Jul 2020

Huntergreed said:
Came across this article from the Beeb this morning:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/53108405

It goes through many of the myths about masks being dangerous to your breathing, and it uses the reasoning of “no evidence to support this claim” to dismiss them. Funnily enough no mention of the fact that the effectiveness of masks in lowering transmission of the virus has “no evidence to support this claim” either.

The BBC seem to have been going out of their way to promote masks, so much so that its left me wondering if someone on the editorial team has something of a fetish for them. Maybe we need to get the "specialist" clubs open again so that the BBC News team can get their kicks elsewhere....

Huntergreed said:
Another concerning thing I’m seeing on social media this morning is that People are now discussing masks as a “fashion accessory” and some think we should keep them mandated for after the pandemic “it will help save lives from other causes and they look good”. We surely aren’t going to do this?

Yeah, masks are rapidly becoming a fashion item amongst the fanatics. Sad but true.

bramling said:
There’s no way masks will last that long. Myself and colleagues are sick of it in our work setting already, with all the trouble it’s causing, and quite simply it won’t be tolerated for that length of time. I suspect it’ll be something which fizzles out in time, like the lockdown did. That’s if events don’t overtake - the level of incorrect mask use must be cause for some concern.

Indeed, so many people don't use them properly to begin with. Sooner or later someone is going to have to wake up to the fact that people are walking around with a virus collecting device strapped to their faces, and that all that lovely drool will be spreading onto surfaces way more than if we just left people to breath normally.

AdamWW said:
I don't remember being told that it wasn't airborne.

And yes, the experts (why quotes round it?) have "changed their minds", if you mean by that changing their views as more evidence has come in. Would you prefer it if scientists blindly followed their first view in the face of contradictory evidence that emerges later?

Have you watched the video with the two epidemiologists posted back on page 4? If not I'd highly recommend it.

LAX54 said:
Our local Budgens has a bisign outside advsing that masks...MUST be worn, otherwise no entry

Then it needs pointing out to them that the law allows exemptions, and as such they are discriminating against those that fall into that category.

Ken H said:
This is really depressing

All this coronavirus law has been brought in under statutory instruments (SI)
That bypasses the normal scrutiny of law by the commons and lords.
And the mask SI was brought in the day the commons went into recess for the summer.
There again the useless 650 morons in the commons would just have nodded it through.
(An SI can be brought in by a minister. It has to be 'laid before parliament' and i think can be challenged by MP's, but they rarely are. They are designed to make minor changes to the law, not to bring in a whole raft of new legislation. They are very common.)

I have mild breathing difficulties - enough to alarm an anaesthetist before a recent operation. So I wont be wearing a muzzle, and will use my inhaler as badge of exemption to a shopworker or policeman. Its nothing to do with anyone else.
no plans to go on a bus or a train.

You are perfectly entitled not to wear a mask, and never let anyone try to convince or worse shame you into doing so.

bramling · 25 Jul 2020

Ken H said:
This is really depressing

All this coronavirus law has been brought in under statutory instruments (SI)
That bypasses the normal scrutiny of law by the commons and lords.
And the mask SI was brought in the day the commons went into recess for the summer.
There again the useless 650 morons in the commons would just have nodded it through.
(An SI can be brought in by a minister. It has to be 'laid before parliament' and i think can be challenged by MP's, but they rarely are. They are designed to make minor changes to the law, not to bring in a whole raft of new legislation. They are very common.)

I have mild breathing difficulties - enough to alarm an anaesthetist before a recent operation. So I wont be wearing a muzzle, and will use my inhaler as badge of exemption to a shopworker or policeman. Its nothing to do with anyone else.
no plans to go on a bus or a train.

Had these measures received proper scrutiny then perhaps the legislation would have been better, so we wouldn’t be seeing failures like the Budgens notice.

Is BJ capable of getting *anything* right?

initiation · 25 Jul 2020

First time wearing a mask when out for my haircut.

I found it very unpleasant after less than 10 minutes. Fortunately i was in and out in 20. This entire thing is super depressing.

yorkie · 25 Jul 2020

bramling said:
The other big elephant in the room has to be open-plan offices. Judging by the emptiness seen in places like the city of London and the lack of railway commuter traffic, clearly many who work in such places are still either furloughed or working from home. Unless employers can find another way of doing things like massive amounts of Perspex screening, it seems almost inevitable there’s going to be clamour for masks in such places on the basis that they must pose more of a risk than shops, as people will be mingling with each other for longer periods.

Maybe; I'd counter that with:

if you are spending a long time close to an infected person, a mask is less likely to be effective
people who are coughing etc are less likely to go into work in an office environment than they are to go shopping
wearing masks for extended periods is going to be more problematic than the relatively short time spent in shops

But you are right that some people will be desperately trying to mandate their use in offices, but it will be very much a small minority.

I am fortunate: in my job that does involve working in an office, I have my own office, and I definitely won't be required to wear a mask in any setting in that workplace environment. And my other jobs are work from home jobs anyway.

While I'll put up with wearing a mask in shops and on public transport, I would not do so in a workplace environment.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

I think it's quite simple, really, in any setting, and I don't see any need for different rules for different public places (in this context "a place to which the public has access") beyond "indoor" and "outdoor" as defined by the smoking ban rules. If 2m can be maintained strictly, then no masks needed. This has proven to be impossible in supermarkets, for example.

If 1m can be maintained and there is adequate mitigation, such as American style enclosed desk cubicles in an office, or such as supermarket checkout staff being behind perspex screens, then no masks either unless you want to.

If mitigation isn't possible, or 1m can't be strictly maintained at all times, then masks and/or face shields.

Under no circumstances whatsoever, other than briefly for identification or to assist a person who needs to lip read etc (these are all defined in law) should anyone be prevented from wearing one if they want to. One exception: I would ban the use of valved masks that do not have a filter covering exhalation, as most don't. Also the exemptions as listed must apply, but in a workplace this must give rise to other mitigations where feasible rather than just "oh, he's exempt, it doesn't matter".

Richard Scott · 25 Jul 2020

Report of abuse over facemask here

Quote 'https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/07/24/deafblind-woman-and-sister-verbally-abused-for-removing-face-cov/'

A teenager briefly removed her mask for a few seconds so her deafblind sister could lip-read and was subjected to abuse by another passenger who refused to accept that she was deafblind.

Disgraceful behaviour from that member of the public. Whilst I believe face coverings will have little if no impact on virus figures they may well feature in mental health issues as people are scared to leave their homes for fear of this is they are exempt or remove them briefly for reasons such as this.
What's our society become? I genuinely fear for the future.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

Richard Scott said:
Report of abuse over facemask here https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/07/...sister-verbally-abused-for-removing-face-cov/ - what's our society become? I genuinely fear for the future.

Any such incidents really need to be reported. As I said last night, a polite pointing-out of a likely error[1] is fine in my book (and I know others disagree, so let's not restart that), but abusing people is never acceptable under any circumstances.

[1] I'd be happy to have it pointed out I'd forgotten my mask just as another gentleman would point out that one was "flying low" rather than waiting to be charged for indecent exposure.

Bantamzen · 25 Jul 2020

Richard Scott said:
Report of abuse over facemask here https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/07/...sister-verbally-abused-for-removing-face-cov/ - what's our society become? I genuinely fear for the future.

That is just shocking, but sadly given the new era of paranoia & mask-vigilantism that is UK circa 2020 not in the least bit surprising.

bramling · 25 Jul 2020

yorkie said:
Maybe; I'd counter that with:

if you are spending a long time close to an infected person, a mask is less likely to be effective

people who are coughing etc are less likely to go into work in an office environment than they are to go shopping

wearing masks for extended periods is going to be more problematic than the relatively short time spent in shops

But you are right that some people will be desperately trying to mandate their use in offices, but it will be very much a small minority.

I am fortunate: in my job that does involve working in an office, I have my own office, and I definitely won't be required to wear a mask in any setting in that workplace environment. And my other jobs are work from home jobs anyway.

While I'll put up with wearing a mask in shops and on public transport, I would not do so in a workplace environment.

Same for me. I have my own office, and there’s no way on earth I’d wear a mask in it.

Richard Scott said:
Report of abuse over facemask here https://www.aol.co.uk/news/2020/07/...sister-verbally-abused-for-removing-face-cov/ - what's our society become? I genuinely fear for the future.

Some of the TOC Twitter feeds make amusing reading. More than a few reports of “I’m on the so and so train and there’s people not wearing masks”.

The GTR feed also contains quite a few gripes about staff not wearing them, which the company has fudged round responding to. I could have guaranteed that would kick off as I don’t think I’ve seen a single driver travelling pass wearing a mask.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

bramling said:
The GTR feed also contains quite a few gripes about staff not wearing them, which the company has fudged round responding to. I could have guaranteed that would kick off as I don’t think I’ve seen a single driver travelling pass wearing a mask.

