Restaurant bans children...

Frank Black

Millicent wrote: »

So you're going to completely disregard what people with experience of the health and safety risk are telling you? Well that's conducive to having a discussion...

Well, given your knoweledge and experience of the 1994 H&S legistation - perhaps you explain why a newborn baby represents a specific H&S risk in this restaurant at lunchtime.

ronjo

MrCreosote wrote: »

It still baffles me why people are so precious that they can't have dinner with a quiet, well-behaved child in the same room.

After 100million posts on the issue you really think this is peoples problem?????

MrCreosote

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

So you would go out of your way just to ruin other people's night out? What a perfect example of being a twat.

People aren't on a night out at 12 noon. And if hearing someone complain is the worst they have to deal with during the day then they have rather sheltered lives.

ronjo wrote: »

After 100million posts on the issue you really think this is peoples problem?????

That is the restaurant's problem- after all they are banning ALL children and their parents regardless of their behaviour

TwoShedsJackson

Why is anyone taking MrCreosote seriously after the 'Iseult' post?? He deserves credit for subtlety but come on...

ronjo

MrCreosote wrote: »

That is the restaurant's problem- after all they are banning ALL children and their parents regardless of their behaviour

Aha, sorry I misunderstood.

So you will be editing your post on the previous page you made in error about being baffled by PEOPLE being so precious to the RESTAURANT IN QUESTION being so precious I assume for correctness.
Fair play for admitting your error.

MrCreosote

ronjo wrote: »

Aha, sorry I misunderstood.

No problems.

ronjo wrote: »

So you will be editing your post on the previous page you made in error about being baffled by PEOPLE being so precious to the RESTAURANT IN QUESTION being so precious I assume for correctness.
Fair play for admitting your error.

Let me try to explain- these are two separate things, and there's no need to deliberately misunderstand me. Firstly "people"- people replying to this thread- have repeatedly said they can't stand children, don't want them on flights, don't want them in public- REGARDLESS of how they are going to behave. They just don't want to see them full stop. They are being precious.

The restaurant are picking up on this vibe. They're not being precious, they are being discrimatory (and possibly breaking the law)

ronjo

MrCreosote wrote: »

No problems.



Let me try to explain- these are two separate things, and there's no need to deliberately misunderstand me. Firstly "people"- people replying to this thread- have repeatedly said they can't stand children, don't want them on flights, don't want them in public- REGARDLESS of how they are going to behave. They just don't want to see them full stop. They are being precious.

The restaurant are picking up on this vibe. They're not being precious, they are being discrimatory (and possibly breaking the law)

To be honest I think so many people are digging their heels in on both sides of the argument so some middle ground should be found.
Some restaurants should be family friendly and some adult friendly for want of a better phrase.
That means that if you dont like kids you have a place to go to eat and if you do like kids you also have a place to go.
Everyone happy

RainyDay

ronjo wrote: »

That means that if you dont like kids you have a place to go to eat and if you do like kids you also have a place to go.
Everyone happy

And the same for black people - right? If I don't like eating with black people, I should find a restaurant that doesn't let them in? And if I don't like eating with people with disabilities, like the idiot in this story, I should find a restaurant that don't let them in.

And restaurants should be allowed discriminate against groups of people for no particular reason, other than the past behaviour of some other people in those groups - that's the kind of Ireland you want - right? Or have I misunderstood?

MrCreosote

ronjo wrote: »

To be honest I think so many people are digging their heels in on both sides of the argument so some middle ground should be found.
Some restaurants should be family friendly and some adult friendly for want of a better phrase.
That means that if you dont like kids you have a place to go to eat and if you do like kids you also have a place to go.
Everyone happy

A bit too conciliatory for me....but what the hell, I'm happy with that :cool:

Tombo2001

Millicent wrote: »

So you're going to completely disregard what people with experience of the health and safety risk are telling you? Well that's conducive to having a discussion...

Are you talking about yourself? That you are some sort of authority on health and safety? because you once worked in a restaurant......?

I worked in a restaurant myself, and in a bar. I suppose that must make me a health and safety expert too so!!!

