Post Reply
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Ban children in restaurants
3 years ago  ::  Sep 01, 2011 - 8:33AM #11
karbie
Posts: 3,329

Actually, it's fairly easy in Indiana, or used to be. Restaurants with large bars visible were automatically off limits to minors without either a "family room' or seating where the bar wasn't in close sight. Apparently the reasoning was that the mere sight of a bottle of alcohol would turn children into raving drunks. It used to drive my grandfather crazy.


If your kids can't sit through a meal at the family table, don't take them any place where the food doesn't instantly appear. It's like anything else--they can't use good manners if they haven't been taught any. running amok, screaming, etc should result in being taken back out to the car.but an actual ban penalizes the customers who have actually taught their children how to behave.


For the others, discreet signs and comments in the menu about the waiters and waitresses not being there to babysit your children, children under a certain age can't be permitted at a buffet or wandering around without adult supervision can be posted. One of the things that always kept my son happy was bringing pencils and letting him draw on the placemat and even mine if he needed more time.

"You are letting your opinion be colored by facts again."
'When I want your opinion, I'll give it to you."
these are both from my father.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2011 - 5:58AM #12
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Aug 13, 2011 -- 2:02AM, ManzanitaBear wrote:


I think it's a civil rights violation. Banning children just because they're children is age discrimination. Think about it. Unless the restaurant is actually a bar, they can't ban anyone because of age.


That doesn't mean restaurants don't have the right to kick people out if they change a baby on the table, or if the children create a real disturbance and the parents do nothing about it. That falls under the right to refuse service.





Of course ... age is NOT a protected class under Title VII.  So old people (and babies) fall into the category of gays, stupid people, students, and so forth.


to really solve this problem-they should discriminate against bad (selfish/stupid) parents.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2011 - 6:04AM #13
Bob_the_Lunatic
Posts: 3,458

Sep 1, 2011 -- 8:33AM, karbie wrote:


Actually, it's fairly easy in Indiana, or used to be. Restaurants with large bars visible were automatically off limits to minors without either a "family room' or seating where the bar wasn't in close sight. Apparently the reasoning was that the mere sight of a bottle of alcohol would turn children into raving drunks. It used to drive my grandfather crazy.


If your kids can't sit through a meal at the family table, don't take them any place where the food doesn't instantly appear. It's like anything else--they can't use good manners if they haven't been taught any. running amok, screaming, etc should result in being taken back out to the car.but an actual ban penalizes the customers who have actually taught their children how to behave.


For the others, discreet signs and comments in the menu about the waiters and waitresses not being there to babysit your children, children under a certain age can't be permitted at a buffet or wandering around without adult supervision can be posted. One of the things that always kept my son happy was bringing pencils and letting him draw on the placemat and even mine if he needed more time.




Absolutely.  Here's the problem:  So let's say they have a policy of "bad child behavior won't be tolerated."  This would lead to lost customers (due to public confrontation), perhaps loud arguments ("My kids are perfect, what are you talking about??"), and perhaps even lawsuits. 


I'm all for it-frankly it would make going to dinner quite amusing, like a free show.  And when kids were being obnoxious, you could get results by complaining.  I agree, the good parents should NOT be penalized for the dumb parents who have no concept of others rights, teaching their children about rule systems, mutual respect, etc.  Frankly, in the US I would argue that 2/3 to 3/4 of the children I see being raised are obnoxious little brats who are in for a rude awakening upon becoming members of society.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 02, 2011 - 2:30PM #14
d_p_m
Posts: 9,584

Aug 28, 2011 -- 5:18PM, Mlyons619 wrote:


Aug 27, 2011 -- 4:48PM, pagan_princess wrote:


Aug 27, 2011 -- 3:01PM, Mlyons619 wrote:

I think most people ought to be able to figure out what restaurants are kids-friendly which one's aren't.


If that were true then we would not have this thread, would we?



If someone is unable to figure it out (e.g., coat and tie required) then that person is an imbecile.





Why should one have to be excessively formal to avoid unruly children?

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"One need only watch a few minutes of any Orphan Black episode to see why Tatiana Maslany deserves to win every acting award available."

