To think my friend was not BU in this cafe situation?

[TicketsThisWayForTheChatsworthExpress]

My friend runs a small independent cafe that is dog friendly but the dogs have to be outdoors. Over the weekend, a family of six people came in with 2 dogs and were directed outside. The tables outside are picnic benches that seat 10, inside the tables seat six (they’re all the same size). The family went outside and took 2 picnic benches. Which annoyed my friend as that’s depriving potential customers of a bench but she let it go and said nothing.

She noticed one of the children, a boy aged about 8, having a tantrum outside because he doesn’t like eating outdoors and wants to eat indoors. Next thing she knew, his mum had brought him inside and sat him at the last available table (with an iPad blasting). She asked my friend if his order could come to that table as he doesn’t like eating outside so she said he could come in and eat alone.

My friend said she couldn’t allow this, because they don’t allow children to eat and drink unsupervised for health and safety reasons (they’d also ordered the child a hot drink). The outside area is down a large set of steps so they couldn’t have seen him from the garden. The mum said he has ADHD and doesn’t like to eat outside. My friend - who also has a DS with ADHD BTW - said sorry no we can’t take the risk of him eating alone. What she didn’t say but wanted to was ‘You’d also be taking up three tables when you should only be taking up one and I shouldn’t have to turn customers away because of this’.

Anyway she dug her heels in and the mum gave in and went back outside, the 8yo had a (small) tantrum outside and played his iPad full blast for the duration of their meal (he was asked by another waitress to turn it down which he did a fraction).

When the family paid the mum said she would be posting reviews online to say that the cafe owner is ableist and wouldn’t accommodate the needs of a disabled child. My friend said nothing, and nothing has appeared as of yet online, but she’s gutted about this accusation especially with her DS having ADHD. She said she’d never let her ADHD DS eat alone because actually the risk of him being hurt would increase greatly.

AIBU to think it’s not about ableism but about health and safety? I feel really bad for her!

Perfectly reasonable to ask for any child to be supervised and to expect IPads to have headphones/be muted - if I was a fellow customer I’d expect your friend to have words if my meal was disrupted by an unsupervised and loud child.

If I was in a group of ten I cannot imagine comfortably fitting round a single picnic bench to eat a meal. It’s hardly insane to use two tables as six people and two dogs. Your friend needs to unclench about the usage of tables and definitely stop referring to her cafe as “dog friendly” - I’m no dog owner but if I was I’d interpret that as dogs welcome inside.

It is very frustrating with a ND child who can’t be flexible (my own autistic child won’t eat outside either) to have made a plan that should work and then have to deal with a massive public meltdown because people misrepresent their services or can’t just bend a bit - not to the level of allowing the child to be unsupervised, but your friend could have offered to allow them to swap one of their outside tables for the indoor one for example.

I'd describe it as dog-tolerant, really.

Dog-friendly (to me), implies that dogs are allowed to go wherever their humans can go. It generally also means that the establishment provides water bowls and biscuits, and the staff are happy to give the dogs a fuss etc.

If a review is posted I suggest that your friend responds with something along the lines of

”Unfortunately we are unable to welcome young accompanied children in our cafe - they do need to have a parent with them. I was unaware of your child’s disability until you told me when you left, our policy is applied consistently irrespective of disability “

Out of interest, how would the people objecting to the term “dog friendly” describe somewhere where dogs are allowed in / on part of the property but not others? It’s clearly not “no dogs”.

Dog tolerant apparently 🤣

I still think dog friendly is an appropriate term. They give away dog biscuits and sell those dog ice creams and outside she has 2 dog drinking stations (aka water bowls next to a sign 😂). Not sure what’s unfriendly about that 🤷‍♀️

No child shouldn't be left unsupervised. However the three tables thing is not on.

"My friend said she couldn’t allow this, because they don’t allow children to eat and drink unsupervised for health and safety reasons"

Err, she did?

Your friends garden is dog friendly but her restaurant/cafe isn’t. This has no relevance to the situation.

I have a dog and children. Therefore I would only visit eateries that could accommodate us together.

For everyone’s safety, children should be supervised regardless of special needs. If I were your friend, I would do exactly the same. The parents were willing to put their child in a compromised position and, would without a doubt, blame your friend if something went wrong.

It is very frustrating with a ND child who can’t be flexible (my own autistic child won’t eat outside either) to have made a plan that should work and then have to deal with a massive public meltdown because people misrepresent their services or can’t just bend a bit - not to the level of allowing the child to be unsupervised, but your friend could have offered to allow them to swap one of their outside tables for the indoor one for example.

My friend didn’t misrepresent her services at all. The sign outside clearly states dogs welcome in the garden only. And as I’ve said, the mum herself said they couldn’t all come inside because they needed to be with the dogs.

I don't understand why your friend didn't just say:

"I can't have him eating in here unattended, but one of you is more than welcome to join him if it would make things easier. The rest of you can stay outside with the dogs on table X and I'll put everything on one bill".

It comes across like your friend was pissed off with them from the minute they sat down and therefore unwilling to accommodate them or help them in any way.

This. And why did the waitress ask for anything to be turned down outside?

We have a local cafe on the beach who welcome dogs inside and outside. It's popular with dog walkers every time I have been in there has been at least 5 dogs inside. It's all good until you get one dog barking then they all start. But they insist dogs are welcome inside.

She mentioned the ADHD when the mum tried to place him at a table. But in my friend’s view it wasn’t a good enough reason to have a child unsupervised (the opposite in fact)

I think your friend was absolutely correct. Leaving an 8 year old unsupervised is not right. Why couldn’t one of the adults stay with him, for instance?

@TimetoPour

The parents were willing to put their child in a compromised position and, would without a doubt, blame your friend if something went wrong.

This was the crux of my friend’s decision really. She inevitably has had people burn themsleves spilling hot drinks etc and the health and safety protocol is a PITA (and for good reasons). She’s never had a child being burned or injured before and she said to me she wants to keep that record!

Its still defined as dig friendly as they are allowing dogs in the enclosed outdoor area where loads would still say no. It's dog friendly as the dog is allowed in the parameters of the business

Of course she's entitled to do what she wants. The objections are to the description of the cafe being dog friendly because it is not. It doesn't have to be unless she wants to describe it as such.

I will look up where to go when I'm visiting somewhere to make sure it's dog friendly.
I could arrive at your friend's cafe to find she is falsely representing her policy on dogs unless it very clearly states 'dogs outside only'.

As I’ve said, the mum said (when seating her son inside) they’d all come in but they need to stay with the dogs.

I don't think your friends' stance is unreasonable but I wonder if it was her attitude that caused a problem.

You generally get a better result if you sympathise with someone rather than just say "No because of Health and Safety". It just comes across as not being very understanding or caring which isn't great when it comes to customer service.

Because other diners don’t want to hear someone else’s kids loud YouTube videos playing while they eat?

Firstly I wouldn’t call this cafe “dog friendly” as dogs are only allowed outside, I would call it “dogs are allowed in the outside area “. And I’m saying this as someone who doesn’t like dogs near my table even in the outside area.
Secondly this mum was very odd, of course she ( or other adult) should have stayed with child inside because of his age, and twice so because of his additional needs, it’s a common sense.
Thirdly your friend should have pointed out politely about taking up too much tables. It’s ok.

I agree about the child being alone and then taking up multiple tables but I can't understand why tge family couldn't use pjs outside table and one inside (with one parent in and one out. The iPad noise should have been immediately addressed it's so annoying how parents can't see how unremitting is, use headphones

The objections are to the description of the cafe being dog friendly because it is not

@foolishone that is MY description on my OP because TBH I never thought to be so weird as to say ‘dog tolerant’ 🤣

I know that, but I think it would have been nice for your friend to be a bit more understanding about their predicament, instead of being so...I don't know...blunt and officious about it.

But if I saw dog friendly on a café website I wouldn't expect to have to sit outside, as long as it's clear on all marketing that's her Choi but she should not use friendly

I could arrive at your friend's cafe to find she is falsely representing her policy on dogs unless it very clearly states 'dogs outside only'.

It does.

RTFT. Or at least my posts.