To get really frustrated by the Think 25 rule

[Cloeycat]

Not so much having to be ID'd but the fact that if I am with my partner and don't have my wallet (I'm over 25 and also obviously pregnant) that he is not able to purchase alcohol for himself unless I hide or pretend not to be with him.

I don't always carry my ID with me, especially if we are just popping to our local supermarket for something for dinner and he is paying but it is so frustrating that I then have to wait outside the door in the cold like a naughty 16yr old so that he can buy himself a beer or bottle of wine.

Does this rule apply to parents buying alcohol if they are accompanied by children who are under 18? Or is it just when it is two adults trying to legally buy alcohol that a problem arises?

I do feel annoyed at being ask.

What really gets me pissed off enough to leave all the shopping behind is someone going on and on about how much I should take it as a compliment.

I am in my mid-late 30s, I have 2 kids, and I look fucking shit, and I certainly don't look 17. I don't even look 24. I look mid-late 30s, and that's ok. I don't mind, I'm not obsessed with looking younger.

So if you act like I should be grateful you're being a twat and not taking the evidence in front of you of my age (my old haggard face, my two kids, my car keys, my debit card, (my title is not one that you can obtain under 18) etc etc) that I will think you're a pathetic twat, who just has to exert their tiny little bit of passive aggressive power. So the feeling's mutual, CrazyGreyhoundLady.

The law says 18. It's your company policy that says 25. And it's you you personally, that decides to make yourselves look daft asking someone ten years older than 25 for ID, and then simpering about it being flattering. It's not flattering, it's a PTA. And I would genuinely love someone to do a study on how many man vs women get asked, and what ages those men and women are.

*asked

twentycups
Those are pretty normal sadly. I once heards a colleague say "I'm terribly sorry but I can't serve you this without ID" to which a customer replied once ascertaining that yes she really couldn't with "fuck off you stupid c* * I should smash the bottle over your head". You get used to asshats but we all felt that was taking it to the extreme. Poor colleague actually had an anxiety attack and had to be taken upstairs to calm down. She was a 5ft2 lady in her sixties and he was a large man somewhere oound his mid twenties. Security and the police had fun!

"Store would rather lose your custom".

If everyone over the age of 25 stopped going along with this farce, then stores would quickly jog on.

That's horrible :(

For what it's worth I do think the policy gets out of hand, but that's because workers have such severe penalties that fear of fines, disciplines and losing our jobs can make people err on the side of caution all the time.

It's nothing to do with power wielding. I once had someone chuck a glass beer bottle at me from across the bar - that wasn't an ID thing, it was because I said I wouldn't serve him any more (he had had enough IMO).

Why would we try to wield power for the hell of it, knowing these reactions can and do happen? Why would we try to provoke people?

I was recently shopping with my mum and we bought some wine. The cashier asked for I'd do I handed over my driving licence showing I was in my late 30s. That unfortunately wasn't sufficient - my 72 year old grey haired and stick walking mum had to produce ID too.

My mate and I got asked for ID in ASDA a couple of years ago. He's in his 50s and looks it, I'm in my mid-40s and look it. But they wanted to see both our IDs. We laughed.

Also I do think people forgot the sheer automation that kicks in when you've been working a lot of hours and serving your zillionth customer. And once they've asked they have to keep asking because no one wants to give the impression if you get shirty you can get away with buying without ID.

I get it, I've worked in retail. I have every sympathy with the employees.

I still think the law is fucking stupid.

The law says 18. It's your company policy that says 25. And it's you you personally, that decides to make yourselves look daft asking someone ten years older than 25 for ID, and then simpering about it being flattering. It's not flattering, it's a PTA

I'd rather look daft and ask for ID than not ask and end up with a huge fine and no job because I misjudged.

I work in a large supermarket and your attitude is exactly why people try to "sweeten" the process by platitudes. I work in customer services and I've had people come to complain about cashiers because they dared ID them "but they're 28!" ... and my response is usually to apologise that they felt they shouldn't have been IDed, outline our Think 25 policy, the consequences of failing a test purchase and end with something like "I'd probably have IDed you too because I'm 27 and I'd say you look a little younger than me" or "Sorry you are upset, personally I love getting IDed because it means someone thinks I look younger than I am!"

Also, this time of year we get a lot of new Xmas temps in, and in their training they are always told that if they are in any doubt whatsoever of someone's age, that is the sign they need to ask for ID. Some of them take to it straight away but I have seen that a lot of the very young (18/19) and the older (50+) cashiers tend to ask more people because they often find it harder to determine whether someone looks under 25 or not.