As I said above I think this is taking the mick, and TOCs deserve serious adverse publicity for it. Drivers in the cab obviously have no need to wear one, nor when they're using the can, but they absolutely should be wearing one when travelling as a passenger unless they fit the requirements of a medical exemption, even if it's not technically legally required. To allow otherwise is rank hypocrisy, same as if a shopkeeper who would not be medically exempt neither wears one nor uses other mitigation such as perspex screens.

The Press really should be taking this one up. Nobody should confront staff about it directly, however I would like to see everyone witnessing this making a formal complaint to the TOC about it, and if I see it (a member of staff travelling passenger not wearing a mask) I shall be doing so; obviously the TOC will know from their medical records if that member of staff had a valid exemption and thus can ignore the complaint if so. Hopefully sufficient complaints will be received that they will act on it and impose this as a policy.

The rule needs to be that if a uniformed member of staff is in the passenger compartment[1] they must wear a mask or face shield. If they are unable to wear either (I suspect there would be very few such people, due to the high standards of medical required to be traincrew) then it would make sense to issue lanyards or similar to make the exemption clear.

And if the Unions threaten to strike, let them.

[1] This wouldn't include a taped-off area e.g. vestibule where that area is laid out so it is impossible for them to come within 2m of a passenger or other member of staff at any time.

Mugby · 25 Jul 2020

AdamWW said:
I don't remember being told that it wasn't airborne.

And yes, the experts (why quotes round it?) have "changed their minds", if you mean by that changing their views as more evidence has come in. Would you prefer it if scientists blindly followed their first view in the face of contradictory evidence that emerges later?

I would have preferred them to admit they didn't know, rather than resorting to guesswork which they obviously did.

bramling · 25 Jul 2020

Bletchleyite said:
As I said above I think this is taking the mick, and TOCs deserve serious adverse publicity for it. Drivers in the cab obviously have no need to wear one, nor when they're using the can, but they absolutely should be wearing one when travelling as a passenger unless they fit the requirements of a medical exemption, even if it's not technically legally required. To allow otherwise is rank hypocrisy, same as if a shopkeeper who would not be medically exempt neither wears one nor uses other mitigation such as perspex screens.

The Press really should be taking this one up. Nobody should confront staff about it directly, however I would like to see everyone witnessing this making a formal complaint to the TOC about it, and if I see it (a member of staff travelling passenger not wearing a mask) I shall be doing so; obviously the TOC will know from their medical records if that member of staff had a valid exemption and thus can ignore the complaint if so. Hopefully sufficient complaints will be received that they will act on it and impose this as a policy.

The rule needs to be that if a uniformed member of staff is in the passenger compartment[1] they must wear a mask or face shield. If they are unable to wear either (I suspect there would be very few such people, due to the high standards of medical required to be traincrew) then it would make sense to issue lanyards or similar to make the exemption clear.

And if the Unions threaten to strike, let them.

[1] This wouldn't include a taped-off area e.g. vestibule where that area is laid out so it is impossible for them to come within 2m of a passenger or other member of staff at any time.

They could quite easily get round that by segregating off part of the train for staff - on something like a 700 it would be very easy to lock off one of the first class areas (providing this had no consequences for fire precautions which I don’t see why it should). People would gripe about that then!

Now I’m not sure if there’s too much truth to the idea that some of the mask clamour came from unions (I’ve heard it rumoured, but again perhaps we’re in the territory of a vocal minority), however I don’t really see why it’s hypocrisy when most staff never asked for this, and evidently don’t want it if they’re choosing to take advantage of the legal exemption.

As an aside there’s tweets moaning about drivers in cabs not wearing them too. My place even had one where a woman felt it was unsafe to board a train driven by a driver not wearing a mask. She might have had a long wait...

adc82140 · 25 Jul 2020

I'm now in Scotland. Mask wearing in service stations is about 95%, but no one bats an eyelid at anyone who isn't. Interestingly no one wears them outside at all. They come off at the door.

At the hotel last night (England) a family with young kids was sat at dinner only taking them off to take mouthfuls. By breakfast this morning the same family had abandoned them. (that's the masks not the kids!)

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

One thing I've noticed more than ever throughout this is that people have utterly appalling spatial awareness - nobody realises they're getting in the way!

