Lidl... the not so nice side.

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

sean8997

MEKK Poggio 3.5 & Merida Cyclocross 3
Location
Chester
whats this got to do with cycling?
 

steveindenmark

Legendary Member
I may have missed it, but when did this happen?

I would imagine that it takes time for an investigation to take place before the head office will comment. Drago, I really cannot believe that your friend was so mortifyingly offended that he did not have the sense to ask for the manager.

The Security guard made a mistake, he doesnt deserve to lose his job for it. He is not the only one who doesnt know the act and year which has been breached. Its a good job most of us are not Security guards, because we didnt know it either.

Bearing in mind we are only hearing one side of a story and even that is second hand. I do have sympathy with your friend but its all the melodramatics, I find hard to swallow.

Steve
 
Similar?? I hope ye jest.

One can be attributed to a mistake and poor training, one cannot.

I was applying a little empathy, do you think the people involved in either instance will feel any different about their unjust treatment?
Similarities:
Customer is ejected from store by security guard because they have a disability.
Customer is ejected from store by security guard because of their religion.

The effect is the same on people involved, regardless of the motivations of the security guards.

There was no intention to compare assistance dogs and Jews, I posted in a rush on way to work and admit it may have been taken quite wrongly from the intent. I found the antisemitism against 2 boys particularly vile and the Sports Direct quick action praiseworthy.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
The chances of being prevented from entering on religous grounds is less likely. But should it occur, it'll have a more immediate response.
Disability Discrimination has only really covered by law since 1996.
 
The Sports Direct article links to an interesting incident about breast feeding

Again controversial, but we used to have a friend who would play off it.

Breast feeding can be discreet and should not cause a problem, however she used to be flagrantly exhibitionist about it in an attempt to get someone to respond and then complain suggesting free products or services as compensation for the "offence caused"

She claimed that she had not paid for a restaurant meal for 6 months!

Always beware that there may be an agenda on the behalf of the complainant.

The store should always investigate before taking action for this reason
 

nickyboy

Norven Mankey
The Sports Direct article links to an interesting incident about breast feeding

Again controversial, but we used to have a friend who would play off it.

Breast feeding can be discreet and should not cause a problem, however she used to be flagrantly exhibitionist about it in an attempt to get someone to respond and then complain suggesting free products or services as compensation for the "offence caused"

She claimed that she had not paid for a restaurant meal for 6 months!

Always beware that there may be an agenda on the behalf of the complainant.

The store should always investigate before taking action for this reason

I thought the same thing. The way the complainant handled this was unusual. Clearly knowing his rights the best way to deal with this was to ask to speak to someone in authority at the store, at which point it becomes a non-issue. However he chose not to and as such you have to question his motivation
 

KneesUp

Guru
On the subject of guide dogs could someone please tell me who picks their doo daahs up?:scratch:
I believe they are trained to do their doo daahs in a specific place at home. I don't know what happens if they are caught short.

EDIT - should have read to the end of the thread before replying - see @User33236's reply above.
 

Profpointy

Legendary Member
I was applying a little empathy, do you think the people involved in either instance will feel any different about their unjust treatment?
Similarities:
Customer is ejected from store by security guard because they have a disability.
Customer is ejected from store by security guard because of their religion.

The effect is the same on people involved, regardless of the motivations of the security guards.

There was no intention to compare assistance dogs and Jews, I posted in a rush on way to work and admit it may have been taken quite wrongly from the intent. I found the antisemitism against 2 boys particularly vile and the Sports Direct quick action praiseworthy.

Not what happened though so you're being disingenuous. Shop has no dogs policy - it's a food shop after all. Hey, for all I know they may be another law forbidding dogs in food shops, or at least a law that would lead you to that. But there's also a law insisting that you must make reasonable provision for disabled access. Now you've got two laws, or at least two rules in conflict so this chap on the ground has to decide on the fly - for which he should apparently be dismissed as some kind of Nazi colaborator

Just a thought though, how does this blind gentleman choose his shopping - Lidl is self-service is it not?
If someone's walking round with him, why does he need the dog as well?
 

You have corrupted a childhood memory now!

I will never again be able to watch Sooty again without "Izzy - Wizzy, lets get busy" having a whole new meaning!

51VE%2BkZMvDL.jpg
 

Cyclopathic

Veteran
Location
Leicester.
Yes, it was an individual.

Even more disturbing is head offices lack of action over the matter. My chum is posting their rather wet letters up on FB.

They're failing to apologise, and failing to explain what action will be taken against those responsible.
It may be an issue of data protection. I'm not sure if they are allowed to say what has been done to whom except in the broadest terms. i.e. the matter is being dealt with.
 
Top Bottom