Think 25 – A response
Posted: Tue 7 July, 2009 Filed under: 1BEM, Advertising, Cynicism 11 Comments »I emailed Sainsbury’s yesterday, asking about why they’d introduced the Think 25 policy. This is what I (eventually) got back…
Thank you for your email asking why we have adopted the think 25 policy for the sale of alcohol.
Although there has been no change in the law for buying and selling alcohol, the policy is promoted by local authorities, health departments and the police to limit the consequences of selling alcohol to underage people. As cashiers now have a personal responsibility by law they must take this very seriously.
I am grateful for you taking the time to write to us and allowing me to explain the background to the policy.
So – despite all their waffle about it being related to ‘all age-related items’, it’s actually only related to the sale of alcohol. And it doesn’t actually explain why they can’t just check for ID that the purchaser is, you know, over 18.
In short, “Think 25” is utter, utter bollocks. What a shocker.
I had philosophical angst about this some time ago (when it was 21). It seemed to represent a fundamental attack on adults, although, frankly, very few would see any advantage in fighting it. And I did think, but what happens if someone looks under-21, will they be checking everyone up to the age of 30, just in case.
If there is a personal responsibility on the cashiers to ensure that someone is the right age, then surely it’s a personal responsibility.
Obviously, there are 13 year old girls that look 18, and 23 year olds that look 17, but really, honestly, I wonder how much alcohol has actually been served to an U-18 by someone who was conscientious about their responsibility. I mean, have knowingly served a 17-yr-old but I wasn’t being conscientious, because there was no comeback in those days.
As someone who works as a cashier dealing with hundreds of customers a day, I can tell you that it’s not only the customers who feel harassed by this policy, but also the cashiers.
We have a legal responsibility not to sell alcohol to people who are under age, and can face fines worth thousands of pounds and risk losing our jobs if we don’t ask EVERYONE who MIGHT be under age for their I.D. One person at my store had to pay an on-the-spot fine. I got cautioned for selling to someone under 21 once who was a test-shopper (I must have made an incorrect judgement about their age. Imagine if they were under 18 and no think 21 policy existed, it was just think 18..)
The reason think 21 was introduced is that, quite frankly, a lot of 18 yrs can look 21, and vice versa. Could you tell me the age of someone walking down the street past you in a few seconds?
If in any doubt whatsoever, we MUST ask for I.D. Think 21 was introduced because there were under-18s getting alcohol under the old policy because they looked over 18. So lots and lots of underage illegal sales were going on because the cashiers believed they were over 18.
Then it was think 21, and I am sure there were still occasions when it was happening a few older looking teens slipping the net, so now they’re setting the bar much higher – 25. There is now, at that level, no excuse for selling alcohol to someone under 18 – there is a noticeable difference between a 26 year old and a 18 year old, but not a 21yr old and 18yr old.
Any single customer and sale presented to us, could be a trading standards officer testing us out. What happens if I think a customer is 19, make a sale, and they turn out to be 17? Excuse me sir, you broke the law, no excuses, pay the fine, lose your job! The shop can get a fine or an alcohol ban, and they might sack me. All for a wrong judgement call.
If your job and bank balance depended on not breaking the law, with hundreds of opportunities a day for both to happen, you too would be relieved to have a “think 25” policy to hide behind because, quite frankly, it’s impossible to tell ages down to the precise year, and if we have to “exercise judgement” on who is “over 18.” we’ll make many many mistakes in there over the course of a year, and any single one of those can get us in SERIOUS trouble.
We feel harrassed because we have a lot of customers arguing with us, some very loudly, calling us stupid and saying things like “I’m over 18, I’m 20!” and getting ratty about it, when we’re just following policy, one that happens to protect us. But the arguing gets really annoying after a while. But what else can we do? Witout think 25, we’ll make a few judgement mistakes, and it only takes ONE trading standards test purchaser to get us in a whole world of trouble..
But the thing is, it’s still rubbish.
The only *fair* system is to have on the tills a check for *everyone* who buys alcohol. That way it’s a thing for the shop, and for every purchase, plus the check is automated, and has a record on the till roll that DOB and/or proof of ID was given.
After all, in your case Steve, why should you get a caution for selling to someone under 21? So long as they were 18 or over, you were fine.
Yes, think 25 makes sense; you’ve got to filter out the possible under 18’s. But I’m 30 and just left Sainsbury’s without my cigarettes because I don’t have photo ID! I could (possibly) pass for 25 in good light but blimey! I dont look under 18! COMMON SENSE PLEASE!!!!
Still won’t stop a 19 yr old from buying booze and fags for his mates….complete waste of time.
After all if a child wan’ts alcohol all they have to do is ask an older mate or a tipsy adult and they are sorted so it won’t stop anything
Its dead simple the legal age to drink is 18 so therefore if anyone looks under 21 then thats acceptable but 25 is just rediculous I’m writting to Mr Salmond and who ever it is thats behind the think 25 scheme.
whats the point in this, there is already too many policies!
I’ve just been checked at Sainsbury’s self-service checkout for buying Cobra 0% alcohol beer. It’s mindless!
Hey mate 😉 How’s it going?!
So you came up number 2 on Google for my rant about Think 25 – turns out today that Tesco require *everyone* in the “group” to have ID, and else they waste your 25 minute journey into their shop.
Yes, we wasted 50 minutes driving in and out, lest the hour walking around the shop, because I (beard and all, married) didn’t have ID. My wife, with her debit card, did.
Apparently it’s not policy it’s LAW. LAW. It’s not law, law is 18. 25 is policy.
We walked out and walked into Sainsburys. They didn’t challenge us at all.
Go figure.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1955793/Tesco-ban-on-alcohol-sales-to-parents.html