Kids eat free discrimination

People are so judgemental aren’t they x

It isn't just a legal term at all. And in the example I gave, the pricing does discriminate against single parents. And given that everything costs much more as a single parent (because you only have one salary, or even if you have two, it is funding two homes), and the job market is also tougher for a single parent, then a child's meal becomes even more unaffordable for a single parent. I do think that a restaurant in this case, or a soft play company, or an attraction, could introduce a pricing structure which does not disadvantage the children of single parents.

But yes, they could just have a packed lunch

I've also seen this and it's ridiculous.

Restaurants and cafes aren't trying to end world hunger, they are trying to make money and the "kids eat free" deal is intended to encourage families to eat there. They aren't going to make any money if people turn up with their 7 kids and pay for one meal.

That i know, i became a single mum.

Last time I checked, eating out was neither cost-free nor compulsory.

Discrimination is a legal term. It easier to buy and prepare your own food. Lots of family make packed lunches.

Well it isn't fair on single parents if you have 2 children.

Single parent, 2 kids would (if a full price meal costs £5 ) cost that parent £11 - so £3.66 a person - that single parent would only get one kids meal.

Two parents 2 kids would cost £12. so £3 a person. The couple parents get 2 kids meals.

So it does discriminate against single parents particularly since they generally are coping on one income.

Having 4 kids costs more than 2. Shocker.

That's something I have noticed too. Although it is probably great for parents who want to treat their children but the budget is tight. About 6 or 7 years ago this was me - so a free meal would have made the odd treat easier.

I do agree it isn't discrimination though.

Of course its not discrimination. One adult eating =1free child.

Earlier it was multiple "adds" for multiple restaurants. So you commented on all of them?

Of course it's not discrimination.
But, I had a full buffet breakfast at a chain pub/restaurant a couple of years ago. It was pay for one adult (about £9) and two kids under 16 can eat free. I took two kids, they were 14 and 15. We ate an absolute mountain . I was embarrassed by how cheap it was when I came to pay.

The way some people's entitlement works, I could believe them reckoning that kids' meals are free, they only have a small appetite and can only manage a child's portion, therefore the two of them (adults eating alone) should therefore be completely free.

And if they later discovered that they do have a bigger appetite, simply come back in later and do it all again.

Agree and sometimes the husband drops dead and even though you have remained independent of him and have a good job financially you end up screwed.

I took the toddler out for her free meal (I got one too obviously) and did notice a lot of single parent families with multiple children and did wonder whether this would be a problem. My meal was £7 so that made it £3.50 for each of our meals technically. I overheard one lady with 4 kids paying £26! Now I understand that's great value for 5 of you but still.. £26 just to get one free meal...

People don't always know in advance the dad is going to disappear or die when they have kids.

I hate myself for still commenting on this... as it goes @BigBaoBun -i havent read anyone outright call you a liar ,youve repeated-but no examples provided ..and at @ERthree -you upon your throne so high..?!...all manner of variables could lead to a single adult(mum) trying to feed herself and 3 kids (as much\as cheaply)as possible. hope to goodness none of the self righteous ever actaully come stuck with kids in tow.judgement and wrath at no extra cost,all day

I agree that it's a bit misleading to say "Kids eat free!" in big letters - but the parents can't just ignore the smaller print that says one kid with one paying adult.

Ultimately, they're probably targeting the adults who resent having to pay for their kids as well (or just can't afford to), or who think they won't appreciate it at their age, so it's a waste and not worth paying for them - removing their 'excuse' for not coming in.

I agree that insults are not very nice, and that some people will see this as their big chance that they otherwise couldn't possibly enjoy; but that doesn't mean that there won't be entitled people who can well afford to pay, but who just like to play their CF face and deliberately misinterpret the offer to try to shame the place into giving in.

It’s costing these retailers pennies to give children some chips, chicken nuggets and beans, which comes out of the pounds they make in profits on an adult meal. I’m still not sure why you’re worried about adults not having a proper meal, when it’s up to the retailer to set a threshold? Who cares?

I’ve personally never eaten in a supermarket cafe, but we know this is not fine dining. People going to these places for free meals are not doing so because they want to abuse the offer.

.

She could always chose to go elsewhere to eat it's a business not a charity. If she can't afford to eat out then she shouldn't.

Even if it could be framed as discrimination against single parents (which it can't) - being a single parent isn't a protected characteristic so businesses are entitled to discriminate against them if they wish. Businesses engage in discrimination all the time. In this case, offering the free meals just to kids is (lawful) discrimination on the basis of age and they're discriminating against those who can't afford them. Only a very limited set of things are unlawful to discriminate against.

There are a lot of posters that claim people are lying across multiple threads. I think it’s because they find the topic uncomfortable so it makes more sense to assume it’s nonsense than it does to use critical thinking skills.

My favourite recent SM post was a link to a petition demanding that kids have access to 10 days off school each year to go on holiday. Blaming schools ( as though schools are responsible for legislation) and not one of them pondering that lots of parents taking children out of school in term time might just push prices up for everyone 🤦🏻‍♀️ Holidays are a UN right you know! (They’re not).