Family reunion at Shaw House is ruined after staff demand a four-week-old baby's buggy is taken out of the building Options

[Iommi]

I was drawn to the story about a baby buggy being evicted from the Shaw house building.

What an idiotic decision to use a carpet that apparently lacks the resilience to cope with the traffic of baby buggies. This presumably means that the users of wheelchairs, that are legally entitled to use the building, will prematurely destroy the carpet!

The situation is exacerbated by the alleged rudeness and incompetent conduct of the staff, who, if the story is an accurate portrait of events, clearly need re-training (I think is the usual remedial action).

[Strafin]

I have two comments, one is rules are rules, it's not down to the management to have to explain themselves, and it's not down to the visitors to decide which ones they follow. Secondly, following that experience and having been told that they can't take the buggy in, why would complimentary tickets for a return visit be a good idea? If I were the family I'd run around in the grounds getting as much mud on me as possible then go for the free wa;lkaround inside, all over the cream carpets.

[Iommi]

I have two comments, one is rules are rules, it's not down to the management to have to explain themselves, and it's not down to the visitors to decide which ones they follow.

This wasn't a prison visit and it's implied the family were unaware of the 'rule', which seems an obsurd one. Just because 'rules are rules' doesn't entitle management to be rude. I'd behaved the same as the family if I felt something was unjust and I do think the management are obliged to explain. If it were me involved and knowing what my mouth can be like, I'd created a bigger stink than the one stated. I'm sure had someone politely pointed out to the family at the beginning of the tour that they would not be able to take the buggy round, this unnecessary scene wouldn't have happened.

[Andy]

Can anyone explain why the wheels on a few buggy should be any more dirtier on a cream carpet than the much more numerous pairs of shoes walking on it?

[Andrea]

It's an absolute joke. There's no logic behind it! Buggies aren't allowed but wheelchairs are? The council should be embarrassed

[GMR]

I have two comments, one is rules are rules, it's not down to the management to have to explain themselves, and it's not down to the visitors to decide which ones they follow. Secondly, following that experience and having been told that they can't take the buggy in, why would complimentary tickets for a return visit be a good idea? If I were the family I'd run around in the grounds getting as much mud on me as possible then go for the free wa;lkaround inside, all over the cream carpets.

‘Rules are rules’. Didn’t they use this as a defence at the Nuremberg trials? People seem to think that because something must be obeyed it must be obeyed. Where does democracy come into all this. Iommi make a good point; what if it was a disabled wheelchair? The law is on the side of the handicapped person. And disabled wheelchair’s are heavier than buggy’s. Sometimes common sense should trump rules.

[GMR]

Can anyone explain why the wheels on a few buggy should be any more dirtier on a cream carpet than the much more numerous pairs of shoes walking on it?

Good point; maybe people are made to take their shoes off and wash their feet in boiling water. Then a foot fetish expert licks the remaining particles off the feet.

[GMR]

It's an absolute joke. There's no logic behind it! Buggies aren't allowed but wheelchairs are? The council should be embarrassed

Idiots don’t need logic; just rules and a backward mentality.

[Strafin]

The law is on the side of the handicapped person. And disabled wheelchair’s are heavier than buggy’s.

A wheelchair is heavier, but I am guessing (based only on my own thoughts, no research done, no evidence acquired), that there are less wheelchairs than there are buggies, on average, therefore there is likely to be less damage overall. I don't agree with the decision, but I am empathetic to the management for having to have made it. Also who'd want to take a buggy there? Can't imagine young children enjoying themselves there.

[GMR]

A wheelchair is heavier, but I am guessing (based only on my own thoughts, no research done, no evidence acquired), that there are less wheelchairs than there are buggies, on average, therefore there is likely to be less damage overall. I don't agree with the decision, but I am empathetic to the management for having to have made it. Also who'd want to take a buggy there? Can't imagine young children enjoying themselves there.

You’ve got to remember this was a reunion; babies+school+reunion. Are you getting my drift now my friend? They probably wanted to take the babies to see if they could get a positive match with the kids’ features. A lot of bike sheds didn't have lighting

[Iommi]

A wheelchair is heavier, but I am guessing (based only on my own thoughts, no research done, no evidence acquired), that there are less wheelchairs than there are buggies, on average, therefore there is likely to be less damage overall. I don't agree with the decision, but I am empathetic to the management for having to have made it. Also who'd want to take a buggy there? Can't imagine young children enjoying themselves there.

By empathy, presumably you are not impartial in this matter? If the article is accurate, the management were rude and incompetent. If buggies were not allowed, it should have been handled more sympathetically and effectively. As for resilience of the carpet under buggy traffic, what do they have on show, a Dr Who exhibition?

[GMR]

By empathy, presumably you are not impartial in this matter? If the article is accurate, the management were rude and incompetent. If buggies were not allowed, it should have been handled more sympathetically and effectively. As for resilience of the carpet under buggy traffic, what do they have on show, a Dr Who exhibition?

Are you both Betazoid’s? As you both have telepathy/ or empathy.

[Iommi]

Are you both Betazoid’s? As you both have telepathy/ or empathy.

Just one little thing Mr G. What are you talking about?

[GMR]

Just one little thing Mr G. What are you talking about?

You’ve obviously never watched Star Trek the next Generation. Their ships councillor was Diana Troy... she was a Betazoid. Actually she was half human half Betazoid. Their unique talents were telepathy/ empathy. Usually amongst their own species, but they could read the minds of humans. I hope I’ve cleared that up for you?

Oh, in case you don't know: i am a Vulcan. Do you need any explanation on that one?

[Rachel]

Firstly I'd like to thank everyone who has written on this forum, when I wrote to the NWN I thought that no-one would be interested, so when Sarah wrote the story I was astounded-in this day & age, us getting evicted from a public building over a buggy is hardly breaking news, let's be honest. However, I decided to write anyway, even if no-one listened. So the fact that you guys read AND commented gladened me. I must say that I can't disagree with any of the comments; Iommi was correct on several points, we weren't aware of the ruling until the manager approached us, the rudeness of staff did exaxerbate the situation & staff do need training; Strafin is right, rules are rules; Andy's observation about muddy buggy wheels being no different to muddy shoes is right; GMRs answer of foot sterilization is fab, as is his comment on Nuremberg (& by the way, Shaw House's bike sheds saw little action as it was a girls only school back then te he! ) ; and Andrea, you are spot on too, there is no logic & the council should be embarassed. I've never joined any of these forums before but felt duty bound to join this one out of gratitude, so here goes!
All we wanted to do on Sunday was have a family day out at a public building where there was an exhibition that was of particular interest to my Mum & her sister. Grace is part of our family so joined us-my Mum & Aunt would have been delighted to show her off if they'd bumped into an old school friend at the re-union. Had we been asked at the door to carry Grace, we would have done so between us (though what a mother of more than 1 would do I don't know). Personally, I think the safest place for any under 2 yr old is a buggy, not least because as they get older & you can keep a store of entertainment for when they tire of grown up stuff & also as they are safe from running off, touching what they shouldn't & sleeping if needs must.
So, my 'Top Tips' for the preservation of a public building!
1. Encourage as many paying visitors as possible (discriminate against no-one)
2. Choose a suitable floor covering ( especially as the tax payer is part-funding it, & I doubt Shaw House ever had cream carpet historically)
3. Encourage the use of buggies to keep little people safe from stairs etc & to keep little hands away from historical artefacts
4. Ensure all staff are fully versed in the regulations of the property
5. Remember-Common sense should ALWAYS trump rules!
I hope that the beautiful building that is Shaw House stands in it's glory for many years to come, giving many generations the opportunity to visit - it really is a fantastic place. I WILL take the council up on their offer of complimentary tickets if my Mother & Aunt want to re-visit, life is way too short to be bitter. But I genuinely hope they think about the points I and all of you have raised, & that they are big enough to change this ruling if they can see the whole picture now.
Thanks again you all, That's All Folks!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[GMR]

Good on you Rachel. That is what it’s all about; open debate. You were right to voice your concerns. The trouble is there are too many do-gooders out there that follow the letter of the law until they disappear up their own backside.

On another note; you are correct about the girls only school as I had forgot about that. On a side issue; a former head Master of Shaw school – Mr McCloud - wrote a book about Shaw House. It is worth a read. Mr McCloud was there when my kids went to Shaw House in the 80’s or 90’s.

[Strafin]

What a nice reasoned response from Rachel. Good on you girl!

[GMR]

What a nice reasoned response from Rachel. Good on you girl!

That is what we need on here; more intelligent people

[GMR]

“If they could explain the reason why they made the policy and I could see the logic behind it, I could understand,” added Mrs Carden. “If cream carpets become dirty, why on earth were they chosen?

Mrs Carden, if I may interject here. Maybe that was why they picked such delicate carpets. People love nothing better than the sound of their own voice and the responsibility they are given and that can be a dangerous combination in the wrong hands. It was only a little thing that triggered Hitler’s megalomania (no, not that little thing, he may have had only one... but according to legend he got a fine tune out of it ). No, it was his moustache; by growing it and then spying a mirror one fine day he was fixated. From such a small acorn grew a tyrant. From one rugged carpet can trigger the seeds of lunacy. Just a thought my dear

[Iommi]

Say goodnight to the troops Gracie.