Tied pubs - pubs code consultation: workshops with tenants

8. Research findings: Scope of the new Scottish Pubs Code

This chapter discusses tenants' views on what the new Code should cover overall. The discussion looked at the current voluntary Code in Scotland and what elements of that were most important to include in the new Code.

8.1 Views on the existing voluntary code

The voluntary code was seen as comprehensive and useful for new and inexperienced tenants. However for the larger, multiple operators it was felt to be an annoyance that they had to go through the same processes set out in the code whenever they took on a new lease.

"It's great for new starts and new people coming into the trade, gives them a bit of grounding in their responsibilities, but for folks like us who have been in the trade a while, for multiple operators it's annoying that we have to go down the same route as everyone else... The time I've got to waste drafting up documentation, almost like a cut and paste just to tick a box, it's a nonsense."– Pub tenant

Thinking about how the new Scottish Pubs Code could improve on this, they felt there should be a fast-track system for multiple operators.

"There should be a waiver for multiple operators at a certain level, a fast track rather than having to go through the same code they do with a single operator in the first pub they've ever taken on... I'm supposed to do the inside knowledge every time I take on a pub, and we take on three or four pubs a month."– Pub tenant

Thinking about the form the waiver could take, one tenant suggested it could be a single document to sign confirming you understand everything that you are expected to according to the voluntary code, rather than having to draft all the basic documentation around knowledge and understanding of responsibilities.

In some scenarios the delays caused by the need to produce and file extensive documentation on basic things like safety and inside knowledge can potentially put jobs at risk, according to the multiple operators in the workshop. One offered a concrete example:

"Imagine a scenario where for good reason the tenant wants to give up the business immediately, for example if he's diagnosed with cancer. If we were to step in to take that business on, there could be a delay of up to six weeks as we go through the safety and other documentation. That means jobs could be at risk… There needs to be a waiver where a multiple operator can walk in the next morning and pick up the business. Staff can be transferred over via TUPE." – Pub tenant

8.2 Scope of the new Code

Tenants overall did not mention areas outwith the scope of the current voluntary code that need to be included in the Scottish Pubs Code, but they did pick up on some areas of particular importance, or areas that needed strengthening.

For the experienced small operators especially, the requirements for training of BDMs needed to be strengthened. They felt that young and inexperienced BDMs perhaps not receiving training until some time into the role were limited in the help and expertise they could offer seasoned publicans.

"[The voluntary code] is too weak regarding training requirements for BDMs. It states they must have training within the first two years of becoming a BDM. It needs to be much sooner and this should be set out in the new Scottish Pubs Code. They need better training and sooner, not just a core skills course. [They] need formal qualifications before or very early on in the role." – Pub tenant

Some tenants blamed the voluntary code for restricting the freedom of BDMs to act autonomously. There could be scope for scaling back the new Code here to allow pub-owning companies to give BDMs freer rein again.

"You find they're saying 'I'm sorry, I can't do that anymore'. It's too regimented, there's no movement any more." – Pub tenant

Other tenants said that the Code needed to clearly cover the specification of premises at the start of a lease "so [the tenant] understands what they're getting into".

One concern that emerged spontaneously among the multiple operators was whether there was a lower limit in terms of number of premises owned below which the new Code need not apply. They felt that making the Code obligatory for the smallest operators could be too onerous for some.

"I've heard the lower limit is going to be three. That's bonkers… there are people who have bought two or three pubs for a pension fund and you're asking them to go through this pub code, now that's just nonsense."– Pub tenant

Multiple operators were aware that the lower limit in England and Wales is 500, and although they agreed that the limit in Scotland should be considerably lower given the smaller number of pubs here, there was some debate over what that limit should be. Some felt that 50 sounded sensible, but others felt that more discretion was needed than simply an arbitrary number.

"You need to look at the operators, who has got the resources, because you don't want to trap a lot of small operators who don't have the resources to be compliant with new requirements." – Pub tenant