Coronavirus and the effect on Public transport

engleburt · 05-08-2020 8:26pm

GT89 wrote: »

Heard that online DB drivers have been told not to challenge passengers who board without masks and say they are medically exempt.

Can confirm no such thing has happened.

Midnight_EG · 05-08-2020 10:19pm

engleburt wrote: »

Can confirm no such thing has happened.

Except it has, depending on what union you're a part of

dublinman1990 · 07-08-2020 5:18pm

I was reading up some news from FG's Jerry Buttimer on the Newstalk website just now. He said on it's breakfast show this morning that he wants the NTA to have all taxis equipped with cashless payment options around the country as a matter of public health.

https://www.newstalk.com/news/taxi-cashless-payment-options-1057746

CIARAN_BOYLE · 07-08-2020 8:32pm

GT89 wrote: »

Heard that online DB drivers have been told not to challenge passengers who board without masks and say they are medically exempt.

By the unions and not the company

punisher5112 · 07-08-2020 8:33pm

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

By the unions and not the company

Even if one did the company would leave you high and dry.....

There is no back up.

GT89 · 07-08-2020 9:16pm

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

By the unions and not the company

I heard there was someone who complained because a driver looked for proof when he said he was exempt. This is bang out of order if you ask me drivers have no right to know a person's medical details.

AlekSmart · 07-08-2020 9:25pm

GT89 wrote: »

I heard there was someone who complained because a driver looked for proof when he said he was exempt. This is bang out of order if you ask me drivers have no right to know a person's medical details.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2020/si/244/made/en/print

It appears that you were overlooked on this one....

Powers of relevant person

7. (1) Where a relevant person reasonably believes that a person travelling by public transport vehicle (in this Regulation referred to as a “passenger”) is not wearing a face covering in accordance with Regulation 5, he or she may do any of the following:

(a) request the passenger to wear a face covering;

(b) refuse the passenger entry to a public transport vehicle;

(c) request the passenger to alight from a public transport vehicle.

(2) Before exercising a power under paragraph (1) in respect of a passenger, a relevant person shall give the passenger an opportunity to provide reasonable excuse and may request the passenger to provide such information as the relevant person considers necessary to determine whether or not the passenger has reasonable excuse.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), the onus shall be on a passenger to establish, to the satisfaction of the relevant person, that he or she has reasonable excuse.

(4) A passenger shall comply with a request or refusal under paragraph (1).

(5) Paragraph (4) is a penal provision for the purposes of section 31A of the Health Act 1947 (No. 28 of 1947).

GT89 · 08-08-2020 12:00am

That is not power a bus driver or any transport employee for that matter should be given. What information can the "relevant person" consider nessecary? A piece of paper, a song and dance or none of the above. Putting this into law without any clear guidance from transport companies to either customers or employees is pretty much allowing it to be left open to interpretion.

To the best of my knowledge nearly all UK operators are either instructing drivers to either not get involved or encourage but not enforce it. The same should be done here in my opinion.

StreetLight · 08-08-2020 9:48am

GT89 wrote: »

That is not power a bus driver or any transport employee for that matter should be given.

That's nothing, compared to Section 58c of the Dublin Bus bye-laws:

"58 (c) Where any such person refuses or fails to comply with a request under paragraph (a) or (b) of this Bye-Law or following such request such person gives a name and address which the authorised person has reasonable grounds for believing is false or misleading, such person may be detained by the authorised person until the arrival of a member of the Garda Síochána. "

https://www.dublinbus.ie/About-Us/Dublin-Bus-Bye-Laws/Enforcement-Procedures/

bk · 08-08-2020 11:55am

Frankly the whole "medical exemption" stuff is complete bull****.

Frankly anyone who has such extreme breathing issues that they can't wear a mask, would be in a VERY high risk category and they should be cocooning at home anyway. Covid19 is very dangerous for these people and they certainly shouldn't be venturing out on crowded public transport without a mask.

Of course most people claiming "medical exemption" are simply selfish morons who are simply using this as an excuse not to wear a mask and in truth they are liars.

