Tweet
Dear all,
I have another conundrum and it seems I have encountered another slippery issue.
A hypothetical example:
A disabled person with a severe physical disfigurement (I don't have one of these in case anyone is wondering) goes into a pub. He is not readily served and often ignored by the bar staff. Whilst he is in the pub he notices that other members of the public are being readily served before him. This happens time and time again.
He raises these issues with the pub management and they allege "oh, sorry, we just didn't see you there."
The issue I face is when does poor service become direct discrimination (in this example and generally)? Further, when does the burden of proof reverse?
Section 4.5 of the Code of Practice states as follows:
"To decide whether a service provider has treated a service user ‘less favourably’, a comparison must be made with how they have treated other service users or would have treated them in similar circumstances. If the service provider’s treatment of the service user puts the service user at a clear disadvantage compared with other service users, then it is more likely that the treatment will be less favourable: for example, where a customer is refused service or a person’s membership of a club is terminated. Less favourable treatment could also involve being deprived of a choice or excluded from an opportunity. If the quality of the service being offered or the manner in which it is offered is comparatively poor, this could also amount to less favourable treatment."
Any input appreciated.
I have another conundrum and it seems I have encountered another slippery issue.
A hypothetical example:
A disabled person with a severe physical disfigurement (I don't have one of these in case anyone is wondering) goes into a pub. He is not readily served and often ignored by the bar staff. Whilst he is in the pub he notices that other members of the public are being readily served before him. This happens time and time again.
He raises these issues with the pub management and they allege "oh, sorry, we just didn't see you there."
The issue I face is when does poor service become direct discrimination (in this example and generally)? Further, when does the burden of proof reverse?
Section 4.5 of the Code of Practice states as follows:
"To decide whether a service provider has treated a service user ‘less favourably’, a comparison must be made with how they have treated other service users or would have treated them in similar circumstances. If the service provider’s treatment of the service user puts the service user at a clear disadvantage compared with other service users, then it is more likely that the treatment will be less favourable: for example, where a customer is refused service or a person’s membership of a club is terminated. Less favourable treatment could also involve being deprived of a choice or excluded from an opportunity. If the quality of the service being offered or the manner in which it is offered is comparatively poor, this could also amount to less favourable treatment."
Any input appreciated.
Comment