Pontins told to stop screening Irish names

[Electro1980]

Absolutely none of that stops it being a racist policy. That is the actual issue. The policy was to treat an ethnic group less favourably. You can try and justify the racism but that doesn’t stop it being racist.

Edited by chris.mod on Thursday 4th March 20:14

[SpeckledJim]

Electro1980 said:

Absolutely none of that stops it being a racist policy. That is the actual issue. The policy was to treat an ethnic group less favourably. You can try and justify the racism but that doesn’t stop it being racist.

Agreed. As long as we agree that travellers are a race. Until very recently they weren’t. Some would say they still aren’t.

And either way, an easy position to take when it isn’t your money and reputation.

Edited by chris.mod on Thursday 4th March 20:13

[Electro1980]

The British and Irish governments recognise them as an ethnic group, so what you think doesn’t matter.

It’s an easy position to take when you are not subject to discrimination. Nothing you have said changes the fact that the policy was racist and illegal. I don’t really care what Pontins think. If they want to ban people they can. But they have to ban people not entire ethnic groups.

[Electro1980]

AJL308 said:

The EDL will surely be an ethnically based group as much as the Travellers are. Why wouldn't they be?

If you’re going to claim EDL is an ethnicity then all hope is lost of any reason.

You carry on denying and supporting racism. I’m not going to change your mind, because you can’t see past your prejudices.

[MB140]

SpeckledJim said:

......

BOOM. It'd be like the Somme at the front gate, if everyone at the Somme was an illiterate thief with a boot full of catalytic converters.

Brilliant, I’ve now got to clean the mouth full of tea I spat across the dining room table up.

God my face hurts from laughing. Cheers for brightening my day up.

[anonymous-user]

slow_poke]Pontin's were excluding [i]anyone[i/ said:

with an Irish accent, regardless of surname.

Certain surnames (of Irish origin) were excluded regardless of accent.

Pretty fking racist, I'd say.

I'm curious how a business should handle persistent issues from a particular group of people (within a wider group).

For example I knew some young people who worked at {chain of low end restaurants, removed name in case it incrimiantes anyone}. They persistently had groups of travellers from the local camp book meals then at the end either do a runner or refuse to pay as the meal was sub-standard (having eaten the lot). They were so intimidating they knew they'd get away with it. In the end to avoid trouble and loss they would not take bookings from people with a certain accent.

Now that's very unfair on all the people with that accent that are decent but what is the business supposed to do? Surely all businesses have the right to choose their customers? Insurers do. delivery companies won't go to certain areas and so on.

It's easy to say racist until it's your business absorbing the losses. What is the solution?

[slow_poke]

Something that doesn't include racism?

[mrporsche]

slow_poke said:

Something that doesn't include racism?

My god you’ve cracked it !! You should write to pontins and tell them that.

Pontins end up being forced to accept bookings from travellers. They turn up and cause damage and chaos as usual who foots the repair / compensation costs ?

Pontins didn’t want them so it seems unfair that they pay perhaps you could contribute??

Or do pontins like several local pubs just give up and close ? Loss of business loss of service for the local community so everybody loses because we can’t address something that is a blight on communities everywhere

[Mr Whippy]

Swap it round.

Reward good customers.

Put prices up double which puts off scum.

Require ID for all visitors.

Then good customers get a great price next visit, then normal prices after that.

Return nice customers get same cost over time. They are happy as it’s cheap next year. They are happy as tts are filtered out.

It wouldn’t take long to black list scum if they’d even bother turning up with the higher initial cost.

[Pit Pony]

Lily the Pink said:

Pit Pony said:

What the Airbnb take on this? Avoid auto booking ? Only take people with good reviews from hosts.?

Why on earth are you asking that on here ? Ask on any of the myriad AirBnB FB pages.

No. I'm not on face book, and I want YOU to do the research.

I bet Lilly the Pink isn't even a real name. I Bet it's something like Piers Bains

Which is short for Paddy O'Brien

[mrporsche]

Mr Whippy said:

Swap it round.

Reward good customers.

Put prices up double which puts off scum.

Require ID for all visitors.

Then good customers get a great price next visit, then normal prices after that.

Return nice customers get same cost over time. They are happy as it’s cheap next year. They are happy as tts are filtered out.

It wouldn’t take long to black list scum if they’d even bother turning up with the higher initial cost.

Why is my holiday costing double this year ?
Because some liberal types who have no direct experience of travellers feel it is for the best ?

I go and there are still the usual traveller issues, the increased prices stop me going next year, pontins lose business.

Travellers aren’t on a fixed wage like the rest of us, if they need more money they just go and acquire it.

Say I can stomach coming back next year at whatever price you are suggesting and the same group of travellers are there using different id or a different group are there creating chaos, what then ?

Or they could just ban travellers ??

[Type R Tom]

Isn't the ban of all male / female groups or groups of young people the same as this?

Seen quite a few T&Cs over the years with lists of people who can't book things, no one seems to be bothered.

If this is wrong due to equalities, isn't the banning of a stag group or a load of 18 year olds not the same?

[Electro1980]

mrporsche said:

Why is my holiday costing double this year ?
Because some liberal types who have no direct experience of travellers feel it is for the best ?

So now it effects you your bothered by a policy?

It’s not about “some liberal types”, “direct experience
“ or “for the best”. It is illegal racial discrimination. You keep on supporting racism, but that doesn’t change the law. If companies don’t want to abide by the law, any law, then they should stop trading.

[mrporsche]

Electro1980 said:

mrporsche said:

Why is my holiday costing double this year ?
Because some liberal types who have no direct experience of travellers feel it is for the best ?

So now it effects you your bothered by a policy?

It’s not about “some liberal types”, “direct experience
“ or “for the best”. It is illegal racial discrimination. You keep on supporting racism, but that doesn’t change the law. If companies don’t want to abide by the law, any law, then they should stop trading.

But why is my holiday costing more ?

[Eric Mc]

Type R Tom said:

Isn't the ban of all male / female groups or groups of young people the same as this?

Seen quite a few T&Cs over the years with lists of people who can't book things, no one seems to be bothered.

If this is wrong due to equalities, isn't the banning of a stag group or a load of 18 year olds not the same?

No it's not the same because there is no specific law saying you can't do that.
There is specific legislation saying you cannot discriminate on the grounds of race.

Pontins decided that a racial characteristic i.e. surnames - would be the measure they would use to decide who they would accept and who they would not. They weren't specifically discriminating against "Irish Travellers" (which is what they were intending), they were discriminating against ALL people with Irish sounding surnames.

That was just dumb and they deserve a good legal slapping for being so stupid.

[mrporsche]

Eric Mc said:

No it's not the same because there is no specific law saying you can't do that.
There is specific legislation saying you cannot discriminate on the grounds of race.

Pontins decided that a racial characteristic i.e. surnames - would be the measure they would use to decide who they would accept and who they would not. They weren't specifically discriminating against "Irish Travellers" (which is what they were intending), they were discriminating against ALL people with Irish sounding surnames.

That was just dumb and they deserve a good legal slapping for being so stupid.

I guess the legal costs are less than the costs of allowing travellers to stay.

Pontins don’t appear to have any other way to manage this issue other than banning travellers.

[Eric Mc]

But they didn't ban travellers. They banned EVERYBODY with a surname off a list.

That was just idiotic.

[mrporsche]

Eric Mc said:

But they didn't ban travellers. They banned EVERYBODY with a surname off a list.

That was just idiotic.

Perhaps when the accept bookings they can have a box that says “are you a traveller?”.

Could you think of another way they could do it ??

[Type R Tom]

Eric Mc said:

Type R Tom said:

Isn't the ban of all male / female groups or groups of young people the same as this?

Seen quite a few T&Cs over the years with lists of people who can't book things, no one seems to be bothered.

If this is wrong due to equalities, isn't the banning of a stag group or a load of 18 year olds not the same?

No it's not the same because there is no specific law saying you can't do that.
There is specific legislation saying you cannot discriminate on the grounds of race.

Pontins decided that a racial characteristic i.e. surnames - would be the measure they would use to decide who they would accept and who they would not. They weren't specifically discriminating against "Irish Travellers" (which is what they were intending), they were discriminating against ALL people with Irish sounding surnames.

That was just dumb and they deserve a good legal slapping for being so stupid.

Are you sure about that? The Equalities act protected characteristics are:

age;
disability;
gender reassignment;
marriage and civil partnership;
pregnancy and maternity;
race;
religion or belief;
sex;
sexual orientation.

Isn't this the what you are referring to or is there some other that I have missed?

[JagLover]

Found this comment

"Downing Street condemned the blacklist as “completely unacceptable”, with the Prime Minister’s official spokesman saying: “No-one in the UK should be discriminated against because of their race or ethnicity.

“It’s right that the Equality and Human Rights Commission and Pontins investigate and address this."

How about you do something about a criminal minority trashing the livelihoods of British businesses with virtually total impunity?. No that would be difficult wouldn't it, and someone might say some rude words about you on Twitter.