.....must remember to put that on my cv.....thanks for the heads up....

ronjo

RainyDay wrote: »

And the same for black people - right? If I don't like eating with black people, I should find a restaurant that doesn't let them in? And if I don't like eating with people with disabilities, like the idiot in this story, I should find a restaurant that don't let them in.

And restaurants should be allowed discriminate against groups of people for no particular reason, other than the past behaviour of some other people in those groups - that's the kind of Ireland you want - right? Or have I misunderstood?

Whoa........ dial it back a bit there Adolf.

I am just trying to find a happy solution

ronjo

MrCreosote wrote: »

A bit too conciliatory for me....but what the hell, I'm happy with that :cool:

A pleasure doing business with you sir.
And if I ever own a restaurant yourself and your kids are more than welcome anytime

MrCreosote

ronjo wrote: »

And if I ever own a restaurant yourself and your kids are more than welcome anytime

Throw out a dish with organic haloumi, quinoa and drizzled with a light garlic-and-thyme jus, and we'd take you up on that offer. That's Iseult's favourite!

MrC signing off now. I think we'll have to call this argument a high-scoring draw.

RainyDay

ronjo wrote: »

Whoa........ dial it back a bit there Adolf.

I am just trying to find a happy solution

So you realise now why your 'happy solution' would actually be extremely dangerous?

Tombo2001

The funny thing about this thread is....

I am a parent of two young kids.

I've always made an big effort when going to restaurants that they dont disturb the other diners.

For example, the place we most frequently go to is an Italian with a main restaurant and a smaller area around the back of the kitchen......we always go to the area around the back, which is empty, purely so that we dont disturb the other diners around the front, where it fills up first. And the reason we pick this restaurant is that we can do this.

The funny thing is......having read this thread, it seems quite clear to me that average Joe is such a self centred, unconsiderate, unwilling to see the other point of view.....that I am now wondering why should I bother adjusting my behaviour to suit these goons......why should I? Its a question I'm asking myself.......

fangee

Great idea.

Who wants to be looking at or listening to a baby when they're eating ?

A baby that is liable to scream, cry or smell the place out without a moments notice thereby ruining my experience.

No thanks.

ronjo

MrCreosote wrote: »

Throw out a dish with organic haloumi, quinoa and drizzled with a light garlic-and-thyme jus, and we'd take you up on that offer. That's Iseult's favourite!

MrC signing off now. I think we'll have to call this argument a high-scoring draw.

No bother

RainyDay wrote: »

So you realise now why your 'happy solution' would actually be extremely dangerous?

Well if its good enough for MrCreosote, I am sure its good enough for you. You can bring your chizzlers too

ronjo

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The funny thing about this thread is....

I am a parent of two young kids.

I've always made an big effort when going to restaurants that they dont disturb the other diners.

For example, the place we most frequently go to is an Italian with a main restaurant and a smaller area around the back of the kitchen......we always go to the area around the back, which is empty, purely so that we dont disturb the other diners around the front, where it fills up first. And the reason we pick this restaurant is that we can do this.

The funny thing is......having read this thread, it seems quite clear to me that average Joe is such a self centred, unconsiderate, unwilling to see the other point of view.....that I am now wondering why should I bother adjusting my behaviour to suit these goons......why should I? Its a question I'm asking myself.......

I have a 2 year old and would always do something like this too.
I would advise you to keep doing it. Better for your own sanity, I guarantee it.

gingernut125

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The funny thing about this thread is....

I am a parent of two young kids.

I've always made an big effort when going to restaurants that they dont disturb the other diners.

For example, the place we most frequently go to is an Italian with a main restaurant and a smaller area around the back of the kitchen......we always go to the area around the back, which is empty, purely so that we dont disturb the other diners around the front, where it fills up first. And the reason we pick this restaurant is that we can do this.

The funny thing is......having read this thread, it seems quite clear to me that average Joe is such a self centred, unconsiderate, unwilling to see the other point of view.....that I am now wondering why should I bother adjusting my behaviour to suit these goons......why should I? Its a question I'm asking myself.......

