To think 'think 25' is getting silly

[ChopSuey2]

I'm in my 30s. I might look late 20s on a good day but there is no chance I look early 20s. It seems like 'think 25' has now become 'is there any chance they could be 25?' when the whole point is making sure under 18s (or 16s, depending on the product) aren't being sold things illegally. You might think someone could be 25 but very clearly not under 18. If that's the case, why do they have to ID?

I usually carry ID so it's not a big issue but it seems ridiculous I get IDed more in my mid 30s than I did at 15!

AIBU to thinks shops should trust their workers to have some common sense and only ID people who there is actually a chance could be under 18 (people who genuinely look under 25).

The employee if caught selling to underage gets the fine, criminal record and loses their job.
Often supermarkets send people in to buy alcohol that look 25 or younger (but all are 18 or over) to test the staff. If the staff member does not ask for id they are then given a written warning or sacked.

The key point being here "under age". So, 17 or under. Not 24.
You cannot be prosecuted for getting someone's age wrong if they are over 18.
And you cannot be reprimanded for getting someone's age wrong if they are over 18 and under 25, because it is so subjective. To be honest, it's all getting so silly that there needs to be a list of products which are age restricted and they ask for ID regardless. Even if you are 90. Plastic cutlery - come on. Calpol? How else are you mean to buy it for your child?

I'd also like to see supermarkets stop putting 17 year olds on age restricted tills (eg on cigarette/lottery ticket counters) so they constantly have to ask for someone to approve a purchase. It's completely nonsensical.

Also why put so many items in an age restricted category which don't need to be when they want you to use self-service? It's pointless using self-serve if you have to call someone over.

Inlaws are just back from America. They went to an event and everyone there got asked for ID for alcohol. Even those over 70 !
Some states ask for id if you look under 40.

Conversely, I think it should be the rule that ID is needed to purchase alcohol whether in a shop, bar, restaurant or anywhere else.

Yes, this was in full swing when I worked there!

I correctly guessed all the under 18s except one and would have IDed that one plus a few others who were 22 or under. At the bottom it says they all should be IDed. The ones in their 30s very clearly look it! Even if I were being generous and thought maybe they could be 25, there is not a chance they are 17.

It is daft, but they'll lose their job if they get caught so I understand the extra caution.

I got IDed in my mid-30s buying ibuprofen, when I was ill with a fluey cold. Now that was annoying - I felt like I looked closer to 100 than 18 😂

the police are the ones who control this, and they are not in the slightest bit interested in customer service or making customers lives easier, because their job is to oversee the sales of restricted items to the general public through licenced premises.
Can I make the obligatory "they should be out catching criminals" comment. They do love a soft target.

Just to add, this isn't a dig at workers who I completely understand have been given instructions by their employers to ID anyone who could be 25 even if there is no chance they are under 18. My issue is that think 25 was put in place to catch those under 18 year olds that look older, not to catch 35 year olds that could look 25 but definitely don't look 17.

Anyone who works there can veto a sale if they think the person is underage
If they saw it and let it go and they were underage both staff members could be in trouble

@ChopSuey2 it doesn't matter if you think they're over 18.
If your employer catches you not ID'ing someone who looks under 25, you will be put through the disciplinary process. And it is harder to guess in a split second the further away from 25 you get...
As a pp mentioned, conditions of license need to be met & that includes Think 25. Im a personal license holder & if I'm on shift & Trading Standards/Police/my employer comes in & says a test purchase has failed, the person who sold the items, me & the company (a national one) can all be held responsible with increasing fines etc.
In Scotland (where I am), it is a condition of your license & premises license that each employee must undergo a minimum of 2 hours of Age Restricted training before they are put on a till, along with a refresher every 6months-1 year.
Retail/hospitality are not the most well paid of sectors & the cost of not following the Think 25 policy (which is backed & encouraged by the government) is extremely high - high financial penalties, loss of job & a criminal record. So, yeah we are going to be cautious when selling these products.

