Is the sunflower lanyard scheme being abused?

[OneOffDave]

No, I am talking about the health guidelines surrounding wearing them, not the regulations / law. I never said you would be breaking the law by wearing one. I said it is very difficult to wear one as required under the law, whilst also acting in consideration to the guidelines issued by public health bodies.

Firstly, you are supposed to wash or sanitise your hands prior to wearing one, despite the fact that that in most shops the sanitiser is only located once you are inside. It is also guidance to replace it if you have touched it (for example if requested by shop staff to verify ID). It is also very difficult to transport your mask to the point at which you are supposed to wear it without risking it becoming contaminated. Once a mask is removed it should not be used again until it is washed (for so-called re-usable ones) or if single use should be disposed of as soon as removed.

The first one is simple and something I've been doing since February and that's to carry my own sanitiser on me. I can remove and replace my face covering by only using the ear loops, thus not touching it and not needing to replace it. The guidance does state that you should avoid taking it off and putting it back on a lot in quick succession. The guidance is very unclear about when a face covering is considered removed for the purposes of it needing to be disposed of or washed. Transport in a safe manner is easy. Mine all came in zip-lock bags. They live in those until I need to use them and the go back into them to go home to be washed. While the face coverings are being washed, I turn the bags inside out and wipe them down with an appropriate biocide, leave them to dry and replace the clean mask in them.

The guidance does need to be a lot clearer and be clarified with examples though

Disclaimer, it is slightly more simple for me as I'm experienced in the use of mask based PPE

 

[matt_world2004]

I personally think it's not worth harassing those who genuinely have an exemption from wearing facemasks and are using the sunflower lanyard scheme to try and catch the infinitely small number who may be abusing it.

 

[bramling]

Even if the time existed in their schedule, it would also be nigh on impossible for a doctor to make a judgment like that.

My boss sent me to a doctor and he basically said that he couldn’t make a decision either way, only that if I feel I need to for health reasons to remove it, that I should.

It’s also worth pointing out that it is very difficult for someone to wear a face mask in accordance with the public health guidelines and also working within the law at the same time.

Given how it’s all-nigh impossible to see a doctor at the moment, and how a lot of their time is being taken up dealing with issues relating to shielding, the last thing we need is doctors wasting their time faffing about over masks.

“I’m sorry the doctor can’t see you for that lump you’re worrying about, as he’s busy writing exemption letters over masks”...

Especially just to appease the it’s not fair brigade.

 

[MikeWM]

My impression of the 'sunflower' was that it was intended to be for people who may need extra assistance or understanding/patience - for whatever reason - in certain circumstances.

As that doesn't really apply to a good number of those who can't wear masks, such as myself, I took the decision to make my own lanyard.

That doesn't mean that I have any issues with those that do choose to wear the 'sunflower', and I certainly don't think that they are abusing the scheme.

 

[greyman42]

What is a bus driver to do if a couple of hefty blokes just go and sit down after claiming they are exempt when asked to put on a mask on boarding?

I would of thought he would carry on driving the bus? Is the mention of the blokes being hefty relevant. Is the implication that if a bloke not hefty then the bus driver can bully that person?

 

[DB]

I would of thought he would carry on driving the bus? Is the mention of the blokes being hefty relevant. Is the implication that if a bloke not hefty then the bus driver can bully that person?

It shouldn't be relevant - but we all know that bullies and jobsworths are often more reluctant to pick an argument with someone who is bigger than them!

 

[yorkie]

This reckoning, are we talking camps? Purges?


How specifically do these two things conflict? Which law would you be breaking by wearing a face mask

You have completely misunderstood both posts.

Is there really mass abuse of the sunflower lanyard scheme ...

No there isn't, and no evidence that there is whatsoever.

I'm not on Twitter, but perhaps somebody could respond pointing out that they are potentially breaching equality legislation by this demand for 'proof', if they refuse travel to someone who doesn't have proof, but is exempt from wearing a mask due to a protected characteristic.

I've tried to them but Ipswich Buses appear to be a stubborn mickey mouse outfit with no intention of adhering to the law in this area. They don't seem the sharpest tools in the box. They are acting as authoritarians typically act.

 

[Mojo]

I've tried to them but Ipswich Buses appear to be a stubborn mickey mouse outfit with no intention of adhering to the law in this area. They don't seem the sharpest tools in the box. They are acting as authoritarians typically act.

Ipswich Buses are still a municipal operator as far as I’m aware, which means they, as an organisation wholly owned by the local authority, will be subject to the Freedom Of Information Act and would, I presume, have been perhaps a bit more au fait with equality legislation.

Does anyone know if Section 149 of the Equality Act (Public sector equality duty) would apply to them, or if not it would at least apply to Ipswich Borough Council.

 

[AndyY]

I was in Loon Fung supermarket in Colindale last week. It is run by the Chinese, and stricter than the normal supermarkets. Other than a sign saying that face coverings are compulsory, there is a temperature scanner at the entrance which measures your body temperature when you turn your face towards it.
Anyway, while I was there, a young lad (black, probably in his 20s?) tried to enter. He was challenged by the staff and just said that he is exempt, when he looked as fit as a fiddle. Anyway, there was some debate for about half a minute but he was allowed in.
Later I asked the person at the door why was he not turned away? She agreed with me that the guy was most probably trying it on, but did not want to cause a scene where the guy may turn violent or where she may be accused of racism (the wonders of BLM for you).

Next I went to Asda nearby and saw so many young and fit without face coverings, talking off the top of their voices on their mobiles or with each other, spraying their droplets all over the place no doubt. I will not be back.

In Borehamwood Morrisons, there was an "incident" and I heard from the grapevine that it was caused by argument about face covering (look at the photograph in the photograph, the black guy was not wearing it - makes it easier to pick him out though).

Woman assaulted in Morrisons in Borehamwood

A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

www.borehamwoodtimes.co.uk

"A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

The incident happened in Morrisons in Stirling Way on November 2 (Monday) at around 8.45pm.

A woman, in her 40s, was pushed by a man who then left the store.

Police have released a CCTV image of a man who might be able to help their enquiries."


I would say that not just the sunflower lanyards, but the concept of exemption are being abused by so many that it is rendered ineffective. As in many things in this country, the sheep stick to the rules while the rule breakers carry on with abandon as if such rules do not apply to them.

 

[DB]

I was in Loon Fung supermarket in Colindale last week. It is run by the Chinese, and stricter than the normal supermarkets. Other than a sign saying that face coverings are compulsory, there is a temperature scanner at the entrance which measures your body temperature when you turn your face towards it.
Anyway, while I was there, a young lad (black, probably in his 20s?) tried to enter. He was challenged by the staff and just said that he is exempt, when he looked as fit as a fiddle. Anyway, there was some debate for about half a minute but he was allowed in.
Later I asked the person at the door why was he not turned away? She agreed with me that the guy was most probably trying it on, but did not want to cause a scene where the guy may turn violent or where she may be accused of racism (the wonders of BLM for you).

Next I went to Asda nearby and saw so many young and fit without face coverings, talking off the top of their voices on their mobiles or with each other, spraying their droplets all over the place no doubt. I will not be back.

In Borehamwood Morrisons, there was an "incident" and I heard from the grapevine that it was caused by argument about face covering (look at the photograph in the photograph, the black guy was not wearing it - makes it easier to pick him out though).

Woman assaulted in Morrisons in Borehamwood

A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

www.borehamwoodtimes.co.uk

"A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

The incident happened in Morrisons in Stirling Way on November 2 (Monday) at around 8.45pm.

A woman, in her 40s, was pushed by a man who then left the store.

Police have released a CCTV image of a man who might be able to help their enquiries."


I would say that not just the sunflower lanyards, but the concept of exemption are being abused by so many that it is rendered ineffective. As in many things in this country, the sheep stick to the rules while the rule breakers carry on with abandon as if such rules do not apply to them.

How do you know that these people aren't exempt? Do you have some magical ability to see medical conditions just by looking at them? Or any of the non-medical justifications?

I am also unclear as to why it is relevant that someone is black - specifically highlighting this looks rather like racism.

 

[yorkie]

I was in Loon Fung supermarket in Colindale last week. It is run by the Chinese, and stricter than the normal supermarkets. Other than a sign saying that face coverings are compulsory, there is a temperature scanner at the entrance which measures your body temperature when you turn your face towards it.
Anyway, while I was there, a young lad (black, probably in his 20s?) tried to enter. He was challenged by the staff and just said that he is exempt, when he looked as fit as a fiddle.

Many people who are exempt will look "as fit as a fiddle"; your point is...?

Anyway, there was some debate for about half a minute but he was allowed in.

There is no need for any debate; no proof needed. He has to be allowed in.

Later I asked the person at the door why was he not turned away?

Have you actually read the law? or the discussions on this forum where people have mentioned the law?

She agreed with me that the guy was most probably trying it on, but did not want to cause a scene where the guy may turn violent or where she may be accused of racism (the wonders of BLM for you).

Next I went to Asda nearby and saw so many young and fit without face coverings, talking off the top of their voices on their mobiles or with each other, spraying their droplets all over the place no doubt. I will not be back.

Good.

In Borehamwood Morrisons, there was an "incident" and I heard from the grapevine that it was caused by argument about face covering (look at the photograph in the photograph, the black guy was not wearing it - makes it easier to pick him out though).

Woman assaulted in Morrisons in Borehamwood

A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

www.borehamwoodtimes.co.uk

"A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

The incident happened in Morrisons in Stirling Way on November 2 (Monday) at around 8.45pm.

A woman, in her 40s, was pushed by a man who then left the store.

Police have released a CCTV image of a man who might be able to help their enquiries."

In my experience these incidents tend to be caused by authoritarians who are unfamiliar with the law, and attempt to impose their own version of it by having a go at people who are covered by exemptions. These people are, quite frankly, scum.

I would say that not just the sunflower lanyards, but the concept of exemption are being abused by so many that it is rendered ineffective. As in many things in this country, the sheep stick to the rules while the rule breakers carry on with abandon as if such rules do not apply to them.

Quite frankly it's getting to the point where whatever you think, I am likely to think the opposite.

I suggest you actually read this thread and actually familiarise yourself with the law before you start making accusations against people or making comments about how fit people look (!)

[Withdrawn] [Withdrawn] Face coverings: when to wear one, exemptions and what makes a good one

www.gov.uk

Please be mindful and respectful of such circumstances, noting that some people are less able to wear face coverings, and that the reasons for this may not be visible to others.

This includes (but is not limited to):

• children under the age of 11 (Public Health England does not recommend face coverings for children under the age of 3 for health and safety reasons)
• people who cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering because of a physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability
• where putting on, wearing or removing a face covering will cause you severe distress
• if you are speaking to or providing assistance to someone who relies on lip reading, clear sound or facial expressions to communicate
• to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to yourself or others ‒ including if it would negatively impact on your ability to exercise or participate in a strenuous activity
• police officers and other emergency workers, given that this may interfere with their ability to serve the public

There are also scenarios where you are permitted to remove a face covering:

• if asked to do so in a bank, building society, or post office for identification
• if asked to do so by shop staff or relevant employees for identification, for assessing health recommendations (for example by a pharmacist), or for age identification purposes including when buying age restricted products such as alcohol
• if required in order to receive treatment or services, for example when getting a facial
• in order to take medication
• if you are delivering a sermon or prayer in a place or worship
• if you are the persons getting married in a relevant place
• if you are aged 11 to 18 attending a faith school and having lessons in a place of worship as part of your core curriculum
• if you are undertaking exercise or an activity and it would negatively impact your ability to do so
• if you are an elite sports person, professional dancer or referee acting in the course of your employment
• when seated to eat or drink in a hospitality premise such as a pub, bar, restaurant or cafe. You must put a face covering back on once you finish eating or drinking

Please note in particular the part I highlighted in bold.


If I caught anyone in my local supermarket treating or talking about the young people I know are coverered by exemptions in the manner you describe, then believe me I'd be telling them the above in no uncertain terms.

 

[greyman42]

Later I asked the person at the door why was he not turned away? She agreed with me that the guy was most probably trying it on, but did not want to cause a scene where the guy may turn violent or where she may be accused of racism (the wonders of BLM for you).

How was it any of your business?

 

[yorkie]

How was it any of your business?

It simply isn't; it's a blatant disregard of " Please be mindful and respectful of such circumstances, noting that some people are less able to wear face coverings, and that the reasons for this may not be visible to others" which i find totally and utterly intolerable and unacceptable.

For example I can think of more than one teenager who looks "as fit as a fiddle" but has asthma and autism. When I read posts such as the above, I can't help but think that someone may treat someone I know in the manner described. I am not going to tolerate it. I am not going to put up with it. I am going to get such people told that their behaviour is unacceptable.

So far I've not encountered anyone in person behaving like this, but believe me, I am ready for them and I won't hesitate to quote the guidance to them, and ask them how on earth can they know if that person has a mental or physical condition or disability. (The answer is: they can't).

 

[STINT47]

"A woman was assaulted in a supermarket in Borehamwood.

The incident happened in Morrisons in Stirling Way on November 2 (Monday) at around 8.45pm.

A woman, in her 40s, was pushed by a man who then left the store.

Police have released a CCTV image of a man who might be able to help their enquiries."

Whilst I do not support violence of any kind if people are going arround acting as the mask police then this is hardly surprising and I'm sorry to say I have very little sympathy for her.

 

[trebor79]

Sorry but can you explain what is wrong with them enforcing the law about wearing masks?

The bus company are not responsible for law enforcement, that is the job of the police. There is no requirement in law to provide any proof whatsoever to anyone of your exemption. "Where's your mask?" "I am exempt and cannot/do not have to wear one". End of conversation.

Also the poorly worded lecture about "think maybe if you should be travelling in the midst of a pandemic" is completely ignorant of why many people who are exempt from masks are exempt. Some rape victims for example, are at no particular medical risk from COVID but can't wear things over their face. I get dermatitis on my chin and my glasses steam up so I can't see properly but am at zero risk from COVID.

The whole statement is just pig-ignorant and high handed.