Badboybez
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2017
- Messages
- 8,284
But you seem to have missed the point that the masks are supposed to protect other people, not you.
I don't think I have missed the point, I was commenting on the way the thread had changed from how you can assure someone that you can't wear a mask, to to the observations about the UK gov sending mixed messages on mandatory wearing of them, and the split between devolved governments.
I know that the original advice from many health bodies was that masks protect other people from you, rather than you from others.
So effectively I think it is many others that have missed the "original" point regarding how people can demonstrate when challenged over their claim to a supermarket that they cannot wear one, and so are exempt, whether it is mandatory by law, or simply expected required by a particular retailer.
We cannot effectively sanitise the goods, which range from books to furniture, so all we can try to do, basically ............. is stop people spitting/sneezing on them before other people handle them or passing the virus on through touch?
Totally appreciate what you are saying here, but that brings me to a matter that personally I think is more important in environments such as retail, whether new, or pre-owned items.
Don't know if anyone remembers, but when shops were preparing to open up again following the "green light" to do so, there were several reports on tv (in particular) as well as other media about some of the retailers preparations. One of note was Waterstones book stores, there would still be books on the stores shelves, and you were free to browse them as before, if you wished to purchase the book you had looked at you took it to the till, and paid for it. If on the other hand you decided not to purchase it, you put it on a table in the store, where it would then be securely stored for 72 hours before being put back on the shelves for the general public. There were also some independant clothing shops that were going to use the same method, pick up a skirt / trousers from the rail, decide not to buy after all, they went into a cage for 72 hours before being put back on the racks.
So in my opinion it is far more important to enforce the wearing of gloves, rather than masks, including all shop staff from warehouse operatives, up to managers.
I have to be honest, I don't think I'd allow anyone in without a mask, for any reason at all.
That is obviously a business choice that your auction house has made, and I respect that, but could that mean that unless it is mandatory by law, then it could be in danger of breaches of the disabled persons discrimination act, as a person can be classed as disabled if they struggle to breathe, and so cannot wear a mask.