UK face coverings discussion

[jtuk]

Not sure what it is like elsewhere, but my friend at the local McDonald's said they have been instructed to allow nobody in without a mask on (no exceptions/exemptions). Is this a national policy or just completely inconsiderate and discriminatory local management?

Probably just negotiated improved rates with Deliveroo etc

 

[Darandio]

Not sure what it is like elsewhere, but my friend at the local McDonald's said they have been instructed to allow nobody in without a mask on (no exceptions/exemptions). Is this a national policy or just completely inconsiderate and discriminatory local management?

I've seen a few messages exchanged with them on Twitter so far this week where staff have demanded to be shown an exemption card before allowing entry. Those without seem to have been told to wait outside and have their order brought to them.

McDonalds to their credit have replied to each one asking for details, whether this concentrates minds is another question entirely.

 

[DB]

Not sure what it is like elsewhere, but my friend at the local McDonald's said they have been instructed to allow nobody in without a mask on (no exceptions/exemptions). Is this a national policy or just completely inconsiderate and discriminatory local management?

I wonder whether that could provoke a legal challenge? It could potentially be possible to bring a case under the equalities act, if someone is unable to wear a mask because of a disability.

McDonald's is a franchise, and I'm not sure how much control the central company has over their franchisees with something like this.

 

[Darandio]

McDonald's is a franchise, and I'm not sure how much control the central company has over their franchisees with something like this.

Straying off topic, but not all of their UK restaurants are run by franchisees.

 

[farleigh]

If they bring your food to you outside that seems reasonable to me.

 

[DB]

If they bring your food to you outside that seems reasonable to me.

It doesn't to me. The whole point of equality legislation is treating everyone equally, not treating a particular group differently. Why should someone who can't wear a mask potentially have to stand outside in the rain when anyone else can wait inside?

 

[talldave]

We've visited our doctor's surgery a couple of times in the last week (physical checks that don't work over Skype), seeing both doctors and nursing staff. Getting past the mask-obsessed receptionist is stressful but once in consulting rooms all medical staff have given the option for a mask free consultation (practitioner and patient) based on their professional opinion that they're unnecessary.

Two other snippets that came from conversations there. Firstly, confirmation of my belief that the level of hysteria is inversely proportional to IQ. And secondly, more worrying, they're seeing around 75% cancellation levels of child immunisations, which they attribute to a growing lack of trust in "the establishment" from the handling of Coronavirus.

 

[DB]

they're seeing around 75% cancellation levels of child immunisations, which they attribute to a growing lack of trust in "the establishment" from the handling of Coronavirus.

That really is not good. Are those who are not taking their kids in of the belief that the government shuld be going further, or that it's going too far?

 

[45107]

. The whole point of equality legislation is treating everyone equally, not treating a particular group differently.

Indeed. Looks like McDonalds are doing that in order to enter the shop.

 

[talldave]

That really is not good. Are those who are not taking their kids in of the belief that the government shuld be going further, or that it's going too far?

I think more that the debate around coronavirus vaccines and how safe they will or won't be is leading people to question the existing immunisations to a greater extent than has always been the case.

Some of the cancellations are of course hysterical bunker hiders, but the concern was more about intelligent parents having a more critical discussion about risk than just taking the NHS/government's "just do it" attitude.

 

[Darandio]

Probably just negotiated improved rates with Deliveroo etc

I'm confused. What has this got to do with refusing people entry to their restaurants?

 

[bramling]

That really is not good. Are those who are not taking their kids in of the belief that the government shuld be going further, or that it's going too far?

There is a definite feeling of distrust brewing up now. At work more and more people are saying they are wary of any vaccine. Indeed some people seem to be branding it a “Boris vaccine”, and saying “I don’t want Boris sticking some random substance into me”.

This is deeply concerning as it does seem that trust in BJ is now at rock bottom. We’re already seeing that with masks which in the grand scheme of things probably doesn’t matter given how masks are scientifically dubious, however going forward it’s a big problem.

 

[Scrotnig]

I've seen a few messages exchanged with them on Twitter so far this week where staff have demanded to be shown an exemption card before allowing entry. Those without seem to have been told to wait outside and have their order brought to them.

McDonalds to their credit have replied to each one asking for details, whether this concentrates minds is another question entirely.

Oh well, good job I've been avoiding McDonalds anyhow since they reopened, as I'd walk away if they tried that one on me.

