No Mask, No Entry, No Exceptions

[Sticks.]

monthou said:

Sticks. said:

Re the OP, it's been clear from the outset that there are exemptions from the requirement to wear face masks including health/disability.

There are exemption cards for those who want them. So if a shop excluded someone for not wearing a face mask and the reason they weren't wearing one was a disability then that would clearly breach the EA.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-co...

Has any shop or business been prosecuted for insisting on mask use?

I doubt it. Iirc the DDA used to require the disabled person to take any accessibility case forward after going through a process off mediation. I doubt many did or will, I suspect this would be the same.

So in theory if a shop had a big 'no disabled' sign outside, the local authority would deal with its size, location, eg obstructing the path, but the individual has to take up the denial of access.

AIUI

[monthou]

Sticks. said:

monthou said:

Sticks. said:

Re the OP, it's been clear from the outset that there are exemptions from the requirement to wear face masks including health/disability.

There are exemption cards for those who want them. So if a shop excluded someone for not wearing a face mask and the reason they weren't wearing one was a disability then that would clearly breach the EA.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-co...

Has any shop or business been prosecuted for insisting on mask use?

I doubt it. Iirc the DDA used to require the disabled person to take any accessibility case forward after going through a process off mediation. I doubt many did or will, I suspect this would be the same.

So in theory if a shop had a big 'no disabled' sign outside, the local authority would deal with its size, location, eg obstructing the path, but the individual has to take up the denial of access.

AIUI

I don't think it's quite as much a slam-dunk as your first posts says. The FSB puts it like this:

fsb said:

If a customer is not wearing a face covering due to a disability, it may be a breach of the Equality Act if the business refuses the customer entry unless they wear a face covering, or treats them unfavourably in some other way. This may put the business at risk of a civil claim for injury to feelings under the Equality Act by a disabled customer, unless the business shows its action was proportionate based on all the circumstances.

Whether it's proportionate for a business to want to protect staff and customers in a pandemic would be for a court to decide. Whether any organisation would want to fund that case is another question.
edit: IANAL

[SteffCTS]

I’m stage 3 COPD with only 41% of my lungs left. Although It’s slowed me down over the years I still work in the fire and security industry maintaining security systems and I wear a mask where I need to. I wouldn’t fancy having one on all day but for the time I need to wear them I’ve been fine with them.

[InitialDave]

sevensfun said:

Look at you, calling people scum for a choice you don't agree with. The irony is strong.

No irony at all.

The choice of which you speak is "choosing to take advantage of allowances specifically meant to help those who really need them for genuine medical issues, when they do not".

That's the kind of choice I'll label as scummy, as I do people using disabled parking spaces when they don't need them.

[sevensfun]

InitialDave said:

No irony at all.

The choice of which you speak is "choosing to take advantage of allowances specifically meant to help those who really need them for genuine medical issues, when they do not".

That's the kind of choice I'll label as scummy, as I do people using disabled parking spaces when they don't need them.

That's exactly what the guidelines are for, absolutely. You got it.

[MaxFromage]

InitialDave said:

I'd like to think such scummy people are by far the minority, and almost everyone you see without a mask genuinely does need to not wear one. But I'm really not at all sure.

Should we class those with facial hair as scumbags? Surely the vociferous posters on here would say yes?

https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/policies-and-gui...

What is the difference between those refusing to wear a mask and those reducing their (potential) efficacy significantly?

[monthou]

MaxFromage said:

InitialDave said:

I'd like to think such scummy people are by far the minority, and almost everyone you see without a mask genuinely does need to not wear one. But I'm really not at all sure.

Should we class those with facial hair as scumbags? Surely the vociferous posters on here would say yes?

Only if you can tell what they had for breakfast by looking at their beard.

[Colonel Cupcake]

monthou said:

Sticks. said:

monthou said:

Sticks. said:

Re the OP, it's been clear from the outset that there are exemptions from the requirement to wear face masks including health/disability.

There are exemption cards for those who want them. So if a shop excluded someone for not wearing a face mask and the reason they weren't wearing one was a disability then that would clearly breach the EA.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-co...

Has any shop or business been prosecuted for insisting on mask use?

I doubt it. Iirc the DDA used to require the disabled person to take any accessibility case forward after going through a process off mediation. I doubt many did or will, I suspect this would be the same.

So in theory if a shop had a big 'no disabled' sign outside, the local authority would deal with its size, location, eg obstructing the path, but the individual has to take up the denial of access.

AIUI

I don't think it's quite as much a slam-dunk as your first posts says. The FSB puts it like this:

fsb said:

If a customer is not wearing a face covering due to a disability, it may be a breach of the Equality Act if the business refuses the customer entry unless they wear a face covering, or treats them unfavourably in some other way. This may put the business at risk of a civil claim for injury to feelings under the Equality Act by a disabled customer, unless the business shows its action was proportionate based on all the circumstances.

Whether it's proportionate for a business to want to protect staff and customers in a pandemic would be for a court to decide. Whether any organisation would want to fund that case is another question.
edit: IANAL

A lady won 7 grand after being denied access to a service after being unable to wear a mask

https://disabilityrights.org.uk/first-face-mask-di...

[Wacky Racer]

zygalski said:

Oh great. Another PH thread dealing with largely hypothetical situations which 99.999% of us either won’t experience or couldn’t give a toss about.

My sister in law has hardly been out of the house for fourteen months, has been extremely careful, actually far over the top (imo), caught it a few days ago, didn't know she had it, no cough etc, had three various visitors who were in the house no longer than fifteen minutes, all now have it.

Don't underestimate how easily it is passed on

[exelero]

The way I see it, No one gives a toss weather you have your mask on or not. I actively keep ,,forgetting” to west it and no one really says anything

[Buster73]

monthou said:

Sticks. said:

Re the OP, it's been clear from the outset that there are exemptions from the requirement to wear face masks including health/disability.

There are exemption cards for those who want them. So if a shop excluded someone for not wearing a face mask and the reason they weren't wearing one was a disability then that would clearly breach the EA.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-co...

Has any shop or business been prosecuted for insisting on mask use?

Currently being investigated by EASS after a complaint by someone who was being extremely provocative and has told a complete lack of lies.

I’ll let you know the outcome as and when.

[Buster73]

Colonel Cupcake said:

A lady won 7 grand after being denied access to a service after being unable to wear a mask

https://disabilityrights.org.uk/first-face-mask-di...

WON £7k ?

More like being paid a huge sum of money completely out of proportion to any alleged offence imagined or otherwise.

[Riley Blue]

exelero said:

The way I see it, No one gives a toss weather you have your mask on or not. I actively keep ,,forgetting” to west it and no one really says anything

You would have been spoken to if you'd turned up without a mask at my local vaccination centre.

[monthou]

Colonel Cupcake said:

A lady won 7 grand after being denied access to a service after being unable to wear a mask

https://disabilityrights.org.uk/first-face-mask-di...

All that shows is that they paid her off. It didn't go to court.
Presumably they saw paying her to go away as the cheaper option.

[sevensfun]

monthou said:

All that shows is that they paid her off. It didn't go to court.
Presumably they saw paying her to go away as the cheaper option.

The more people that do what she did, the better. They'll eventually get the message.

[monthou]

sevensfun said:

monthou said:

All that shows is that they paid her off. It didn't go to court.
Presumably they saw paying her to go away as the cheaper option.

The more people that do what she did, the better. They'll eventually get the message.

I think you're right in that entitled aholes writing compo letters to businesses will stop businesses enforcing no-mask policies.
Where we differ is that you see it as a good thing.

[sevensfun]

monthou said:

I think you're right in that entitled aholes writing compo letters to businesses will stop businesses enforcing no-mask policies.
Where we differ is that you see it as a good thing.

Awwww, some much anger from the govenments little sheep. 'aholes' from you, 'scummy' from the other guy. Bless.

[Colonel Cupcake]

Buster73 said:

Colonel Cupcake said:

A lady won 7 grand after being denied access to a service after being unable to wear a mask

https://disabilityrights.org.uk/first-face-mask-di...

WON £7k ?

More like being paid a huge sum of money completely out of proportion to any alleged offence imagined or otherwise.

Best thing all round then is to get on with your own life and keep your nose out of other peoples.

(I am using your in general terms here)

[rscott]

sevensfun said:

MaxFromage said:

Some info to consider:

https://www.meehanmd.com/blog/post/170332/if-masks...

Great find - and there we have it

If a surgeon were sick, especially with a viral infection, they would not perform surgery as they know the virus would NOT be stopped by their surgical mask.

A blog giving the opinion of a surgeon in which he claims CDC say masks don't prevent transmission.

Hmm - this CDC page clearly states their view that masks massively reduce transmission (by up to 80% ) - https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/...

It also points out flaws in the Danish study which reported that masks don't make a difference.

[Colonel Cupcake]

monthou said:

sevensfun said:

monthou said:

All that shows is that they paid her off. It didn't go to court.
Presumably they saw paying her to go away as the cheaper option.

The more people that do what she did, the better. They'll eventually get the message.

I think you're right in that entitled aholes writing compo letters to businesses will stop businesses enforcing no-mask policies.
Where we differ is that you see it as a good thing.

You don't think it's a good thing that disabled people have protections in law?

I bet you're one of those people who tip people out of wheelchairs, punch blind people in the face and set fire to homeless peoples sleeping bags whilst they are still in them.