Is This Discrimination?

[Vincent Vega]

I don't think it's me that isn't getting it. Serving alcohol to minors is illegal. Serving raw meat is inherently dangerous, to everybody, that's why it isn't done. Not really good examples.

Of course if a car and a person collided the person would get hurt. That's obvious. Sure a guy could get hit walking through a drive-through. He could also get hit crossing the parking lot. Either way, if a car's brakes go somebody could get pasted.

Bottom line is, they're refusing to sell this guy coffee & donuts based on his disability (inability to drive). If he could go in, or they had a walkup, then he'd be being a pain in the ass trying to drive the chair through the drive-through. But they don't.

It is a drive-thru only.

Everybody who can't drive isn't served there.

Now we have to ban drive-thru only fast-food restaurants so nobody feels left out?

It isn't a restaurant with drive-thru, that doesn't provide acces to disabled, it is a drive-thru only.

I have a driver's license, but no car.
Still I wouldn't blame a drive-thru only restaurant here because they won't serve me.

Why can't the van, that brings him there, go through the line, or bring him to the other DD across the street?

(Luckily we only have some restaurants with drive-thru, called drive-in and no drive-thru only).

 

[CTU2fan]

Bottom line is they are refusing to serve anyone without a car because it would be completely irresponsible for them to do otherwise.

Try running a business once, and you'll understand.

Well now we're just going in circles. So it's OK for any business owner to deny service, as long as they can make a case for said denial based on liability. Fine.

I take stuff like this a bit personal I suppose, because I've had to deal with it. Went into a local package store, I was probably 24 at the time. Tried to buy a case of beer, and they refused to sell it to me, because I had a state ID, rather than a license. Clearly discriminatory. I guess the logic is it's easy (easier?) for someone underage to get hold of an ID than a license, who knows...and the stores are afraid of being busted for selling to minors. Regardless, I should have been allowed to buy my beer. Wasn't a huge deal, I went down the street & bought somewhere else, wasn't even carded But it should never have been an issue. But because most everyone drives nobody bothers to give a damn about those of us who don't.

 

[BVS]

Well now we're just going in circles. So it's OK for any business owner to deny service, as long as they can make a case for said denial based on liability. Fine.

Yes liability is a HUGE factor in running a business. As long as it's based purely on liability and no other factors, then it's not discrimination.

I take stuff like this a bit personal I suppose, because I've had to deal with it. Went into a local package store, I was probably 24 at the time. Tried to buy a case of beer, and they refused to sell it to me, because I had a state ID, rather than a license. Clearly discriminatory. I guess the logic is it's easy (easier?) for someone underage to get hold of an ID than a license, who knows...and the stores are afraid of being busted for selling to minors. Regardless, I should have been allowed to buy my beer. Wasn't a huge deal, I went down the street & bought somewhere else, wasn't even carded But it should never have been an issue. But because most everyone drives nobody bothers to give a damn about those of us who don't.

Educate me, does your state ID have a seal or magnetic strip that they can verify that it's real? You shouldn't have been denied if you had a legit ID. Problem is how many store cashier's are educated about all the different types of ID? Their ass is on the line, I can understand their hesitation.

 

[redhotswami]

They're refusing to serve him because he's not in a vehicle, not simply because he is disabled. I'm sure they serve disabled people who drive or have special cars.

Just think of the precedent you're trying to set. What's next, car washes will be required to service wheelchairs and bathe service dogs? There's never been a reasonable expectation that walk-up customers would be serviced at a drive-through business. They are not discriminating; they're servicing a certain demographic of consumers.

i took bailey to a carwash. it was awesome!

 

[BrownEyedBoy]

So much fuss over a cup of coffee...

In Honduras, they wouldn´t care if you were crawling towards the drive-thru window, you´d still get your food served.

 

[CTU2fan]

Yes liability is a HUGE factor in running a business. As long as it's based purely on liability and no other factors, then it's not discrimination.

Educate me, does your state ID have a seal or magnetic strip that they can verify that it's real? You shouldn't have been denied if you had a legit ID. Problem is how many store cashier's are educated about all the different types of ID? Their ass is on the line, I can understand their hesitation.

It has a hologram thingy in it now, basically identical to a license. At the time I don't think it did though. Actually as luck would have it the manager was there, and he denied me. I didn't make a big deal out of it (I'm a non-confrontational sort generally), though if I'd struck out at the other store I might have gotten a bit testy.

I totally get the liability issue, and I don't blame DD for wanting to reduce their risk - that's just smart. If I'm running the place I'd likely do the same thing (not let walkers/wheelchairs/non-motor vehicles in the drive-through). Something can be smart business practice & discrimination at the same time, and IMO this is. I never thought they were doing it out of spite, or because they hate guys in wheelchairs.

 

[Canadiens1131]

I'm betting most of the "it's not discrimination" posters in this thread drive cars/have driver's licenses.

It's discrimination, and it's not even really a "gray area" type of thing, it just is. FWIW, it's also discrimination to deny a walkup. The only reason they do it is because they need to cover their asses in case someone's hurt.

I don't drive.

It is absolutely not discrimination to refuse that man service because he is not a driver and he is trying to get service through a drive-thru. If someone walked up to the drive-thru window or rode up on a skateboard they would be subject to the exact same rules.

You completely proved everyone else's point when you said "they need to cover their asses" because they absolutely do as a business. If he is injured by another car in the drive-thru line, not only can he sue the driver, but he can sue Dunkin Donuts.

Is it unfortunate that the manager of this Dunkin Donuts can't come up with a solution? Absolutely. If I were managing it I would arrange to have him give me a call when he rides up near the place and I'd run a coffee out to him. There's nothing wrong with accommodating him out of kindness and customer service, but that doesn't change the fact that he isn't allowed through the drive-thru.

 

[Angela Harlem]

I understand what you mean- but does the fact that a disabled person wants to do what others are able to do because they can drive and not be "different" in such an everyday function, does that mean he has a chip on his shoulder? Some disabled people might be perfectly fine with someone bringing the coffee out to them, but if he wouldn't does that necessarily mean that? I can understand that from the point of view of a disabled person, as best I can being lucky enough to be abled. I'm not saying you aren't or can't

I know what you're getting at, and do agree. I dont know, obviously, hence my 'maybe'. The thing which makes me wonder though is it's pretty accepted that able-bodied folk dont walk through drive-throughs. We take our legs for granted and walk in, or take our cars. He is not able to do either of those with this specific DDs which shows their lack of catering to everyone, at least. This guessing on what kind of person he is is something I shouldn't be doing. Perhaps he doesn't like to trouble people by having them meet him outside with it, perhaps he is stubbornly ignoring rules, perhaps he honestly saw it as no problem before now - who knows.

In the end, I see disabilities as something which everyone needs to work toward ensuring that there's opportunity and ability as much as possible. If this is a situation where not everything has been done, then I applaud and support his fight. If it is a situation where every effort has been made to see customers served regardless of their disability, then he might need to begrudgingly accept that there will be limitations. That is something nearly everyone can accept and has to face, I think, regardless of disability, that there are things we will be prevented from doing based on numerous things out of our own personal control. It sucks, but it's the way it is. I do admire him fighting it, though.