so called family resturant!

Plasticman

Poppy9 wrote:

Ok you've convinced me, leave the kids alone, fork the parents, spit in their food and spill the drinks all over them .:rotfl:

and then ask for a tip :rolleyes:

margaret_3

SidB wrote:

OK Margaret, I think we're talking about 2 different types of restaurant, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I believed the original poster was talking about the "Brewsters" type establishment, which do have a soft play area attached, and in my view are aimed at families with younger children. I also wouldn't call your example as a "family" group, but more a group of adults. If I took my mother to lunch I wouldn't call us a faily group, would you ? I guess our definitions are different.

I believe that the manager was being over zelaous, and should have had the discretion to quietly mention to the OP that this was not the area for children, but that he would only ask them to move if there was a shortage of tables or he had a complaint from other customers.

Two things Sid.
Firstly, the nearest restaurant to us before we moved was a Brewsters and we loved it. There was a children's area---nowhere near the bar area, which I thought was an excellent idea, ----and we were NEVER disturbed by children. I have no bother with this kind of restaurant and we do miss it.
One thing that bothered me was that you wouldn't consider a meal with your mother a family meal. Well of course, neither would I if there were only two of you dining together, but if she joined you with the rest of the family, wouldn't that be a family meal?
I know that our family is a very close one and we love family meals, either indoors or eating out, and I know that some people prefer meals with friends, but quite honestly, I don't.
The original poster went to a restaurant with two of her friends and all their children and then objected to being asked to sit in the family area. Now, I'm sure that if I walked in to a restaurant and saw a crowd like that sitting in the adult area, we would walk out and from this thread alone I can see that others would follow suit.
I can't comment on the manager for we only heard one side, only to say that I think he made the correct decision.
Are we in agreement now?
Margaret

Poppy9

I agree with Margaret. Dining with adult members of your family is still family and why shouldn't they frequent an establishment that has children play area if the business has decided that it's cost effective to cater for adult groups as well. If the restaurant get the seating arrangement right then then it will show in their takings if they have the right mix of groups. No doubt they can easily establish which tables are the most profitable etc.

The same problem can arise with smoking and non smoking areas. as the OP mentioned she sat in a non smoking area. How would the OP have felt if a smoker sat at a table in that zone because it was empty and less crowded than the smoking zone. Would it have been fair of the management to ask them to move? Does it matter that the non smoking area has no other patrons at that time? Would it put off non smokers dining there if they saw people smoking in the non smoking area? I think so. The same really applies to adult only areas. There was no discrimination the restaurant was just enforcing it's policies on its patrons. If the patrons don't like it they won't come back and it would force the restaurant to review their policy. Obviously all parties are happy as these restaurants are thriving (selling over priced food and drinks IMO).

Kantankrus_Mare

oh come on Sara!!

I think it was said tongue in cheek and as I replied to it does that make me a nasty waitress??

What I think and what I do are two very different things and I think this is the case for most people :rotfl:

SidB_2

Well Maragaret, technically you're right, dining with my mother is a family meal. Would you call dining with my wife a family meal, or a meal with my best friend ? To me, in the context here, the term applies to groups that include under 13's.

Smoking ? Don't even get me started.

margaret_3

SidB wrote:

Well Maragaret, technically you're right, dining with my mother is a family meal. Would you call dining with my wife a family meal, or a meal with my best friend ? To me, in the context here, the term applies to groups that include under 13's.

Smoking ? Don't even get me started.

Dining with your wife alone, you can call it what you like and no one would disagree.
When you have one child in a group of adults, it would be silly to expect them to sit in a children only area. The adults area doesn't exclude children all together. It's a matter of common sense surely.
I am very much for a smokers only area and if someone smoked near me, I would ask them to stop before calling the manager.

Margaret

SidB_2

margaret wrote:

I am very much for a smokers only area

How about Siberia.

margaret_3

SidB wrote:

How about Siberia.

Excellent

---

except that I have some sympathy for them having been a smoker myself and I know how addictive cigarettes are. However, friends and family know that they are not allowed to smoke in our house and I won't sit near smokers in a restaurant.

IvanOpinion

SaraSeahorse wrote:

I do have sense of humour but quite frankly find adults conspiring to cause an accident for a child whether or not he 'deserves it' quite disgusting. Nothing more than assault and despicable behaviour for adults. What next fork inthe back of a hand accidentally for a child that spills a drink so that the waitress has to wipe the table (rather than just leave it seemingly clean but tacky!!).

Common sense dictates that it was a throw away comment. However ....

Not my kid so I really don't care what happens to him - that may sound harsh but it is a fact of life (I probably/hopefully will never see him again). If his parents are so irresponsible and incompetent how is the kid ever going to grow up with any sense of responsibility - WHO is ever going to discipline him (I think the do-gooders have pretty much sorted that one out ... so the answer is NOBODY).

Come on, yes children need to behave. Parents are ultimately responsible, here we have example of badly behaved child and poor parenting. If the child is that bad ask parents to leave and not come back again. Or if child is just moderate nuisance then maybe a polite request may encourage the parents to behave and if not then are they the sort of customers the pub wants??

Have you ever made a request of a parent about their child ... I have and have decided that I never again will ... the parents jump on their high horses. Or in one case a neighbour who saw an incident occur went and told the parents of the child who immediately summoned the child and asked him if it was true, the child said 'no' so the parent turned on the neighbour telling him to take his lies elsewhere. So experience has taught me that I do not interfere even the mother/father is knocking the living daylights out of the kid (as long as there is no risk of permanent damage it has nothing to do with me). And before you jump on this comment if you search this board you will find a posting related to someone who did interfere and ended up having to serve community service - and I am also aware of another case were someone served a (short) prison sentence for assault because they hit the parent to stop them from pounding their child).

But conspiring to trip up or injure a CHILD, disgusting.

Not my child so I don't care ... if it happened I would probably laugh, and lets be honest the vast majority of people would be thinking 'serves the little brat right' although naturally out loud they would have to say 'that is disgusting, oh the poor little dear, did you get hurt'.

Some parents are just so dumb that they will not realise the danger THEY are putting THEIR child in until they have been severely burned or injured ... it has happened before and will happen again ... can people not keep their children under control where there is a danger ... the risk is obvious. If they don't care about their own child then why should I. I really do like the new laws in America were, if a child has an accident, then the parents can be held responsible and can be fined/imprisoned for negligence. Accidents happen all the time the problem is that many could be avoided if the tiniest little bit of common sense were to be applied.

Ivan

Poppy9

margaret wrote:

Excellent

---

except that I have some sympathy for them having been a smoker myself and I know how addictive cigarettes are. However, friends and family know that they are not allowed to smoke in our house and I won't sit near smokers in a restaurant.

I have been a non smoker for 15 years and I have no sympathy for them If I can do it so can they.:D