Lawsuit 'Discriminatory' Gluten-Free Menu
Replies
-
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.
Guess what. Coffee needs to be brewed at unsafe temperatures, otherwise you get horrible tasting coffee.
Tea needs to be brewed at even hotter temperatures.
Do you like to spend $1.50 on coffee to tastes terrible?0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »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.
CA=California. Sorry for the confusion.0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Apparently, yes.
And so I go back to my original comment on this thread.
I weep for humanity.0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?0 -
Translation: Truth has invalidated my belief, but I stand behind my belief!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.
Result: sad feelings, deep in the area where my lungs might be.
-1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »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?
only if beef is made from wheelchairs.0 -
Translation: Truth has invalidated my belief, but I stand behind my belief!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.
Result: sad feelings, deep in the area where my lungs might be.-1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »NJGamerChick wrote: »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.
CA=California. Sorry for the confusion.
I got that. I don't know if US has the same tax breaks as Canada, or if the state of CA does, so I'm saying, it could be a legit inquiry of sorts, in that they are being compensated twice, though I doubt it. IRS allows a person with Celiac to deduct additional costs of gluten-free products in their taxes, so additional costs for eating out could be itemized with proof of diagnosis.0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
Are you an attorney?0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »NJGamerChick wrote: »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.
CA=California. Sorry for the confusion.
I got that. I don't know if US has the same tax breaks as Canada, or if the state of CA does, so I'm saying, it could be a legit inquiry of sorts, in that they are being compensated twice, though I doubt it. IRS allows a person with Celiac to deduct additional costs of gluten-free products in their taxes, so additional costs for eating out could be itemized with proof of diagnosis.
No, dear God, no.
0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
accommodations? hmm, I would like to have the option to know exactly what is on my plate before I order when I go out...oh wait...that already exists...called asking the waiter....hmmm this is hard since most restaurants are already very accommodating to most allergies and intolerance....
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
Are you an attorney?
I don't think would ever consciously admit to being one.0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »NJGamerChick wrote: »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.
CA=California. Sorry for the confusion.
I got that. I don't know if US has the same tax breaks as Canada, or if the state of CA does, so I'm saying, it could be a legit inquiry of sorts, in that they are being compensated twice, though I doubt it. IRS allows a person with Celiac to deduct additional costs of gluten-free products in their taxes, so additional costs for eating out could be itemized with proof of diagnosis.
No, dear God, no.
This is my reaction to my brain sometimes too.0 -
Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.0
-
-
You have at best a position as defensible as a paper mache castle, yet you base your best debate tactics on interpersonal attacks and irrelevant analogies in an attempt to confound others into believing your preposterous claims.Adrianox85 wrote: »
Translation: Truth has invalidated my belief, but I stand behind my belief!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.
Result: sad feelings, deep in the area where my lungs might be.
You have poor reading comprehension.
I wiggle my moustache in discomfort and disdain for your general position based on belief and not actual knowledge or fact.
*wiggle*
0 -
Haven't made it through the whole thread, but my initial reaction after reading the OP and the subsequent disdain from people on this board is that perhaps the woman who filed the lawsuit either doesn't have Celiac's disease, or maybe has a mild gluten intolerance... and is just feeling particularly litigious... Most of the people who have commented and those that I know IRL who have gluten sensitivities are so grateful for actual gluten free products and restaurant options that they are more than willing to pay a little extra...
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
Are you an attorney?
I don't think would ever consciously admit to being one.
?? I'm only asking because you seem to be well versed on ADA, but I've learned over time that familiarity with how a law is written doesn't always come with familiarity with how the law is interpreted.0 -
lol, we got a mad flagger!
Grumble grumble passive angry passive angry. >_<0 -
liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
There was a similar impact at a chain restaurant that provided full nutritional info. Someone sued them saying it was incorrect and made them fat... so they just decided they didn't want the liability. Now there's no more nutritional info available on their website.0 -
liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
yup!
had that happen at my local little grocery store...someone complained that the shop only had 1 brand of almond milk and it was expensive (the only milk I can drink btw) so the owner just stopped stocking the milk altogether and told her "problem solved" sucked for the rest of us....she never came back to the store...she was at least smart enough to realize how many people she just pissed off.
0 -
HardcoreP0rk wrote: »liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
There was a similar impact at a chain restaurant that provided full nutritional info. Someone sued them saying it was incorrect and made them fat... so they just decided they didn't want the liability. Now there's no more nutritional info available on their website.
Yes! I like that result, honestly.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
Are you an attorney?
I don't think would ever consciously admit to being one.
?? I'm only asking because you seem to be well versed on ADA, but I've learned over time that familiarity with how a law is written doesn't always come with familiarity with how the law is interpreted.
Only really familiar with the interpretation from an employment perspective, and really only in the 6th circuit court.0 -
HardcoreP0rk wrote: »liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
There was a similar impact at a chain restaurant that provided full nutritional info. Someone sued them saying it was incorrect and made them fat... so they just decided they didn't want the liability. Now there's no more nutritional info available on their website.
Yes! I like that result, honestly.
Me too. ME TOO.0 -
liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
yup!
had that happen at my local little grocery store...someone complained that the shop only had 1 brand of almond milk and it was expensive (the only milk I can drink btw) so the owner just stopped stocking the milk altogether and told her "problem solved" sucked for the rest of us....she never came back to the store...she was at least smart enough to realize how many people she just pissed off.
Of all the things to get worked up about in the world, this is what some choose to waste their energy on?0 -
Disability is the consequence of an impairment that may be physical, cognitive, mental, sensory, emotional, developmental, or some combination of these.
how is celiac a disability...someone explain! if celiac is a disability does that mean my lactose intolerance is one as well?
Under US law...yes. What reasonable accommodation would you like to have?
That seems to me unclear at best. For example, from Griffin v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (5th Cir. 2011):“[N]either the Supreme Court nor this court has recognized the concept of a per se disability under the ADA, no matter how serious the impairment; the plaintiff still must adduce evidence of an impairment that has actually and substantially limited the major life activity on which he relies.” Waldrip, 325 F.3d at 656. Griffin's restrictions on what and how much to eat are at the moderate end of the diabetes spectrum and do not amount to a significant restriction on his eating. Accordingly, this case is closely analogous to those in which our sister circuits have concluded that modest dietary restrictions concomitant with an employee's diabetic condition do not amount to substantial limitations under the ADA. See Carreras, 596 F.3d at 34 (“Proof that a medical condition requires medication, a fixed meal schedule, [and] timely snack breaks, without more, does not amount to a ‘substantial limitation’ under the ADA.” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); Collado v. United Parcel Serv., Co., 419 F.3d 1143, 1156 (11th Cir.2005) ( “Many people have to *224 monitor their food intake for health and lifestyle reasons, and avoiding ‘mostly sugars' is not ‘significantly restricted’ for this purpose. If it were, all insulin-dependent diabetics would have a ‘disability’ for ADA purposes, and we know from Sutton that they do not.”); but see Fraser, 342 F.3d at 1041 (“We must carefully separate those who have simple dietary restrictions from those who are truly disabled. At the same time, we must permit those who are disabled because of severe dietary restrictions to enjoy the protections of the ADA.”).
The cases that the 2008 amendment were responding to were different, as I recall--in particular dealt with disabilities that interfered with the ability to work.
There's no way the courts will start deciding that restaurants MUST provide meals to accommodate those with any kind of allergy, IMO, which would be the natural result of the interpretation you are pushing, so substantially limits can't just mean "I can't order at PF Chang's" or "I can't order at PF Chang's without paying $4 more if I want an appetizer AND dessert."
0 -
HardcoreP0rk wrote: »liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
There was a similar impact at a chain restaurant that provided full nutritional info. Someone sued them saying it was incorrect and made them fat... so they just decided they didn't want the liability. Now there's no more nutritional info available on their website.
That wouldn't fly in NYC, where it is pretty much law to have caloric info on the menu.0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »HardcoreP0rk wrote: »liekewheeless wrote: »Someone may have already mentioned this but the outcome here will most likely not be a reduction in the price for gluten free meals weather she wins or not. They will probably pull all gluten free items before eating the difference in cost.
There was a similar impact at a chain restaurant that provided full nutritional info. Someone sued them saying it was incorrect and made them fat... so they just decided they didn't want the liability. Now there's no more nutritional info available on their website.
That wouldn't fly in NYC, where it is pretty much law to have caloric info on the menu.
Only for chain restaurants.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