"It is bureaucracy gone mad".

[daviejones]

Seriously...all he had to do was confirm his age. It's not the job of the person asking him to make an on the spot decision themselves.

At 71? Why would he need to confirm his age at 71? I don't know of any 71 year olds that look under 21.....

[Board Game Geek]

At 71? Why would he need to confirm his age at 71?

The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

[DBA_bloke]

The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

What a big fecking pity that this wasn't explained to him up front, then. I'd be just as pooed-off, and I'm a slip of a lad of 38!

[Chugnut]

The age is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person at the till is bound by company policy to ask the customer, irrespective of the apparent age of the customer.

Please tell me you're kidding.

Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18.

End of.

[Sysman]

Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18.

It sounds like the infuriating telephone support helldesks who go through a fixed script, no matter what the circumstances.

[Sysman]

We are speaking of Morrisons here... following the takeover of Safeway, all the staff who could get out got out.... not a happy ship.

Oh, I didn't realise that had happened.

[Spartacus]

Seems like a sensible policy to me along the lines of that operated by many states in the US. Anyone buying alcohol has to be able to prove their age, no matter what. No proof of age = no entry / no sale.

That way no one can moan or feel victimised. I've always thought the same system applied here would make sense.

[BoredBloke]

"Of course, the company policy could *change* to include a common sense clause so no ID is required when people are clearly older than 18."

Exactly. What is the point of getting somebody to prove something which is clearly the case. Does the checkout person have some inability to recognise the bleedin obvious? That thing barks - is it a dog?

I can understand the requirement being in place if the person in question was borderline. But this guy is an old age pensioner and the fact that the checkout person asked the question at all says more about him and the company he works for.

When I go to Tescos and buy beer, when it goes through the till a bleep sounds. The checkout person then glances up and cancels the warning. Why? Because Tescos are not bothered about selling to under age kids or because it is obvious that I'm way older than 18 - unfortunately.

[_V_]

If you challenge someone on their age for buying alcohol, by law they must produce it or the sale cannot proceed. You cannot withdraw the challenge.

The person who carries the rap now for serving under-age drinkers is the checkout person and not the store. This can mean a large fine and a criminal record.

Often the checkout person is too busy, tired or fed up to look at the customer and some might mistakenly ask the person before looking properly.

Lets see how clever you would be after sitting for 8 hours on a checkout at min wage.

[pisces]

I'm gonna stop shagging grannies in case I get done for being a peado.