Owners of golf clubs are often faced with various legal curiosities. Not always a case costs a joke. It is true for the U.S., a country where golf culture and industry are developed to the highest level. Various legal «traps» are hidden in whimsical and sometimes «meticulous» laws. That is a pressing problem for owners and operators of golf courses. In fact, lawyers also do not warm the bench. To earn their bread, they «develop» court trials to protect golf clubs. 

There is an article in a recent issue of «Golf Business» magazine, which is devoted to the issue. The magazine is published by the National Golf Course Owners Association (Kiev Golf Club is a member of it – see more on this >>). We would like to introduce one fragment to readers of the site, paying tribute to the good old genre of our journalism under the name «their morals».

An excerpt deals with the so-called «gender» issue. Do golf clubs allow discrimination based on sex? And what must be considered as such discrimination?

For years, women have argued that clubs prohibit them from playing at certain times of the week, relegating them to such off-peak times as Tuesday mornings. Course operators who are in the habit of «reserving» prime tee times such as Saturday mornings for men (whether it's an official policy or an implied rule) should re¬consider this stance, if they hope to stay out of the legal crosshairs.

Obviously, the argument of gender inequality can extend well beyond the course and the tee sheet. Quite often, it starts (or stops, depending on your view) at the doors to the separate men's and women's grills that are found at many private clubs. On the surface, the idea of providing separate facilities for men and women – particularly when they're attached to the respective locker rooms – is a fair allocation of resources that makes perfect sense. However, that's not always the case, as a number of these «grills» have been challenged as discriminatory, with the argument being that everyone should have access to both facilities.

Some clubs have challenged the issue by arguing that although the traditional grill facilities may have been separate, they were equal in quality. In California, at least, the courts did not accept this defense. As for the obvious argument that allowing unfettered access to either area reduces a member's right to privacy? The courts have consistently ruled that clubs need to make both grills accessible to everyone and provide screening to address the privacy issue. Unfortunately, it seems to be an expensive exercise in futility.

«Most clubs that have made the changes to provide equal access to both facilities report that use of the facilities have remained virtually unchanged, with women largely favoring the traditional women's grill and men favoring the men's grill», attorney Tengberg says.

Interestingly, operators may see an increase in the number of reverse discrimination cases. According to Tengberg, there have been several instances where programs such as ladies' day discounts (where all women receive reduced prices on green fees, food and beverage, and pro shop items) have been successfully challenged as discriminatory. In California, a case involving ladies' night discounts at a bar and another for discounted car washes for women were both found to be illegal.

«The owners argued the purpose was to increase use of the facilities by women, but the courts ruled they were simply ways to make additional profit and were, therefore, illegal», says Tengberg, who anticipates some¬one will eventually make a persuasive argument that efforts like these are more along the lines of affirmative actions to counterbalance past wrongs, similar to preferential treatment for racial minorities and women in hiring or awarding contracts.


Source: «Golf Business», November 2008
National Golf Course Owners Association