Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It is possible (and increasingly normal) for local councils to impose requirements for security on licenced premises - something like "licence application granted subject to the following conditions:


1. Provision of an SIA registered doorman at weekends between 8pm and 2am..."


Don't know the specifics here.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17310
Share on other sites

Of course the solution to the problem would be "female bouncers"....not! I assume that Nero is indulging in the sexist stereotype that all men are inherently aggressive and threatening, whilst all women are nurturing, caring and given to compromise rather than confrontation. I think we should take this interesting indulgence in gender stereotypes a little bit further and encourage woman to withdraw from the workplace on the grounds that they are weepy, unbalanced and irritable for several days a month? Anyway, if all that compromise and caring didn't work and the s**t hit the fan, would you really want a female bouncer? She might not want to wade in and sort it out in case she broke a nail!!


Also, unless there are some absurd exclusions in the overall legislation, the practice of appointing or refusing to appoint an employee on the grounds of his/her gender is unlawful!


DISCLAIMER: Since some of my previous postings on the issue of gender equality seem to have been completely misunderstood by some of the meatheads on this forum, who apparently are of limited intellignce and who have no concept of irony, sarcasm etc, let me clarify the following points:


1. I do NOT think that women are constantly worried about breaking their nails - I am offering this notion in a tongue in cheek manner to highlight the equally absurd gender stereotypes proferred in Nero's post.

2. I do NOT believe that all woman are weepy, unbalanced and irritable for several days a month. See above point for explanation.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17651
Share on other sites

Well, Dom, I have experience of female bouncers and I personally find them to be generally more polite and efficient than the males. It is nothing to do with eye candy. I am not at all sexist - women should be able to do what they want, and men likewise. If men and women like to look at bouncers, good for them too. It's only natural to like looking at what one considers attractive. I understand your irony but just wanted to stress my position. To tell the truth, I don't like places that have bouncers, so male and female is irrelevant. Nero
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17653
Share on other sites

Female bouncers are a benefit in most cases - I have some experience in this raea on a professional level


Un reconstructed macho W/Class males tend - on the whole - to view women as the fairer sex , irrespective of the advances towards equality on the past century and are far less likely to "kick off" with a femal bouncer tha with a male one when they are full of ale. A muscle bound bouncer ususally comes ion for more stick from these macho fellows that a smaller one. Its all abour competition.


Further, Drunken W/Class females tend to kick off with relative impunity with bouncers, fairly safe in the view that they are unlikely to get dealt with in a particularly curt manner, due to the same reasons outlined above - i.e. Most bouncers tend to me W/Class males with a standard set of values regarding women.


Female bouncers tend not to have as much retaliation against them when they intervene and as a bouncers role is to defuse rather than fight, women have an added advantage in nearly all cases and are able to use their ( mother like ) authority to placate testosterone filled drunken men..The only disdadvantage is possibly in sheer muscle should a whopping scrap kick off, but most women who are bouncers are usually trained in a martial art anywway.


Women Bouncers = win win for everyone

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17658
Share on other sites

Win-win for everyone except the male bouncers who are told that their services are unwelcome due solely to their gender. Snorky, the arguement you put forward could be extended to almost any other domain. For example, there are some patients who go into hospital and object to being treated by a female doctor or by a doctor from an ethnic minority who has come to the UK to train and work. Such patients may kick up a right old stink and refuse to co-operate with the female or ethnic origin doctor. Do we indulge that and employ only white, male doctors? Of course not.


What about a woman who takes a job on a building site with an almost exclusively male worlforce. She is likely to attract all manner of stick, hassle, harrassment which could disrupt the working environment. Do we ban said female from the building trade on grounds that she is likely to provoke the above-mentioned responses? Course not. Or rather, we could, but the building firm/hospital/NHS Trust in question would find itself in an Employment Tribunal so fast its head would be spinning.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17668
Share on other sites

Dom, are you a male bouncer? ;-)


On the subject of liquorice itself, I have to admit I've never liked the place... I'm not sure why, as it's not really any different to any of the other "bars" down LL, but I just can't get in to it.....


As for bouncers... I used to "know" (meaning I drank in the same pub as) a gang of "doormen" in Liverpool and they were total c**ts the lot of them!I know this doesn't mean that all bouncers are bad, but there are plenty like these guys who just want to throw their weight around, and enjoy handing out a few slaps just that bit too much!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17678
Share on other sites

Of course not - you emply the best doctor for the job - there is no "standard" Doctor - all have their steenghts and weaknesses - further , in a door team you should have a fine balance of meathead steriod filled attack dogs and people who can talk, persuade and pacify.Unfort. you do not find many women are of the meathead steriod variety.There is always a plce for men bouncers.


With my wage slave team members/monkeys , I find it is best to get a balance - a mix counters the excesses that can bubble to the surface in a spehere dominated by one sex.


Have in a female or two on pub or club door is a more balanced & responsive situation than having one sex only

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-17681
Share on other sites

Yes indeed the service in there was very poor too.Met with a rather

unfriendly overweight man with no social skills..Waited 15 minutes

for 2 mojitos (the bar wasnt even busy he was cutting the lime on

his hands and didnt seem to care if we waited for 15 mins.Had a better

time at the magdala


Wont be going there again.0 out of 10 for service

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18030
Share on other sites

I was hoping that its service would have changed by now as I mentioned on an earlier thread,but they do not listen, not even to humble old me (or young me) as I am a very local landlord. ( I keep repeating myself I know). Its a shame really as the place used to get real busy and have a great vibe. Oh well, there is still time. That new tea shop up the road will probably take alot of its custom.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18161
Share on other sites

I don't think Liqourice is a bar-by-numbers. It is it's own thing which may or may not be to everyone's taste but it has always been individual enough to make it one of my more favoured watering holes


Until recently


I was worried when the old manager had to return to Nottingham and it just hasn't been the same since. I thought it was just me, but it's pretty apparent that many people feel the same way


I did go back last week for first time in weeks and there were 4 people behind the bar none of whom I recognised - most unusual. That menu has been cut to the bare bones as well.

I hope it picks up again but for now...

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18190
Share on other sites

What about that rude fat boy that works there I will not go back as long as he works there

not all that anyway.I design hotels for a living .The interior design consists of just a

illuminated backbar.


Id rather spend my money in the bishop barstaff are more polite luvly crowd and less arsy.

bouncers are probably just some local yobs

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18601
Share on other sites

As some of you have noticed we have had a few management and staff difficulties recently. We have been been been making a number of staff changes and recruited a new General Manager to work on delivering the simple values we have always aimed to provide: friendly and attentive service, tasty food and a welcoming fun environment.


We really appreciate the comments made on this site and and have been working to tackle the negatives. Make no mistake: surly staff and arrogance have no place at liquorish.


On the door security side Southwark Council require us to have 2 bouncers every Friday and Saturday night. Most of our customers have only ever had very positive things to say about Kevin and Candice our regular door staff. From time to time they take a holiday and we have agency replacements and I'm sorry if any have been rude. They are there to serve our customers and protect you from trouble.


Apologies for having to bear with us.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18650
Share on other sites

Thanks for keeping us posted 'Liquorish'. It's been a while since I've been in (probably a year or so, partly down to baby M, partly as I've stopped drinking), but I have to say I really enjoyed the decor (thought the polished concrete, rectilinear approach and semi-knackered leather worked really well) the staff (very friendly at that time) and the food (cracking burger as far as I can remember).

Not sure when we'll get the chance to go back, but good luck getting back on top of things, it's good to see local retailers taking their customer feedback so seriously and positively.

BM

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-18651
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

phwoarrrr - female bouncers yippee - i'm in for a frisking!

Dom, i was with you for a second there but me thinks you are forgetting your sense of humour.

the point is about female bouncers not females in teh workplace as a whole.

it is correct that they are more effective in this role for the multiple reasons stated. this will not do the 'poor male' bouncers out of a job - they can go back to burgling houses like they used to do ;-)

anyway this thread is ancient so all water under the bridge now i expect - i'll be assessing the bouncers myself this weekend! & they better be charming!!

...& i'm up for a frisk if it should come my way...

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/712-liquorice/#findComment-138916
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
  • Latest Discussions

    • Last week we had no water for over 24 hours and very little support from Thames Water when we called - had to fight for water to be delivered, even to priority homes. Strongly suggest you contact [email protected] as she was arranging a meeting with TW to discuss the abysmal service
    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...