None of the guidelines are law?

[Paddingtonthebear]

Is this correct? It will be against the law to have groups of more than 30 people, and against the law for businesses to reopen if they have been instructed to remain closed (beauty salons, gyms etc). But other than that the guidelines for businesses are just advice not actual law. So pubs for example have no actual legal requirement to provide table service only, to ask for customer contact details or to enforce any social distancing or covid related modifications when they reopen on 4th July?

That’s my understanding too.

Surely not... So a venue can host an indoor wedding with 100+ people and no social distancing and they won’t get a fine?

Ah sorry I misunderstood. Only the 30+ people things and closed businesses.

I can see many pubs not bothering with enforcements in that case.

Yep a quick look on Twitter suggests many won’t

I had naively assumed that table service in pubs rather than people congregating at the bar would be a legal requirement. If it isn't, I feel very sorry for bar staff.

Why refuse to allow gyms, pools and beauty salons etc to open up if the businesses you have deemed safe to open have no actual law to open safely?

My understanding is that all businesses have to operate in a safe way under existing health and safety law, which would mean following the guidance? And that their public and employers liability insurance would not cover them either if they aren’t operating in line with the guidance?

A pub near me has been told they can accommodate 42 people when they re-open - if you can’t have a group of more than 30 how can this happen?

With weddings of up to 30 people, are you meant to still socially distance?!

My understanding is that all businesses have to operate in a safe way under existing health and safety law, which would mean following the guidance? And that their public and employers liability insurance would not cover them either if they aren’t operating in line with the guidance

Yes. So they do have to comply.

As for the 30 versus 42 point - you can't have groups of more than 30. But you can have eg groups of 4 at 10 tables, spaced 1m apart.

@puffinkoala There's a difference between mandating compliance with specific rules and just having a general requirement to provide a safe work environment.

There is a legal requirement to risk assess the hazard of COVID within the workplace. This should have regard to the GOV guidance. In wales and Scotland 2m SD is a legal requirement. In England it's in the guidance only.

Your risk assessment will guide you to whether you decide to offer counter or table service for example. Or whether you have a self service carvery (a hot topic today!)
If you choose to deviate from the guidance you should really be able to justify this.
Councils will only really have the resource to investigate complaints regarding unsafe operation, but some will be doing spot checks if they can.

So the pubs publicly saying they are not going to follow the guidelines, will they be ok?

Everyone's ok as long as no one is looking at them. If I got a complaint about a premises operating in an unsafe manner then I'm going to want to see their risk assessment (legal requirement).
Premises are being short sighted if they say stuff like that. If punters don't feel safe they either won't go at all, or won't come back.

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/7/contents/enacted

52 covers events, gatherings and premises, and yes they can be limited by law: also schedule 22

HSE can shut businesses down for not following regulations and thereby endangering workers or customets. Local councils can remove licences from pubs. Other regulators similarly can take action, most regulated work and most business insurances cite compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

It might not be law but if someone gets covid and dies, and can prove it was down to the negligence of a venue or office, then expect there to be corporate manslaughter cases made.

"So the pubs publicly saying they are not going to follow the guidelines, will they be ok"

Depends on the attitude of the government to go head to head on this

(6)A direction under sub-paragraph (1) may impose prohibitions, requirements or restrictions by reference to (among other things)—
(a)the number of persons in the premises;
(b)the size of the premises;
(c)the purpose for which a person is in the premises;
(d)the facilities in the premises;
(e)a period of time.

I think it was the point that D Cummings took to the rose garden to make: whilst we were all slavenly do-not-leave-your-home-especially-if-you’re sick with covid that actually this Was not law at all, merely guidelines that only good loving parents would use their good common sense to interpret

And yet we still can’t send our children to school...

You really think that the risk factors for pubs are the same as for schools?

Everything has risk. Where did I say the risk factor was the same? But the excitement over pubs being open is so ridiculous and our country has its priorities all wrong. Meanwhile our children are being failed. Massively.

You didn't explicitly use the word risk

But you did compare pub opening and school opening which is why I joked about it.

So I guess frivolling about pubs and churches long antedating schools in British society would be cup of cold sick territory too?

Apparently Boris is going to make it the law for schools to re open in September anyway ...