this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
578 points (96.0% liked)

News

23367 readers
3291 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago (3 children)

According to the Americans with disabilities act, they apparently are under obligation to do it.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (2 children)

They're under obligation to make a reasonable accommodation. They accomplish this in 2 ways. You can either order it without milk, or you can pay extra for a milk substitute.

Restaurants aren't required to provide gluten-free pasta, fake seafood, or artificial peanut products just because some people can't eat everything on the menu.

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The ADA has very specific language about not charging extra for reasonable accommodations, and dietary restrictions are mentioned.

Restaurants are not required to stock ingredients for all allergies, and they are not required to order in special ingredients on request. But starbucks does stock non-dairy milks. Using the non-dairy milk that they already stock is a reasonable accommodation.

The case is based on a good faith reading of title III of the ADA. It's not unreasonable to argue that charging extra is illegal in this case.

[–] maryjayjay@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

If I can't eat beef (that's a real allergy) is a restaurant obligated to substitute lobster if they happen to serve it? The fact is, oat milk isn't milk. Milk treated with lactase is milk.

[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a source? My understanding was that they were under obligation to not charge for the accommodations, hence the lawsuit.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Their accommodation is having product without milk at all. Requiring them to provide an alternative ingredient isn't a reasonable accommodation when they have plenty of existing products without dairy. The customer can order one of those items.

Having a milk substitute that costs more for the establishment is going beyond what is required under the ADA, so up-charging for it is fine.

[–] AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a source for that? From what I've found, food allergies are generally not considered a disability and therefore no accomodation is obligatory.

https://accessdefense.com/?p=2623

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The ADA is a complex law, like all laws. Food allergies are mentioned by the ADA.

Although food allergies don't require proactive accommodation, disabled people are entitled to equal access despite their disability.

If a restaurant offers no substitutions that's fine. But if a restaurant offers substitutions but refuses it for those with allergies, that's not fine.

If a restaurant doesn't stock non-allergic ingredients it doesn't have to. But if the restaurant will stock special ingredients upon request, they must do the same for disabled customers.

In this case, starbucks DOES stock and offer non-dairy milks. Using a different milk is probably a reasonable accommodation. The ADA has rules against charging extra for reasonable accomodations.

The conclusion that starbucks charging extra is a violation of the ADA is not an unreasonable one.

[–] AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It is not a violation to charge extra for an accomodation if everyone has to pay the same for that accomodation. See the link I posted previously; it mentions this explicitly. Their case is charging more for plus sized clothing. The price for that size of item is the same regardless if the person is obese or normal, so it's not discrimination. It only becomes discrimination when you charge a person more because they're lactose intolerant and give lactose tolerant people soy milk for no cost.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 months ago

God bless America, sometimes