The average Joe isn't the person posting on this forum. If you want to annoy people on purpose go ahead, I can't stop you, but don't brand the average person with the same brush as a few more extreme after hours posters.

The poll only was to say if people think the restaurant have a right to refuse, it wasn't asking do you hate family friendly restaurants.

The restaurant in question is very busy at lunch times (no room for buggies) and serve cocktails etc,, in the evenings, it's not a family restaurant, probably because so many are in the area they need to differentiate themselves.

You'd think with the recession and all people would have more important things to complain about .....

RainyDay

ronjo wrote: »

Well if its good enough for MrCreosote, I am sure its good enough for you.

It's not good enough for me. Anything that discriminates against people based on anything other than the behaviour of those specific people is not good enough for me.

osarusan

Millicent wrote: »

Comparing one restaurant not allowing children in for 10-14 hours a week with what she has to put up with everyday from asshole businesses is disgraceful and anyone who is making that comparison should be ashamed of themselves.

Nobody is comparing those things.

People (like me) are asking if people who support a ban on children because of the things they are liable to do which are annoying/dangerous to other customers and staff would also support a ban on people with disabilites which makes them more likely to do things which are annoying/dangerous to other customers.

That's the only comparison being made.

BizzyC

Tombo2001 wrote: »

The funny thing about this thread is....

I am a parent of two young kids.

I've always made an big effort when going to restaurants that they dont disturb the other diners.

For example, the place we most frequently go to is an Italian with a main restaurant and a smaller area around the back of the kitchen......we always go to the area around the back, which is empty, purely so that we dont disturb the other diners around the front, where it fills up first. And the reason we pick this restaurant is that we can do this.

The funny thing is......having read this thread, it seems quite clear to me that average Joe is such a self centred, unconsiderate, unwilling to see the other point of view.....that I am now wondering why should I bother adjusting my behaviour to suit these goons......why should I? Its a question I'm asking myself.......

Again, your taking it as "children should not be allowed in restaurants".
That's not the point.

There should be an option available to people so that they can get away from children though.

If you have a babysitter for the night and organise a nice night out with the OH, wouldn't you like to know you're not going to have a crying baby at the table next to you?
Why are you opposed to having that option available to you?

RainyDay

BizzyC wrote: »

If you have a babysitter for the night and organise a nice night out with the OH, wouldn't you like to know you're not going to have a crying baby at the table next to you?
Why are you opposed to having that option available to you?

There is a big difference between a restaurant saying 'no crying babies' and a restaurant saying 'no children'. Restrictions on behaviour (e.g. crying) are fine. Restrictions based on family status are not.

BizzyC

RainyDay wrote: »

There is a big difference between a restaurant saying 'no crying babies' and a restaurant saying 'no children'. Restrictions on behaviour (e.g. crying) are fine. Restrictions based on family status are not.

So are they supposed to allow children in, and then boot the family out mid-meal after the child starts crying?

Frank Black

BizzyC wrote: »

If you have a babysitter for the night and organise a nice night out with the OH, wouldn't you like to know you're not going to have a crying baby at the table next to you?
Why are you opposed to having that option available to you?

I wonder how many people have gone out in the circumstances you suggest (presumably for a meal around 8.00pm) and ended up at a table beside a crying baby?

Certainly never happened to me.

Maybe I've led a very lucky life.

old hippy

RainyDay wrote: »

And the same for black people - right? If I don't like eating with black people, I should find a restaurant that doesn't let them in? And if I don't like eating with people with disabilities, like the idiot in this story, I should find a restaurant that don't let them in.

And restaurants should be allowed discriminate against groups of people for no particular reason, other than the past behaviour of some other people in those groups - that's the kind of Ireland you want - right? Or have I misunderstood?

Keeping mewling poopsters and other satanic spawn out of our pleasure spaces is not discrimination. Babies have not been oppressed for centuries, sold into slavery or denied the right to vote. They are babies, fer crissakes :mad:

BizzyC

black francis wrote: »

I wonder how many people have gone out in the circumstances you suggest (presumably for a meal around 8.00pm) and ended up at a table beside a crying baby?

Certainly never happened to me.

Maybe I've led a very lucky life.

8.00pm is a bit late, I'd say anything after 6pm.

If it's so unlikely for someone to bring kids to a nice restaurant after that time, what's the problem with them not allowing kids during that period?

oldyouth

RainyDay wrote: »

There is a big difference between a restaurant saying 'no crying babies' and a restaurant saying 'no children'. Restrictions on behaviour (e.g. crying) are fine. Restrictions based on family status are not.

So what does the restaurant do when it seats a family, takes an order and THEN the child gets disruptive? Do they ask the family to leave and throw the half prepared/eaten meal in the bin and take a financial loss?

Frank Black

BizzyC wrote: »

8.00pm is a bit late, I'd say anything after 6pm.

If it's so unlikely for someone to bring kids to a nice restaurant after that time, what's the problem with them not allowing kids during that period?

If it's so unlikely to happen - why do you want a ban enacted?

Trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

RainyDay

oldyouth wrote: »

So what does the restaurant do when it seats a family, takes an order and THEN the child gets disruptive? Do they ask the family to leave and throw the half prepared/eaten meal in the bin and take a financial loss?

What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the adult gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the black guy gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the wheelchair gets disruptive?

Get the idea?

old hippy

RainyDay wrote: »

What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the adult gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the black guy gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the wheelchair gets disruptive?

Get the idea?

You cannot compare babies with rational adults. Babys are not a minority, they are not discriminated against.

Babies don't vote, don't pay taxes and don't contribute to society. They scream and poop and cause mayhem in public places because they don't know any better.

BizzyC

Making me where a shirt and shoes to your restaurant is discrimination against me cause I don't wear them normally!!

Your steak restaurant doesn't cater to my vegan requirements, that's discrimination!!

I dont have enough money to afford the items on your menu, that's discrimination!!!

fangee

BizzyC wrote: »

Making me where a shirt and shoes to your restaurant is discrimination against me cause I don't wear them normally!!

Your steak restaurant doesn't cater to my vegan requirements, that's discrimination!!

I dont have enough money to afford the items on your menu, that's discrimination!!!

I don't like dress codes therefore I don't frequent venues that have them. My choice.

I don't eat meat therefore I don't go to eat in steak restaurants. My choice.

If I can't afford to eat there then I don't/didn't do enough in my life to have the money to eat there. My choice.

At no point am I being forced at gun point to do anything. It's all about choices.

oldyouth

RainyDay wrote: »

What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the adult gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the black guy gets disruptive? What do you expect them to do when they seat the family, take an order, and then the wheelchair gets disruptive?

Get the idea?

I know exactly what you are saying, I just don't agree that there is a rational link between the examples given and children in restaurants

ronjo

I am sorry if this is not allowed but of all the whiny moany threads this one really is unbelievable.

Its about one fcuking restaurant not allowing children for a few hours a day.
Get fcuking over it.
There are hundreds of other restaurants that allow you to bring your kids.

Its worse than the moaning about "They took down our FLEG" !

RainyDay

old hippy wrote: »

You cannot compare babies with rational adults. Babys are not a minority, they are not discriminated against.

Where did you get the mad idea that adults are rational from?

BizzyC wrote: »

Making me where a shirt and shoes to your restaurant is discrimination against me cause I don't wear them normally!!

No, it's not discrimination - because it's based on your behaviour. If a restaurant requires shirts, that's fine. If a restaurant bans Australians because some Australians came in once with no shirts on, that's discrimination.

BizzyC

So why is it we're allowed to limit a 16 year old's ability to purchase alcohol?
Surely that's discrimination?

Not every teenager is going to get wasted and experience health issues associated with over drinking.
To stop the ones who can drink responsibly based on the behavior of others is discriminatory.

