How would you interpret this sign?

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire.

These are the "rules" at our local public indoor swimming pool. When the pool opened, I took my bathing suit, my 10 year old and a friend and asked whether this meant I needed to be in the pool with them, and was told no, you can watch in your clothes from the observation deck.

I have since taken my son, and various friends many times and each time I sat on the observation deck (like a balcony) and did homework for grad school, keeping an eye out at the same time. The pool employees clearly saw me do this each time, and never objected.

Today I took my son and 2 other 11 year olds, and was told that the rules above meant that I needed to be on the pool deck in a bathing suit, watching them. I told them that if they changed the rules, they needed to change the sign, and they were adamant that the above sign made it clear that I needed a swimsuit. After I whined (we'd driven about 1/2 an hour to pick up the other 2 kids and bring them, and it was raining so there was nothing outside we could do, our home is too far away to have gone back there) they found a swimsuit that I could borrow.

Is that how you would have interpreted it?

While I'm at it -- does this seem like a fair distribution of resources? We have, essentially 4 pools -- a "therapy pool" (giant hot tub) that is adults only, a "lesson pool" that today was adult learn to swim, a "baby pool" with a zero entry ramp that goes up to 2 1/2 feet, it does have a basketball hoop at the deep end that the bigger kids like, and an Olympic sized pool that today was set up with 9 full length lanes, however they "allowed" the kids to share the lane by the wall with the adults who were water walking. The lanes were not full, many had 1 person in them.

Am I crazy to think that they can devote one or two lanes so that the kids can play in the water in the big pool, at least when the lesson pool (which is 3 - 4 feet deep) is in use? 11 year olds don't want to swim in the baby pool.

 

[ncmickeyluvr]

Sorry. I interpret it to mean that everyone in the pool area needs to be wearing a swimsuit.

If you child is under 6, you must actually be in the water with them.

If your child is older than 6 but younger than 13, you don't have to be in the water, but you have to be wearing swim attire.


I do understand that it's frustrating that they don't always enforce their rules the same way. I also agree about the distribution of space. That's one of the reasons that we no longer swim at our YMCA. They clear the entire main pool for exercise class and cram everyone else into the kiddie area.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Sorry. I interpret it to mean that everyone in the pool area needs to be wearing a swimsuit.

If you child is under 6, you must actually be in the water with them.

If your child is older than 6 but younger than 13, you don't have to be in the water, but you have to be wearing swim attire.


I do understand that it's frustrating that they don't always enforce their rules the same way. I also agree about the distribution of space. That's one of the reasons that we no longer swim at our YMCA. They clear the entire main pool for exercise class and cram everyone else into the kiddie area.

I get that you have to wear a swim suit to be on the pool deck -- that much is clear. What I was told before that being on the observation deck (like bleachers, you enter from a different door, no entry directly to/from the pool itself) counts as "supervising".

 

[allison443]

I get that you have to wear a swim suit to be on the pool deck -- that much is clear. What I was told before that being on the observation deck (like bleachers, you enter from a different door, no entry directly to/from the pool itself) counts as "supervising".

Honestly I would say that isn't close enough to count as supervising. You wouldn't be close enough to speak to the kids if they start misbehaving or roughhousing, for example.

However, it doesn't matter what we on the dis think...making the rules is up to the management. I get that you were allowed to sit upstairs in the past. Who knows, maybe they got a new manager who decided to enforce the rule, or there was an incident where a kid (not yours) needed parental supervision and the parent wasn't able to do so since they were upstairs.

I know it's annoying to be told inconsistent things at different times. Are you planning to pursue this further or something? Or just bring your suit from now on?

 

[XTinabell]

IMO the sign is not clear. If it's supposed to be obvious that you are to be in a swimsuit then why do they only specify swim attire for the under 6's? It should either not be specified at all for any categories under the assumption that it's obvious, or it should be specified under ALL categories. The inconsistency does make it confusing and I would have been peeved as well.
They need a sign that says all children under the age of 13 must be accompanied by an adult. Why the need for two separate categories just to specify that children under six need to be within arms reach of the adult (which IMO is a duh thing to say)? That doesn't make sense. I think you were dealing with a staff member that was on a power trip.

 

[disneyjunkie]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire.

It's pretty clear to me.

If I have a kids under 13 in the pool, I have to accompany/supervise them.
If I'm in the pool area, I must wear swimming attire.

The sign doesn't say I have to be in the pool area, but I think that part is understood.

I get that you have to wear a swim suit to be on the pool deck -- that much is clear. What I was told before that being on the observation deck (like bleachers, you enter from a different door, no entry directly to/from the pool itself) counts as "supervising".

It sounds like the first person gave you wrong information. Why would you have parents supervising from an area that does not have direct acces to/from the pool?

 

[aprilgail2]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire.