    —Mark Rozeman, http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2014/07/18-first-time-emmy-nominees-wed-like-to-see.html?a=1
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 04, 2011 - 8:19PM #15
Upperlimits
Posts: 2,979

Sep 2, 2011 -- 6:04AM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:


Sep 1, 2011 -- 8:33AM, karbie wrote:


Actually, it's fairly easy in Indiana, or used to be. Restaurants with large bars visible were automatically off limits to minors without either a "family room' or seating where the bar wasn't in close sight. Apparently the reasoning was that the mere sight of a bottle of alcohol would turn children into raving drunks. It used to drive my grandfather crazy.


If your kids can't sit through a meal at the family table, don't take them any place where the food doesn't instantly appear. It's like anything else--they can't use good manners if they haven't been taught any. running amok, screaming, etc should result in being taken back out to the car.but an actual ban penalizes the customers who have actually taught their children how to behave.


For the others, discreet signs and comments in the menu about the waiters and waitresses not being there to babysit your children, children under a certain age can't be permitted at a buffet or wandering around without adult supervision can be posted. One of the things that always kept my son happy was bringing pencils and letting him draw on the placemat and even mine if he needed more time.




Absolutely.  Here's the problem:  So let's say they have a policy of "bad child behavior won't be tolerated."  This would lead to lost customers (due to public confrontation), perhaps loud arguments ("My kids are perfect, what are you talking about??"), and perhaps even lawsuits. 


I'm all for it-frankly it would make going to dinner quite amusing, like a free show.  And when kids were being obnoxious, you could get results by complaining.  I agree, the good parents should NOT be penalized for the dumb parents who have no concept of others rights, teaching their children about rule systems, mutual respect, etc.  Frankly, in the US I would argue that 2/3 to 3/4 of the children I see being raised are obnoxious little brats who are in for a rude awakening upon becoming members of society.





What society? At our current rate, we soon wont have one left.

According to 2nd Corinthians 3:2, there are five gospels in the world. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the Epistle of ones own life.  Most people will probably never read the first four.

God desires that our lives would bear spiritual fruit - not religious nuts.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 08, 2011 - 11:32PM #16
jesusfreakgal
Posts: 937

With the exception of overly fancy restaurants that are not generally siuted for kids, I generally do not agree with banning children from restaurants. Its not right to penalize parents with good children just because some parents have royal pains in the you know where. In my family I have a brother who is 7 years younger then my youngest sister (almost 11 years younger then me, I am the oldest). If there was a ban at most, if not all restaurants (though unlikely in Toronto, too many restaurants and such), that would have meant either RARELY going out to eat (because of ban, not cost), or always leaving my brother at home with a babysitter (until he was over that 'magic' age to be allowed at restaurants). My brother was never one to act up in restaurants either. Not sure what the age ban would be (such as anyone 10 and under is banned, or 12 and under or what), but that would have meant that for 10-12 years (okay, and 3-5 for my sister) he would have had to miss out on family events, even if simply my family and I going out to dinner to celebrate someone's birthday. I do believe some kids can be HUGE brats and cause HUGE scenes and such at restaurants, but I also believe there are times when people (particularly people who do not like kids) over react, like if a child was only being slightly loud, and not throwing a fit or anything. The problem here is that even 'family' restaurants will get people going there who do not have a family (no kids that is). You could get people who really cause a stink when a child acts out at the restaurant, no matter how minor the acting up. True with a family restaurant, a manager could remind the person that they ARE at a 'family' restaurant, but for some people, IMO, that would make no difference.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 6:57AM #17
jesusfreakgal
Posts: 937

Another problem that I thought of regarding banning children at work related to employees. While currently the employment situation in North America is not good, banning children, IMO could have an effect on employment of enough of the employees have children, and those employees eat at the restaurant (when not working, and with their children). Unless it is a
restaurant that is not really appropriate for children (such as an overly fancy place), or had the ban when the employee started working at the place, you could have employees who decide to look elsewhere for work, and only continue working at the restaurant at long as they have to (either they can’t find anything anywhere else, or they have given their two weeks’ notice and it’s not up). Not to say that a mass amount of employees will just quit or will get new jobs all at once, but you could end up with a place that is significantly short staffed if employees (who have children) become upset if children are banned from eating at the restaurant in which they work (maybe unless a lot of the employees won’t eat at the restaurant). While there is no maximum weekly number of work days where I live (Nova Scotia, Canada), after 48 hours overtime pay kicks in. That does not mean an employer can force their employees to work necessarily work more than 48 hours. But with a ban on allowing children to eat at the restaurant, it could cause employees with children who do eat at the restaurant with their children, to stop working at the restaurant if they find employment elsewhere. If enough employees did leave, that would either mean being significantly under staffed at times (not being able to serve the customers that they should be), or ending up having to pay a lot of staff for overtime. For example, if you a restaurant lost 25% of its staff due to such a ban, you
could end up with paying at least some staff for overtime.  True, probably a lot of restaurants have a good number of part time works, probably a lot of those part time workers have a
good reason to be part time (they work 2 jobs, or they are in school, effectively making it so they might not be able to pick up a lot of extra hours). Oh and I just read that for the most part, employers in Nova Scotia have to give employees at least one consecutive 24 hour rest period per 7 days. There are exceptions, but pretty much I think employees have to agree as well.


JFG

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 13, 2011 - 7:35AM #18
watcher59
Posts: 1,606

I am always itnrigued by the double standard people apply to themselves and their neighbors.


For instance, they are deeply offended if a restaurant bans their children. However, they have not a thought for spoiling an evening for the other patrons.


They are insensed at the idea the restaurant would dare infringe on their 'right' to take their ill behaved, undisciplined, unruly children where ever they choose, but demand the restaurant owner/manager give up his right to refuse service to customers he would rather not serve.


Interestingly, those restaurants who have chosen "no children" policies have had a marked increase in business.

How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 25, 2011 - 5:51AM #19
jesusfreakgal
Posts: 937

I agree, at least to an extent, and within reason that resturants should be allowed to make whatever rules they want (as long as they are all legal and so fourth). Also, I don't generally think it is a great idea to take out young kids to a restaurant, unless theya re kid friendly. The trouble is, you get all sorts of situations where an event comes up where children are welcomed, but are at such a restaurant that although it isn't anti kid, or isn't one of those restaursnts that kids shouldn't go to, its not specifically child friendly. And parents shouldn't be limited to the 'dinner out with the kids is either fast food, chuck e cheese or left home with a babysitter.' I don't believe parents should be peanalized for simply having children. But then again, there are some parents who may be offended by the ides of restaurants or whatever banning children, whether simply children a certain age and under or essentially all children (either 12 and under or all non adult children).The trouble there is when any of those parents have children who should NOT be taken out to a restaurant because their children are so poorly behaved at such a place that it ruins the experience for other restaurant goers, and could even drive business down at some restaurants if the 'badly behaved child' is too frequent a patron at the restaurant. On the flip side, what can a restaurant owner who has impoaed such a ban say to a parent who has come to the restaurant before with children, and the owner know the child was never a problem (and the child is in the banned age category)?


JFG


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 26, 2011 - 1:42AM #20
Mlyons619
Posts: 16,336

Sep 25, 2011 -- 5:51AM, jesusfreakgal wrote:


parents shouldn't be limited to the 'dinner out with the kids is either fast food, chuck e cheese or left home with a babysitter.'



Most restaurants are kid-friendly, so it shouldn't be an issue.  But parents need to be aware of and considerate of other patrons, and if their kids act up, they'd best be prepared to leave and deal with the kids.  Too many parents aren't, and if too many patrons leave as a result, then restaurant owners have to do what's best for their business.


 


Sep 25, 2011 -- 5:51AM, jesusfreakgal wrote:


I don't believe parents should be peanalized for simply having children




I'm a parent myself, and once upon a time my guys were little, so I do agree.


But again, restaurant patrons should not be made to suffer if somebody's kids are acting out, and restaurants should not be subjected to lost business because some parents can't control their kids.


Sep 25, 2011 -- 5:51AM, jesusfreakgal wrote:


what can a restaurant owner who has impoaed such a ban say to a parent who has come to the restaurant before with children, and the owner know the child was never a problem (and the child is in the banned age category)?




That's something that a business owner is going to have to figure out for him/herself.  He/she will have to wigh the pros and cons of dealing with indvidual parents or simply putting out an all-emcompassing ban.  Each situation's going to be different. 



"No freedom without education"
            --Thomas Jefferson

"NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition"
            -- Monty Python
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 7  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook