Anyone else been refused tap water in restaurant

warmhands.coldheart

jouef wrote: »

There are 500 UK food poisoning deaths annually, the most common cause of which is cross-contamination from poultry. Children are at higher risk of complications. Fast-food outlets use work-area-separation and no-touch dispensing (like sealed bottled water) amongst other means of prevention. A policy of 'no tap water' would support this as the supply is outside any designated hand-dispensed drinks area. Instead of risking your child's health to support your sense of entitlement, why not carry a bottle filled from your own tap or just buy what's on offer?

You see I do agree with you on this point as in this case it's a fast food outlet and not really geared up to dispense tap water from a non kitchen area...... general bars and restaurants are geared up to serve drink outside of the kitchen area so no excuse for them really

jenheiffer

suki1964 wrote: »

She named them - KFC in kings lynn

No need to be sarky.

My point was actually that we should all be doing what the lady had done and name and shame places which treat us like this.

jenheiffer

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

What we pay in is significantly less than what we take out so not really a valid argument.

It is if you consider the UK (which at the moment includes NI) as a whole. Our taxes are all paid into the same pot.

warmhands.coldheart

jenheiffer wrote: »

It is if you consider the UK (which at the moment includes NI) as a whole. Our taxes are all paid into the same pot.

Look at bigger Picture.... We pay in £A in taxes etc to UK Government...... UK Government subsidies NI to the tune of £AxB ...... and trust me B is significantly more than 1 !!
Note the "SUBSIDISES"!!! i.e. we could NOT support ourselves to run this place.......

jouef

warmhands.coldheart wrote: »

You see I do agree with you on this point as in this case it's a fast food outlet and not really geared up to dispense tap water from a non kitchen area...... general bars and restaurants are geared up to serve drink outside of the kitchen area so no excuse for them really

General bars and restaurants have to pay thousands of pounds for the equipment, running costs and staff to become 'geared up' to serve drinks from outside the kitchen area. This is why it costs them to supply tap water, just like any other drink. Only the ingredients are either cheaper (for metered water) or neutral (for rated water). Why should they allow tap water drinkers free 'gearing up' when other customers have to pay for it? It is the proprieter's choice whether they offer free use of their facilities to serve tap water for goodwill or the PR value, not the customer's right to demand it.

jouef

jenheiffer wrote: »

No need to be sarky.

My point was actually that we should all be doing what the lady had done and name and shame places which treat us like this.

They were protecting her child from the risk of food poisoning as their tap water is not in a separate work area from food-prep (especially as poultry is involved). No shame in that.

dmxdave

jouef wrote: »

They were protecting her child from the risk of food poisoning as their tap water is not in a separate work area from food-prep (especially as poultry is involved). No shame in that.

The employers are required by law to provide drinking water for employees so they could use that?

jouef

dmxdave wrote: »

The employers are required by law to provide drinking water for employees so they could use that?

Yes, drinking water is required under HSWA but eating or drinking in the food-prep area is prohibited by food-handling regs. So the employee must invoke the procedures for leaving and re-entering the food-prep area. They cannot serve from the staff area. This is fast food - think high volume and rapid turnover plus low margins and tight skill-set; it is impractical to expect them to show the flexibility such a customer requires.

almillar

jouef - I understand your argument. If someone gets free tap water, and you buy a beer, your beer money is subsidising the washing of their glass etc. OK.
Now, imagine you and I are in a restaurant and you use the toilet and I don't. That toilet needs to be cleaned regularly of course. Should I subsiduse your use of the toilet, or should you pay to get in?!

jouef

almillar wrote: »

jouef - I understand your argument. If someone gets free tap water, and you buy a beer, your beer money is subsidising the washing of their glass etc. OK.
Now, imagine you and I are in a restaurant and you use the toilet and I don't. That toilet needs to be cleaned regularly of course. Should I subsiduse your use of the toilet, or should you pay to get in?!

But that's not my argument (unless you plan to run off without paying). Assuming we each pay for our meals and drinks (or someone else does), the cost of all the facilities we use is included in the price we pay. If one of us goes to the toilet more, or has dirtier shoes (carpets need cleaning too), or is larger and soaks up more of the heating, or leaves more leftovers to be cleaned off their plates, or sits further away so the staff have to walk more, or knocks over the salt, our bills would cross-subsidise each other's use of the facilities with no need to be fussy about apportioning the costs. If one of us ordered extra drinks, ate more courses or brought a greedy friend, we would pay extra too. My argument is with people who don't pay, not those who do.