7
Jul '09

Think 25 – A response

   Posted by: lyle   in 1BEM, Advertising, Cynicism

Add Comment

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.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 7th, 2009 at 08:00 and is filed under 1BEM, Advertising, Cynicism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

8 comments so far

Gert
 1 

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.

July 13th, 2009 at 23:38
Steve
 2 

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..

July 27th, 2009 at 11:01
lyle
 3 

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.

July 27th, 2009 at 11:35
Clair Rouse
 4 

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!!!!

September 15th, 2009 at 21:53
Ol' Jeffers
 5 

Still won’t stop a 19 yr old from buying booze and fags for his mates….complete waste of time.

January 2nd, 2010 at 13:46
jack
 6 

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

May 23rd, 2010 at 14:28
Mark O' Hagan
 7 

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.

September 3rd, 2011 at 10:39
Ben P
 8 

whats the point in this, there is already too many policies!

November 21st, 2011 at 09:53

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

Back to top