![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Now, we all should know that, contrary to popular belief, state health departments don't ban going barefoot in businesses.
But recently, somebody told me that this sort of thing is regulated by the locality, and not the state. Interesting, interesting.
Well, it's official:
Dear Ms. Baker:
I am writing in response to your recent inquiry addressed to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) asking whether there are sanitary regulations requiring that food service establishment (FSE) patrons have on footwear.
Neither the New York City Health Code nor the New York State Sanitary Code contain any provisions which address the issue of clothing or footwear worn by patrons in New York City FSE’s.
Thank you and I hope this adequately addresses your inquiry.
(I assume that they do not have stricter rules for places which do not serve food.)
So the shoelessness is not, legally, a problem for the niecelings - at least, not so long as we stay in the state :)
That post got deleted a while back, I'm sad to say, but all the same - HAH! Ha-HAH!
But recently, somebody told me that this sort of thing is regulated by the locality, and not the state. Interesting, interesting.
Well, it's official:
Dear Ms. Baker:
I am writing in response to your recent inquiry addressed to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) asking whether there are sanitary regulations requiring that food service establishment (FSE) patrons have on footwear.
Neither the New York City Health Code nor the New York State Sanitary Code contain any provisions which address the issue of clothing or footwear worn by patrons in New York City FSE’s.
Thank you and I hope this adequately addresses your inquiry.
(I assume that they do not have stricter rules for places which do not serve food.)
So the shoelessness is not, legally, a problem for the niecelings - at least, not so long as we stay in the state :)
That post got deleted a while back, I'm sad to say, but all the same - HAH! Ha-HAH!
no subject
Date: 2007-04-20 02:55 am (UTC)the sign would cover for the liability, but not for the social stigma...allowing people to be barefoot inside your establishment is going to be looked on as dirty by most patrons, regardless of the truth, and might lose you some business, especially if you're an establishment that serves food.
In college I often walk into the diner with my shoes off, completely by accident, if I'm working in the attached building on an event. I never wear shoes while I'm working on a show, unless I'm setting up a stage...then I wear huge boots because crushed toes are not my idea of fun. So I definitely enjoy being barefoot and have my barefoot times. that is mostly because I hate socks, though...I am indifferent towards most shoes.
no subject
Date: 2007-04-20 03:04 am (UTC)If you're really concerned about the social stigma, then say that instead of making up dumb reasons. (Though that's a pretty silly reason in and of itself in most places. We can expand the argument to all sorts of things which people are unreasonably prejudiced against, fill-in-the-blanks for yourself, and which one would plainly see as unreasonable to ban. Additionally, there is something to be said for normalizing things like the normal condition of the human foot... and then again, I often do wonder why people spend any time looking at other people's feet. This is why I gave up on socks for a while, because I was tired of explaining that if my socks didn't match, it was because I hadn't done laundry, not because I was starting/following some trend. Why people thought it was any of their business, I *don't* know....)
no subject
Date: 2007-04-20 03:40 am (UTC)I think it is a silly reason, but I think that's sort of at the base of the policies...that and the fact that it's the norm and not to require it means you need to think about it more carefully when most people probably don't ever think about going barefoot.