As others have said, I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask for face coverings to be mandatory in a closed environment such as a scaremaze where screaming and shouting will be a natural reflex.
I despise wearing a face covering. As someone who relies heavily on lip reading it makes communication incredibly challenging and stressful. They are also far from the most comfortable things (though there are certainly some which are more comfortable than others if you’re prepared to take the time and test the options). However, I completely accept that they are a necessary evil, and go along with it when required to do so. I feel guilty and uncomfortable when someone feels the need to remove their covering to communicate with me. I don’t want someone else to feel the need to compromise their safety and wellbeing to accommodate me.
I have scaled back some of my personal activities as a result of the restrictions to avoid putting myself in too many difficult situations, which is not ideal, but again a necessity at the moment.
Let me be clear, I am all for accessibility (a big part of my job is creating accessible experiences for people, and I also say all of the above as someone with a disability), but I do think we need to weigh everything up at the moment to truly appreciate the risk to the participant and those around them. Everyone should have the right to work in a safe environment I believe.
Above all else, let’s make sure we have some perspective on this; we are talking about a scaremaze. An optional, upcharge, leisure facility. We’re not talking about freely walking the streets or visiting a supermarket.
I find the subject of exemptions problematic as anyone, I repeat, anyone can visit Gov UK and print an exemption card. No questions asked. What is intended as a vital tool for certain groups has been made too easily abused. It’s made it much more difficult for frontline workers to challenge, and I can completely understand that many feel uncomfortable challenging people (this is simply not something they would normally have to do in their position).
So yes, while it does initially seem like a tough policy, I personally can’t blame them for putting it in place.
The app is an odd one. Especially given the compatibility issues many have reported I’d be surprised if they are going to outright turn people away without it... I was under the impression that an alternative means needs to offered. Perhaps they are simply trying to reduce the number of edge cases but will still have an alternative in place for those genuinely cannot use the official app?..
