Jump to content

John Lewis Boss Calls For Abusing Shop Workers To Be An Offence


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, HeHasRisen said:

I also once had someone in front of me at Tesco argue the toss with the operator that a leg of lamb should be costing him £7 as that's what it said on the label. It was explained to him that it was £7 per kilo yet he was having none of it. 

I have never seen that before, but I'm sure it must have happened just as you said.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

I can only repeat I cannot remember seeing any of this "abuse" of shop workers nor experienced it myself.

Just like the trans debate it is being blown up out of all proportion.

However, the big unresolved problem is what is abuse ? It is fundamentally unreasonable for an over sensitive soul to decide what abuse is. And once they start talking about something which cannot even exist : "violent speech", (as opposed to actual violence or threats of it), they lose me completely and I just think it's all cobblers.

But you do accept that both major retailers, and the trade union USDAW who represent shop workers have reported that they have seen a big rise in violent and abusive behaviour..

 

However, the big unresolved problem is what is abuse ? It is fundamentally unreasonable for an over sensitive soul to decide what abuse is.

As I said above there are norms of behaviour, and I'm not talking about someone forgetting to say please or thank you. 

I suppose ultimately is up to the shop manager to decide if they are going to refuse the custom of someone who is behaving in an abusive way. Once again, the problem isn't the 'over sensitive soul', it's the person who is behaving in a threatening, abusive or violent manner.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Mister M said:

Once again, the problem isn't the 'over sensitive soul', it's the person who is behaving in a threatening, abusive or violent manner.

Forget threats or violence, that's just a red herring, we're talking about so called "abuse", or "micro aggression" (which isn't really aggression at all). 

So, talking specifically about so called "abuse" or "micro aggression",  why should over sensitive types determine how everyone should act ? Particularly as people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, i.e. the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

 

Incidentally, from A N Other thread (but close in subject matter) I am still waiting for an example of so called "hate speech" from you (specifically from either the Mail, the Express, the Sun).

I have asked you numerous times and have not, AFAIK, had one.

Talk is cheap but essentially meaningless without proof

Edited by Chekhov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

Forget threats or violence, that's just a red herring, we're talking about so called "abuse", or "micro aggression" (which isn't really aggression at all). 

So, talking specifically about so called "abuse" or "micro aggression",  why should over sensitive types determine how everyone should act ? Particularly as people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, i.e. the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

 

Incidentally, from A N Other thread (but close in subject matter) I am still waiting for an example of so called "hate speech" from you (specifically from either the Mail, the Express, the Sun).

I have asked you numerous times and have not, AFAIK, had one.

Talk is cheap but essentially meaningless without proof

Oh I replied to that ages ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.