Working in a threatening environment, any ideas/help please?

worriedaboutwork

Emmzi wrote: »

1. stop being sexist, the problem is not that your co-worker is female, it is that she cannot cope with the undesirables. Some of the best security staff are female.
2. are you all members of a union?

It could well be said that she cannot cope with undsirables. Havinjg said that, when she agreed to take on the role, it was on the understanding that two people would be servicing the bar, and that dealing with riff raff would not be left to her.

We're not members of a union, but its a good idea and one which I will be looking into, thanks!

worriedaboutwork

marybelle01 wrote: »

Oh, and GIRL's go to school. Female adults are called WOMEN.

You are just being pedantic here, a bit unnecessarily so really.

marybelle01 wrote: »

And whilst I agree with you that staff safety is important, be aware that if your facility is not paying its way, and the cost of employing two people is too high, the result of this may be that management simply close the facility and you are made redundant.

This is a big worry... upset the apple cart and it could all be over, which I don't want, as I enjoy the job - but I don't enjoy it when theres just one person in the building doing ALL the work AND getting abused by nasty customers.

marybelle01 wrote: »

How does complaining about breaks, which is not the problem, get you a solution to being threatened? If you are going to complain about something to your employer, complain about the thing that is the problem - or is that too obvious?

It partly is the problem, because if the company followed the letter of the law, then there would always be two people working, which is what we want, and it ALSO covers the problem of no breaks.

worriedaboutwork

dickydonkin wrote: »

So basically you are suggesting that the OP has to put up with a load of abuse because by raising the issue with management might make her lose her job?

'Staff safety' prioritises above everything in my mind.

It is attitudes like this that really get up my nose.

Nobody - and I mean NOBODY should have to go to work to be abused - and abuse at work comes under many guises.

Poor pay, poor safety, disregard to workers rights and welfare are all types of abuse in my opinion - although Bullying, physical and verbal abuse are the types we are all familiar with.

Based on the post - it would seem that the OP would be better off out of the place, however, I appreciate that financial issues may not allow that option as an exit strategy.

From a safety perspective:

As the OP is a lone worker, your employer should have procedures in place to ensure your safety is not compromised.

A lone worker should not be placed at any more of a risk at work than someone who isn't working by themselves.

As this employer is part of a chain, then I would expect that there is a policy in place do deal with abusive and drunk customers - and a lone working policy - if not - well there should be.

If I was in your shoes OP - I would write to your head office expressing your concerns - don't focus so much on your breaks, but mention that certain people who are coming into the club may jeopardise the clubs reputation and who may also cause trouble.

Ask if they have a conflict and lone working policy and that you have concerns for your personal safety - ideally by providing examples..........oh, and keep a copy of your letter as well.
GOOD LUCK.

Edit to add:

Thank you VERY much indeed for this constructive advice, it will definitely be something I'll read and act upon. This is exactly the sort of advice I was hoping for!

worriedaboutwork

marybelle01 wrote: »

No actually, I was not suggesting any such thing at all. It is "get on my soap box and just attack anyone I feel like" attitudes like yours that get right up my nose. I didn't say that staff safety wasn't important. In fact I said it is important. What I was pointing out is that (a) complaining about something that isn't the problem will not get the problem addressed, and (b) the solution to "the problem" may not be the solution that worriedaboutwork wants, and they should realise that.

I don't disagree with any of the positive suggestions you have made at all. But not one of them is a guarantee that the employer will not simply decide that the cost of the facility is more than it is worth and simply dispense with it.

Being honest, this post is a lot more useful than the other one, so many thanks for that. The management closing the facility down due to costs was something that probably none of us had considered until now.

As far as I was concerned, the breaks problem and the working alone problem (which is the far more serious of the two, as far as we are concerned) seemed to go hand in hand. Apologies if you do not agree with me on this point.

worriedaboutwork

dickydonkin wrote: »

Reading your post:



Sorry - but the additional staff issue is not only related to breaks - or lack of them in this case.

The fact that the OP is working alone in a seemingly hostile environment is a seperate issue and should be addressed by the employer.

Some could read your post as implying that if the employer had to introduce another member of staff to allow breaks, then that could place her position or the facility at risk.

I would say then so be it! That would certainly eiminate the risk of assault and abuse targeted at the OP.

But it isn't just the break issue is it?

It is likely that the employer is quite prepared to cut staff down to the bone at the expense of the safety and welfare of his staff - all too common an occurrence nowadays.

Let's wait and see what the OP decides and how the employer responds.

As suggested earlier, emailing the relevant people is a good option.

I'll be truthful, its got to the point whereby we're thinking well if they close us down, at least we won't be in danger any more. Thats a very sad thing to think each time you go to work, isn't it?

The place isn't hostile all the time, just when certain people come in (and these people seem to be coming in much more regularly recently). A lot of the time we get either people who just don't give us any trouble, the sort who just want to come out have a few drinks and play some pool/snooker, which is great, and those customers who are a lot of fun to be around; so the job certainly isn't always awful!

If I'm honest I think the main problem I've got with the whole situation is that I'm working hard (fine, thats work for you) being abused (NOT acceptable), and yet the company has enough money to pay for an acceptable staff level, if they want to. Now, I'm not naive enough to wonder why they are doing this, they want more money, and what business doesn't. But when they do it at cost of their own staffs welfare, well, somethings wrong.

I've now started a diary of all incidents that occur, the time and date and what happened. I've also got the last 6 months rota, showing shift patters, length of shifts etc. I will be updating this on a daily basis. I'm not sure what use it will be, if any, but at least I will have facts to speak with if I need them.

To clarify, I'm male, it is my colleague who is female :-)

worriedaboutwork

marybelle01 wrote: »

I think you are absolutely right about health and safety, but the real world is that some people really do have to make the choice, and I think it is quite legitimate to point out that since what worriedaboutwork wants is two people working the night shifts, this is not necessarily the result that they will get by complaining.

Again, thank you for a well informed and written post, detailing that of course (as we know) sometimes tough choices have to be made, and indeed it is good to have ALL the possible outcomes of complaining.

One of the reasons I've been reticent to complain so far is that, as some have already said, the management may simply think "No, the club costs too much to run with two people, we'll simply close it". If that happened, I'd rue the day I bothered to complain. On the flip side, if the complaint generated the required response of two people working the evening/night shift, then it would have been worthwhile. All a bit of a gamble really, and unfortunately not one that I am in a financial position to take, since the job pays very well due to tips from the decent customers.

19lottie82

Out of curiosity, how much would your bar take on a evening mid week shift? I've worked in a few bars and the takings during these times are always poor. Sure it would be ideal to have 2 staff behind the bar but the reality is the owners just can't afford it. We were lucky to take £150 from 6- close, - stock, electricity, rent, wages. Taking another £40 off this for another wage just isn't feesable. I know this isn't "fair" but it's reality I'm afraid. If you go complaining it's not going to get you anywhere apart from the dole que!

you need to accept that this is the case and at the end of the day, you don't get paid nmw to split up fights. If there is any trouble, shut your bar hatch and stay as far back as you can, if it doesn't disperse quicky, call the police If people refuse to leave at the end of the night, bar them for x weeks, then permanently, if they re offend. If people get aggressive refuse to serve them, they prob don't react to your threat to call te police because they know you won't do it, it's just an empty threat.



Again it's not ideal but if you can't cope with this, find another place to work in as sadly, there isn't really another solution.

Ultima_K

If it's license premises the venue must have had a risk assessment done.

Is the venue part of a chain?

The employers would be liable for health and safety should anything happen to someone working behind the bar on their own.

Chances are if something did kick off, the place gets robbed, or wrecked the insurance wouldn't cover it due to lack of staff on duty.

It might be worth having a word with the manager or setting up a meeting with him/her and the rest of the team present to discuss the concerns.

I work as a door supervisor at weekends and the nature of the job is you get abused by punters. I'm afraid that is the nature of bar/club work. I'm not saying it's right but just the reality of the situation.

Emmzi

worriedaboutwork wrote: »

You are just being pedantic here, a bit unnecessarily so really.

Actually, no. The whole tone of your post is a bit "poor ickle girl cannot look after herself, big strong clever man help!"

When you've been subject to years of sexism, then you have the right to call it pedantic.

marybelle01

Emmzi wrote: »

Actually, no. The whole tone of your post is a bit "poor ickle girl cannot look after herself, big strong clever man help!"

When you've been subject to years of sexism, then you have the right to call it pedantic.

Too right.