digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

McDonald's sued over drive-through policy

chicagotribune.com — What's that?

show profanity settings
expand all
  • ClarkBender, on 07/16/2008, -17/+32Wow, they wouldn't just let her drive up? That's smart...
    • charm803, on 07/17/2008, -10/+4That's what the new generation is all about, I guess.

      People just don't appreciate their job anymore.
      What ever happened to customer service?

      But yeah, she's going to end up going to their competition and let's hope that all the media attention doesn't affect their business.

      • cdahlkvist, on 07/17/2008, -11/+15*****. This was the 3rd time she had gone there.

        This wasn't an issue of her autistic kids or the fact that she is deaf. She was looking to sue so she was intentionally going there to build her suit.

        $10 says she and her kids are fat pigs, live in a trailer or are toothless rednecks...or all of the above.
      • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -7/+5cdahlkvist: Reading comprehension is a skill that will last you for the rest of your life. The article doesn't say it's the 3rd time she'd gone there. It says it's the 3rd time she's been refused at the drive through. She may go there every day.

        The article also isn't about whether her kids are fat pigs or live in a trailer or how many teeth they have or how they were brought up, so put your $10 back in your pocket.
      • cdahlkvist, on 07/17/2008, -4/+1marx2k: I apologize. I obviously hit a nerve with you. Maybe it was a little too close to home? Are you a toothless fatty redneck living in a trailer?

        The point of my comment was that she was obviously trying to build a case. You're right. She may go there every day but once she was refused she could have taken her business elsewhere. She chose to continue visiting McDonald's. Why? Because, as I stated previously, she was looking to cash in on her situation.

        By the way, the Americans with Disabilities Act does not require "special access" to a Drive-Thru. It only requires "handicapped access" to a facility (and some other criteria). She had access. She just didn't want to go inside.

        Furthermore, if she is so "deaf" how could she hear when someone said "Welcome to McDonald's. May I take your order?" or "Please pull around to the window." or even "We won't take your order at the drive-thru window. Please come inside."?

        My guess...she saw a way to make an easy buck and she is using her "disability" as her meal ticket.
      • mahdaeng, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5@marx2k:

        [[She may go there every day]]

        If she goes every day to a place of business that gives her what she considers to be poor service, her hearing is not the only thing that is impaired.
      • CryRightardCry, on 07/17/2008, -3/+2@cdaklvist
        Just because you may be a dishonest person looking to scam others, don't assume everyone else is.

        Way to show you have no compassion for the disabled. Way to show you don't bother thinking outside your tiny little box.
        Ah, I see.
        You are another rightard jackass with no regard for anyone but yourself.
        Yes, I see your other comments.
        You are a selfish right wing loser. Simple.
        Tell your mom to change your net nanny password, or have her sit with you while you surf.
      • cdahlkvist, on 07/18/2008, -1/+1Cry: Yes, that is it. I am smart enough to see a scam so therefore I must be a scammer.

        As for being a right wing republican, yes, I am. Do you know why? Because I am sick of the hippy, bleeding heart liberals like yourself that always assume big business has somehow screwed them.

        You obviously don't live in the real world. In the real world there are scammers, theives, swindlers and crooks. In your paradise that you insist is coming those don't exist. Instead, everyone is honest, happy, equal and most importantly - a victim.

        Get real. You live in a fantasy world. I'm sorry that you can't see a scam when confronted with it.

        On that note, I have $45 million US that your relative left you. All I need is a small finders fee and your SSN, bank account information and a copy of your driver's license. I will take my fee of $50 and send you the rest.

        Thanks. Bye.
    • jamesLankford, on 07/17/2008, -19/+64what, she's too ***** lazy to get out of the care and walk in?

      she thinks eveyone has to cater to her and make special allowances just for her?

      how about just following the rules?

      and if she doesn't like the rules, then just go some where else

      *****, sue
      • tedrock, on 07/17/2008, -22/+9obviously you didn't read the article.

        Tumeh is physically capable of walking inside to order, but that's not the point, her attorney, Shirley Ann Mora James, said Tuesday.

        "She has children who are autistic, and if they're having difficulties, it would make it problematic for her," Mora James said.
      • G-RaZoR, on 07/17/2008, -7/+26Dude it doesn't matter if her kids are Autistic. is McD the only restaurant she goes too, NO.

