🗳️ ELECTION 2024: THE MSE LEADERS' DEBATE Got a burning question you want us to ask the party leaders ahead of the general election? Post them on our dedicated Forum board where you can see and upvote other users' questions, or submit your suggestions via this form. Please note that the Forum's rules on avoiding general political discussion still apply across all boards.
Discrimination over single person holiday
Options
Comments
-
I think the point is that married couples shouldn't be treated differently to unmarried couples.fluffnutter wrote: »See, this is what I thought which is why I asked. It includes marriage/civil partnership. So by that token, isn't placing a premium on someone holidaying alone in breach of this?
If you only got the discount on presentation of a marriage certificate then this would be unfair.0 -
fluffnutter wrote: »See, this is what I thought which is why I asked. It includes marriage/civil partnership. So by that token, isn't placing a premium on someone holidaying alone in breach of this?
Of course that person could be married and merely choosing to holiday alone, but that's a bit of a loophole IMO. Essentially charging a single person more because they are single is falling foul of discrimination law, isn't it?
This characteristic has been interpreted quite narrowly compared to others. I'll have a read up and see what precedent I can find, I could be wrong but I am pretty sure it means that those in civil partnerships should be treated the same as those in a traditional marriage.0 -
Seems we were all partly right and partly wrong! Discriminating against civil partnerships compared to married couples comes under the sexual orientation provisions (still protected, just a different section of the Act). The marriage/ civil partnership provisions are nicely described by ACAS:Direct discrimination occurs when someone is treated less favourably than another person because of being in a civil partnership or marriage. Indirect discrimination can occur when an employer has a condition, rule, policy or a practice in a company that applies to everyone but will disadvantage people who are in a civil partnership or marriage. Indirect discrimination can be justified only if an employer makes a lawful decision in running a business or organisation and this decision is fair and reasonable and they can show they have looked at less discriminatory alternatives.
No provision for us singletons.
0 -
misssarahleigh wrote: »I'm more interested in the term "other 1/3rd". Do tell :-) I'm confused!
:rotfl: All you feminists out there!
It's because she is little and I am much taller and there is, ahem, too much of me than is good for my health.
it was put to me as " I will be your half but right now, scolding look at the tummy, I think I will be your other third"
Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »I'd also like to know what the "1/3rd" is all about. [Also, the "rd" is a tautology!]
So this isn't a per-person price you are talking about with a suppliment for single people? It's the total price for the villa?
And you're going to a villa that sleeps a family of 5 on your own? Maybe they figure that anyone doing that can afford to pay extra, too!!
Yes it is however in this text driven age "one third" is not always understood. It is pricer per villa not per person or a minimum.
As to sleeping 5 it is only 2 bedrooms. And it is cheaper and better than most of the local hotels.Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
Thank you all. The Company have since responded to my call to explain that it was an error and the person needs "re-training". I am not convinced....
But thank you all for your comments
CheersStop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
If you want one with a pool to dip in most villas do sleep 5.JimmyTheWig wrote: »wanted a five person villa for themselves!Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
Presumably the resort assumes money spent by persons staying, so fewer people staying means lower income and higher base price?0
-
propertyman wrote: »:rotfl: All you feminists out there!
It's because she is little and I am much taller and there is, ahem, too much of me than is good for my health.
it was put to me as " I will be your half but right now, scolding look at the tummy, I think I will be your other third"
Hahaha, my wife is 4ft9, and I have in the past been known to do the same.
You’re not the only one, and (I don’t think) there’s anything dodgy going on with us, certainly not from my end :eek:💙💛 💔0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 11 Election 2024: The MSE Leaders' Debate
- 343.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 450K Spending & Discounts
- 236.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 609.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.4K Life & Family
- 248.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards