[ad_1]
When it comes to rules, there is the letter and then there is the spirit.
Sometimes they are one in the same. Other times, there is a difference.
An example of that difference emerged last week in the retail sector, when Level 5 restrictions were implemented across the country.
They were supposed to shut down all but non-essential retailers, and for the most part now they have.
But certain stores that inhabit a gray area, or in some cases seem to at least normally fall into the “nonessential” category, have remained open.
They are justifying this; It is claimed by those who are unhappy with the situation, carrying some essential stocks like PPE and food, for example, among the predominantly non-essential items.
It has also been alleged that some essential retailers that sell smaller amounts of non-essential goods continue to sell them.
Some may genuinely believe that they are legitimately acting within the rules. Others, however, may be simply trying to push the limits.
Either way, the situation has generated significant and understandable resentment among particularly smaller specialty retailers who have followed public health rules to the end, closing their doors and in many cases laying off staff.
They claim that everyone must abide by both the spirit and the letter of the rules.
These store owners say that by opening when they shouldn’t, or by selling stocks that aren’t classified as essential, their competitors are gaining a significant advantage in the lucrative Christmas gathering.
At a glance: What does level 5 mean?
Unlike when the country entered the highest level of restrictions in March, this time around the rules on retail are pretty clear, as are detailed descriptions of what is essential and what is not.
Under Tier 5 restrictions, retailers with a mixed retail offering that have discrete spaces for essential and nonessential retailers must arrange for the separation and closure of nonessential retail areas, they say.
For the most part, that should be reasonably achievable, although in circumstances where essential and nonessential stocks were actually intertwined before the restrictions appeared, it may be justified to leave it that way.
Retail Excellence, which represents more than 2,000 retail businesses across the country, says its members are angry about the situation.
He is asking the government to intervene, saying that the actions of those who do not follow the rules is like pouring salt on the wounds of others who do.
It also claims that in cases where restrictions are circumvented, prompting people to travel and purchase non-essential items, the entire purpose of the closure is jeopardized.
That, in turn, could jeopardize the expected reopening of the retail sector for all outlets in just under five weeks.
Small business organization ISME has gone further, claiming that if left unresolved, the situation could lead to “civil disobedience” from some increasingly angry and small retailers.
The Government is well aware of the problem and it is understood that it is working behind the scenes to solve it in a non-confrontational way.
Both Tánaiste Leo Varadkar and the Minister of State for Trade, Employment and Commerce, Damien English, have made public and private calls on all retailers to adhere to the spirit of the guidelines.
Well-located sources indicate that if compliance is not achieved through this type of participation in the very near future, other measures will have to be considered.
That could mean garda inspections of outlets, for example, a path that the government will be willing to avoid if possible.
Because, in addition to the unattractive specter of a showdown with companies, there is also the difficulty that some members of the public can support the actions of retailers that are bending or breaking the rules.
In Wales, for example, thousands of people have signed a petition calling on the authorities to revoke the ban on supermarkets selling non-essential items during the closure there.
The rules there are similar to those here, preventing supermarkets from selling non-essential items such as appliances, telephones, clothing, toys and games, garden products, and sections dedicated to household items.
But yesterday afternoon, 17,000 people had signed a petition expressing their opposition to the measure.
And in the same way here, any effort to prevent some open outlets from selling certain products may not go down well with people who are already frustrated with not being able to shop normally.
So expect the efforts of the government and retail leaders to resolve the issue to continue.
Otherwise, we could be facing something akin to a retail rebellion on both sides of the counter.
[ad_2]