Van Sharing

[Owieb]

with what's happening im guessing we are still van sharing at the moment until told differently?

[scoobydo79]

Correct

[theotherone]

I'll be honest last year we went back to van sharing coincidently before peak pressure. I think there is very very little chance of us returning to the one in a van rule, unless of course told otherwise.

[rambo1]

Mandatory masks in vans would be a nice caring touch by management.

[mags999]

i wont be wearing a mask in the van unless they threaten me with the sack

[vinny79]

They can’t sack you.

Mandatory is not law

What if you are exempt

[P13]

They can’t sack you.

Mandatory is not law

What if you are exempt

They can sack you unless you are exempt

[DICKIEG]

You only have to say you are exempt, and they must respect this

[clashcityrocker]

You only have to say you are exempt, and they must respect this

Wrong.

[pinstripe]

i wont be wearing a mask in the van unless they threaten me with the sack

Why not? Is even the slightest possibility that you are not going to harm your colleague so reprehensible?

[koolishy67]

i wont be wearing a mask in the van unless they threaten me with the sack

Really

[TrueBlueTerrier]

It would be nice if people posted links that back their claim, from whichever side.

https://www.employmentlawworldview.com/ ... -story-uk/

The Employment Tribunal’s recent decision in Kubilius v Kent Foods Ltd is entirely unremarkable on the law but notable for its appearing to be the first reported judgment where the employee’s refusal to wear a facemask led to his dismissal.

It is neither new nor novel for employers to expect more from their employees than the minimum levels of compliance required by law (though see below). There may of be instances where employees have genuine medical reasons for refusing to wear a mask meaning disciplinary action should be approached with caution to avoid disability discrimination risks. Our prediction is nevertheless that this decision will frequently cited by employers to rebut allegations by employees that their dismissals were unreasonable because any COVID-19 related requirement which they failed to comply with exceeded the base level required by the state and/or was not imposed by their employer.

Now I have quoted selectively and its a little more nuanced than I have presented, so I suggest everyone reads the article, but in essence, it does look like they can sack you, in some cases, if you refuse to wear a mask when they have requested that you do.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

You only have to say you are exempt, and they must respect this

They might have to respect it, but that doesn't mean they can't make reasonable adjustments, such as removing you from your duty, to accede to your request for exemption.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/healt ... -covering/

Wearing a mask or face covering at work
If your employer tells you to wear a mask or face covering at work, you normally have to.

Tell your employer if you can’t wear a mask or face covering, for example if:

wearing one makes you extremely anxious
you’ve got an illness or disability which means you can’t wear one
If you’re disabled and you can’t wear a mask or face covering, you should ask your employer to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ for you.

[rambo1]

i wont be wearing a mask in the van unless they threaten me with the sack

Wow, you sound such a nice person! How are you going to go shopping? I really don't understand what people have got against wearing a mask? My wife has to wear one for a 12 hr shift at hospital and you aren't prepared to wear one for what amounts to probably a total of less than an hr? What a selfish individual you are!

[vinny79]

It would be nice if people posted links that back their claim, from whichever side.

https://www.employmentlawworldview.com/ ... -story-uk/

The Employment Tribunal’s recent decision in Kubilius v Kent Foods Ltd is entirely unremarkable on the law but notable for its appearing to be the first reported judgment where the employee’s refusal to wear a facemask led to his dismissal.

It is neither new nor novel for employers to expect more from their employees than the minimum levels of compliance required by law (though see below). There may of be instances where employees have genuine medical reasons for refusing to wear a mask meaning disciplinary action should be approached with caution to avoid disability discrimination risks. Our prediction is nevertheless that this decision will frequently cited by employers to rebut allegations by employees that their dismissals were unreasonable because any COVID-19 related requirement which they failed to comply with exceeded the base level required by the state and/or was not imposed by their employer.

Now I have quoted selectively and its a little more nuanced than I have presented, so I suggest everyone reads the article, but in essence, it does look like they can sack you, in some cases, if you refuse to wear a mask when they have requested that you do.

Please

Read the article and it’s nothing to do with covid.

It quotes an employee handbook about respecting their customers PPE requirements.

Which pre dated covid

Please show me where we signed up for this at Royal Mail.

Nonsense.

They cannot dismiss you for a face covering if exempt which they have no legal right to ask for proof of.