Covid-19 measures for PSV drivers (FOI)

Request

Please supply me with information relating to,

A

As an employer the States of Jersey are obliged under the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989, Part 2 General Duties, to identify and make an assessment and to make a written a statement of risks on The potential disadvantages of masks and visors and any face coverings used by employees.

B

As the legislator the states have ordered the use of face coverings for PSV Drivers, please supply a written statement of risk assessment on The potential disadvantages of masks and visors and any face coverings in the private and public sector for drivers of PSV's.

C

As the legislator the states have ordered the drivers of PSV's to use masks, visors and face coverings, please supply the risk assessment on the potential disadvantages of driving a PSV vehicle whilst using masks and visors and any face coverings.

Response

A

Under the Health and Safety at Work (Jersey) Law 1989 there is a requirement to assess and control significant risks to health. The most significant risk within this context would be COVID-19 infection and transmission. Risk assessments conducted by each relevant department within the Government of Jersey would therefore focus on COVID-19 as a significant risk to health. During the risk assessment process mouth and nose coverings may be highlighted as a control measure depending on each department’s own specific activities, other operational policies, and compliance with the Covid-19 (Workplace Restrictions) (Jersey) Order 2020, as relevant. The use of masks and visors as a control measure to mitigate the most significant risks would be assessed and considered in the context of the response to questions B and C below.

B and C 

A written statement of risk-assessment specific to PSV drivers is not held. Article 10(1) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 therefore applies. Rather than a specific risk assessment taking place the decision to recommend mouth and nose coverings across the community followed the changes in international guidelines, the growing international evidence base, and changes in local context and emerging threats. Further details can be found in a previous FOI response which is publically available on www.gov.je. Please see the link below:

Risk assessment for face coverings (FOI)

This includes a table of advantages and disadvantages as previously highlighted by reviews conducted by the World Health Organisation and European Centre for Disease Control. This information is already in the public domain and therefore Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. 

To clarify further, the decision to mandate mouth and nose coverings within PSV vehicles under the Covid-19 (Workplace Restrictions) (Jersey) Order 2020 includes a specific exemption under section 5A(3) which states “the driver of a public service vehicle need not be required to wear a mask or visor when doing so would make driving unsafe”.

A link to the Order is available in the following link:

Covid-19 (Workplace Restrictions) (Jersey) Order 2020 

Articles applied

Article 10 - Obligation of scheduled public authority to confirm or deny holding information

(1) Subject to paragraph (2), if –

(a) a person makes a request for information to a scheduled public authority; and

(b) the authority does not hold the information,

it must inform the applicant accordingly.

Article 23 - Information accessible to applicant by other means

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it is reasonably available to the applicant, otherwise than under this Law, whether or not free of charge.

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant where the applicant may obtain the information