Licensing@aol.com - Peter Couslon answers your Q's
Are musicians 'employees'?
QWe employ musicians on a regular basis, who play in the main bar. I have just been told that they are not allowed to buy drinks in the pub after the end of my permitted hours when they finish work, even though this is the only chance they get. Can you advise whether this is the case under the new law? I seem to remember something about employees being exempt.
A Not in this instance. No person, whether an employee or not, is allowed to buy a drink from the bar after the end of the agreed hours which apply on your premises.
The new law states clearly that no sales or supplies of liquor may be made outside these hours, which form a condition of your premises licence, except in very limited circumstances. The only exception that might still apply to you is where persons actually reside on the premises. If you have live-in staff, for example, then they would be allowed to purchase and consume drinks at any time. But non-resident staff do not share the same exemption.
Even if you describe the musicians as a "resident band", that still does not qualify them to make purchases after time, as they are not legally residing on the premises.
The only way in which drinks would be allowed for the musicians is under the exemption for employees who are genuinely entertained by the licensee or person in charge of the business. So, if the pub provided a free round of drinks when the musicians had finished playing, this would be acceptable in law, because there would not be a sale.
The old exemptions are not really needed in this context, because consumption of alcohol is not a licensable activity and where there has been no sale, there is no breach of conditions. If your licence has opening hours, these will only apply to the public, and employed musicians might be considered exempt if a gift of the drinks was established.
Betting on pool games
QI have seen a licensing handbook in which it appears that betting on pool matches is legal in pubs, as it is a game of skill. Is this accurate? I thought it often took place, but was technically illegal.
A It would pay you to be extremely
cautious about any form of betting which takes place on licensed premises, and
perhaps the paragraph in question could have been better phrased to help you.
What may have been intended is to draw a distinction between the playing of games of chance for money, which is controlled by the Gaming Act 1968 and in future by the
Gambling Act 2005, and the playing of games of skill for wagers between the participants, which is not controlled in the same way.
Games such as darts, snooker, pool, shove ha'penny and skittles are considered games of skill, in which the element of chance is not predominant. So if the opponents bet with each other on their own prowess, this is perfectly in order and the winners may claim the money or drinks that have been wagered on the outcome.
What is not covered by this concession is the placing of side-bets or the making of a book by a non-participant on the outcome of the game. This certainly constitutes gaming and should be actively discouraged wherever it is encountered.
It might be sensible to ban all forms of gaming that have not been authorised by the local authority or by the licensee.
In this way you can remove the possibility of borderline cases that could land you in court.