Forever Hopeful

Just throwing this out there but once I met a friend for lunch last summer. It was one if the few days that was sunny and warm outside so we sat outside. She had brought her 2 kids ( 18 months & 6 months with her). I haven't met her for a lunch since, why? Her kids behaved like animals and she didn't bat an eyelid. I was embarrassed and stressed. The 18 month old screamed her head off that patrons were staring. That kicked off the 6 month old screaming so I took the 18 month old for a walk to calm her down, her mother wouldn't budge. She kept saying she's only a child, she doesn't know any better.
I was horrified at her attitude. I felt sorry for everyone in the restaurant.
I have nieces and nephews and while most are well behaved, some are challenging. The challenging ones don't get to go to restaurants.
To be fair, the public don't know how your kids are going to behave and there are some good parents and some God awful parents ( like my friend). If I were to ever meet her with her kids again, I would be choosing a time and place that would hopefully not be disturbed too much by their antics in about 17 years time. Sorry not sure what my point is only that I am still not right after it.

end of the road

MrCreosote wrote: »

That is the restaurant's problem- after all they are banning ALL children and their parents regardless of their behaviour

this has been explained to you and others time and time again, this is being done because the restaurant is to small and to busy to cater for children during their busiest 2 hours which is lunch time, they just can't cater for them, they probably have many regular customers who have had to go somewhere else unwillingly, and the staff can't do their jobs because of buggys in the way taking up space that is needed for customers and staff to get round because again the restaurant is to small, thats where the H&S comes in

hooradiation

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Ever think some of us don't have kids is because we don't want to deal with screaming babies?

Now if we decide we prefer not to have deal with that in our own lives why the hell do you think we should have to deal with someone elses kid running riot and bawling?

Unless you imagine it possible to live your life in a bubble, then you're going to find this plan of yours a constant disappointment.

end of the road

MrCreosote wrote: »

people replying to this thread- have repeatedly said they can't stand children, don't want them on flights, don't want them in public- REGARDLESS of how they are going to behave. They just don't want to see them full stop. They are being precious.

rubbish, people are saying they want a choice between child friendly and child free places, depending on when and the situation their in when going for a meal, if they are a pearant/pearants have kids in tow they want a child friendly restaurant, when they want a break from children a child free restaurant

MrCreosote wrote: »

The restaurant are picking up on this vibe. They're not being precious, they are being discrimatory (and possibly breaking the law)

again it has been explained to you why their doing it

kunst nugget

Forever Hopeful wrote: »

Sorry not sure what my point is only that I am still not right after it.

Tell her to bring her kids to a kid free wedding just to piss off the bride. It'll be gas.

I got kicked out of a parent and toddler group just because I didn't bring a child with me. I hadn't even made a fuss. It was totally discriminatory

Ms. Pingui

Forever Hopeful wrote: »

Just throwing this out there but once I met a friend for lunch last summer. It was one if the few days that was sunny and warm outside so we sat outside. She had brought her 2 kids ( 18 months & 6 months with her). I haven't met her for a lunch since, why? Her kids behaved like animals and she didn't bat an eyelid. I was embarrassed and stressed. The 18 month old screamed her head off that patrons were staring. That kicked off the 6 month old screaming so I took the 18 month old for a walk to calm her down, her mother wouldn't budge. She kept saying she's only a child, she doesn't know any better.
I was horrified at her attitude. I felt sorry for everyone in the restaurant.
I have nieces and nephews and while most are well behaved, some are challenging. The challenging ones don't get to go to restaurants.
To be fair, the public don't know how your kids are going to behave and there are some good parents and some God awful parents ( like my friend). If I were to ever meet her with her kids again, I would be choosing a time and place that would hopefully not be disturbed too much by their antics in about 17 years time. Sorry not sure what my point is only that I am still not right after it.

Sounds traumatic. I hope you got counselling after that.

Forever Hopeful

Ms. Pingui wrote: »

Sounds traumatic. I hope you got counselling after that.

Sometimes.... In the middle of the night... I can still hear the screaming...



Haven't laid eyes on the kids since. I can hear them acting up when I am on the phone to my friend. Brats

worded

Was there today - see pic

oldyouth

worded wrote: »

Was there today - see pic

Well there's the compromise that should see this thread finished

englandfan

Well done, They can refuse anyone they like!!!!!!!!! I coming there to dine now.

Lucyfur

Zooommmbbbieeeeessssssssss