By Anthony Lee, CEO and Personal Fitness Trainer at Activ8 Lifestyle & Fitness
When choosing somewhere to live in Dubai, the facilities can be a big part of the decision. The pool, the gym, the padel court that you’ll definitely use every week and absolutely won’t forget exists after three months. You’re paying for access to these amenities as part of living there, so what happens when you decide you want professional help to make better use of them?
For some residents, that can mean discovering that the personal trainer they’ve hired isn’t permitted to train them in their building gym, or needs specific approval before they can enter. As a personal trainer of more than 25 years, I can understand why this is frustrating, but I can also understand why the rules exist.
The interesting part for me is what happens in communities where residents are permitted to bring guests into the gym. A friend may be able to join you and use the equipment alongside you, while a qualified trainer whose primary purpose is to watch, advise and correct you may face different restrictions. Of course, every building has its own policies and there are legitimate considerations around security, insurance, licensing and commercial activity, but I think it raises a fair question about whether a blanket ban is always the best solution.
When I train someone in their residential gym, I’m not there to get my own workout in. I’m watching their technique, checking the depth and tempo of movements, adjusting exercises and making sure they’re training at the right level. My client is using the same equipment they would have used without me. I’m simply there to help them use it more effectively. I have a perfectly good residential gym myself, but I also pay a considerable amount for a private gym membership for my own training. There’s a difference between using a facility professionally to coach a resident and treating it as your own personal gym.
That said, I’ll happily admit that personal trainers themselves haven’t always helped the argument. I’ve seen external trainers take over several pieces of equipment for circuits while residents are trying to train, use the gym themselves before or after a client session, situations where trainers have entered communities with clients who don’t actually live there, and trainers who don’t live in the community sneaking in with clients who aren’t residents either. That crosses a line. A residential gym isn’t a free alternative to a commercial gym and, as an external trainer, you shouldn’t be making the experience worse for the people who actually pay to live there.
In fact, I think trainers should probably be held to a higher standard. If a resident needs the machine I planned to use with my client, we adapt. There are plenty of ways to train the same muscle group without standing around for 15 minutes guarding a piece of equipment. If your programme requires you to occupy four different stations in a busy residential gym, change the programme. That’s part of being a good trainer.
So I don’t think this needs to become an argument between residents and building management, or between trainers and communities. If I were responsible for a residential building, I wouldn’t want unknown trainers wandering in and effectively operating their businesses from my gym either. I’d want to know who they were, who they were training and that they met whatever professional and security requirements were in place.
But there is a sizeable middle ground between unrestricted access and no access at all. Where appropriate, buildings could consider systems that allow approved trainers to register, provide the required documentation and enter with the resident they’re training, while making it clear that they cannot monopolise equipment, train non-residents or use the facilities themselves. If a trainer doesn’t respect those rules, remove their access. There should also be clear agreements around responsibility and liability if an injury or serious incident occurs during a session. My view is that residents choosing to engage an external trainer should take responsibility for that decision, rather than automatically placing the burden on building management, although any legal liability would ultimately depend on the circumstances and applicable rules.
Ultimately, paying to live somewhere doesn’t mean you own the gym or can ignore the rules governing a shared space. But if you’re paying for access to fitness facilities and want to hire a qualified professional to help you use them safely and effectively, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to want that option considered. The responsibility works both ways. Buildings need to protect their residents and facilities, while trainers need to remember that when we’re invited into a residential gym, we’re not walking into our workplace. We’re walking into someone else’s home environment.
Perhaps the question isn’t whether personal trainers should be allowed or banned. It’s whether we can create sensible rules that allow residents choice without everyone else having to pay the price for it.
