Jump to content

Recommended Posts

chica1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In US, security guards in depots or warehouses

> (B&Q, Homebase equivalent in UK) even have guns

> (not that I want same practice here). But that

> role is taken very seriously and those guards are

> also totally alert.

>

> I've observed some SGs in Sainsburys sometimes and

> they are yawning, dragging their feet, staring at

> a distance, I feel like making this point to

> Justin King (CEO) actually...and same goes with

> the cashiers who more often than not have long

> faces and rude.



I take it you have never worked in this kind of environment ?

huncamunca Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> chica1 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > In US, security guards in depots or warehouses

> > (B&Q, Homebase equivalent in UK) even have guns

> > (not that I want same practice here). But that

> > role is taken very seriously and those guards

> are

> > also totally alert.

> >

> > I've observed some SGs in Sainsburys sometimes

> and

> > they are yawning, dragging their feet, staring

> at

> > a distance, I feel like making this point to

> > Justin King (CEO) actually...and same goes with

> > the cashiers who more often than not have long

> > faces and rude.

>

>

> I take it you have never worked in this kind of

> environment ?



I can appreciate that the tedium of the job and lack of acknowledgment/appreciation from customers leads to these behaviours but I still think we are entitled to expect the SGs to wade in when there IS a bit of action.

huncamunca Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> chica1 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > In US, security guards in depots or warehouses

> > (B&Q, Homebase equivalent in UK) even have guns

> > (not that I want same practice here). But that

> > role is taken very seriously and those guards

> are

> > also totally alert.

> >

> > I've observed some SGs in Sainsburys sometimes

> and

> > they are yawning, dragging their feet, staring

> at

> > a distance, I feel like making this point to

> > Justin King (CEO) actually...and same goes with

> > the cashiers who more often than not have long

> > faces and rude.

>

>

> I take it you have never worked in this kind of

> environment ?


If you are in a customer facing work environment there is no room for having sense of apathy, boredom, or anything of negative attitude.


And no, I've never worked in Supermarket, if that's what you mean....but that's has nothing to do with what's being discussed here.


Anyway before I digress further... heroic job by that lady, Niki, maybe Sainsburys could hire her!

>

> If you are in a customer facing work environment

> there is no room for having sense of apathy,

> boredom, or anything of negative attitude.

>

> And no, I've never worked in Supermarket, if

> that's what you mean....but that's has nothing to

> do with what's being discussed here.

>

>


really ?

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's rather a serious accusation without

> presumably any basis of evidence whatsoever?


And I do also think that a small bit of training would have aided staff in dealing with the situation.

i.e - dont mop up blood or throw away the weapon at a crime scene.

Both of which they did much to the policewoman?s horror.


georginas words, not mine


Sue, do you know what a Devils Advocate is ?

chica1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> If you are in a customer facing work environment

> there is no room for having sense of apathy,

> boredom, or anything of negative attitude.

>

> And no, I've never worked in Supermarket, if

> that's what you mean....but that's has nothing to

> do with what's being discussed here.

>

> Anyway before I digress further... heroic job by

> that lady, Niki, maybe Sainsburys could hire her!




Ha ha! Trust me, if you had worked in a supermarket then you would know that it is the customers precisely who lead to one having a 'sense of apathy,boredom, or anything of negative attitude'.


Anyway, back to topic, the point is that although various people may well have had training and instruction on what to do in emergency/first aid and similar situations, it is often by its nature just a tick-the-box exercise in which everybody is thankful for a couple of hours that break up the tedium. nothing is probably remembered or learned. i know this because i have been on countless first aid courses, playing with bandages and giving mouth-to-mouth to plastic dummies, and my name is proudly displayed in large letters all over the office as the designated first aider...


....but i suspect you wouldn't want me anywhere near you in an accident situation.

In supermarkets, you are constatntly being told to clean up any spillages, incase someone slips and makes a claim against the store.


Seeing as no-one else has been stabbed in Sainsbury's Dog kennel hill, then why on earth would they get stab incident training??

This is horrific and perhaps some sort of gang incident. It would appear to me that security should have attempted to resolve this before it got to the stabbing with a bottle stage - it seems clear from the earlier in store announcement that this incident had been building up inside the store for some time.


Perhaps the announcement should have advised the shoppers to move to the other side of the store rather than just sainsbury staff, surely efforts should have been made to prevent shoppers and their children having to witness this type of attack.


If the announcement had stated that police had been called it might have encouraged these youths to take their issues elsewhere.


Well done Nikki, very brave and perhaps you did save a life.

I'm sure I'm missing a really obvious point here - but what's the issue with the blood being mopped up ?

If you need a blood sample (don't know why they would, I assume the victim was identified and his clothes will be covered in the stuff) and there will be traces of it on the floor still if they want to get all 'DNA' about it.

Like I say it's probably an obvious point and I'm to dim to get it !

I don't think it's the blood, more that if the bottle that we are told was used to stab the person was cleared up then the finger prints of the alleged attacked might be rubbed off etc. I'm speculating though, since I wasn't there and don't know what happened!
Must have been scary at the time for all concerned. However, while I wasn't there myself, some of the comments about Sainsbury's management of the situation seem a bit unfair. I've been there a few times in the past when there has been some kind of incident that the police have been called to, though not at this level, and I got the impression that the staff are trained to deal with them without causing all-out panic - telling all staff to go the back of the store bears this out. Human nature being what it is, what probably happened is that some shoppers went over to see the scene for themselves (ashamed to admit I suffer from the ghoulish tendency) and had to be warned off firmly by employees to avoid someone else getting hurt. Making further announcements commenting on it would only cause panic and probably get picked up by the media.

Ms B Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Must have been scary at the time for all

> concerned. However, while I wasn't there myself,

> some of the comments about Sainsbury's management

> of the situation seem a bit unfair. I've been

> there a few times in the past when there has been

> some kind of incident that the police have been

> called to, though not at this level, and I got the

> impression that the staff are trained to deal with

> them without causing all-out panic - telling all

> staff to go the back of the store bears this out.


Sorry - but I have to disagree. Asking staff to move to a safe area protects staff whilst failing to protect customers, which is just wrong.


And its not the blame game - By looking closely at how these situations are dealt with, we can deal with them better in future. If I was a customer there with a child, I'd like to have been told to move to a safe area of the store.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ms B Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Must have been scary at the time for all

> > concerned. However, while I wasn't there

> myself,

> > some of the comments about Sainsbury's

> management

> > of the situation seem a bit unfair. I've been

> > there a few times in the past when there has

> been

> > some kind of incident that the police have been

> > called to, though not at this level, and I got

> the

> > impression that the staff are trained to deal

> with

> > them without causing all-out panic - telling

> all

> > staff to go the back of the store bears this

> out.

>

> Sorry - but I have to disagree. Asking staff to

> move to a safe area protects staff whilst failing

> to protect customers, which is just wrong.

>

> And its not the blame game - By looking closely at

> how these situations are dealt with, we can deal

> with them better in future. If I was a customer

> there with a child, I'd like to have been told to

> move to a safe area of the store.


"Staff to the back of the store" was hardly likely to have been an order for all staff to go to the back of the store - how the heck could the check-out staff have walked away from their tills letting people bugger off with goods just because of a scrap in one of the aisles? I suspect it is much more likely to have been a coded announcement to alert security staff that there was an incident.


When I worked in a major shopping mall in Belfast which also housed government offices it was well known that the announcement (which was heard more than once in my time) "Plumbers to the basement please" was actually a coded announcement to security staff that there was a suspect device in the building. It was done to avoid uneccesary panic pending a decision as to whether to evacuate the centre or not.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Sorry - but I have to disagree. Asking staff to

> move to a safe area protects staff whilst failing

> to protect customers, which is just wrong.

>



Errrrr, the drinks aisle is at the back of the store.....

Ruffer >>> "Errrrr, the drinks aisle is at the back of the store....."


Georgia said this was announced when the incident was elsewhere in the store..ie not at the drinks aisle at the back of the store...clever clogs. ;-)


Anyway at the end of the day - as some people have stated, children should be protected from this type of thing and not have to witness attempted murder. Sainsbury's IMO should protect their customers from something of this nature taking place in their stores by suggesting they move to a safe area. Surely that is common sense.

ruffers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >

> > Sorry - but I have to disagree. Asking staff to

> > move to a safe area protects staff whilst

> failing

> > to protect customers, which is just wrong.

> >

>

>

> Errrrr, the drinks aisle is at the back of the

> store.....



i thought the same


i also don't get what 'we' (being mostly occasional customers, i am guessing) are supposed to learn by 'looking closely at how these situations are dealt with' (meaning by analysing very few facts on a forum?) so that 'we can deal with them better in the future?'


it's all just for gossip innit?

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

    • 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.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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