On top of that, last month our store failed two of our company's internal challenge 25 test purchases (different cashiers but if we fail 3 in a row our store can get into serious trouble) so the checkout supervisors have been on at the cashiers to be really strict on IDing people and so a lot of cashiers have recently been IDing more people than usual because they're being so closely watched and nobody wants to be the person to fail the 3rd test in a row and risk the consequences.

Oh, and I've actually ID'd more men than women.

I got IDd in Poundland for hairspray once. They let me buy lighters and rizla (16 age limit at the time) but told me as I didn't have ID I couldn't buy the hair spray as you had to be over 21!

I also remember my mum buying some wine when I was with her (I was 20 but didn't have any ID) and they refused the sale. We had a load of food shopping it wasn't like she was just getting booze. I thought that was rediculous.

Totally understand the need to ID the person who is buying the product but not the person who is with you. And I also think it doesn't need to be a showdown when they ask, I often find the shop assistants are incredibly rude when asking and are basically accusing you of breaking the law.

Men in their mid to late 30s?

Alcohol I refuse to get wound up about. Other stuff that is age restricted includes:

• Calpol/ Calprofen
• Nurofen

Both of which is necessary which Alcohol isn't. Probably other medicines also. So someone needs to buy some for a sick child and they are refused as they have forgotten their ID...?

There are other random things also, I once bought some blunt children's cutlery meant for babies and it came up as 'think 25' I mean wtaf...? I mean fair enough if it was a carving knife. Bizarrely enough bleach doesn't and anyone can buy that . Eggs and flour are also sometimes restricted.

There was also a really bizarre case I read about where someone was refused a quiche because they didn't have any ID at Tescos. There was obviously some kind of glitch in the system.

For those....majority of you...,, who are enjoying bashing the retail worker and their workplace....

You do realise that these conditions are set by TRADING STANDARDS and they (and the police also.) REGULARLY send in decoys trying to buy age restricted goods

The retail worker would get a hefty fine, lose their job AND in a lot of cases,a criminal record

Quit your moaning and get on with it, it takes 2 minutes to show your ID

No. No criminal record for selling someone clearly in their mid 30s anything, whether they show ID or not. No criminal record for selling to someone aged 20. The issue is selling to those under 18.

Isnt it obvious to everyone that the think25 check is to ensure under 18s who look older are id checked? The cashiers are doing their jobs to prevent fines/prosecution. Put id in your purse.

And there is no need for the platitudes. It doesn't "sweeten" the process, it makes you look like a twat.

"You do realise that these conditions are set by TRADING STANDARDS and they (and the police also.) REGULARLY send in decoys trying to buy age restricted goods"

Do they use 72 year old women accompanying their late-30s wine buying daughters as decoys?

I think not.

You do realise that these conditions are set by TRADING STANDARDS and they (and the police also.) REGULARLY send in decoys trying to buy age restricted goods

For alcohol/ cigarettes yes.

I doubt that trading standards send a 16 year old in to try and buy a PG film, however. A lot of these rules the supermarkets are making up themselves.

Test purchasers are sent in to attempt to buy many goods, the people that work in retail know this.
The companies empower the staff (pass the buck) so if you have been asked of id and don't have it, no one else can override that decision and serve you.
Being pregnant does not mean you must look 25 btw so i don't know why people use this as an argument!

Carry id if you are going to buy age restricted goods and don't expect us to serve your child an 18 game and go mad when we refuse.

popcorn do you not get that there is no exhaustive, agreed list of age restricted products and it is often up to shop policy? Not all are governed by law.

To all those moaning that cashiers ID anyone with the purchaser; we have to. It's also part of the Trading Standards thing. Because after all, it's not like people don't buy for underagers is it...

saucyjack yes! They send people in together to test how thorough stores are

In our store it's not alcohol or tobacco.... it's knives. A group of teens with one underage.

Police cadets are often used

So.... yes! Age appropriate groups can be used and nobody is exempt from the law,72 or otherwise. Why would they be?

basicbrown shop policy??

It's usually trading standards.... but 'shop policy' can be to protect vulnerable people, such as eggs/flour around mischievous night. Etc.

but 'shop policy' can be to protect vulnerable people, such as eggs/flour around mischievous night

Or stopping someone making a pancake for their tea.

I think in all seriousness though there are some situations where the policies risk causing harm. If a shop decides that no alcohol will be sold to anyone with a child with them, the obvious solution is to leave them in the car....! The rules around calpol/ calprofen are invented and run the risk of someone not being able to buy medication for a young child. There are sometimes risks both ways it isn't as simple as 'all is good if it prevents danger'