Schrade
Member
Come on. It's not a stupid question. Part of driving is being able to listen to the environment you're driving in. Why do you think ambulances and fire trucks and cop cars have sirens?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Deaf New Jersey woman sues Taco Bell over drive-thru orders
- Thread starter Krakn3Dfx
- Start date
- Status
Come on. It's not a stupid question. Part of driving is being able to listen to the environment you're driving in. Why do you think ambulances and fire trucks and cop cars have sirens?
Some people just lack empathy for the deaf woman, she did nothing wrong and it's Taco Bell who are in the wrong in failing to accommodate her needs.
Hi deaf person hear and yes I can actually drive.
It is a stupid question because it shows a lack of understanding and as for sirens you do know that they have flashing lights as well so we deaf people use our common sense to move over.
Plus I observe my surrounding so when I see emergency vehicles I check to see if other cars are moving to allow access.
Hi deaf person hear and yes I can actually drive.
It is a stupid question because it shows a lack of understanding and as for sirens you do know that they have flashing lights as well so we deaf people use our common sense to move over.
Plus I observe my surrounding so when I see emergency vehicles I check to see if other cars are moving to allow access.
Knuckle Sandwich
Member
He likes Taco Bell.
it's illegal in many places to drive with headphones on so I can see why he'd think if he can't drive without being able to hear the outside then how can deaf people drive.
Yeah it should be a manager complaint not a lawsuit. Some 16 year old giving her a hard time about writing it down and handing it to them isn't lawsuit worthy.
Mushroomer25
Member
Hypothetically, couldn't she have used the mobile app/website to order the food, then pick it up through the drive-thru? I have no doubt that Taco Bell failed to consider the needs of the deaf when figuring out a drive-thru system, but they've arguably created a workable solution regardless.
Because she had complications at two separate New Jersey locations, the issue now falls on the lack of training these kids are receiving and becomes lawsuit worthy.
Corran Horn
May the Schwartz be with you
I've seen plenty of times where they ask the person to park in a spot and they will have someone walk the order out to the vehicle.
Only issue I can see with it though is during the times when the inside is closed as it could be a safety issue walking outside.
witchedwiz
Member
you're trolling right?
this woman is clearly bullying the corporate to get money..
I don't have any problem to get a payback for damages, but there are no damages..
none at all.. simply the drive through is not "able to serve deaf people"..
is it racism? nope..
or you want, like in school, a serving guy who can read/use the sign language because deaf people MIGHT show up?
christ saske..
Straight Edge
Member
You sound like the D-bag in your avatar.
Most? I live in Los Angeles and have yet to encounter a single one.
Eh, even people who order at the microphone can place large or complicated orders that will inconvenience the people behind them. If those can be accommodated, why not the rare window order by a deaf person?
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
Would we be having this discussion if she hadn't?
Shotgun Kiss
Member
Equal rights for all also means that people with disabilities can be called out when they're being assholes.
EDIT: I may have misunderstood; sounds like she isn't seeking damages because the drive-through doesn't offer specialised service for deaf people (for example, offer sign language), but because they didn't even try to accommodate her in any way, which wouldn't be particularly hard (write stuff down). In that case, I don't particularly judge her too harshly. It's true that a complaint to management may have been more appropriate, but for all we know the employee who served her could have been extremely dismissive, which would technically be discrimination.
EDIT: I may have misunderstood; sounds like she isn't seeking damages because the drive-through doesn't offer specialised service for deaf people (for example, offer sign language), but because they didn't even try to accommodate her in any way, which wouldn't be particularly hard (write stuff down). In that case, I don't particularly judge her too harshly. It's true that a complaint to management may have been more appropriate, but for all we know the employee who served her could have been extremely dismissive, which would technically be discrimination.
Ninja Scooter
Member
The lack of basic empathy in this thread (and exhibited by the Taco Bell employees) is kind of astounding, in addition to the general ignorance of disabilities and things like the ADA.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Not trolling, no. Just not seeing why I should be annoyed that taco bell may have to pay some money out to an individual that was treated like shit. Maybe she doesn't deserve cash but a payout may light a fire under them to make some changes. It's not like this is going to bankrupt them or destroy their business.
Big Baybee
Member
This is a big issue in the deaf community. My coworkers are always fussing about the communication issues at drive thru restaurants. I honestly don't know what to tell them without pissing them off lol.
metalslimer
Member
I mean to be honest it would be nice to be able to put in an electronic order and pull up to the drive through and pick up the food
You already can with the app or the website.
HawksWinStanley
Member
Well it depends on how she actually did it. If she bypassed where you order completely and just went straight to the pickup window then I'd imagine that would screw up the orders and cause some confusion. If they don't know a car is coming in between two orders because she didn't stop then the person behind her now has food cooling, the kitchen doesn't understand why there's an order in between the two orders that were taken and then they have to rush to make sure that her order is filled based on a jotted down note, etc.
If that's how it plays out every time she orders then I can understand how they'd want her to come inside.
A Link to the Past
Banned
My McDonald's did at least some stuff to accommodate deaf people in drive-thru; it's not that hard to offer assistance.
Maybe they could hire people who can read notes
I guess that's unreasonable huh
Maybe they could hire people who can read notes
I guess that's unreasonable huh
Ninja Scooter
Member
Then they should figure out how to better accommodate her instead of refusing her service or telling her not to use the drive thru anymore, which are basically just them begging to be sued.
bootsthecat
Banned
I'll admit I'm not too familiar with what provisions the ADA allows, but Taco Bell offered a reasonable accommodation imo, by having a door through which a disabled person can enter and order their food via note, talking, whatever.
As far as 'no big deal' having the customer order at window and wait for a server to bring it out, usually that is done because the restaurant has an issue (messed up order, couldn't cook the meal in time, etc), not the customer. It takes resources away from the operation. 100000 Billion dollar company or not.
Hey, I just want to sit in the parking lot and have a server come to me on demand to take my order. Maybe I broke my leg. Is that cool? What about smaller restaurants with drive thrus that couldn't afford a fancy touch screen solution, etc? A bad precedent to set. It's a convenience option with obvious limitations such as what she experienced, not a fundamental right.
Can Regal be sued because they don't offer subtitles at movie theaters? And so on.
f-r-i-v-i-l-o-u-s
As far as 'no big deal' having the customer order at window and wait for a server to bring it out, usually that is done because the restaurant has an issue (messed up order, couldn't cook the meal in time, etc), not the customer. It takes resources away from the operation. 100000 Billion dollar company or not.
Hey, I just want to sit in the parking lot and have a server come to me on demand to take my order. Maybe I broke my leg. Is that cool? What about smaller restaurants with drive thrus that couldn't afford a fancy touch screen solution, etc? A bad precedent to set. It's a convenience option with obvious limitations such as what she experienced, not a fundamental right.
Can Regal be sued because they don't offer subtitles at movie theaters? And so on.
f-r-i-v-i-l-o-u-s
HawksWinStanley
Member
Seems like many here have already posted that you can use the app to place an order and have it ready via drive thru. Not sure how it works exactly since I've never used it but it definitely sounds more efficient for both sides than a handwritten note sprung on the person working the window.
The way fast food places pipeline food orders is probably a pretty tight process. Having somebody who can't put their order until they get to the window probably messes up a lot of things for them. This lawsuit seems rather ridiculous and there are probably other areas where the hearing impaired should be assisted in.
HoodWinked
Member
i'm thinking in a very mechanical way.
think about how a drive thru operates.
you take an order. then make the order. give the order the person in their position.
now if you have one person in the line of cars that has to give you the order by hand it actually messes up the ordering system for everyone in the line.
in situations where shes the only car in the drive thru its fine, but think about a situation at lunch time where multiple cars are in queue.
now heres the thing. taco bell actually does have a solution already you make your order with their app. while there are some limitations on how you can order through it, its still such a great middle ground for convenience for both parties.
this is fairly common during lunch where the person at the window is waiting for their food. they wouldnt be able to get the deaf person's order until order 2 is completed meaning 4 and 5 would have to wait until she gave her order. or they could take order 4 then her order would be started but would be completed before no3. anyways the point is it gets fairly complicated and is prone to lots of mistakes because it is a conveyor belt assembly/order style. alternatively the other likely approach would be to take her order then tell her to drive into a parking spot which they do for excessively large order but then why not just go inside at that point.
think about how a drive thru operates.
you take an order. then make the order. give the order the person in their position.
now if you have one person in the line of cars that has to give you the order by hand it actually messes up the ordering system for everyone in the line.
in situations where shes the only car in the drive thru its fine, but think about a situation at lunch time where multiple cars are in queue.
now heres the thing. taco bell actually does have a solution already you make your order with their app. while there are some limitations on how you can order through it, its still such a great middle ground for convenience for both parties.
this is fairly common during lunch where the person at the window is waiting for their food. they wouldnt be able to get the deaf person's order until order 2 is completed meaning 4 and 5 would have to wait until she gave her order. or they could take order 4 then her order would be started but would be completed before no3. anyways the point is it gets fairly complicated and is prone to lots of mistakes because it is a conveyor belt assembly/order style. alternatively the other likely approach would be to take her order then tell her to drive into a parking spot which they do for excessively large order but then why not just go inside at that point.
gunslikewhoa
Member
Reasonable accomodations are ten feet from the parking lot, right on the other side of those double doors.
TheCochese
Banned
i'm thinking in a very mechanical way.
think about how a drive thru operates.
you take an order. then make the order. give the order the person in their position.
now if you have one person in the line of cars that has to give you the order by hand it actually messes up the ordering system for everyone in the line.
in situations where shes the only car in the drive thru its fine, but think about a situation at lunch time where multiple cars are in queue.
now heres the thing. taco bell actually does have a solution already you make your order with their app. while there are some limitations on how you can order through it, its still such a great middle ground for convenience for both parties.
this is fairly common during lunch where the person at the window is waiting for their food. they wouldnt be able to get the deaf person's order until order 2 is completed meaning 4 and 5 would have to wait until she gave her order. or they could take order 4 then her order would be started but would be completed before no3. anyways the point is it gets fairly complicated and is prone to lots of mistakes because it is a conveyor belt assembly/order style. alternatively the other likely approach would be to take her order then tell her to drive into a parking spot which they do for excessively large order but then why not just go inside at that point.
As someone who worked in fast food for many years, you're making it way too complicated. The person who skips the speaker either gets their food made pretty quick, or gets shuttled off to the side. It's not something that produces a lot of stress on the worker bees.
When counter-service is closed, and drive-thru is the only option, what then?
It should have never gotten to this point. The people at that location were dicks.
Shit, that got me good. Well done.
HoodWinked
Member
i like how you explained nothing or just reiterated my points. so basically you're telling me they make the order instantaneously even during lunch time even though when im the only person in line it still takes a bit of time to get my order. okay...
People have been bringing this up a lot, but not all locations allow that. Regardless, unless there's a sign directing disabled customers to do exactly that, her case is as strong as if she didn't have the capability to order online.
Not that you were saying that she didn't have a case.
A Link to the Past
Banned
...The restaurant owns the drive-thru. Why are you bringing up hurt feelings in a situation where a person was denied access to services due to their disability?
It's being said that this isn't a real problem. As someone who has also worked fast-food. Deaf people don't simply go and create problems, and a day-time rush isn't logistically the issue here if they specifically refused to even take her order.
TheCochese
Banned
What's there to explain? It's already lunch time, the kitchen is in full-press mode. Unless the order is special, there isn't much effort needed to get it done. If there is, then they get shuffled out of line.
The process doesn't get put on hold because someone skips the speaker. Not at restaurants that are capable of handling an actual lunch rush. We didn't process over 100 orders an hour through the drive-thru because we had our thumbs stuck up our asses.
Nice theory, but courts have already disagreed with you. Reasonable accommodation means you must reasonably attempt to accommodate FULL use of the facilities, including the drive in.
Lots of places ignore the ADA until someone sues. If companies simply followed the law, rather than ignoring it until forced by the courts, she wouldn't have the opportunity to sue. The ADA is hardly a new law. And deaf people are hardly a new population.
Pinko Marx
Banned
I've never heard of such ridiculousness
😏
Edit: I'm on the lady's side but I feel like suing for "damages" is a tad too far. But get that payday i guess.
😏
Edit: I'm on the lady's side but I feel like suing for "damages" is a tad too far. But get that payday i guess.
The drive-thru isn't the only way to place an order at Taco Bell. I've ordered inside before.
If they locked the doors on her because she is a deaf person then you can say they denied her access.
A Link to the Past
Banned
The only way she could file a discrimination suit is to sue for damages.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Would you feel the same way if black people couldn't use the drive-through, but could only use the door?
The ADA is a civil rights law. It guarantees the rights of those with disabilities, in the same way that other civil rights laws guarantee the rights of those with different skin colors or different genders.
The only allowance made for not doing this, is the concept of reasonable accommodation, which is decided by the courts. It's unlikely that a court would force Taco Bell to build entirely new order taking system, but I have a hard time imagining any court not seeing taking a written order as a reasonable accommodation.
She is probably going to win this lawsuit.
So was the restaurant open or closed when she went through the drive-thru? A.k.a was she damaged in any way?
Your first sentence is the most ridiculous straw man argument any one has used against me on this forum. Congrats. Where in my post did you get the idea that i was against the Civil Rights Act?
So about the ADA act - does it specifically have provisions or requirements for drive-thrus? Or just general requirements for the restaurant? If Taco Bell didn't comply with the ADA they should be punished and make changes to comply. If they are in compliance I see no issue. Going in to order is not too much to ask if the doors aren't locked.
She is in the right. This is Taco Bell. They create new food items with the same ten ingredients every couple of months and they can't accommodate deaf person at the drive thru. Why not tell her to park and bring her food out to her?
No, it's not in the slightest. You're arguing for separate but equal treatment of minorities, which is a violation of bedrock civil rights principles.
They aren't in compliance. It's already been explained WHY they aren't in compliance. The general rules are that they are required by law to make all facilities available to disabled people in new buildings, and must make reasonable accommodations in old buildings. As has been pointed out upthread, courts have already ruled on this specific issue.
Ninja Scooter
Member
It's not. Her disability puts her in a protected class, just like race. You have to offer accommodations and service to people with disabilities. You can't say "Sorry deaf people can only be served here until 12am when the restaurant is open, but not from 12-2am because that's drive thru only". That's discriminatory.
I can't believe it's 2016 and this has to be explained to people. Scary.
No you have no idea what you're talking about and implying meaning into my post to argue against. Show me where in my post, the one you quoted, where you somehow got the idea that I'm against the Civil rights act of 1964. The one that bans discrimination against protected classes which includes race. I don't remember anything in there about deaf people so please enlighten me.
Now since you're confident that Taco Bell is not in compliance with the ADA act I'm asking you to show me where specifically in the act they are not in compliance. I'm actually curious and would like to be educated.
If you're going to not respond to either of the 2 things I'm asking then at least don't argue against more things that I've never said.
See my above post regarding the Civil rights act of 1964. Protected classes are specifically spelled out. Was there an update to protected class?
When they stated they would only serve the customer "one time" at the drive-thru.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked