Disability Discrimination
Discussion
The doorman was just doing his job, it wasn't discrimination: for that to be the case he'd have had to believe you were indeed what you said you were and refuse you entry anyway. He just didn't believe you. It's nothing personal and no more discrimination than refusing entry to someone who looks underage if they don't have ID proving otherwise!
Doormen have a responsibility to their premises and the law; he may not have handled it as politely as you'd like but to be fair it's his job. Pubs risk losing their licenses if they're seen to be admitting people who (appear to be!) inebriated already; just like with underage drinkers and so on. If you had something in your wallet that could demonstrate that you're being honest and you're not just one of a hundred drunks with elaborate stories he's going to turn away that evening...
Hopefully no hard feelings!
Doormen have a responsibility to their premises and the law; he may not have handled it as politely as you'd like but to be fair it's his job. Pubs risk losing their licenses if they're seen to be admitting people who (appear to be!) inebriated already; just like with underage drinkers and so on. If you had something in your wallet that could demonstrate that you're being honest and you're not just one of a hundred drunks with elaborate stories he's going to turn away that evening...
Hopefully no hard feelings!
If that doorman can't tell a glassy eyed beer sodden drunk from a person with a disability then he shouldn't be in the job. Sounds like he was on a power trip to me.
I'd have one more go at the management stating you won't be accepting the matter being brushed under the carpet nor their claims that they're not responsible. I'd also state that if the matter isn't properly investigated and they don't get back to you with an explanation and apology then you will go to social media and leave truthful reviews. I'm fairly certain your local paper would be interested in running such a story too. I'm fairly certain they wouldn't want the negative publicity.
I'd have one more go at the management stating you won't be accepting the matter being brushed under the carpet nor their claims that they're not responsible. I'd also state that if the matter isn't properly investigated and they don't get back to you with an explanation and apology then you will go to social media and leave truthful reviews. I'm fairly certain your local paper would be interested in running such a story too. I'm fairly certain they wouldn't want the negative publicity.
The doorman has a right to not permit you entry, he doesn't need to justify or back his decision up with evidence. As said above, they will hear every excuse under the sun.
At the time you would have been better to have raised it with the pub management there and then, they are likely to have a higher IQ than the doorman and be more likely to listen to you. Complaining about it after the event won't get you far.
At the time you would have been better to have raised it with the pub management there and then, they are likely to have a higher IQ than the doorman and be more likely to listen to you. Complaining about it after the event won't get you far.
The doorman was just doing his job initially but having spoken to you, it should have been perfectly obvious you weren't drunk. People who are so drunk that they can't walk properly talk like they're drunk.
I suspect he knew he'd got it wrong but was one of these t
ts whose ego wouldn't allow him to apologise and back down. You get a lot of those types working the doors. Knuckleheads, basically.
I suspect he knew he'd got it wrong but was one of these t
ts whose ego wouldn't allow him to apologise and back down. You get a lot of those types working the doors. Knuckleheads, basically. On the other hand I've been with mates one of whom who was so drunk he couldnt stand, challenged by nightclub doormen, and another mate castigate the doorman using the disabled line and much to our suprise get an apology and let in...
Not fair I know, but like said you do get some knuckleheads doing the job so you need to pander, do you (op) ever use a walking stick or such or is there a way to make it more "obvious"
Not fair I know, but like said you do get some knuckleheads doing the job so you need to pander, do you (op) ever use a walking stick or such or is there a way to make it more "obvious"
I think unfortunately you came up against an unpleasant idiot, but I doubt there's much you can do about it, other than giving is some publicity locally.
By the way, you refer to being "registered disabled". I know that the old DHSS ran a registration scheme, but I had understood it stopped many years ago. Could you tell me more, thanks.
By the way, you refer to being "registered disabled". I know that the old DHSS ran a registration scheme, but I had understood it stopped many years ago. Could you tell me more, thanks.
So on trying to get back into the first pub and being denied entry, you simply decided to call it a night and go home? 
So what happened with your supposed friends?
Did they not try to contact you by phone or come out and look for you to see what had happened?
Why didn't you try to contact them to tell them what had happened? - Especially as you were the "designated driver".
I've been in situations where one of our group couldn't get into a pub on a few occasions (normally due to them being genuinely a bit too drunk for the doorman's liking), and what we tend to do is find out what's happened with our friend, and if they can't get in then we all go somewhere else.
I can appreciate that you feel aggrieved by what has happened, but what exactly are you expecting the pub chain to do?
The staff on the doors have to make an immediate on the spot assessment as to people's condition, and decide if the person should be allowed into the pub or not, usually based on how they are walking and carrying themselves in general, what their attitude is like, how they are talking, and how coherent they appear to be.
In your case, it seems they got their assessment wrong, but the doormen are not medical experts. If you approach the pub swaying, staggering and struggling to walk, based on their experience of drunk people, you appeared to fit the profile as being too drunk to be allowed entry.
Your protestations of being sober, whilst apparently true, were met with incredulity by the doorman because he hears the exact same thing from every drunk person he deals with.
Are you hoping that the pub chain are going to train all of their door staff to be able to distinguish between genuinely drunk people, and other people with disabilities who on visual inspection, look as though they're drunk, even when they're not? - If so, sorry, but that's simply not going to happen. Like it or not, doormen simply don't have the time to carry out detailed assessments of people, and study ever possible bit of evidence that could prove if a person is drunk or disabled.
Are you hoping the doorman involved in your situation loses his job? - Again, not going to happen! At the end of the day, he aired on the side of caution and denied a person whom he genuinely believed to be drunk, entry to the pub. That's what he has been trained to do. The fact he got it wrong makes no difference.
I have a work colleague who has Huntington's disease, and due to the effects of the disease, to anyone who does not know him, he appears to be drunk, with uncontrollable movements, severe walking difficulties, and slurred speech. On a few occasions he has been denied entry to pubs because the doormen have assumed he is simply extremely drunk rather than suffering a disease. So how would you expect a doorman to make a correct assessment in his case when there are loads of other people trying to get into the pub at the same time
You're talking about the pub chain trying to pass on their liability responsibilities by stating that the doormen are not their employee's, but as I see it, you have gone to the pub-chain complaining about "their" staff and how they are trained, and they have simply informed you that the door staff are not "their" staff, and so they are not responsible for the training that they receive.
Don't get Me wrong, it sucks that this happens, but you are talking as though you have been deliberately targeted due to your disability, but that's simply not the case. You were not refused entry because you are disabled, you were denied entry because you were (incorrectly) assessed as being drunk. Had the doorman said: "Sorry mate, you're not coming in because you're disabled!", then you'd have a case.
Let's not forget that on occasions, people without disabilities, who are also not drunk, get refused entry to pubs and clubs all the time, simply because the doorman don't like the look of them or how they are dressed. Is it fair? - No, but it happens!
So what happened with your supposed friends?
Did they not try to contact you by phone or come out and look for you to see what had happened?
Why didn't you try to contact them to tell them what had happened? - Especially as you were the "designated driver".
I've been in situations where one of our group couldn't get into a pub on a few occasions (normally due to them being genuinely a bit too drunk for the doorman's liking), and what we tend to do is find out what's happened with our friend, and if they can't get in then we all go somewhere else.
I can appreciate that you feel aggrieved by what has happened, but what exactly are you expecting the pub chain to do?
The staff on the doors have to make an immediate on the spot assessment as to people's condition, and decide if the person should be allowed into the pub or not, usually based on how they are walking and carrying themselves in general, what their attitude is like, how they are talking, and how coherent they appear to be.
In your case, it seems they got their assessment wrong, but the doormen are not medical experts. If you approach the pub swaying, staggering and struggling to walk, based on their experience of drunk people, you appeared to fit the profile as being too drunk to be allowed entry.
Your protestations of being sober, whilst apparently true, were met with incredulity by the doorman because he hears the exact same thing from every drunk person he deals with.
Are you hoping that the pub chain are going to train all of their door staff to be able to distinguish between genuinely drunk people, and other people with disabilities who on visual inspection, look as though they're drunk, even when they're not? - If so, sorry, but that's simply not going to happen. Like it or not, doormen simply don't have the time to carry out detailed assessments of people, and study ever possible bit of evidence that could prove if a person is drunk or disabled.
Are you hoping the doorman involved in your situation loses his job? - Again, not going to happen! At the end of the day, he aired on the side of caution and denied a person whom he genuinely believed to be drunk, entry to the pub. That's what he has been trained to do. The fact he got it wrong makes no difference.
I have a work colleague who has Huntington's disease, and due to the effects of the disease, to anyone who does not know him, he appears to be drunk, with uncontrollable movements, severe walking difficulties, and slurred speech. On a few occasions he has been denied entry to pubs because the doormen have assumed he is simply extremely drunk rather than suffering a disease. So how would you expect a doorman to make a correct assessment in his case when there are loads of other people trying to get into the pub at the same time
You're talking about the pub chain trying to pass on their liability responsibilities by stating that the doormen are not their employee's, but as I see it, you have gone to the pub-chain complaining about "their" staff and how they are trained, and they have simply informed you that the door staff are not "their" staff, and so they are not responsible for the training that they receive.
Don't get Me wrong, it sucks that this happens, but you are talking as though you have been deliberately targeted due to your disability, but that's simply not the case. You were not refused entry because you are disabled, you were denied entry because you were (incorrectly) assessed as being drunk. Had the doorman said: "Sorry mate, you're not coming in because you're disabled!", then you'd have a case.
Let's not forget that on occasions, people without disabilities, who are also not drunk, get refused entry to pubs and clubs all the time, simply because the doorman don't like the look of them or how they are dressed. Is it fair? - No, but it happens!
4rephill said:
Don't get Me wrong, it sucks that this happens, but you are talking as though you have been deliberately targeted due to your disability, but that's simply not the case. You were not refused entry because you are disabled, you were denied entry because you were (incorrectly) assessed as being drunk. Had the doorman said: "Sorry mate, you're not coming in because you're disabled!", then you'd have a case.
OP contention is that the incorrect assessment was because of the way he walks, ie his disability, rather than, say, slurred speech or embracing a fugly woman. Re 'registered disabled' iirc this was a green card administered by Dept Employment (Jobcentres) up until sometime mid 90s. AFAIK there isn't any current registration.
ETA, OP, keep in mind your objectives in deciding what to do next. For me it'd be aiming to make sure the company took their responsibilities seriously so that it didn't happen again.
If their overall attitude to accessibility is poor and you wanted to raise the profile, that's up to you.
Edited by Sticks. on Sunday 18th June 13:40
If its any consolation OP, I've had the same experience since sustaining nerve damage which has numbed parts of my feet and toes, affecting my balance without substantially impacting my mobility i.e. I'm not eligible for a blue badge. I've tried to laugh it off saying "appreciate I may walk with a slight swagger but can assure you its a result if spinal cord damage not intoxication" and they really don't want to know.
theboss said:
If its any consolation OP, I've had the same experience since sustaining nerve damage which has numbed parts of my feet and toes, affecting my balance without substantially impacting my mobility i.e. I'm not eligible for a blue badge. I've tried to laugh it off saying "appreciate I may walk with a slight swagger but can assure you its a result if spinal cord damage not intoxication" and they really don't want to know.
Similar here.Been likened to an extra from Shaun of the Dead.
And that's without seeing my fizz.
If you like the pub & intend to return, a quite email to management might not go amiss.
Sticks. said:
Re 'registered disabled' iirc this was a green card administered by Dept Employment (Jobcentres) up until sometime mid 90s. AFAIK there isn't any current registration.
Yes, I think you are correct, above I suggested it was the old DHSS, but it was, as you say, Dept of Employment. Also think you are right about there not being any current registration scheme.Edited by Sticks. on Sunday 18th June 13:40
I've had the same, being turned away for being drunk when totally sober and with nothing about me suggesting drunkenness (wearing a suit, with my wife, going out at eight from the office), and it took me a while to get my head round what I was being told (the moron didn't have the wits to say "sorry sir, I think you're too drunk to come in", instead saying "stand over there mate, give it ten nimutes").
I know that some will defend doormen, and many likely do a good job, but it's also the case that if you are a cock, think you're a hard man, and don't have the intellect to stack shelves then it's the ideal calling, so it does have more than its fair share of aholes.
I'd suggest dropping a polite line to the management, letting them know that you're a bit upset, and asking what you need to do in future to stop this happening.
If you don't get a decent reply then let your local paper know, it's exactly the kind of story that they'll love to run with.
I know that some will defend doormen, and many likely do a good job, but it's also the case that if you are a cock, think you're a hard man, and don't have the intellect to stack shelves then it's the ideal calling, so it does have more than its fair share of a
holes.I'd suggest dropping a polite line to the management, letting them know that you're a bit upset, and asking what you need to do in future to stop this happening.
If you don't get a decent reply then let your local paper know, it's exactly the kind of story that they'll love to run with.
I think people are wrong saying that the doormen don't have the time to check if somebody is actually disabled or drunk, or that they can simply just refuse permission rather than determining it. I'd think that refusing to enquire further, or deferring to "my word is final" would amount to discrimination.
One solution would be for them to speak to the person a little longer to decide, and then if in doubt, let them in and then either check on them later, ejecting them if they are indeed drunk.
If the establishment's security doesn't have time to cater for the needs of the disabled then they either need more security staff, or those who are more professional.
A friend of mine works security on nightclubs in London and spent weeks learning sign language at night school purely so they could assist the deaf and hard of hearing better.
One solution would be for them to speak to the person a little longer to decide, and then if in doubt, let them in and then either check on them later, ejecting them if they are indeed drunk.
If the establishment's security doesn't have time to cater for the needs of the disabled then they either need more security staff, or those who are more professional.
A friend of mine works security on nightclubs in London and spent weeks learning sign language at night school purely so they could assist the deaf and hard of hearing better.
Gareth79 said:
I think people are wrong saying that the doormen don't have the time to check if somebody is actually disabled or drunk, or that they can simply just refuse permission rather than determining it. I'd think that refusing to enquire further, or deferring to "my word is final" would amount to discrimination.
One solution would be for them to speak to the person a little longer to decide, and then if in doubt, let them in and then either check on them later, ejecting them if they are indeed drunk.
If the establishment's security doesn't have time to cater for the needs of the disabled then they either need more security staff, or those who are more professional.
A friend of mine works security on nightclubs in London and spent weeks learning sign language at night school purely so they could assist the deaf and hard of hearing better.
Your friend has gone above and beyond the call of duty and should be praised, but your first statement is not true - doormen can refuse entry to anybody they like, for no reason at all. They're a private establishment and have no obligation to let anybody enter. One solution would be for them to speak to the person a little longer to decide, and then if in doubt, let them in and then either check on them later, ejecting them if they are indeed drunk.
If the establishment's security doesn't have time to cater for the needs of the disabled then they either need more security staff, or those who are more professional.
A friend of mine works security on nightclubs in London and spent weeks learning sign language at night school purely so they could assist the deaf and hard of hearing better.
Venturist said:
Your friend has gone above and beyond the call of duty and should be praised, but your first statement is not true - doormen can refuse entry to anybody they like, for no reason at all. They're a private establishment and have no obligation to let anybody enter.
That's not true, and I'm not sure where you'd get the idea from that it is.It's illegal to discriminate based on any one of several protected characteristics which includes disability. It's probably the sort of thing that is hard to prove or prosecute, but that doesn't alter the fact that the law is not silent on this.
This BBC story reports on it,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/article/34401457/the...
IanA2 said:
Yes, I think you are correct, above I suggested it was the old DHSS, but it was, as you say, Dept of Employment. Also think you are right about there not being any current registration scheme.
Yes, BUT( always a but), on one application to welfare help agency, when asked about the disabled question, test was ability to do tasks a non disabled person of similar age could. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff