Lawsuit 'Discriminatory' Gluten-Free Menu
Replies
-
Adrianox85 wrote: »JustAnotherGirlSuzanne wrote: »LOL, gluten free products cost more, that's why the prices are higher. You're also paying for the chef to do his/her best to avoid cross-contamination. Be thankful that the option is out there... gluten-free options didn't used to be so readily available for Celiac sufferers.
Personally, I'm always a little surprised that it's ONLY a buck or two more expensive.
Devil's Advocate
Here's the problem. Can we agree that an apple is gluten free? Yes? Okay.
Can we also agree that an apple costs the price of an apple? okay. Great.
Now I open a restaurant and I sell apples and bread. I charge 50 cents for the apples that are kept in the bread basket along with the bread and 1 dollar for the apple that sit in the apple-only basket. Is this cost justified?
The problem here is not the fact that gluten free products cost more. They don't. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges. Both are gluten free. We aren't talking about gluten free cakes and pastas. PF Changs doesn't have gluten free bread or GF substitutes, They just have foods WITHOUT gluten (Vegetables and Meat) and are prepared in a safe environment. You're paying a surcharge for the preparation of the food to keep you safe from an allergy.
And that's okay if that preparation takes additional resources, whether that be storage space, separate grill areas, glove changes, training. The company needs to take those costs into account when setting prices.0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »We aren't talking about gluten free cakes and pastas. PF Changs doesn't have gluten free bread or GF substitutes, They just have foods WITHOUT gluten (Vegetables and Meat) and are prepared in a safe environment. You're paying a surcharge for the preparation of the food to keep you safe from an allergy.
Actually, they do have to use GF food items, GF sauces, GF noodles (most noodles on the market are not GF), etc, so yeah, there is an increased cost.0 -
Devil's Advocate:
So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »Devil's Advocate:
So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?
How do you know they're not? That cost could be baked into prices without notification to the consumer.0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?
99% of food does not have peanuts in it. Therefore, it is very easy to make factories and restaurants peanut free. The costs of doing so are low.
Gluten, soy, and corn are extremely common and are in 99% of the foods we eat. To try to isolate foods that do not contain these allergens is nearly impossible and takes a lot of effort and cost.
Therefore, gluten free food is more expensive than peanut free.0 -
Because omission doesn't incur cost, substitution does. If you're replacing almonds for peanuts, they probably would.
Asking for a burger without a bun or wrapped in lettuce doesn't incur additional cost, but asking for a specialty bun, one that in a store costs $1 each vs one that costs 10 cents each, will.0 -
chivalryder wrote: »Adrianox85 wrote: »So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?
99% of food does not have peanuts in it. Therefore, it is very easy to make factories and restaurants peanut free. The costs of doing so are low.
Gluten, soy, and corn are extremely common and are in 99% of the foods we eat. To try to isolate foods that do not contain these allergens is nearly impossible and takes a lot of effort and cost.
Therefore, gluten free food is more expensive than peanut free.
Wrong here. Check labels in the supermarket and see how many "This product was manufactured in a factory that also processes tree nuts" labels you can find. You'll be shocked.0 -
Peanuts aren't tree nuts.0
-
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
The question is, is having a gluten-free option available and charging for it reasonable. I can see both sides to the argument, and the restaurant will likely have to show that it would face an undue burden in providing the gluten-free options for no charge.0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »chivalryder wrote: »Adrianox85 wrote: »So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?
99% of food does not have peanuts in it. Therefore, it is very easy to make factories and restaurants peanut free. The costs of doing so are low.
Gluten, soy, and corn are extremely common and are in 99% of the foods we eat. To try to isolate foods that do not contain these allergens is nearly impossible and takes a lot of effort and cost.
Therefore, gluten free food is more expensive than peanut free.
Wrong here. Check labels in the supermarket and see how many "This product was manufactured in a factory that also processes tree nuts" labels you can find. You'll be shocked.
They're being made in a factory that also processes tree nuts. They're not made of tree nuts.
Also, they're not claiming to be peanut free. So, what's your point?0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »Peanuts aren't tree nuts.
I stand corrected but the statement is the same. There are products that list peanuts on shared equipment.
0 -
.0
-
1) They aren't buying special products to remove peanuts.
2) Some restaurants won't make the modification. Some restaurants will require advance notice so that they can prepare those meals ahead of time.
3) They won't modify just anything on the menu. They will tell you if they can't do it.
4) A lot of menus now have caveats (eat at your own risk) on them now.
0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »NJGamerChick wrote: »Peanuts aren't tree nuts.
I stand corrected but the statement is the same. There are products that list peanuts on shared equipment.
These products are not claiming to be peanut free.
It is very easy to make a product peanut-free as it is not a common ingredient.
Gluten is a very common ingredient, therefore it is difficult to make a factory gluten-free.
Therefore, peanut free = not expensive. Gluten free = expensive.0 -
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
She's not suing under the federal ADA, but only the CA state version and various other CA state laws, unless I missed something in the complaint. (Presumably CA law also defines it as a disability, though.) She also does claim to have celiac.
0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »NJGamerChick wrote: »Peanuts aren't tree nuts.
I stand corrected but the statement is the same. There are products that list peanuts on shared equipment.
Foods that are labeled gluten free in the US must contain less than 20 ppm of gluten. They are tested to be that way even if made on a shared facility. It is even more strict in Canada at 10 ppm. And I believe in Europe it is 10 ppm as well. Italy takes Celiac Disease very seriously and is very accommodating to those who are gluten-free. They are pretty much the model for many other countries.
ETA: Shared facility doesn't mean shared space or equipment. It could be made on a whole different, dedicated line on the other side of the building than everything else. Shared equipment still needs to have validated cleaning protocols that show contamination isn't happening.0 -
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
The question is, is having a gluten-free option available and charging for it reasonable. I can see both sides to the argument, and the restaurant will likely have to show that it would face an undue burden in providing the gluten-free options for no charge.
I have no doubt that PF Changs will be able to prove that burden well enough to justify the up charge.
But I still roll my eyes that this is now a "disability." Unfortunate and horrible, yes. But now is every allergy a freakin' disability? Sigh. Ugh.
0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »chivalryder wrote: »Adrianox85 wrote: »So then I ask this. Why aren't peanut allergy sufferers being charged more for their food?
99% of food does not have peanuts in it. Therefore, it is very easy to make factories and restaurants peanut free. The costs of doing so are low.
Gluten, soy, and corn are extremely common and are in 99% of the foods we eat. To try to isolate foods that do not contain these allergens is nearly impossible and takes a lot of effort and cost.
Therefore, gluten free food is more expensive than peanut free.
Wrong here. Check labels in the supermarket and see how many "This product was manufactured in a factory that also processes tree nuts" labels you can find. You'll be shocked.
Well that's an entirely different thing though. You can remove items that have that warning from a dish without substituting them with something else.
You can't make a gluten free pasta dish without gluten free pasta.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
She's not suing under the federal ADA, but only the CA state version and various other CA state laws, unless I missed something in the complaint. (Presumably CA law also defines it as a disability, though.) She also does claim to have celiac.
Is she in Canada? According to the update article, restaurants get a tax break for incurred costs of serving a GF menu in Canada, so then her lawsuit could stand on murky grounds, but still, I don't think most of us who are GF really care about having to pay the extra money if it means we don't get sick.0 -
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
The question is, is having a gluten-free option available and charging for it reasonable. I can see both sides to the argument, and the restaurant will likely have to show that it would face an undue burden in providing the gluten-free options for no charge.
I have no doubt that PF Changs will be able to prove that burden well enough to justify the up charge.
But I still roll my eyes that this is now a "disability." Unfortunate and horrible, yes. But now is every allergy a freakin' disability? Sigh. Ugh.
So, if this is now a disability, does that mean I can park in the handicapped parking spots?0 -
Meh. Maybe it affects the ability to eat, but it's still a personal choice to eat at a restaurant. You can make the case that said person has an option to go to a grocery store.
Now, the digestive issue? That's different because it can come on in an emergency. That's why Chron's/Colitis patients carry cards to show so that they can be let in to restaurants and such to use a bathroom.
It's a disability under the ADA(AA) which is what she is suing under. The ADA extends to places of public accommodations, such as restaurants, and requires that accommodations be made.
The question is, is having a gluten-free option available and charging for it reasonable. I can see both sides to the argument, and the restaurant will likely have to show that it would face an undue burden in providing the gluten-free options for no charge.
I have no doubt that PF Changs will be able to prove that burden well enough to justify the up charge.
But I still roll my eyes that this is now a "disability." Unfortunate and horrible, yes. But now is every allergy a freakin' disability? Sigh. Ugh.
As of January 1, 2009, everything is a disability. Everything.
And don't be so sure that can prove undue burden...they are a large company, not a mom-and-pop shop. They have a much higher ceiling.
0 -
A whole dollar more? How awful.0
-
Food allergies are covered under ADA. At schools student who have documented medical reasons they can't consume foods such as an allergy or celiac disease must be accommodated for. The school must provide safe food for them to consume. I think this lady might have a case it will be interested to see if she wins. I can't charge people more to come to my store because I had to build a ramp for their wheel chair. I think that most people gladly pay the extra money for convenience - and I guess that PF Chang could just remove the choice???0
-
Exact.lyNJGamerChick wrote: »I think the general consensus from the gluten-free folk is that we'd gladly pay to not be sick for the occasional meal we're actually risking our health for by eating out. The woman initiating the lawsuit is a jerk. This is why we can't have nice things.
0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »Devil's advocate here. Should a wheelchair bound person have to pay a surcharge on their order if a wheelchair ramp is installed for disabled people? Just curious what everyones opinion on that would be.
Under the law or morally? In any case, my answer is the same, of course not.
Question to you: if I'm allergic to chicken and thus my only options are the beef or shrimp, both of which are more expensive, has a restaurant violated my rights?0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »JustAnotherGirlSuzanne wrote: »LOL, gluten free products cost more, that's why the prices are higher. You're also paying for the chef to do his/her best to avoid cross-contamination. Be thankful that the option is out there... gluten-free options didn't used to be so readily available for Celiac sufferers.
Personally, I'm always a little surprised that it's ONLY a buck or two more expensive.
Devil's Advocate
Here's the problem. Can we agree that an apple is gluten free? Yes? Okay.
Can we also agree that an apple costs the price of an apple? okay. Great.
Now I open a restaurant and I sell apples and bread. I charge 50 cents for the apples that are kept in the bread basket along with the bread and 1 dollar for the apple that sit in the apple-only basket. Is this cost justified?
The problem here is not the fact that gluten free products cost more. They don't. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges. Both are gluten free. We aren't talking about gluten free cakes and pastas. PF Changs doesn't have gluten free bread or GF substitutes, They just have foods WITHOUT gluten (Vegetables and Meat) and are prepared in a safe environment. You're paying a surcharge for the preparation of the food to keep you safe from an allergy.
There's an enormous difference between an apple in a basket and a working, professional kitchen churning out 100s of orders and trying to avoid cross contamination. And I'm sure they use some GF products in sauces and such. This comparison doesn't hold.
Correct.0 -
chivalryder wrote: »
So, if this is now a disability, does that mean I can park in the handicapped parking spots?
This is really ignorant.
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Adrianox85 wrote: »Devil's advocate here and as a person who suffers from celiac disease. Should a wheelchair bound person have to pay a surcharge on their order if a wheelchair ramp is installed for disabled people? Just curious what everyones opinion on that would be.
Is celiac disease a disability? I'm not sure it's an appropriate comparison.
ETA: I'm not saying it's not a disability. I just don't know if all conditions count as disabilities deserving of protection. I have a pretty nasty immune system disorder that should limit what I eat, but I don't know that I would qualify for disability protection.
Let's break it down so you can understand better then:
"(1) Disability
The term “disability” means, with respect to an individual—
(A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;
(B) a record of such an impairment; or
(C) being regarded as having such an impairment (as described in paragraph (3))."
Let's assume that the person has a documented medical history of having celiac disease. Most celiacs do. Prong one met.
Next prong...does it affect a major life activity?
"(2) Major life activities
(A) In general
For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.
(B) Major bodily functions
For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions."
I think it affects the operation of digestive/bowel function and one could argue that, depending on severity, it affects the ability to eat. Doesn't matter, it affects a major bodily function, so prong two met.
So, celiac disease is a disability. With the act amended in 2008, pretty much everything is.
Holy crap, I'm double disabled with asthma and low t.
Some would say triple, because I'm male... lol.
I deserve something. Seriously.0 -
Adrianox85 wrote: »chivalryder wrote: »
So, if this is now a disability, does that mean I can park in the handicapped parking spots?
This is really ignorant.
It's called a joke.0 -
The mcdonalds lady used because the coffee was heated to an unsafe temperature and she was severely burned. That particular mcdonalds was told several times to turn down the temperature on their coffee and they did not. Not saying I would have sued in her position, but I definitely don't feel sorry for the McDonald's.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions