To think that Birds the bakers were right to sack their employee?

[Sootikinstew]

Employee of something like 25years accepting cash from pensioners and paying for shopping on her own card.

Now I know it likely came from a good place and she was trying to be kind and helpful. But AIBU to think Birds were right to sack her. This scenario opens up her and Birds to all sorts of accusations and would surely come under fraud or money laundering rules?

@heartsonacake

In their younger years many of these older women for whom you have no sympathy would have been expected to retire from a job when they married, certainly to stop working once they had a baby. They would have had no income of their own to bank even if they could have had a bank account of their own to manage - up to 1975 women couldn't open a bank account in their own name and not every woman was able to summon up the courage to approach a formerly off-limits bank even at that point, even if they had a job and were paid by cheque. Many employers paid the 'girls' who worked for them in a lowly capacity in cash.

Then there were the old-fashioned husbands many of them had to put up with for decades, who 'took care of the finances' and in many cases made sure the wives knew they were useless with complicated matters like numbers or technical details like balancing the chequebook and keeping track of the family finances.

Women who are now in their 80s might have had absolutely no experience of banks, and might have had no agency whatsoever over their finances, maybe never had anything to do with a bank during their husband's lives, and now lack the confidence to engage with these institutions.

Many might be still living with someone who gives them a weekly cash allowance, and no amount of telling 'himself' that everyone is now using cards will make a dent in a stubborn, old-school gentleman's conviction that his wife is full of balloon juice as usual and he knows best when it comes to money.

Mugging someone for their credit card achieves nothing because that card can be stopped in a matter of minutes.

There are older people who would have no idea how to do that or that this should be done. They wouldn't know who to call or what to say. The number to call would be on their card after all and the card number would be on the card too.

Mugging someone for their credit card achieves nothing because that card can be stopped in a matter of minutes. Take someone’s cash and there is no way to get it back.

People don't tend to get "mugged" for their credit cards, but credit card fraud is a huge cost to society (paid for by the interest rates and fees on CCs, and by higher prices all round).

In many ways, crime figures have been going down over the last few decades but that's partly because the go-to source for crime figures (The British Crime Survey) doesn't record most CC fraud.

On the topic of CC fraud - many older people are targeted and because they can be suckers for a well-spoken con artist and would give any details asked for over the phone, families sometimes like to see an elderly parent using cash only. There are families who have been hit a few times. Clever thieves take maybe £50 a time, which adds up if they hit a few hundred older people.

Some families have managed to link an adult child's phone number to mum's account so that larger withdrawals trigger a quick reaction. However, the conversation in which you persuade your elderly father to let an adult child have access to his bank account is often as fraught as the conversation about dad giving up driving.

Many older people don't understand that they are not going to get mugged for their credit or debit card. They fear that they will lose everything if a thief gets their card, because in their minds it's the same as the mattress stuffed with cash.

I would like to know what part of the article suggested this woman actually touched any of this money.

From my understanding she had her purse there so anyone without a card could put the money into her purse (and presumably help themselves to change) and then she would pay by her credit card for the purchase.

Birds were getting paid by card.
The assistant was never handling cash.

So on that evidence what exactly was she doing wrong.

I don’t agree. Incredibly harsh. I’ve signed the petition.

@heartsonacake
So what if they’ve had decades. Getting a card has always been a choice. Rather like getting a driving licence or not. Why is this the responsibility of relatives? NB not everyone even has relatives. Life changed recently. Post offices and local banking branches closing. That isn’t their responsibility or fault. Would you crow “your fault, your fault” to someone in their late 40’s, who said they wish they’d bought a house in their 20’s when they could afford it because house prices have risen exponentially? No one could have predicted the future.

It worries me too, as PP said moving to a cashless society, Sweden I think I am right have already reassured they residents that cash will remain for a number of years, due to the senior generation that still use cash.

I know many seniors use cards, but others do not, and haven’t internet access or the knowledge to bank online. Why should they be forced to change?

Bank of England published a paper for discussion a while back about moving to digital currency.

Covid is leading so much change, I don’t like the way things are heading if I am honest.

It's not just elderly people who are affected by measures like this.

Many disabled and homeless people don't have access to cards and rely on cash to pay for everything. Why would you advocate for laws that only serve to marginalise the most vulnerable people even further?

Lots of elderly people shop at Birds, my local always has a big queue. So many elderly are affected by things like this. My DM doesn’t do internet banking and still sends me cheques.

Refusing cash is discrimination on the basis of age, and potentially also sex/race/disability, as members of those groups are also less likely to have debit card accounts (or indeed any bank account at all in some cases).

Anyone can get an account and card, it's not excluding anyone. If someone has a disability preventing them from understanding or being able to do this then they'd have some support to do it.

I don't understand why age is a get of jail free card for just refusing to do things. Fair enough not immediately jumping on every new technology but bank accounts and debit cards have been around for a long time. How does someone without either pay rent and bills?

And @Thisfucker absolutely incorrect. I agree with using cards where possible as cash was filthy before Covid, the bakery has undertaken its own risk assessment and these are the measures they have put in place. Why does this employee get to pick and choose which she follows? £180 is a lot of money to have just popped in her purse elderly customers or not. Like I said, from a purely corporate point of view. Personally I'd help any elderly family/friends that struggle not leave them to it and have been doing so for a long time, that would include helping them with simple things like having a contactless card (I've also bought, set up and taught my DGM to use a smartphone to help her stay connected, but she's the kind of 88 year old who will adapt).

From the article, I don't really think it sounds as though she did anything wrong. It's maybe poor judgement to have her own purse out on the counter, but she was clearly just trying to help. On the handling money issue, there surely must have been quite lot of other customers having done the same thing? I know I would offer to use my card if there was anyone else in the queue who didn't have theirs. So, the actual physical money would still be changing hands, just between other customers.

She saved them money as the elderly had touched the bread so it have had to be thrown away.

Either there is more to this story than has been reported or Birds have just treated a loyal employee who was trying to help the company and customers (misguided maybe) in an appalling manner.

Seems a cruel end to a long employment.

As the world now revolves around covid, absolutely, those old people wanting some bread, the audacity. Or in the real world, its a lovely thing to do and this whole situation now is ridiculous.

Awful as it was to be sacked.
She put herself in harm's way.What if someone would have accused her of something.Or one of the tills where down.

I don't think she deserved to be sacked,but I do think they used that as an excuse to fire her.

Birds customer base I'd say (based on the two or three in my area) is overwhelmingly pensioners.

My 76 year old decidedly not frail, ex company manager, buying and selling sticks and shares etc would have no issue paying by card, but you wouldn't get her to use an ATM if you paid her. She insists on going in to the bank, to the desk and asking.

"" Refusing cash is discrimination on the basis of age, and potentially also sex/race/disability, as members of those groups are also less likely to have debit card accounts (or indeed any bank account at all in some cases).""

The Equality Act has exceptions when it comes to National Security and National Health threats. So discrimination laws haven't been broken.

There were voluntary groups everywhere set up by various charities (including help the aged), community groups, MP's etc, so people who already have a DBS and have shown trustworthiness. There are preloaded cards which don't need credit ratings etc. People who can only have basic bank accounts because of fraud convictions etc were advised to get them. Then there were the shopping cards set up for volunteers, which could be used by anyone.

The group who she was helping should have mainly been shielding. If there wasn't local volunteers, it would have been better to address that. People had months to sort out payment cards. The company could have easily set something up.

We don't know if change from the purse was being given out. We don't know if its been a colleague that's complained. If they witnessed ways in which they were being put at risk, then it's right that they did.

If the panel concluded that she'd risked public health, including the health of other very vulnerable shoppers/colleagues, then to sack her was correct.

I agree with another poster. Our children have gone without education and social contact, so elderly people are protected. For those with issues getting a card, as said there were options. For those that just don't want change, well tough, there's been a lot of sacrifices made for them.

up to 1975 women couldn't open a bank account in their own name

Seriously!?!
Yet by the early 80s banks were falling over themselves trying to attract primary aged kids (Sammy Squirrel accounts, with a lure of stationary set, piggyback & quarterly magazine)

However I do agree with what you are saying many elderly prefer to deal in cash. While Cashcards / cheque guarantee cards have been around since the 80's, Chip n pin / Contactless are both relatively new.

My mum, now in mid 70s got a Cashcard when they came out, made the move from cheque to chip n pin. But very reluctant to go Contactless - too easy to use the wrong card / someone else use her card.

I also think that the older generation struggle with the concept of using cards for tiny amounts. At one point shops discouraged Chip n pin for less than fiver / tenner depending on shop. Hard to change that mindset.

Birds is very much the elderly and frail in our area - who want to go in and buy small quantities of stuff and pay in cash.

I’m appalled how they’ve treated the customers in terms of this - they know their customer base and have just decided to hide point blank behind rules rather than humanity. The sacked employee was trying to help her regular customers out and be kind and customer focused and has been going out to dry over this.

Birds are fucked if they lose the goodwill and custom of the older generation - Greggs are coming after their breakfast cob and sandwich trade really aggressively (they opened two doors down from them here) so they really shouldn’t be turning away the elderly who pop in every couple of days for a few slices of ham and their loaf

The group who she was helping should have mainly been shielding

Why?

Tbh, re tills, it's only been in about the last five years that the assistants in my local Birds haven't written it all down in pencil on your paper bag! Birds has hardly been cutting edge with the technology.
And if the till wasn't working, it wouldn't be working for a card either.

Domina- couldn't agree more. I've heard people ask for one slice of boiled ham and one small cake. (And it breaks my heart every time)
The lack of humanity in their response to both cases is astonishing.

I also think that lots of people on low incomes probably much prefer to pay in cash as it‘s so much easier to keep a track on what you’re spending. Preferring customers to use cards is one thing, but it seems absolutely crazy to refuse physical money.

Ponoka- you missed the "and she will probably be dead in a few months anyway" trope out of your ageist rant.

I think it's appalling. She's worked for them for 40 years. It's really harsh and reflects more on the company than it does on the member of staff.

I've never heard of Bird's. Not great PR for them.

Well Birds have made themselves look like right wankers.

Bless her if the people she'd helped had been someone from my family or a friend I'd be forever grateful to her.

They'd have no one to blame but themselves if they start losing customers over this.