LightRoasted
If I may ...
If I may ...
We are on the same road, but in different lanes, heading in the same direction, with just a bit of distance between us.Again, no, you may not....
TPD's business could be open if he complied with the current restrictions set by the local health official. It seems the sticking point is with not all employees using masks, not the customers. He has stated that those employees have indicated that they have breathing "issues" when wearing masks. The Governor. as well as the CDC, has allowed exceptions to the mask rule, but the EO allows the local health officials to place more restrictive conditions upon businesses. The difference when dealing with the big box stores (versus TPD's) is that the bigger businesses have to also follow Federal ADA requirements on providing accommodations for those employees within their business that have similar issues with the masks. To my knowledge the state cannot override the federal mandates
Thus for me the fact that TPD is choosing to voluntarily adhere to the ADA provisions (which btw is a great thing) he does not employ the requisite number of employees to mandate such adherence on his part, thus it seems that the local health official would be under no obligation to allow him an accommodation that is not required under law.
Given that there are no cases for that zip code and none of his employees have been confirmed to have the illness, and just so we are clear, I absolutely think that all of these mandates are BS, but the legislature allows for them, the rule should be that businesses must clearly advertise only:
And then let the people choose whether to do business with them up and until it can be proven that there is an actual health risk at that business. Then, and only then, would isolation, quarantine, and/or closure be indicated.
- Are masks required for customers - yes or no
- Are masks required for employees - yes or no