My daughter was asked for ID in a shop by a girl who was 2 years behind her at school and knew perfectly well how old she was. I guess she liked the feeling of power it gave her 🙄

There is a lack of common sense. My mum has been ID’d in a supermarket and she’s in her late 70’s. You would think nobody could be that stupid bet yes they clearly are!

How do you fail a 'think 25' audit? You either think someone looks 25 or you don't. It's entirely subjective.

It’s like the window keeps shifting.

Think 25 gives you a margin for error to make sure you’re not selling to a 17 year old or younger. If a 23 year old comes in and you don’t ID them as you think they are 25 then that should be absolutely fine - the margin for error is working because they are much older than they legally need to be to buy that product.

As I’m sure many others have said, we now seem to be in a situation where 25 is treated as the legal age and people are worried about getting that wrong - so they are adding on another margin for error on top of the “Think25” margin for error!!

You now have people who might be 13 years or more older than 17, who don’t look like they could possibly be under the legal age to buy alcohol, who are being ID on the basis that from a distance and if you were squinting they might just about be in their mid to late 20s (and so perhaps only 7 to 10 years over the legal drinking age).

But surely the whole point is that “looks under 25” is subjective. So how can someone be disciplined for not checking someone who “looks under 25”?

I’m not being goady, I genuinely don’t get it.

There's only one woman in her thirties and one guy over 25 in the whole booklet. She definitely looks over 25. He is borderline. Although I think in real life it might be clearer. I didn't even attempt to specifically pick out the under 18s, but correctly picked out those two older ones who I correctly would not have IDed because I think they look over 25.

There is no law against selling someone over 18 but under 25 alcohol so even if a company fails a think 25 audit, they are only breaking the law of they fail an underage (under 18) test purchase.

Again, I completely understand why workers ID people who could be 25 but are definitely over 18. It isn't worth them risking their job if they fail a think 25 audit, even if they know the person is over 18.

@User19844666884 the company will send in someone under 25. If you don't ID them, you're in trouble - disciplinary/job loss.
That's literally it.
Trading Standards & the police will send in under 18s. If you fail that, disciplinary/job loss, with added potential fine & criminal record.

Can someone explain the logic of refusing to sell alcohol-free beer (Brewdog Punk AF) to a parent who has their 12 year old child with them? I've heard of many parents who have been refused alcoholic drink purchases because they have children with them, but refusing to sell an alcohol free beer is completely bizarre. And no, they wouldn't listen to reason.

It doesn't make any difference if she knew your daughter. Her employer requires her to check and to record on a log that she has checked. It's nothing to do with a checkout person having feelings of power. Her job is at risk I'd she doesn't check

YANBU op. Recently a male member of staff at a supermarket used IDing my 33 year old self as a conversation opener to hit on me so I’m very pissed off at the whole thing atm!

Think 25 “hey shops, here’s a great idea to reduce underage drinking whilst reducing the stress on your staff of having to identify exactly whether or not someone is 18 or not by introducing a significant margin for error. Great huh?”

Shops: “yeah, thanks. Like almost all of it, except maybe that bit about making life less stressful for our staff, leave that with us…”

Also shops: [Introduce internal policy that if staff member fails to determine exactly if someone is under 25 they get disciplined and may lose their job].

“Result!”.

Trading Standards & the police will send in under 18s.
Why do we, as a society, allow this entrapment. And who is the responsible adult that signs up minors for this job?
How would you feel if someone asked for a lift to the station then said "hurry! hurry! I'm going to miss my train" purposely so that you speed and trigger the speed camera that they know is round the corner. It's pretty indefensible really.

I find it very reassuring, having recently been present while paramedics desperately tried to resuscitate a 13 year old vodka-drunk teen, found unconscious and alone in the street on a Saturday afternoon. It’s an inconvenience for adults that really saves lives. I was delighted to be id’d in my local shop, the one that’s frequented by my teenage children , and not only because it made me feel temporarily youthful!