Traveller sues hotel for not having enough security for wedding

suicide_circus · 27-05-2015 3:47pm

silverfeather wrote: »

We are not supposed to positively discriminate either. The positive stereotypes can be patronizing.

"we are not supposed to..." that's frankly a scary comment for an autonomous adult to make.

end of the road · 27-05-2015 3:48pm

anncoates wrote: »

Might be an idea to just increase the breakage deposit required; sigh a legal disclaimer to cover any damage to the premises or even force the wedding/funeral party to foot security costs.

Unfortunately, I think you'd just see somebody taking action on discrimination grounds.

well as it would be that i should imagine its what would happen indeed

end of the road · 27-05-2015 3:51pm

Cienciano wrote: »

I'm sure hotels don't open up and decide they're never going to do traveller weddings. I'd say it's along the lines of out of the 20 weddings a year, 5 were traveller weddings, and maybe 4 out of that 5 were a disaster. Do that for a few years and work out that it costs you money so you stop doing them. But you're racist for not doing them.
It's not exactly the hoteliers association of ireland is run by a load of racists that would rather refuse money than serve travellers.
Any big event in ireland the pubs make a fortune. Concerts or matches around croker, pubs around towns when festivals are on. But when it's a travellers horse fair in Borris where the pubs would be jammed they'd rather close than make thousands. Are the struggling publicans actually racist? Or is it more hassle than it's worth?
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/borris-pubs-and-shops-to-close-for-street-fair-1.930027
All people hotellers and publicans want from travellers is to behave in a civilised way, no agro, sure they want to take your money.

replace the word racist with bigot. some pubs do shut rather then take money yet some of them will whine about how hard things are. so forgive me if i've no sympathy for them

suicide_circus · 27-05-2015 3:51pm

end of the road wrote: »

well as it would be that i should imagine its what would happen indeed

you really are talking like a mindless drone now - do you even consider the words you type? have you ever had a thought in your head that wasn't informed by some kind of ill-conceived quango mandated legislation?

end of the road · 27-05-2015 3:57pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'm only on page 8 but I have to ask whether end of the road and conor think there is any elevated risk of violence at a traveller wedding or funeral over a settled funeral?

I'm finding it difficult to understand how you could call it discrimination if there is a reasonable expectation of different behaviour between travellers and settled people. A business could be set up for weddings and 1% might end in damage to the establish in damaged property and reputation. If traveller events pose a 10% risk of damage then the business might not be able to sustain that rate of damage.

Should a business be able to turn down a wedding because it can't afford to cater for the wedding and it's associated risks?

So do end of the road and conor think there is any elevated risk of violence at a traveller wedding or funeral over a settled funeral?

to me its irrelevant. the law states travelers can't be refused because they are travelers, no matter what way the business tries to turn it or what excuse it makes, its still down to the fact its travelers or incert whatever other minority group.

end of the road · 27-05-2015 3:58pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

have you ever had a thought in your head that wasn't informed by some kind of ill-conceived quango mandated legislation?

yes, all of my thoughts. i decide my own opinions

end of the road · 27-05-2015 4:02pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

It has nothing to do with them being good or bad people. If taking traveller weddings would break your business because their behaviour can reasonably be expected to be more violent, then the business should be able to refuse their custom.

no, they shouldn't. discrimination laws are that, there are no exceptions nor can there be. if they want to refuse someone, get the evidence that person is a trouble maker and bring it to court to get permission from a judge to refuse them. no evidence no permission

Help!!!! · 27-05-2015 4:03pm

end of the road wrote: »

to me its irrelevant. the law states travelers can't be refused because they are travelers, no matter what way the business tries to turn it or what excuse it makes, its still down to the fact its travelers or incert whatever other minority group.

So what would you do if a group of travellers set up camp outside your home & while there the kids were causing trouble going in on your property. Hassling your wife etc
How would you feel then?

end of the road · 27-05-2015 4:04pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The main difference between traveller weddings and settled weddings is that there is no invite required for travellers. Your average settled wedding goes off without much trouble because if the happy couple have any sworn enemies they tend not to invite them, thus avoiding the much feared "cultural fracas"!
That's not the case with our more malodourous travelling brethren - half the guests want the other half dead - throw in a bucket load of alcohol and a sprinkling of slash hooks - it's never going to end well.
Anyone who says otherwise has most likely never had to deal with them. Their reputation for aggression, thievery and general assholery is not based on thin air. The majority of people are not racist in my opinion - but neither are they blind. If I was running the hotel - no way would I book their weddings - It's not racism, it's economics. Even if only 1 in 10 end in disaster (at a guess I'd say it's actually more than 1 in 2), that 1 negates all the profits you'd made from the other 9. If there's no money it - it's stupid to be doing it, any business that operates differently is doomed!

discrimination comes before economics.

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The main difference between traveller weddings and settled weddings is that there is no invite required for travellers. Your average settled wedding goes off without much trouble because if the happy couple have any sworn enemies they tend not to invite them, thus avoiding the much feared "cultural fracas"!
That's not the case with our more malodourous travelling brethren - half the guests want the other half dead - throw in a bucket load of alcohol and a sprinkling of slash hooks - it's never going to end well.
Anyone who says otherwise has most likely never had to deal with them. Their reputation for aggression, thievery and general assholery is not based on thin air. The majority of people are not racist in my opinion - but neither are they blind. If I was running the hotel - no way would I book their weddings - It's not racism, it's economics. Even if only 1 in 10 end in disaster (at a guess I'd say it's actually more than 1 in 2), that 1 negates all the profits you'd made from the other 9. If there's no money it - it's stupid to be doing it, any business that operates differently is doomed!

discrimination comes before economics. economics is no excuse and using it to discriminate should also end in a shut down indefinitely of your business.

VinLieger · 27-05-2015 4:09pm

end of the road wrote: »

no, they shouldn't. discrimination laws are that, there are no exceptions nor can there be. if they want to refuse someone, get the evidence that person is a trouble maker and bring it to court to get permission from a judge to refuse them. no evidence no permission

Kinda difficult when firstly members of that community have a strange difficulty with finding their way to court house's unless it benefits them financially. Secondly they also have a rather difficult time providing their real names for many things including legal proceedings so tracing back if one of them is a trouble maker or has a history of violence or criminal record can be quite difficult.

tayto lover · 27-05-2015 4:12pm

It's either sue for money or steal money with them. Certainly not work for money.

end of the road · 27-05-2015 4:15pm

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Yeah, **** the potential cost of repairs/lost business to the private business owner who will have to deal with these "people".

In fact let's just fine them if they do close their business to stop it from being wrecked by these animals!

good idea.

mickydoomsux wrote: »

Want to be treated without "discrimination"? Act like a normal person then.

whats a "normal person" entitled to be treated without discrimination, crack down hard on those who discriminate using legislation and other tools.

mickydoomsux wrote: »

People are starting to tire of the fact that certain sections of society (who contribute nothing to said society) are seen as being above reproach whilst they thumb their noses at everyone else.

they are tiring of something that isn't true. only deluded gullible idiots see the myth that certain sections of society, some of who like some in our community, don't contribute to society, are above reproach whilst they thumb their noses at everyone else. we have a court system and a police force to deal with all who break the law

end of the road · 27-05-2015 4:18pm

Help!!!! wrote: »

So what would you do if a group of travellers set up camp outside your home & while there the kids were causing trouble going in on your property. Hassling your wife etc
How would you feel then?

thats what the police and courts are there for. if they refuse to deal with it i keep going higher up until they do as its what i pay them to do

VinLieger · 27-05-2015 4:21pm

end of the road wrote: »

thats what the police and courts are there for. if they refuse to deal with it i keep going higher up until they do as its what i pay them to do

You know damn well the second police go near them they shout discrimination and pavee point get involved meaning the guards get stopped from touching them and lengthy legal battle ensues. Also theres very likely "retribution" caused in the immediate vicinity to whoever they think was involved with calling the gardai

Boom_Bap · 27-05-2015 4:23pm

MOD
I'm closing this thread, the topic is no longer being talked about, numerous other topics are being discussed including an incident at a hotel.
There are also some remarks which have crossed the line or are at least stepping on it.

Traveller sues hotel for not having enough security for wedding

Comments