Lawsuit 'Discriminatory' Gluten-Free Menu
Options
Replies
-
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 -
Oh boy....I'm getting ready.
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.
It was probably the right thing to do anyhow... though a chain restaurant, they prepare food by hand and I cannot imagine they are particularly consistent with quantities of things that are typically added "to taste" or used as garnishes and sauces. The numbers were probably largely meaningless.0 -
lemurcat12 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?
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."
ADA is very important, and in terms of Celiac, is the reason why some dorming college kids even have accommodations and kitchens in order to prepare food, for example. It's sadly abused in cases like this pathetic lawsuit. The law states that reasonable accommodations need to be made, and they are being made. They don't have to make them. Bakeries don't make accommodations for Celiac persons, neither do many larger chains. In the end, this woman is just pissing us all off.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.
The person who posted about the restaurant said it was a chain restaurant.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.
Oh it flies in NYC. There are plenty, I daresay most, restaurants without caloric info. Perhaps you're thinking mainly of quick serve places? Never saw calories on the menu at Per Se...
0 -
double post
0 -
NJGamerChick wrote: »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.
The person who posted about the restaurant said it was a chain restaurant.
Understood. I was just clarifying. Again. Because....well, just wait.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.
not even all chains... I think it's just certain categories of quick serve places0 -
HardcoreP0rk wrote: »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.
Oh it flies in NYC. There are plenty, I daresay most, restaurants without caloric info. Perhaps you're thinking mainly of quick serve places? Never saw calories on the menu at Per Se...
The person said it was a chain restaurant. Never saw a chain restaurant in Manhattan without caloric info. Not that I've been to many, since I can't eat at most anyway, because I'm gluten-free and either I'm too broke for it or they don't accomodate. Manhattan is an expensive place to eat if you're gluten-free.0 -
HardcoreP0rk wrote: »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.
not even all chains... I think it's just certain categories of quick serve places
It's dependent on the number of restaurants that the chain has...I think it's 10 or 15 or something.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 967 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions