Makro -are the BU? Babe in arms not allowed in

[NiceGerbil]

Makro turned away a woman because she had a 3mo on her.

I feel like this was a dick move, and the company have confirmed no under 16s is an absolute rule.

Interested to know what others think though. I haven't been on this topic much but remember when Corona kicked off there was quite a hard line around single parents/ those without childcare etc. Interesting to see if that has changed or got harder etc.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-55153396

Macro had a no children rule for many years around late 1980s they started to allow children in with parents.
As a company they can decide the rules. If they dont want children going in they they can decide not to allow them in. Children are an additional risk to other customers and their staff. Where do they draw the line? Babes in arms ok but not in pushchair. Toddler in arms? Etc its far easier to have a clear no children rule than it is to have lots of specific and different catagories

As they have banned all under 16s, I think it perfectly acceptable to turn this mother away. If you allow one in because they have no childcare then it sets a precedent and others will expect to go in.

I think a lot of people would feel safer in a store/warehouse where no children are allowed in the current pandemic.

I too think it's a dick move.
The child was in a baby carrier so I really can't see the issue. There wasn't a pushchair/pram/child walking/running around. What next banning pregnant women?
I get much more peeved with couples ambling around supermarkets having an intense discussion in the middle of an aisle about what to have for dinner.

Makro is a wholesaler, its only meant to be used by businesses, charities and retailers, in practice what is happening is that workplaces are giving almost any staff member who wants one a card to do their own personal shopping.

It is entirely reasonable that a trade only warehouse should not allow under 16's.

She was buying something for her business so not a CF.

I always imagined babes in arms were a bit different but seems not.

Interesting to see that most agree with them- that's what I was interested in really, whether people generally agreed with them or not.

As a silly aside, I hope they don't get any women going into labour suddenly in any of their shops!

If it’s no under 16’s then of course they were right! Otherwise where do you draw the line?
It’s the same at places like betting shops. Why would it be otherwise?

Cash & carry warehouses are also totally different than for example supermarkets. Very common to have forklifts and things on the shop floor.

No under 16’s means no under 16’s. That is the store rules and furs you battter if the baby was being carried or pushed in a pram it is UNDER 16!

Sounds all very straightforward to me if it's no Under 16s.

No under 16s means no under 16s. I work somewhere that under 18s are legally not allowed to be over the door, but people still try and bring in babies and young children because apparently they don't count as people.

Pretty unanimous! Thanks all!

Wholesaler not a supermarket,so entirely acceptable, it has people moving big trolleys pallets about and don't want to be looking out for kids due to their height

The babe in arms probably wouldnt be a problem by itself, but sometimes it's easier to have a blanket rule as loads of people would have a excuse why they should've exempt also.

Thank you for that comment.

I saw babe in arms, small business, needs stock etc and thought dick move.

It's clear from the company and the thread that this is aok so I will have a think about why my thoughts are so out of kilter.