Once again, those with exemptions might as well wear bright yellow t-shirts with "UNCLEAN" printed on them in big red letters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's also deeply concerning because the vaccine, if workable, is the easy "way out" of this situation, but that won't work if the majority of people refuse to take it - I believe it's thought that the herd immunity figure is about 60-70%, which means that that proportion of people need to either be vaccinated or to have some sort of natural immunity in order for the disease to subside. (There's another thread knocking around to go into that specific aspect in more detail).

 

[adc82140]

Oh well, good job I've been avoiding McDonalds anyhow since they reopened, as I'd walk away if they tried that one on me.

Once again, those with exemptions might as well wear bright yellow t-shirts with "UNCLEAN" printed on them in big red letters.

I've been avoiding Maccy D's for the last 30 years. I think my coronary arteries are thanking me for it.

 

[Scrotnig]

Am I the only one who thinks one way systems (provided they are well designed) are great and should be continued?

Please, no!

I have got to be honest and say you seem to be displaying quite a streak for controlling and marshalling what other people do.
I'm all for orderly behaviour but there's no way I want to live my life being ordered about in this way.

 

[farleigh]

It doesn't to me. The whole point of equality legislation is treating everyone equally, not treating a particular group differently. Why should someone who can't wear a mask potentially have to stand outside in the rain when anyone else can wait inside?

Fair enough. I am not an advocate of masks as it goes as I think they potentially cause more harm than good. However, I thought McD doing that would be seen as a reasonable adjustment. Wouldn't really argue with you though

 

[talldave]

I've been avoiding Maccy D's for the last 30 years. I think my coronary arteries are thanking me for it.

And they're better prepared to help you get through Covid-19

 

[AdamWW]

With respect, stating that something has actually happened when the source you quote is based on modelling, not factual numbers, is speculation, not evidence.
We all know how accurate modelling has been in the past, particularly that of Professor Neil Ferguson. Not.

OK I'm going to bite.

There is a big difference between using modelling to predict the future, and interpreting information about the past.

I disagree that "speculation" is the correct term.

It is considered quite normal to say something like "34% of the population think we should nationalise the railways" when actually we mean "extrapolating from a survey of a small number of people, we conclude that if the whole population were asked we'd get 34%" or "5 million viewers watched the latest episode of Doctor Who" when again this is an extrapolation from the habits of a small panel of people.

Whether you know it or not, much of your everyday life is influenced by modelling and as a general concept it is ridiculous to reject it as "speculation". And whether Niel Ferguson's model was accurate or not, that has absolutely nothing to do with the ability of the ONS to take measurements on a small sample of the population and sensibly extrapolate those to the whole population.

I do find it interesting that a study which attempted to see if masks reduce transmission by comparing different parts of the US and trying to discriminate the effect of masks from other things, and which concluded that masks did reduce transmission was shot down, but a trend in raw infection figures in the UK (which suffer from the fact that test numbers and criteria change) is taken as clear evidence that masks don't help.

 

[sheff1]

Not sure what it is like elsewhere, but my friend at the local McDonald's said they have been instructed to allow nobody in without a mask on (no exceptions/exemptions). Is this a national policy or just completely inconsiderate and discriminatory local management?

I walked past a McDonald's the other day and the queue managing thug was having a stand up row with a maskless person.

 

[sheff1]

We've visited our doctor's surgery a couple of times in the last week (physical checks that don't work over Skype), seeing both doctors and nursing staff. Getting past the mask-obsessed receptionist is stressful ,,,

Yet doctors are specifically excluded from the mask wearing requirement.

 

[DB]

I do find it interesting that a study which attempted to see if masks reduce transmission by comparing different parts of the US and trying to discriminate the effect of masks from other things, and which concluded that masks did reduce transmission was shot down, but a trend in raw infection figures in the UK (which suffer from the fact that test numbers and criteria change) is taken as clear evidence that masks don't help.

One survey which appears to show an effect, but which appears to have a geographical element to it is potentially of use as supporting evidence, but doesn't prove anything on its own. In the case of the UK nothing has changed in the way of rules since masks were enforced, so if they had a noticeable benefit we would expect to see numbers dropping now. The fact that they aren't isn't proof that masks don't help, but it's a pretty substantial indication.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

P

I've seen a few messages exchanged with them on Twitter so far this week where staff have demanded to be shown an exemption card before allowing entry. Those without seem to have been told to wait outside and have their order brought to them.

McDonalds to their credit have replied to each one asking for details, whether this concentrates minds is another question entirely.

Presumably this one would be ok?
It only costs 25p.
It a quarterpounder

 

[Jamiescott1]

Has the legislation been published yet for the new mask legislation being introduced tomorrow

 

[Pete_uk]

The government will be watching Northern Ireland to see if there is large compliance with the new masks in busy outside areas rule.

Wait for it folks!

 

[AM9]

We've visited our doctor's surgery a couple of times in the last week (physical checks that don't work over Skype), seeing both doctors and nursing staff. Getting past the mask-obsessed receptionist is stressful but once in consulting rooms all medical staff have given the option for a mask free consultation (practitioner and patient) based on their professional opinion that they're unnecessary.

Two other snippets that came from conversations there. Firstly, confirmation of my belief that the level of hysteria is inversely proportional to IQ. And secondly, more worrying, they're seeing around 75% cancellation levels of child immunisations, which they attribute to a growing lack of trust in "the establishment" from the handling of Coronavirus.

Well 'conversations there' sounds like a case of confirmation bias without any evidence produced. It may make you feel content, but could you share any real evidence that you could point readers to?

 

[Huntergreed]

I see a school in England has decided to go against the government guidance and mandate masks for all staff and pupils at all times, no exceptions/exemptions:

A UK school has become the first to make coronavirus face masks compulsory for all pupils and staff, with parents forking out for specific, school uniform coverings made by a local company.

Holmes Chapel Comprehensive School in leafy Cheshire is making the navy blue, embroidered masks, part of the official uniform and admits it is "contrary" to Government guidelines.


The academy, a secondary school and sixth form centre, says "masks will form part of our uniform", CheshireLive reports.

In a letter to parents, the school body stated: "Everyone, students and staff, MUST wear a face covering whilst inside the school buildings. This includes classrooms and corridors. Masks will form part of our uniform.

"We have taken this decision as a precautionary additional measure to our expected safe behaviours.


"On the balance of probability, the wearing of face masks is likely to make our school safer than if we don’t wear them."

The school is understood to be requiring pupils to wear navy blue, reusable face masks.

(https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....virus-face-masks-become-official-22475876.amp)

I think this is awful and I feel extremely sorry for the pupils of this school, clearly a decision that’s not at all based on evidence and is going to cause many issues

 

[island]

I wonder whether that could provoke a legal challenge? It could potentially be possible to bring a case under the equalities act, if someone is unable to wear a mask because of a disability.

McDonald's is a franchise, and I'm not sure how much control the central company has over their franchisees with something like this.

It’s a curious one. They seem to have effectively limited the menu nationwide without difficulty, for example.

It doesn't to me. The whole point of equality legislation is treating everyone equally, not treating a particular group differently. Why should someone who can't wear a mask potentially have to stand outside in the rain when anyone else can wait inside?

The provisions of the Equality Act do not, as you claim, state that everyone must be treated equally. Under section 15 (2) of the Equality Act it is permissible to discriminate against a disabled person where to do so is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I think it would not be difficult at all to claim that requiring face coverings whilst ordering a takeaway is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, the aim being reducing the spread of Covid-19. The claim is stronger still where the disabled person is offered an auxiliary aid under section 20 (5) of the Act such as having their order taken outside. And they can of course use Drive-Thru if able.

As an aside, on my recent visit to McDonald’s I did not wear a face covering or have any issues. As the McDonald’s in question offers table service, face coverings are not legally required therein – whether one is using the table service or not.

 

[talldave]

Well 'conversations there' sounds like a case of confirmation bias without any evidence produced. It may make you feel content, but could you share any real evidence that you could point readers to?

No of course not. My doctor's surgery doesn't routinely publish stats on how thick its patients are or their appointment cancellation rate. But the observation of a doctor who interacts with 100s of patients has more weight in my book than my own opinion formed from interaction with very few people.

 

[DB]

Under section 15 (2) of the Equality Act it is permissible to discriminate against a disabled person where to do so is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. I think it would not be difficult at all to claim that requiring face coverings whilst ordering a takeaway is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, the aim being reducing the spread of Covid-19.

I disagree - the risk of them even having it, never mind spreading it, is very low, and there is no strong evidence that masks would make any difference even if they did have it. This does not outweight the humiliating experience of being told to wait outside and treated as if they are 'unclean'.