Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to think this Supermarket is judging my parenting?

384 replies

Doingmybestmum · 31/05/2016 15:30

AIBU? Standing in a queue in Tesco with (home from uni) DD chatting to me. I was clutching a much anticipated bottle of Pimms, with accompanying lemonade, strawberries, mint etc... goodies going through when charmless checkoutee asks for age of said 21 year old DD and ID for her or she would not be able to sell me the Pimms. I calmly explained that I (substantially over 21) am buying said alcoholic beverage with my money and a) DD is only standing next to me b) its my money c) DD is over 21 and d) what on earth... the manager was called and I was allowed to purchase. AIBU to think that this is ridiculous - I understand that adults must not buy alcohol for underage children, but if you were - would it be Pimms, and would you have the "child" standing next to you?

OP posts:
Motheroffourdragons · 01/06/2016 14:12

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

HidingUnderARock · 01/06/2016 14:13

To the pp who said she'd empty the bags in the till areas, I've had that done to me and it did nothing bar make me annoyed at the person who had left. Have some kindness for checkout staff, their job isn't easy and they dont need extra hassle
That was probably me. I don't doubt what you say at all, however bear in mind that the policy did nothing bar make me the customer annoyed and waste their time ofc.
Why were you annoyed btw? How did that impact you as the cashier?

If I have spent 45+ minutes (over)filling my trolley with £100-200 food and drink for my family and queuing at a till, only to be told that I have to go elsewhere for some of it because I have an under18 with me, I have lost (upaid) more of my life than the person who has to put it back, and I don't need the extra hassle either. Especially unpaid! Whoever puts it back is at work anyway and paid for their time just the same. It costs the company to pay them for their time.

So now suppose that this happens to quite a lot of people, and many of them are as annoyed as me about it, based on this thread.

I don't wish to abuse or threaten anyone. I want the policy to change.

If we/people want to change a company policy, what is the best way?
a) Roll eyes and comply
b) Abuse front line staff
c) Join a loud pressure group
d) Peacefully and legally ensure the policy costs the company time, money and/or reputation in a way that cannot be misunderstood

MN might be c)
Leaving the trolley contents at the till is d)

Lots of us doing that affects the company (policy maker) a whole lot more than the individual at the till, who frankly has a whole lot less to be annoyed about than the (non-abusive non-threatening) customer does anyway.

RitchyBestingFace · 01/06/2016 14:15

That's exactly who they are using! (I know people who do this) Why do you think being female and middle class / middle aged / buying Pimms exempts you from alcohol laws? Confused

BarbaraofSeville · 01/06/2016 14:21

Calling the manager and explaining why you are leaving a big shop at the till is probably the most effective way of complaining.

It's probably also worth complaining to head office if they have been especially ridiculous - like the teen DS who wasn't allowed to help his disabled mother because in the supermarket's eyes scanning the alcohol equates to intending to drink it.

Do they apply the same logic if he scans her tampons or face cream or nappies and food for his baby sibling?

They will see the lost sale and wasted goods (anything frozen or chilled will have to be binned as they don't know how long you were going round the shop).

LurkingHusband · 01/06/2016 14:23

like the teen DS who wasn't allowed to help his disabled mother because in the supermarket's eyes scanning the alcohol equates to intending to drink it.

I'm not a lawyer, but I smell a whiff of discrimination there ...

gandalf456 · 01/06/2016 14:48

Regarding leaving the shopping at the till, I disagree with a couple of coup le of points. Firstly, it's like saying 'here, take that. That'll wipe the smile off your face.' Not really fair when you are not a decision maker.

The next, it's like treating the person putting it back like a servant. It's not ok because they are getting paid. It's not anyone's job to put back customers' shopping so it would mean pulling someone who is already busy off the shop floor to do that especially. That means they have to stop what they are doing then go back to it and rush because they are already inundated with other enquiries over and above what they do. Sometumes this has meant staying 15 mins late because you havent finished your real job on time. All for £7 per hour.

As far as I know, no one gets paid to do their own shopping anyway and it is your choice to leave it and spend another hour elsewhere 'for free.'

If yo want to complain, do it properly and go via head office. They are the decision makers. If you feel like dumping your shopping, dump it at their headquarters. Don't humiliate the cashier

RitchyBestingFace · 01/06/2016 14:48

Calling the manager and explaining will do nothing apart from mark you out as a loon. Supermarkets get millions of shoppers per week. They aren't going to change their policy, risk prosecution and lose their license because a few shoppers cut off their nose to spite their face take umbrage.

BursarsFrogs · 01/06/2016 14:58

The same as OP's happened to me and my mum. (It was Pimms, too!) At the time I was 34 and mum was 64. We were making separate shoppings, but were obviously together, I suppose, since DM asked my help with her packing etc. No Pimms for us!

Motheroffourdragons · 01/06/2016 14:59

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

RitchyBestingFace · 01/06/2016 15:00

Sorry, why what doesn't happen every time?

Motheroffourdragons · 01/06/2016 15:03

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

gandalf456 · 01/06/2016 15:04

It must just be Tesco then. (I don't work for them.)

RitchyBestingFace · 01/06/2016 15:10

I don't know. (I also don't know why a 34 year old can't buy Pimms. Confused)

I would guess:

  • different levels of training
  • different perspectives / interpretation of the policy
  • not giving a shit
  • not noticing you have children with you
  • recognising you as a regular and being confident the alcohol is for your use and that you aren't mystery shopping

I guess that's why the supermarket policies are draconian - they can't just rely on saying 'don't sell to under 18s' - they have to drill in harsher guidelines to reduce the risk of their staff interpreting them too 'softly'

Gileswithachainsaw · 01/06/2016 15:12

Because with any job there are staff who are on.probation periods, staff who are new/inexperienced, received training g by different people, part timers who are left out the loop and those who don't give a shit. not to mention the who can spot a mystery shopper a mile off.