.

To me it means that you need to wear a swim suit if your child is under 6- otherwise why would it specifically say that on that line of the sign and not the other???

 

[Jennasis]

I personally do feel that sitting in an observation area with direct pool access or a way for you to immeidately ommunicate/correct your children vocally, is supervising. You need to be ON the pool deck.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire.

These are the "rules" at our local public indoor swimming pool. When the pool opened, I took my bathing suit, my 10 year old and a friend and asked whether this meant I needed to be in the pool with them, and was told no, you can watch in your clothes from the observation deck.

I have since taken my son, and various friends many times and each time I sat on the observation deck (like a balcony) and did homework for grad school, keeping an eye out at the same time. The pool employees clearly saw me do this each time, and never objected.

Today I took my son and 2 other 11 year olds, and was told that the rules above meant that I needed to be on the pool deck in a bathing suit, watching them. I told them that if they changed the rules, they needed to change the sign, and they were adamant that the above sign made it clear that I needed a swimsuit. After I whined (we'd driven about 1/2 an hour to pick up the other 2 kids and bring them, and it was raining so there was nothing outside we could do, our home is too far away to have gone back there) they found a swimsuit that I could borrow.

Is that how you would have interpreted it?

While I'm at it -- does this seem like a fair distribution of resources? We have, essentially 4 pools -- a "therapy pool" (giant hot tub) that is adults only, a "lesson pool" that today was adult learn to swim, a "baby pool" with a zero entry ramp that goes up to 2 1/2 feet, it does have a basketball hoop at the deep end that the bigger kids like, and an Olympic sized pool that today was set up with 9 full length lanes, however they "allowed" the kids to share the lane by the wall with the adults who were water walking. The lanes were not full, many had 1 person in them.

Am I crazy to think that they can devote one or two lanes so that the kids can play in the water in the big pool, at least when the lesson pool (which is 3 - 4 feet deep) is in use? 11 year olds don't want to swim in the baby pool.

Sounds like they don't want anyone at the pool not in swimming attire. I think that is a very silly rule myself. But rule number 3 covers it. So even if you were just sunbathing, it seems they'd want you in swimming attire. Sounds like the prior staff just let you go and now you have the Rule Enforcement police on your hands.

And yes--if they have open swim, they should have a place for older people to swim (including older children who can swim) that doesn't include the baby pool.

Our public pools do that. Otherwise, there is no point in open swim.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

double post

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

IMO the sign is not clear. If it's supposed to be obvious that you are to be in a swimsuit then why do they only specify swim attire for the under 6's? It should either not be specified at all for any categories under the assumption that it's obvious, or it should be specified under ALL categories. The inconsistency does make it confusing and I would have been peeved as well.
They need a sign that says all children under the age of 13 must be accompanied by an adult. Why the need for two separate categories just to specify that children under six need to be within arms reach of the adult (which IMO is a duh thing to say)? That doesn't make sense. I think you were dealing with a staff member that was on a power trip.

2 separate categories b/c within arms reach will require a parent to enter the water with the child--even in a splash area. It means, you should be able to "touch" the child at all times and not have to sprint and rescue them in case they have a problem.

 

[Tracy Savage]

I get the sign. I don't get the fact that they gave you a bathing suit to "borrow" To me, thats like wearing someone elses underwear.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Thanks everyone for your different thoughts.

To be clear, the observation deck is close enough to call/talk to the kids, but it's not inside the pool area, it's separated by a low railing. When I've been up there I can and have talked to my kids, asked them not to do something, or told them it was time to get out of the pool and get dressed. I do consider that enough supervision for 11 year olds who have been on a swim team and through many years of lessons.

I can see both interpretations of this sign, which is why I asked the first time -- they were pretty clear that observation deck = supervising, and doesn't require a suit. I asked a manager, I didn't sneak around behind anyone's back. I then did the same thing at least 10 times. Yesterday I was annoyed because I'd left work early, and driven about 40 minutes to gather up the kids and go across town to the pool, and because the new manager basically implied that I had knowingly broken the rules in the past, and that the sign was crystal clear that what I was doing was not allowed. If they'd said "I'm sorry, we changed the rules (or better yet, posted a notice in advance that the rules were going to change), here's why (an incident happened, we got clarification from the central office, whatever)" or "Yes, I can see why you might interpret that sign that way, we will have it changed, but we just can't allow an exception, so sorry". Instead when I asked why I couldn't do something I've been doing for a long time, they basically said "How dare you have done that!"

My city is notorious for not giving clear directions. The other day I parked directly under a sign that said "No parking on Tuesday -- street cleaning". It was a Wednesday so I figured I was safe, but it turned out that way up the block was a sign with an arrow pointing my way that said "No parking Monday through Friday". A few months ago I let my son take my dog to the school playground (on leash, with poop bags ready to go) at 8:00 p.m., when there's a sign that says "No dogs allowed 7 a.m. to 7 p.m." and the security guard came out and yelled at him and chased him away. I went to DMV, waited in line for 3 hours to change my car registration when I moved last year, and was told that my "proof of residency" didn't count because I had brought an "unpaid bill" (I had printed out the bill online, and then paid it, but should have paid and then printed). I'm tired of it.

So, I might complain. I'm going to write the manager and suggest that they take out one of the lane dividers and leave 2 lanes free for the kids to use -- they'll still have 7 lap lanes, the therapy pool, and the lesson pool all "kid free", so I think that seems quite reasonable. I will probably put something in there about the signs not being clear.

 

[dawn1620]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult. - Sitting out in the car is not supervised..keep a watch on your kid.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach. Be attached to your child like velcro in the pool and not sitting on the bleachers paying more attention to your cell phone.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire. Thongs are not swimming attire, they are barely underwear.

QUOTE]

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

It seems to me that your problem is in the uneven enforcement of the rules. If they allowed it before and no longer allow it, is it a result of new management or staff? The rules themselves are ambiguous in that they do not spell out that an adult must be in the pool area to supervise, but that does not mean that they can't enforce it that way.

I would just ask that they evenly enforce whatever interpretation of that rule that they decide upon. That, or put in a pool (we did).

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Sitting out in the car is not supervised..keep a watch on your kid.

Where does sitting in the car come in to this? I don't think anyone is proposing that I do that?

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Sitting out in the car is not supervised..keep a watch on your kid.

Where does sitting in the car come in to this? I don't think anyone is proposing that I do that?

That poster was simply responding to the OP's original question--"How would you interpret this sign?"

ETL: Sorry--you are the OP..okay, they were responding to the question without getting to the nitty gritty of the rest of the discussion.

 

[design_mom]

Has the "all people in pool area must wear swim attire" rule always been in force, or did they add one.

I would interpret the rules as:
-- All children under 13 must have an adult in the pool area supervising them. (Your boys sound like strong swimmers and probably don't *need* that level of supervision, but more casual swimmers (like my son) would probably need closer supervision. I think the rule means *in* the pool area, not the observation deck.)
-- All children under 6, must have an adult in the water with them (or sitting on the side) within arm's reach.
-- All people in the pool area (in the water or out) must wear a swim suit. I wonder, since proper attire was addressed in the rule about 6 year olds, but not the rule about 13 year olds, if the swimwear rule was added later. Otherwise, there was no reason to specify proper attire for the 6yo's chaperones.

Either way, it sounds like they are now enforcing a rule that they didn't previously enforce. I find inconsistent rules/rule enforcement VERY frustrating. If you're going to have a rule, enforce it. If it's not going to be enforced, don't make it a rule! Sorry that they didn't just let you have a "warning" last time. I would not have wanted to wear a "loaner" bathing suit. But I wouldn't have wanted to disappoint the boys either.

 

[kaytieeldr]

Children under 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult.

Children under 6 must be accompanied by an adult in swimming attire, who stays within arms reach.

Any person inside the pool area must wear swimming attire

It's pretty clear to me.

If I have a kids under 13 in the pool, I have to accompany/supervise them.
If I'm in the pool area, I must wear swimming attire.

The sign doesn't say I have to be in the pool area, but I think that part is understood.

And now, one time only, the true, the accurate, the exact, the final word... the kaytieeldr interpretation of how the sign SHOULD be worded, if management wants users to understand the sign the way management understands the sign (not to be confused with the actual intent of the sign):

Children under 6 must be accompanied by and constantly within arm's reach of an adult in swimming attire.

Children between 6 and 13 must be accompanied by and supervised by an adult in the pool [deck] area.

Any person inside the pool [deck] area must wear swimming attire.

I have decreed, and it shall be so.

 

[taximomfor4]

I would interpret it to mean that if your child is under 6, you have to be in a swimsuit and within arm's reach. If your child is 6-12, you must be in a swimsuit and in the pool area but not within arm's reach.

TBH, I think they just let the rules slide for a while (or jsut the employees you were encountering did). Now, it seems that they won't let you get away with the little extra freedom they gave you previously.

It's kind of like when I frequented a certain restaurant in the past. Every time I got a salad, for a loooooong time, it was huge with plenty of cheese and croutons (yum). But one day, my usual salad was noticeably smaller, with just a sprinkling of cheese and only a few croutons. I questioned the server, who told me the district manager had recently come around, and cracked down on the overly generous portions they were giving out. I nodded, thanked her for the info, and said, "well thanks for all the extra cheese and croutons I've gotten over the past year!" It's not that something was taken away from me, it's that I had gotten a bonus many times before that visit.