MidlandsChap · 25 Jul 2020

Bletchleyite said:
One thing I've noticed more than ever throughout this is that people have utterly appalling spatial awareness - nobody realises they're getting in the way!

Agreed. Pre Coronavirus it didn't used to bother me because I would accept that some people are just not very bright. However I still try and social distance even when wearing a mask, and the lack of common sense is now grating on me.

scarby · 25 Jul 2020

yorkie said:
I see cases are rising in Spain and France, but falling in Sweden; does anyone know what the mask usage is like in those countries?

Few people wear masks in Sweden - I read 5% somewhere but in my experience it would be more like 1%.

It’s actually the opposite situation to many other countries because people wearing masks tend to get stared at.

Huntergreed · 25 Jul 2020

I’ve been taking a look through social media this morning, and I am beyond blown away at the amount of people who are outraged and/or threatening to boycott Sainsbury’s after they tweeted

We won’t be challenging customers without a mask when they enter or when they are in store since they may have a reason not to wear a mask. Karen

(Quote:https://twitter.com/sainsburys/status/1286275914926632961?s=21)

A lot of people seem to really hold a grudge against exemptions, with an intent to label them, remove their ability to shop freely or use public transport, and in some cases leave their homes at all.

We’re turning really nasty

CaptainHaddock · 25 Jul 2020

MidlandsChap said:
Agreed. Pre Coronavirus it didn't used to bother me because I would accept that some people are just not very bright. However I still try and social distance even when wearing a mask, and the lack of common sense is now grating on me.

Chill out. If everyone's wearing a mask then no-one needs to do social distancing any more.

RomeoCharlie71 · 25 Jul 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
Chill out. If everyone's wearing a mask then no-one needs to do social distancing any more.

That's not the case. It's been said on numerous occasions that face coverings are an additional mitigation, not in lieu of any others.

People clearly think otherwise and this is what I think has caused the uptick in cases in Scotland over the past week.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

bramling said:
They could quite easily get round that by segregating off part of the train for staff - on something like a 700 it would be very easy to lock off one of the first class areas (providing this had no consequences for fire precautions which I don’t see why it should). People would gripe about that then!

I'd say that sounds reasonable as there isn't the demand there at the moment to make it a problem. Wouldn't bother me as I find the effing Fainsa Sophias less comfortable than the ironing boards, so they sit in the same bracket as 350/1 and /3 as units where I would travel in Standard even if my ticket was for 1st!

As an aside there’s tweets moaning about drivers in cabs not wearing them too. My place even had one where a woman felt it was unsafe to board a train driven by a driver not wearing a mask. She might have had a long wait...

Now that's stupid. A wall with a closed door clearly provides far more protection than any mask, even an N95 respirator.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

Huntergreed said:
A lot of people seem to really hold a grudge against exemptions, with an intent to label them, remove their ability to shop freely or use public transport, and in some cases leave their homes at all.

We’re turning really nasty

I think as with Brexit-based racism it's latently there anyway, it just becomes visible. But equally it's fear. People genuinely think someone without a mask will cause them to die. When in fact it's a small increased risk that is tiny for one individual but scales up when you look at the whole population.

Richard Scott · 25 Jul 2020

Bletchleyite said:
I think as with Brexit-based racism it's latently there anyway, it just becomes visible. But equally it's fear. People genuinely think someone without a mask will cause them to die.

This is caused by lack of education (not school education and not implying people are dull), Government has caused this fear through its campaign now it's going to find it very hard to reverse it even with a good education campaign, which I wouldn't trust them too be able to do.

MidlandsChap · 25 Jul 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
Chill out. If everyone's wearing a mask then no-one needs to do social distancing any more.

And this is exactly the problem we are going to face.

People are not wearing N95 masks on the whole. We are wearing very basic coverings or simple buffs. These will not capture the small water droplets which travel the furthest and hang in the air for longest.

Bletchleyite · 25 Jul 2020

MidlandsChap said:
And this is exactly the problem we are going to face.

People are not wearing N95 masks on the whole. We are wearing very basic coverings or simple buffs. These will not capture the small water droplets which travel the furthest and hang in the air for longest.

Actually, three layer fabric masks are surprisingly good at doing so. The Welsh probably got that one right.

MidlandsChap · 25 Jul 2020

Bletchleyite said:
Actually, three layer fabric masks are surprisingly good at doing so. The Welsh probably got that one right.

The point is we still need to social distance unless we legislate and enforce mask type, which isnt feasible.

UK face coverings discussion

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member