BursarsFrogs · 01/06/2016 15:14

RitchyBestingFace - I didn't have ID on me, so couldn't prove I was 34. I thought the check out woman was taking the piss, as there was really no way on earth I looked under 18 two years ago! But I really didn't have the energy to make a fuss about it, either. This happened in Asda, by the way.

You see parents with tiny kids buying alcohol all the time. I wonder at what age (of your kids) you should all of a sudden become unable to do so, in case you're buying for the kids...

gandalf456 · 01/06/2016 15:21

At 32, you could look under 25, though. I ID someone who was 35. He was like WTF. I got ID at 40 but was told later he had cataracts

jacqroberts68 · 01/06/2016 15:39

I bought some wine along with other things from my local tesco. My 15 year old son (big strapping lad) being polite and knowing I have Parkinsons and struggle, he automatically picked up the bag for me to carry to the car, he at no point left my side. The cashier said that he couldn't as it was against the law...what if I had no arms I exclaimed? She said he still couldn't. I thought this was odd and said I think you're mistaken in thinking that my child carrying my bag is me buying alcohol for him and you are misinterpreting the rules? I emailed tesco later that day and they said she was wrong and that its a matter of common sense that should be applied and that they would off retraining. And received a huge bunch of flowers too! I wasn't angry by the cashiers comments just though it was daft.

HidingUnderARock · 01/06/2016 15:45

gandalf your suggestion of leaving the shopping at headquarters means paying for it and then wasting hours - possibly more than a day - driving there and back. srsly? I don't think so. I did actually honestly mean what I wrote and thought it through first.

Firstly, it's like saying 'here, take that. That'll wipe the smile off your face.' like many other things, it could be done with that attitude, or it could not be. Your choice really, depending on your personality and how the interaction has gone so far.

it's like treating the person putting it back like a servant. It's not ok because they are getting paid. It's not anyone's job to put back customers' shopping
No, really. Its like finding that the company is not allowing you to buy your shopping from them, after you have spent time and effort on the completely reasonable assumption that they will, and then not spending considerably more time putting it back where they want it for them.

Of course it is their job, how ridiculous! They may or may not have explicitly written it out in anyone's contract, but for sure it is covered in several employee's contracts. It is a foreseeable and common event that goods need to be moved from the till to the shelves or elsewhere. It happens many times every day in every supermarket and absolutely is someone's job. How the company arranges for that (within the law) is neither the responsibility nor right of the customer.

If it has to happen a lot more because the company is peeing off their customers with a bad policy they may need to pay for extra staff, or ideally rethink the policy.

If the company is requiring someone to work for no money or in any other way outside of their contract or the law, that is a completely different point to address, and not an excuse for customers to also suffer from different bad policies.

LurkingHusband · 01/06/2016 15:46

its a matter of common sense that should be applied

I get nervous when "common sense" is expected of people ...

TaliZorahVasNormandy · 01/06/2016 15:56

She was probably just being over cautious. I worked the tills for sainsburys and during training they told us that we had to ID anyone who looked under 25. I've ID'd people in nearly 40 because they didnt look old enough to by booze.

gandalf456 · 01/06/2016 16:11

No, I wasn't being serious, Hiding. I just wanted to make the point that you shouldn't take it out on the checkout girl and take it to the powers above. Contrary to what you say further down, this most certainly does not happen every day and, when it does, the cashier is often visibly shaken. The younger ones, in particular, have to be taken off in tears, if the customer is particularly aggressive towards them and you get all sorts of complaints from pricing to not stocking items to the way the shop is laid out, none of which is the decision of someone earning £7 an hour.

Most of the staff are students and are even younger than OP's daughter and it is not very nice to witness. I am not sure if there is actually a nice way of doing it and it's pretty pointless anyway. You yourself have to do your shopping all over again instead of taking the shopping you already have, buying the wine elsewhere and writing a stiffly worded email to Head Office, who may be able to actually do something if enough people complain in writing, rather than throwing a tantrum at the till. And you'll get an apology and vouchers. I know from experience that complaints rarely get passed up to hq - even from the managers.

And, as I said, it is relatively rare for this to happen and is often the gossip of upstairs and, mostly, the customer is perceived in a very bad light for behaving in this way. We have had the odd customer banned from the premises if they are particularly abusive. They can't just behave as they please.

As for it being my job, well, yes, effectively, someone has to do it but what many customers fail to remember is that 99% go around, do their shopping, are pleasant and then go home and those are the ones that make us enjoy our jobs and wish to work hard for.

And finally, with regards to taking on more staff, naively, yes, perhaps they should but they don't. Supermarkets work on tight margins and if they can get the minimum amount in for minimum pay, then they will. That's not the fault of the customer but that's the way it is.

LurkingHusband · 01/06/2016 16:14

Supermarkets work on tight margins and if they can get the minimum amount in for minimum pay, then they will. That's not the fault of the customer but that's the way it is.

It is the fault of the customer ... we all want cheap stuff.

MLGs · 01/06/2016 16:14

I'm glad I do my shopping on line! They never question the fact that under age dc are in the house......

gandalf456 · 01/06/2016 16:16

Very true, Lurking.
MLG, yes, that's a good point although they wouldn't bring the shopping in if your under age DC were in the house even if you didn't have any alcohol on the list!

spanky2 · 01/06/2016 16:24

The person on the til is the one who gets prosecuted not the supermarket. This is why they were so careful. They also get sacked.