What really happens
So about these people staging anti-mask rebellions at Trader Joe’s and similar – we’re getting some contradictory instructions on the subject.
The mask FAQ for King County, Washington, where Seattle is, is one source of such contradictory instructions.
Question one:
When am I required to wear a face covering?
You must wear a cloth face covering over your nose and mouth in an indoor public setting and at outdoor public spaces where it is difficult to maintain six feet of physical distance at all times. This means you don’t need to wear a face covering when you’re outside walking, but you would be directed to wear one while at a farmers market or visiting a crowded park where social distancing is not possible to maintain. You are directed to wear a cloth face covering for the entire duration of the time you’re in either of those settings.
Question eight:
What do I do if I see someone not wearing a face covering, even though they should be?
Nothing. Some people have conditions or circumstances that would make wearing a cloth face covering difficult or dangerous. Just wear your mask and stay six feet away.
But I can’t stay six feet away. That’s the whole point. We’re told to wear them “in an indoor public setting and at outdoor public spaces where it is difficult to maintain six feet of physical distance at all times” so it’s no good telling us to stay six feet away when we’re talking about places where, as you say yourselves, it is difficult to maintain six feet of physical distance at all times – like busy grocery stores, like Trader Joe’s.
So what if we’re in a crowded grocery store, or on a bus, and there are people blithely brushing against us while not wearing masks? Are we really required to assume that all of them “have conditions or circumstances that would make wearing a cloth face covering difficult or dangerous” and that they have to be inside Trader Joe’s or the bus and that we don’t get to tell them to back off or put on a mask?
It makes no sense. By this standard the Trader Joe’s workers who were trying to persuade the angry woman to (wear a mask? leave? stop shouting in people’s faces while not wearing a mask inside a store with a clearly stated rule that masks are required?) were misbehaving?
It makes no sense.
There’s also question four:
Do I need to wear a face covering on buses?
Yes, King County now requires individuals to wear face coverings while riding King County Metro buses. Metro operators will not prevent passengers without face coverings from boarding, but recorded reminders will play on the vehicle’s public address system informing riders of the face covering policy. Security officers will communicate public health guidance to riders who are not wearing a face covering or staying apart from other passengers.
Nonsense. None of that happens. People without face coverings board and none of that happens. No reminders play on the vehicle’s public address system informing riders of the face covering policy. No security officers are present.
None of this adds up.
I suspect that King County advice is intended for members of the public. They’re trying to minimize the number of face-to-face, shouty confrontations with non-mask-wearers. As frustrating as it is to see people not wearing masks, getting into a confrontation with one increases the risk. Leave it to those in authority, either law enforcement or store employees. I don’t think King County is saying — nor could it say — that private establishments can’t enforce their own rules.
Hmm. Maybe…but then shouldn’t the advice be to speak to a store employee or the like?
Not the same on the bus, because the driver is by far the most vulnerable person in that situation. I feel a constant background anxiety for them, which only gets worse when more maskless people get on. I can get off, the driver has to stay.
Well, I can certainly say that the majority of the unmasked people I see (I am not in King County, or even in Washington, but CDC recommendations remain the same) are unlikely to be people for whom mask wearing is difficult or dangerous. My last trip to the grocery store was more than 90% unmasked. And social distancing? Don’t make me laugh.
If you have a condition that makes face mask wearing difficult or dangerous, you should probably find a way to avoid public spaces when other people are there. I know, that sounds callous, and not everyone has someone they can send to the store for them, but…I imagine the percentage of people that applies to is very small, since I have serious respiratory problems, and I am able to wear a mask. It seems there should be some way to deal with it…such as, okay, sir, you can’t wear a mask? Stand out there…six feet away, please…tell me what you need, and I will bring it to you so you don’t risk the health of all the nice people in the store.
Or do like Best Buy announced they were going to do: limit the number of people allowed in the store at one time. This isn’t hard, since doors have locks. Lock and unlock as required. (Yes, might need to put on an extra person, but there are lots of people who would be happy for the job right now.)
I read something about this tension yesterday, I forget where, and what that said was not that it’s a “nobody can do anything” situation but a “make arrangements” situation. It listed the ways stores can accommodate people who can’t mask – no-contact deliveries, no contact appointments to put the stuff outside for pickup, and variations on that theme. None of it was just “oh go to the store unmasked, that’s fine.”
OB@4,
You may be recalling the Orac article you linked to, about the people falsely claiming that the ADA gives them the right to enter stores maskless. (And, often relatedly, that HIIPA forbids stores from inquiring about the alleged medical condition.)
As Orac noted in the referenced article, even someone with a legitimate medical condition that forbids mask-wearing is not entitled to walk around a store maskless. The ADA requires “reasonable accommodation” of disabilities, which in this context means that offering curbside pick-up and/or delivery services, or a personal shopper, or other alternatives are acceptable means of compliance.
I don’t think so…I think it was something else, with a longish detailed list of accommodations. Then again maybe you’re right, maybe the list was included or linked in his post.
Oh yup, you’re right, that’s where I saw it. Specifically: