Can you ban people from a shop or workplace for covering their face?

[999tigger 10]

I'm pretty sure you have the right to refuse service to anyone without giving any reason. So it doesn't matter if someone is gay, black, vegetarian, wearing a burqa, got a wooden leg, looks at you funny, or you just can't be arsed. You're not breaking any law by refusing to serve people.

 

Certain forms of discrimination are not allowed, so in many of your examples yes you would be breaking the law.

[Sidla 10]

Why? Is it somehow related to a self imposed rule or a belief?

Obviously the answer is yes, but I fail to see how it's related to you explaining the difference.

Do you believe you should have the right to cycle on the road?

[Cyclone 10]

I don't have a belief that I HAVE to cycle on the road, nor a personal rule that I must do so.

 

If I had a belief that I must cycle on the road, that would be a lot like a personal rule that I must cycle on the road.

 

Beliefs about what I must do are no different to personal rules that I set and follow.

 

Beliefs about the world in general are nothing like rules.

 

But you were trying to say that a belief that you must wear a hat, is not the same as a personal rule that you must wear a hat. The two are identical. The belief and the rule translate into the behaviour.

[scania 10]

Any shop can refuse to serve anyone. All this discrimination stuff is in the eye of the beholden.

[Cyclone 10]

Any shop can refuse to serve anyone. All this discrimination stuff is in the eye of the beholden.

 

If they refuse to serve someone for certain reasons then they are breaking the law.

[scania 10]

If they refuse to serve someone for certain reasons then they are breaking the law.

 

No shop in the UK is obliged to serve anyone. If somebody did get refused for any reason, it would be a customer service issue, not a legal issue. Shops invite people into their premises, but do not have a legal obligation to sell anything to anyone. The legal term is "invitation of offer" to which any business in the UK is legally allowed to reject from any individual. Should that individual take offence, that is their problem, and their prerogative to shop elsewhere.

[JFKvsNixon 11]

No shop in the UK is obliged to serve anyone. If somebody did get refused for any reason, it would be a customer service issue, not a legal issue. Shops invite people into their premises, but do not have a legal obligation to sell anything to anyone. The legal term is "invitation of offer" to which any business in the UK is legally allowed to reject from any individual. Should that individual take offence, that is their problem, and their prerogative to shop elsewhere.

 

Do you believe that a shop that served a load of white people, refused to serve a black person and then continued to serve white people could get away with those actions?

[Cyclone 10]

No shop in the UK is obliged to serve anyone. If somebody did get refused for any reason, it would be a customer service issue, not a legal issue. Shops invite people into their premises, but do not have a legal obligation to sell anything to anyone. The legal term is "invitation of offer" to which any business in the UK is legally allowed to reject from any individual. Should that individual take offence, that is their problem, and their prerogative to shop elsewhere.

 

You're completely clueless.

 

People who access your goods, facilities or services

are protected from direct discrimination on the

basis of a ‘protected characteristic’.The relevant

characteristics are:

• � disability (definition changed)

• � gender reassignment (definition changed)

• � pregnancy and maternity

• � race – this includes ethnic or national origins,

colour and nationality

• � religion or belief

• � sex, and

• � sexual orientation

 

from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85008/business-quickstart.pdf

 

Some examples

 

Brian wants to take his wife, who is

a Muslim, to his golf club dinner.The

club refuses admission because she is a

Muslim.This is unlawful discrimination

under the Equality Act 2010.

 

A private members’ tennis club, which

has members of both sexes, allows

its male members to play at all times

but female members can only play on

certain days.The Equality Act 2010

means that the club will now need to

offer the same facilities to all members.

 

Patrick wants to go to the local

nightclub with his disabled girlfriend,

Bridget.The doorman turns them away

because disabled people do not fit with

the club’s image. Patrick would be able

to claim that he has been discriminated

against because of disability, as he was

refused entry because of his association

with Bridget, an individual with that

protected characteristic.

 

Geoff is a former soldier who lost both

his legs during his service. Staff at his

local café ask him to leave as they are

worried that other customers may

feel distressed when they see him.

This is direct discrimination because

of disability.

 

Moira, a black woman, is shopping in

her local grocery store and overhears a

shop assistant and a customer chatting

and making racially abusive comments.

As this conduct was unwanted by

Moira and it made her feel humiliated

and degraded, she can make a claim

of harassment, even though it was not

directed at her.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Cyclone

[scania 10]

Do you believe that a shop that served a load of white people, refused to serve a black person and then continued to serve white people could get away with those actions?

 

Absolutely not. That is clearly a terrible scenario, however if a person came to our trade counter wearing a full face helmet with the visor down, I wouldn't serve them unless they removed it. We have had one occasion where a religious person came in, head to foot in a black cape, and was mumbling something, and I nor my lads could understand a word he/she was saying. It was a surreal moment and ended with the person walking away empty handed.

At the end of the day, if staff feel uneasy about a customer, it's their right to refuse to serve.

[Cyclone 10]

Face covering and mode of dress are not a protected characteristic. What you claimed though is that a business can refuse to serve someone for any reason

If somebody did get refused for any reason, it would be a customer service issue, not a legal issue

You're wrong. As usual. There are reasons for which it would be illegal to refuse to serve someone.

I don't think that face coverings of any kind fall under the religious protection angle, so you could refuse to serve someone who was covering their face.

You couldn't refuse to serve someone because they were black, gay or Buddhist or all three.

[sgtkate 10]

Absolutely not. That is clearly a terrible scenario, however if a person came to our trade counter wearing a full face helmet with the visor down, I wouldn't serve them unless they removed it. We have had one occasion where a religious person came in, head to foot in a black cape, and was mumbling something, and I nor my lads could understand a word he/she was saying. It was a surreal moment and ended with the person walking away empty handed.

At the end of the day, if staff feel uneasy about a customer, it's their right to refuse to serve.

 

Yes and no one is saying otherwise. But that wasn't what you were saying. You said it's fine to not serve BECAUSE they were gay or black etc and that just isn't true.

Lets say a man came into your store wearing a bike helmet and you refused to serve him - no law broken here as nothing discriminatory

Man tries to sue you because he was gay and thinks you discriminated against him due to sexuality - No case in law as you had no idea he was gay therefore can't have refused to serve him

Same man removes his helmet upon being challenged and then something about his manner makes you think he is gay and you refuse to serve him on that basis - Law broken.

 

It's all pretty simple.

[Cyclone 10]

Sidla said that actually, not Scania. He just agreed with it and extended it to allow any reason at all for not serving, denying that there were legally protected characteristics at all.