Please boycott Metro Hotel in Woking - read for more details

exsquaddiegirl

I see a lot of sweeping generalisations in this thread, chiefly made by people who have no direct experience of life in the armed forces. It's very easy to form an opinion about a group of people who you have no understanding of, just look at the history of the KKK, the facsict movement, homophobic movements etc. We call these people ignorant bigots these days, but how is presenting an opinion on this whole social grouping as a stereotype any different ?

I'm sure that there have been several incidents involving rowdy groups of servicemen, as there can be from time to time in garrison towns. However, I've personally never encountered such a problem whilst staying at a hotel. I have, on the other hand, encountered noise and disruption from a group of rugby players, as well as several groups of students and several wedding parties. Does this mean I think that rugby players, wedding parties and students should be banned from budget hotels? Of course not, because that would be a sweeping generalisation and discriminatory, not to mention ignorant and half-witted.

Speaking as a former serving military officer, I have to shake my head at some of the uninformed nonsense being perpetrated on this thread, particulalry with regard to what military training involves.

However, it is true that the hotel has the legal right to refuse admission to anyone they choose. That is their choice.

It is also true that I, as the General Manager of a Limited Company who commissions fairly large hotel contracts on a regular basis to hotels within this general price range, have the right to enquire politely of the company what their actual policy is with regard to servicemen, and ask what has been done following this incident. I then also have the right, should I not agree with the response, to add this company to the list of companies we have on a 'black list'. Granted that this is usually due to their environmental practices, but I think this probably comes under our ethical policy with regard to the fact that we tend to support companies who share our ethical ideals and avoid those in opposition.

duchy

Seems like it's fairly obvious what happened.
Hotel had problems in the past with disruptive soliders (something I find very easy to believe having lived near Caterham when it had a barracks and now living near Chatham. I've worked in pubs in both areas and seen how they can behave-partially I believe because they tend to go out in packs rather than in smaller groups and the macho pack mentality isn't pretty especally after 10 pints.)
Hotel gets hit with complaints from other customers and probably a repair bill and say-no more soliders- in total exasperation. Staff are told "No soliders" and not informed to use common sense.
Solo respectable soliders checks in and receptionist either doesn't have the sense to get a manager to give permission or can't contact one -so refuses hospitality not having the authority to over ride it themselves.
Solider doesn't have the sense to find another hotel
Solider goes crying to the press

My questions would be-was a manager consulted-or did the solider ask for a manager-if not -why not. Why didn't the solider go elsewhere ?

It isn't discrimination -it's the bloody binge drinking culture indirectly causing the problem

vfm

I think it is a disgrace the way armed forces are treated in this country and I for one would never stay at this hotel.
Whilst I agree that not all soliders may be innocents, neither are all other groups of people. Everyone should be judged by thier individual behaviour and not the grouping to which they belong. This solider should not have been refused a room when he had done nothing wrong.
In America recently i noticed how much better the armed forces are treated there, with respect to gaining entry to events and discounts etc. it is a shame this doesn't happen here.
I sometimes think that criminals etc. are treated better/have more rights than the armed forces, which in my mind is clearly wrong.

pinkcandyflossprincess

money must be good if they can afford to be choosy :eek:
personally think it was wrong, he was on his own..what was he going to do..have a one man party:rolleyes:

off topic..but...my brother was chucked off a camp site he has gone to for years as he had "visitors" (staring pointedly at dads g/f)ie my fathers girlfriend who is black.
its never been a problem to have visitors there before as its open to public anyway due to it having a pub so you can pitch a tent if you like and saves driving on the night yet when my dad brought his g/f with him they were promptly removed:eek:

meester

Paul_Herring wrote: »

Considering it was a reply to my post wondering why he felt the need to martyr himself by sleeping in his car, rather than drive to another hotel, I wonder why the accusation in your reply.

He popped up making three posts starting off with

"Any hotel owner has the right to refuse a customer. I don't know why this owner does not wish to have military personnel staying at his hotel, but if this is so then so be it.

Maybe he has had bad experiences in the past. There are cases where military personnel returning from Iraq or Afghanistan have behaved in a brutal manner towards their family and members of the public. Probably not their fault after possibly being trained to be brutal against their occupiers."

This faux-naif response is a little suspicious when his next post he reveals that he knows Woking town centre very well.

bargainbarmy

moore493 wrote: »

Please inwardly digest.

As I have previously explained, the whole point of stereotypes is that they are a misreprerentation an exagerated truth, they are not the truth in themselves, you need to grasp that concept before you can even enter into discussion.

I am fully accepting of the fact that some soldiers although few in numbers are involved in violent drunken behavior but so are groups of people, what about groups of young women under 25 drunken and frequently seen in all cities across our country, I find them far more aggresive and threatening and far more high profile. Squaddies drunken behaviour is easy to latch on to by the media and makes for good coverage.

It seems to me that you have lumped your prejudised veiw of servicemen on every soldier.
And yes I do have a problem with all discrimination, students pets disabled, children, read some history see were it all ends.

Are you a young female student.

Soldiers do not discriminate who they defend or risk their lives for, good job they dont share that attitude isnt it.

God, you're weird.......


What is it with you? Why don't you just get over yourself......wake up. It was a no news day and the media were grasping at straws. It doesn't matter if they refused the soldier a room. It happens all the time to young scally looking lads. Just go and get your issues sorted out and stop distorting this post!!! !!!!!!, I am so bored !!!

SugarSpun

duchy wrote: »

Seems like it's fairly obvious what happened.
Hotel had problems in the past with disruptive soliders (something I find very easy to believe having lived near Caterham when it had a barracks and now living near Chatham. I've worked in pubs in both areas and seen how they can behave-partially I believe because they tend to go out in packs rather than in smaller groups and the macho pack mentality isn't pretty especally after 10 pints.)
Hotel gets hit with complaints from other customers and probably a repair bill and say-no more soliders- in total exasperation. Staff are told "No soliders" and not informed to use common sense.
Solo respectable soliders checks in and receptionist either doesn't have the sense to get a manager to give permission or can't contact one -so refuses hospitality not having the authority to over ride it themselves.
Solider doesn't have the sense to find another hotel
Solider goes crying to the press

My questions would be-was a manager consulted-or did the solider ask for a manager-if not -why not. Why didn't the solider go elsewhere ?

This. A receptionist isn't going to risk his/her job to override the management's policy.

Also, in all hotels and many shops/bars/restaurants there's a little sign that says "management reserves the right to refuse admission". Management exercised that right, and the soldier could have gone on somewhere else.

I'm not in any way anti-military, but I'm not prepared to participate in the ruining of someone's business because some people don't approve of the way they run it.

brightonman123

seems there's no room(!) for manager's discretion these days..

not_loaded

I suppose there’s no point mentioning that the hotel seems to think there’s something wrong in what they did, as they hastily backtracked and apologised, saying it was all a mistake.

Cardelia wrote: »

If a man walks into a bank wearing a balaclava and carrying a shotgun, you are going to think the bank is about to be robbed. The man hasn't actually done anything except walk into a bank, and for all you know he may just want to sort out his overdraft…

Where on Earth do you live? Beirut?

And why DO people post on a thread to say they’re sick of it/fed up/bored? Just don’t click on it!

moore493

Cardelia wrote: »

Erm, you've not explained that the soldier stereotype is a misrepresentation. You've admitted it's true, here, in post #44:

Not necessarily, no. If a man walks into a bank wearing a balaclava and carrying a shotgun, you are going to think the bank is about to be robbed. The man hasn't actually done anything except walk into a bank, and for all you know he may just want to sort out his overdraft, yet you are predicting his future behaviour on the basis of what previous people who walk into banks wearing balaclavas and carrying shotguns have done. That's discrimination (well, actually it's prejudice but this whole thread has used discrimination as a catch-all term). And I'm sure banks have a policy of not allowing people to enter their establishments wearing balaclavas and carrying shotguns. That's discrimination. Are you going to argue that banks should not prevent people from walking into their branches carrying shotguns and wearing balaclavas because it's fundamentally wrong?

This is obviously a very difficult concept for you!! A stereotype is not real its an exaduration. The stereotype of the soldier is the one many people believe so that is what I mean when I say it is a true stereotype. Do you understand? Cant understand why you have not yet grasped that.