'Dangers' of the half-pint wine glass

Title – ‘Dangers’ of the half-pint wine glass
Source – The Times
Date – 26th June 2008

It’s a subject I have covered before in this blog and one which seems to be set run and run. The consumption of wine in the UK has changed dramatically in the last 15 - 20 years. It has changed from an ‘elitist’ almost ‘specialist’ pursuit and is now very much mainstream. Even at the upper end of the market, champagne is now no longer the reserve of weddings and 21st birthday parties, but consumed so regularly that many outlets sell it by the glass without the risk of wastage from bottles remaining open and unsold over long periods of time.

When I first started in the licensed retail sector, pubs clubs and bars were even reluctant to open a bottle of red wine for fear of not selling the rest of the bottle before it went off; wine merchants were providing cooled dispensing units with 125ml measures to dispense wine from and even draught wine (from an unknown source below the bar) was deemed ‘acceptable’.

In those days the quality of the ‘table’ or ‘house’ wine was generally such that people were put off purchasing and the ‘half-decent’ wine was something either outside of the budget or very much only consumed in a more formal dining setting.

But things change... mostly for the better, but rarely without needing a little tweak here or there; wine consumption is a great example of this. The old 125ml glass is no longer the norm because people simply don’t consume wine in the same way anymore; that does not make them binge drinkers. The oversized 175ml is a much more ‘civilised’ way to enjoy wine, it allows the consumer to enjoy the bouquet of the wine, it allows the wine to breath and it is just a more relaxed way of enjoying the flavour of the wine. The days of shuffling back from the bar with a 125ml glass filled almost to the brim will seem alien and unappetising to most consumers; we must remember that the vast majority of consumers are responsible.

However there are as I said always blips that need tweaking when cultural shifts take place and there are always segments of our communities that either don’t understand or abuse this cultural shift; and that is what has happened, wine consumption has taken a cultural shift. The 250ml glass is undoubtedly a large glass of wine and its merits beyond the obvious are difficult to defend on some fronts, but the licensed retail sector is strongly consumer led and what the consumer demands has to be met or they will go elsewhere.

What has not moved with this cultural shift is the message that both the industry and the government have a duty to communicate. Both the health risks from excessive drinking and in the case of 250ml glasses of wine, the potentially serious consequence of driving whilst over the limit after consuming ‘just one glass of wine’.

Everyone working within the sector has a duty firstly to understand the effects of alcohol on their customers and to retail alcohol responsibly. The consumer should have a choice and we should protect that right, but to make a choice they must have easy access to all the information on their purchase good and bad. For this information to be available all staff need to have the appropriate level of training. For front line staff this may be a course such as the Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR) and for more senior staff this may include the National Certificate for Personal Licence Holders (NCPLH) or the National Certificate for Designated Premises Supervisors (NCDPS).

Please visit our website please visit at www.btbl.co.uk

Ban Supermarkets from selling alcohol

To view the original article Click Here

Title – Ban Supermarkets from selling alcohol
Source – The Independent
Date – 17th June 2008

This is an opinion that will be shared by off-licenses across the country, even if the chances of it actually happening seem remote; but some form of compromise would certainly not be unimaginable. As I have discussed many times before in this blog, the supermarkets find themselves in a difficult situation, unable commercially to take a unilateral stance on ‘minimum pricing’ and unable for fear of ‘price fixing’ to get together to reach agreement, it does seem that they are inevitably locked in a battle that can and will lead to some form of legislation. How far that legislation goes, is going to be the key.

It would be a government willing to face a war with the supermarkets and the courts that bans them selling alcohol; something that is highly unlikely. But some form of compromise where they run separate sections within the supermarkets that only sells alcohol is certainly a possibility and happens already in some supermarkets and is relatively common in some European countries. This ‘segregation’ provides more control and can restrict access to the area, as well as who purchases. It would also allow the supermarkets to ensure that staff in these areas receive more stringent training and supervision from appropriately qualified individuals.

But the supermarkets would probably fight this ‘solution’ as well, the expense not just of building these areas would be substantial and the money they make currently from selling alcohol as loss-leaders would be curtailed with customers having to specifically shop for their alcohol rather than buy it as a by-product of their weekly shop (exactly what the government would be hoping to achieve). But the government has demonstrated before that it does not care about the cost to industry in order to achieve its goals, just look at the expense of the smoking ban on the on-trade through loss of sales and facilities they had to build to accommodate smokers.

The on-trade and independent off-licences would certainly welcome this ‘levelling’ of the playing field. But it is the whole industry that is under fire, not just the supermarkets and we know from bitter experience that it is much more effective to make voluntary changes rather than to wait for restrictive legislation. So maybe it is time for all those involved in the licensed retail sector, probably through the alcohol manufacturers, to get together and find a solution to the current problems and concerns of the public and the government. The advantage of a voluntary code of practice rather than legislation is obvious;, before everyone pays the price of added legislation at a time when the economic climate is already enough of a burden.

The first place to start, training staff to retail responsibly across the sector. Not simply to meet their legislative needs but to allow all staff to retail alcohol responsibly. At Beyond The Blue we provide the portfolio of BIIAB courses from the National Certificate for Personal Licence Holders (NCPLH) to the Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR). Effective training provides retailers with staff that understand that responsible alcohol retailing benefits their business as well as safeguarding the sector as a whole.

Please visit our website please visit at www.btbl.co.uk

Scotland to raise drink-buying age

To view the original article Click Here

Title – Scotland to raise drink-buying age
Source – Sunday Times
Date – 15th June 2008

It has seemed to be the case for many years now that what happened in Westminster council in regard to the private security industry was rolled out to the country later and what happened in Glasgow in regard to licensing was later rolled out across the country. So it should come as no surprise to anyone to find that if Scotland does go ahead with raising the age for off-sales alcohol purchasing and introduce other measures of ‘minimum pricing’, the rest of the UK is eventually likely to follow suit.

But this is a big change that is undoubtedly going to face some major hurdles, great opposition from sectors of the community and the drink manufacturing industry. So England and Wales will initially take a step backwards and gauge the effects of any action Scotland takes before committing to any of there own. What you can expect is that if changes are accepted and enforceable in Scotland they will soon enough cross over to the rest of the UK.

What effect these changes would have is going to be difficult to quantify and different businesses across the country will frantically be getting their calculators out and working out who the winners and losers will be.

The pubs and clubs will welcome any change; they have been complaining about the ‘loss-leading’ strategies of the supermarkets for years and have been championing the ‘control’ they have over drinkers that no one has when they drink at home.

Small retailers and off-licenses face a mixed bag. On the one hand ‘minimum pricing’ could rebalance the playing field with the supermarkets and raise their margins; on the other hand they would miss out on the very lucrative 18-21 year old market.

The supermarkets may be hard hit, selling alcohol as a loss-leader has proved to be very successful and losing the 18-21 year old market will certainly be a blow. This may be offset by increase in margins forced upon them by minimum pricing and refocusing their promotional strategies on less expensive alternatives.

The drinks manufacturers lose on all fronts, their market is squeezed and margins will not significantly increase. Equally some businesses that rely very heavily on the 18-21 year old market such as University shops or those located near Universities will undoubtedly have to rethink their strategies.

As for enforcing these potential new laws that is set to be a battle on its own. We may be used to seeing 15 year olds outside a shop asking passers by to go in and buy them a can of cider, it will be an odd sight indeed, to see a 20 year old doing the same…

We run the portfolio of BIIAB licensed retail sector training courses including the National Certificate for Personal Licence Holders (NCPLH), the Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR) and the National Certificate for Designated Premises Supervisors (NCDPS) to help those working in the licensed retail sector to meet their statutory requests and to champion responsible alcohol retailling.

Please visit our website please visit at www.btbl.co.uk

When £20 buys you 60 bottles of strong lager, how can we take a crackdown on drinking seriously?

To view the original article Click Here

Title – When £20 buys you 60 bottles of strong lager, how can we take a crackdown on drinking seriously?
Source – The Daily Mail
Date – 9th June 2008

There is undoubtedly a problem within the licensed retail sector as a whole when it comes to pricing. It is an impossible task for any part of the sector to justify the status-quo, but equally everyone is desperately trying to cling on in what is a very challenging economic downturn. Somewhere in all of this the concept of ‘responsible alcohol retailing’ is trying to force its way through and be heard.

So what are the real problems of each sector? The supermarkets thrive and survive in one of the most competitive business sectors in the UK, when they succeed they win big, when they fail they collapse spectacularly. The main supermarkets are all publicly listed with shareholders demanding returns, we could argue about the greed of shareholders, but any of us who have a pension plan are probably shareholder in one supermarket or another. So they have to compete with each other and alcohol sold as a loss-leader works. It would be a brave (and shortly to be unemployed) CEO of a supermarket who gracefully stepped out of this competition and opted to sell alcohol at twice the current cost to make a profit. Would they do it if everyone played ball, undoubtedly yes. If you told the supermarkets they had to make a margin on alcohol sales currently sold at a loss they would bite your hand off, but only if everyone else followed suit, after all as long as one supermarket continues this practice, the others have to follow or shut up shop.

So why don’t they agree amongst themselves? It’s called price fixing! The OFT are already on the rampage when it comes to the supermarkets and price fixing, several have already fallen foul. No one is going to fall into that trap.

Supermarkets do retail responsibly when it comes to selling to children, they in many cases set a standard for others to follow it’s what happens after people have bought the alcohol that is the real problem.

So what can the government do? Well they can’t be seen to tip the balance of a level playing field, if they make the supermarkets fix a price, what about pubs and corner shops. How do you fix a price and differentiate between brands; If you impose a minimum cost for a case of beer, is that the same for Stella and Carling; the drinks manufacturers will have them tied up in court for years to come. The drinks manufacturers will claim that their business is being restricted and then there is EU law… let’s not even start on that. So for the government it is a minefield which the prospect of stepping into is both unattractive and dangerous.

So what about pubs and clubs? Well it does seem that they will end up as the losers whatever happens; while the supermarket prices are unrealistically low, who isn’t going to be tempted to buy take-out to drink before a night out or instead of a night out; regulation is costing businesses more time and money; the economic down-turn tends to hit them first. Every landlord and door supervisor who has been in the industry for 10 years or so will have noticed dramatic changes, the business of controlling customers consumption has to some degree been taken out of their hands, customers turn up drunk and yet often it is not until an hour or more after they have entered a venue that the alcohol they consumed at home really kicks in. Who bears the cost and blame for their behaviour? The pubs and clubs. With 27 closing a week in 2007, is it any wonder they feel under fire?

At Beyond The Blue we run the Portfolio of BIIAB licensed retail sector training courses including The National Certificate for Personal Licnece Holders (NCPLH), the Award in Responsible Alcohol Retailing (ARAR) and the National Certificate for Door Supervisors (NCDS)

Please visit our website please visit at www.btbl.co.uk

NHS workforce suffers 56,000 assaults in a year

Title – NHS workforce suffers 56,000 assaults in a year
Source – The Daily Mail
Date – 07-06-2008

The claim by the Department of Health that assaults on NHS staff have fallen every year since 2004 is hardly reassuring when the figures still indicate 56,000 assaults or one every ten minutes. Other figures in recent years have indicated an assault every seven minutes, but the most worrying fact is that everyone who has ever worked in the health sector knows the figure is actually much higher. The fact is that many doctors and nurses and others working in the health sector simply do not report all the assaults against them.

So as much as the authorities should be examining how more is not being done to reduce the number of assaults, they should concentrate just as much in examining why more assault or a higher percentage of assaults are not being reported.

The first place they should look is the number of assaults resulting in prosecutions. Out of 56,000 only 869 cases resulted in criminal conviction. That tells us that only one in every 65 assaults are successfully prosecuted. When staff are already overworked they may well feel that even reporting an assault is not worth the trouble with such a small chance of anything being done about it. After all if there are 153 reported assaults each and every day and yet only 2.3 of these result in prosecution then it might seem like a futile exercise. Add to this that the actual number of assaults is much higher and you can understand the reluctance.

What we should worry about is that there seems to be an attitude growing (rather than declining) that assault is something that those working within the NHS have to accept as ‘part of the job’ and it is this assumption and attitude that breeds a reluctance to report.

The NHS and the government have to empower their staff to reverse these trends and to realise the benefit of reporting so that we get a real picture of the dire situation with violence in their workplace. On a parallel strategy the need for proactive training for staff within the NHS on how to effectively deal and resolve conflict in their workplace needs to be embraced and for more volatile working environments and especially the lone workers within the NHS more advanced training should be provided. The key to this training which the government made a key objective is that it is not just ticking a box, but is actually effective. To be effective staff have to be given the time to complete the training and the training needs to prove itself by being appropriate for the working environment.

Our Conflict Management and Resolution courses (CMR) are developed through a training needs analysis for each client to reflect their specific working environment. They vary from one to two days depending on the findings of our research and can be complimented for high risk environments by our Physical Intervention course (PI) which uses easy to learn and easy to remember, low-impact, disengagement and break-away techniques to allow candidates to work with more confidence and more safely in their workplace.

Please visit our website please visit at www.btbl.co.uk