In the US, airlines are now saying, no mask, then you don't fly. No "medical exemptions" allowed, find another way to travel or stay at home. We should be taking this approach on public transport, shops, etc.

bk · 08-08-2020 11:59am

Given that lockdown is now being re-implemented in three counties, hopefully everyone now understands how important it is that we all follow these measures and do everything within our power to keep the numbers low. Or we will all be back into lockdown with even more extreme damage done to our economy and community.

punisher5112 · 08-08-2020 12:06pm

I'd like to see better cleaning of vehicles than what I see as 2 or 3 minutes a bus isn't enough....

bk · 08-08-2020 12:18pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

I'd like to see better cleaning of vehicles than what I see as 2 or 3 minutes a bus isn't enough....

Of course more cleaning is always better. Though the evidence now is suggesting that the whole cleaning/washing hands stuff actually plays very little part in the spread of Covid19.

They are still arguing about it, but the evidence now very strongly points to it being primarily airborne and people are mostly getting it by breathing it in.

Thus the emphasis now having switched to masks wearing if you can't socially distance.

Of course I'd keep washing hands, etc. regardless.

punisher5112 · 08-08-2020 1:12pm

bk wrote: »

Of course more cleaning is always better. Though the evidence now is suggesting that the whole cleaning/washing hands stuff actually plays very little part in the spread of Covid19.

They are still arguing about it, but the evidence now very strongly points to it being primarily airborne and people are mostly getting it by breathing it in.

Thus the emphasis now having switched to masks wearing if you can't socially distance.

Of course I'd keep washing hands, etc. regardless.

After getting into the cleaning and wipes for surfaces, I'm nearly afraid to touch anything anymore after seeing what coming off.

Tickityboo · 08-08-2020 1:24pm

bk wrote: »

Frankly the whole "medical exemption" stuff is complete bull****.

Frankly anyone who has such extreme breathing issues that they can't wear a mask, would be in a VERY high risk category and they should be cocooning at home anyway. Covid19 is very dangerous for these people and they certainly shouldn't be venturing out on crowded public transport without a mask.

Of course most people claiming "medical exemption" are simply selfish morons who are simply using this as an excuse not to wear a mask and in truth they are liars.

In the US, airlines are now saying, no mask, then you don't fly. No "medical exemptions" allowed, find another way to travel or stay at home. We should be taking this approach on public transport, shops, etc.

For those who refuse to wear a mask because of supposed medical grounds what's stopping them wearing a face shield?

Atlantic Dawn · 08-08-2020 1:28pm

They are still saying essential journeys only on public transport yet at the same time are telling people to holiday in Ireland, completely conflicting advise.

GT89 · 08-08-2020 1:53pm

Tickityboo wrote: »

For those who refuse to wear a mask because of supposed medical grounds what's stopping them wearing a face shield?

Well they're saying visors/face shields are useless now.

ressem · 08-08-2020 3:20pm

GT89 wrote: »

Well they're saying visors/face shields are useless now.

Who is "They"? And did they say useless or is that your interpretation?

Face shield's are not useless, but are not to be used as a replacement for a mask. Some situations might benefit from combining both.
The Swiss office of public health say
https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/en/home/krankheiten/ausbrueche-epidemien-pandemien/aktuelle-ausbrueche-epidemien/novel-cov/masken.html

https://www.bag.admin.ch/bag/en/home/krankheiten/ausbrueche-epidemien-pandemien/aktuelle-ausbrueche-epidemien/novel-cov/masken.html wrote:

Different types of mask
The following types of mask are available on the market:

Face mask/surgical mask: Such masks, when used correctly, primarily protect other people from infection. If you have symptoms of an acute respiratory disease, you should use a mask of this kind.
Industrially produced textile mask (community mask): When used correctly, this type of covering primarily protects other people from infection. The Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force has drawn up a standard which this type of textile mask must meet.
Filtering face piece (FFP) or FFP2/FFP3 mask: This type of mask protects the wearer from solid and liquid particles and aerosols. They are worn by medical staff in a work situation. Some of these masks have a vent outlet to make it easier to breathe out. Infected persons with or without symptoms of illness should not use masks with a vent outlet as they do not filter air that is breathed out and so could lead to the virus spreading. The use of FFP masks is not recommended for private use.
Other types of face covering (homemade textile face covering, DIY face covering): These types of covering do not provide any reliable protection, and are therefore not recommended.
Covering your face with a scarf of cloth does not protect you sufficiently from becoming infected and is of only limited use in protecting others. A scarf or cloth should not be used instead of a mask.

Visors are also no substitute for a face mask. They protect the eyes from possible infection through droplets, but the possibility of infection via the nose or mouth cannot be excluded. Visors only serve as a complementary form of protection measure in conjunction with a mask.

They have a few examples in Switzerland where staff wearing masks avoided infection, where those wearing face-shields did not.

But
We won't know for months or years whether the eyes are a common entry and spread point for the virus. Just that it's a possibility. Similar to the question of how long the virus remains airborne in an enclosed environment.

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-face-masks-what-you-need-to-know

What is a face shield?
A face shield is a piece of rigid, clear plastic attached to a headband. The plastic piece covers the face, extending to below your chin.

You might have seen face shields on some of your health care providers, even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Dentists and dental hygienists sometimes wear them when they are working close to their patients’ mouths. Doctors, nurses and technologists might use face shields, together with face masks, when performing certain procedures that could propel blood or other substances into the air.

At Johns Hopkins, care teams treating COVID-19 patients wear face shields over N95 respirators for additional protection.

Should I wear a face shield?
If you maintain physical distancing of at least 6 feet between you and other people when in public places, you will not need a face shield. Wearing a mask will contain your respiratory droplets. Avoid close contact with anyone who is not wearing a mask. If you must be in close contact with someone who is not wearing a mask, a face shield may provide some additional protection.

Charles Babbage · 08-08-2020 4:49pm

GT89 wrote: »

I heard there was someone who complained because a driver looked for proof when he said he was exempt. This is bang out of order if you ask me drivers have no right to know a person's medical details.

THe problem here is that people without masks should not be allowed on buses. End of.

GT89 · 08-08-2020 6:04pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

THe problem here is that people without masks should not be allowed on buses. End of.

Not what the law states. If you have a problem with the current regulations lobby the government to change to change it. But that's not going to take from that a large proportion of bus drivers don't want the hassle or aggro.

xhomelezz · 08-08-2020 6:08pm

GT89 wrote: »

Well they're saying visors/face shields are useless now.

It was clear to anyone with a bit of brain long time ago. But guess what, it was discovered over here only now. Shocked? I'm not.

ronano · 08-08-2020 10:03pm

What's the covid guidelines for private coaches? I was on one earlier and fellow passenger sat beside me. Is that allowed with covid situation or company mess up?

punisher5112 · 08-08-2020 10:30pm

ronano wrote: »

What's the covid guidelines for private coaches? I was on one earlier and fellow passenger sat beside me. Is that allowed with covid situation or company mess up?

Well did you move or ask them to do so?
Was there signs or notices?

ronano · 08-08-2020 11:37pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Well did you move or ask them to do so?
Was there signs or notices?

My question is not about the passenger, it's about the covid guidelines. I'd have no problem asking someone to move. No signs about seating

Sultan of Bling · 09-08-2020 12:18am

bk wrote:

Frankly the whole "medical exemption" stuff is complete bull****.

bk wrote:

Frankly anyone who has such extreme breathing issues that they can't wear a mask, would be in a VERY high risk category and they should be cocooning at home anyway. Covid19 is very dangerous for these people and they certainly shouldn't be venturing out on crowded public transport without a mask.

bk wrote:

Of course most people claiming "medical exemption" are simply selfish morons who are simply using this as an excuse not to wear a mask and in truth they are liars.

bk wrote:

In the US, airlines are now saying, no mask, then you don't fly. No "medical exemptions" allowed, find another way to travel or stay at home. We should be taking this approach on public transport, shops, etc.

Well said

GT89 · 09-08-2020 12:42am

bk wrote: »

Frankly the whole "medical exemption" stuff is complete bull****.

Frankly anyone who has such extreme breathing issues that they can't wear a mask, would be in a VERY high risk category and they should be cocooning at home anyway. Covid19 is very dangerous for these people and they certainly shouldn't be venturing out on crowded public transport without a mask.

Of course most people claiming "medical exemption" are simply selfish morons who are simply using this as an excuse not to wear a mask and in truth they are liars.

In the US, airlines are now saying, no mask, then you don't fly. No "medical exemptions" allowed, find another way to travel or stay at home. We should be taking this approach on public transport, shops, etc.

But the government are not advising cocooning for the immunocompromised anymore and masks don't protect the wearer either. I don't have a problem with wearing a mask on a short enough myself. I wear a mask going on the bus although I'm not totally convinced of the benefit. I think it's more there to make people feel confident using public transport rather as actual protection.

Most people are wearing masks on public transport so I don't really see any problem with a handful who are not. Your comparision with airlines is completely off the mark as public transport does not have near the same level of security as airlines it is not enforceable unless you put security on every bus and train in the country to police it walking up and down to esure no one removes their mask which is completely unfeasible.

Gael23 · 09-08-2020 5:51am

Heard private operators are being prevented from operation by the NTA. Does anyone know about this?

devnull · 09-08-2020 11:50am

Gael23 wrote: »

Heard private operators are being prevented from operation by the NTA. Does anyone know about this?

The NTA and Department of Transport on behalf of central government are having discussions with commercial bus operators, both public and private in relation to the effect that the COVID-19 pandemic and the required restrictions have on their operation which make the trading environment extremely tough with many key demand drivers simply not there or heavily reduced.

The operators hope to reach a conclusion leading to them being able to resume services in a sustainable way that preserves the health and safety of their customers and staff as well as ensuring the companies can continue to trade for the foreseeable future, safeguarding the jobs of their employees and in turn the welfare of the families who rely on the wages from such jobs.

bk · 09-08-2020 1:43pm

GT89 wrote: »

But the government are not advising cocooning for the immunocompromised anymore and masks don't protect the wearer either. I don't have a problem with wearing a mask on a short enough myself. I wear a mask going on the bus although I'm not totally convinced of the benefit. I think it's more there to make people feel confident using public transport rather as actual protection.

If you are immunocompromised, you would be out of your mind to risk boarding public transport now, government advice or not.

My father is immunocompromised and he hasn't stepped outside of his home since this has all started. This is based on the advice of his consultant.

While the advice to in general for elderly people has changed, I'm certain that the advice from GP's and consultants to their patients who are immunocompromised or genuinely have such low lung capacity that they can't wear a mask, would be not to go out and about.

GT89 wrote: »

masks don't protect the wearer either.

Well some masks do in fact protect the wearer. The growing evidence is that even basic masks offer some protection to the wearer, though that isn't the primary use for them, it is to stop you from spreading it to others.

However N95/N99/PPF2/PPF3 masks exist, the ones worn by medical staff when treating Covid patients and they of course offer protection to the wearer.

The WHO now actually recommends elderly people to wear medical grade surgical masks, not just face coverings. And to be honest if you are in a high risk category, I'd go for a (non vent) N95/PPF2 mask.

Of course if you those at the highest risk category, immunocompromised or people with extremely low lung capacity, they should really be talking to their GP/Consultant and really shouldn't be venturing out and onto public transport in anything but the most essential circumstances e.g. hospital appointment, with no other option for travel.

GT89 · 09-08-2020 2:31pm

bk wrote: »

If you are immunocompromised, you would be out of your mind to risk boarding public transport now, government advice or not.

My father is immunocompromised and he hasn't stepped outside of his home since this has all started. This is based on the advice of his consultant.

While the advice to in general for elderly people has changed, I'm certain that the advice from GP's and consultants to their patients who are immunocompromised or genuinely have such low lung capacity that they can't wear a mask, would be not to go out and about

Well some masks do in fact protect the wearer. The growing evidence is that even basic masks offer some protection to the wearer, though that isn't the primary use for them, it is to stop you from spreading it to others.

However N95/N99/PPF2/PPF3 masks exist, the ones worn by medical staff when treating Covid patients and they of course offer protection to the wearer.

The WHO now actually recommends elderly people to wear medical grade surgical masks, not just face coverings. And to be honest if you are in a high risk category, I'd go for a (non vent) N95/PPF2 mask.

Of course if you those at the highest risk category, immunocompromised or people with extremely low lung capacity, they should really be talking to their GP/Consultant and really shouldn't be venturing out and onto public transport in anything but the most essential circumstances e.g. hospital appointment, with no other option for travel.

With all due respect people are entitled to make their own decisions as to what they feel works best for them. That includes how much you want to go out and what mask they should wear.

The problem with the likes of the N95 masks is many do not know how to use these propperly as they are supposed to be tight fitting in order to protect the wearer. Another point is that those masks to the best of knowledge are disposable and are quite expensive.

Coronavirus and the effect on Public transport

Comments