        I completely agree with james, McD doesn't need to go bend over backwards for her considering they are making pennies on the dollar riding their high efficiency system as it is. They are in the biz to make $$, not provide community service.
      • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -26/+4So should black people not mind when they're refused service at a restaurant? They should just man-up and go to another restaurant, right?
      • orlyfactor, on 07/17/2008, -1/+10@marx2k:
        Only if the black person is deaf.
      • MrFurious2k, on 07/17/2008, -3/+27She wasn't "refused service", they asked her to come in and order.
      • DyceFreak, on 07/17/2008, -2/+15Last I checked you don't need to know how to hear going through the McDonalds drive through... not only are your items added in front of your face as you see them, but it shows you a total there, AND at the window... basically this is just a miserable bitch that doesn't have a lot of money
      • CryRightardCry, on 07/17/2008, -5/+3JamesLankford, dumb *****.
        Too dumb to read the article, he shows the world what illiterate stupidity combined with a lack of compassion for the disabled is like.
        Kudos to you James.
        And for you other ***** like grazor:
        It's the Disability acts, losers.
        It's so disabled people (who you OBVIOUSLY don't give a ***** about) have the same access the rest of us do.
        Yeah, we get it. You two are such self centered jackasses that you don't believe cripples should have rights.
        Good for you!

        @marx2k
        You stupid bitch. Black is not disabled.
        I'm astounded by the incredible idiocy on this thread.
      • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1CryRightardCry: You seem to have some anger management issues. But as far as your reply to me, a lot of businesses (especially in the south) will still refuse to serve black people. Being disabled and being black are two things you can't really do much about. Hence my comment. So relax, you stupid bitch.
    • punkcat, on 07/17/2008, -4/+22because it could slow down the drive thru process if there are multiple people in the line.
      its made that way to be more efficient. you order wait your turn as other orders are being placed and made, hopefully by the time your turn at the window comes up you can just drive away.

      but no this lady wants the world to stop while she does her thing. by ordering at the window you could be blocking others.
      • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -16/+7So McDonalds should probably decline customers with a larger-than-average order as well?
      • blipblipbeep, on 07/17/2008, -4/+0Its bloody Mca's dude. Thumb the hell out of them.
      • qwertydvorak, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8@marx2k: actually they will tell you that you can either come inside with a huge order, or you will have to pull off to the side for 20 minutes while they make it. most fast food restaurants are that way if you don't call ahead a really large order.
    • drmangrum, on 07/17/2008, -5/+13The arrogant bitch knows she has a hearing problem. It's hard enough for someone with proper hearing to get their order right in a drive-through, let alone hearing impaired. There is a difference between refusing to take her order and asking her to take the realistic route in placing her order.

      Technically, her lawsuit has no merit. McDonalds has a method for the hearing impaired to place an order, she just didn't want to do it. Just another frivolous court case to extort money out of McDonalds. She'll probably get a good 50k out of them just so they don't have to deal with the PR nightmare or the lawyers.
    • Zeny, on 07/17/2008, -4/+9Honestly ***** her she is no more special than anyone else, why is everyone so liberal IMO who cares that she is deaf??? I DO agree with McDonalds and condone their actions. If it was me at the window I would have told her where to go properly!!!
      • dannylewis, on 07/17/2008, -9/+3Why don't you try being deaf/hard of hearing? Why should they be forced to enter the building when others with hearing can easily order at the drive-thru? McDonald's might as well put up a sign that says, "If you're deaf, do NOT use the drive-thru." One should be able to drive up to the window to complete the order. One should be able to interact with a human being directly.
      • MortVent, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3Do they turn away anyone that just drives up to the window?

        If so it's not discrimination, it's corporate policy at the store.

        Accommodating does not mean preferential treatment

      • mahdaeng, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4@dannylewis:

        Are those constitutional rights or more general human rights to which you refer?

        Buried for implying that anyone's rights are being violated in this situation.
  • megamod, on 07/16/2008, -21/+48Maybe it's for the best. Don't eat at McD's it's not good for you.

    Go eat with Jared at Subway instead =)
    • Jennica, on 07/17/2008, -3/+19Do they even have drive-thru Subways?
    • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -9/+3schlotzkys > quiznos > subway
      • diggitydoc, on 07/17/2008, -4/+6all of the above < poop
      • cygnus2112, on 07/17/2008, -1/+6Yeah, diggitydoc is right. If you can find a decent bakery or pizza joint that does subs right, you won't even remember the names of those fast-food sub joints. Trust me.
      • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I agree. but we were talking about crappy fast food chains.
    • lebatte, on 07/17/2008, -11/+10Why not just make your own food? If you've got enough time to walk to and from a fast-food place, you have enough time to actually eat healthier on your own, exercise on your own, and stop feeding corporate greed.
      • diggitydoc, on 07/17/2008, -9/+21look, the lady is fail... deaf lady with autistic kids who feeds them McD's ???
        just let her have her heart attack so she stops breeding.
      • kitkatsavvy, on 07/17/2008, -12/+4maybe you shouldn't have been born either :)
    • ldkronos, on 07/17/2008, -8/+1"Go eat with Jared at Subway instead"

      Yeah....if you wanna get aides.
      • ldkronos, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1I'm guessing the people modding me down aren't South Park fans
    • jbrand45, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4$5 footlong spicy italian on herb and cheese bread for the win!
  • mydigga, on 07/16/2008, -19/+212I don't condone McDonald's procedure here, but it is there right as a private business. Why are people always bitching and suing? If you don't like there policy, don't give them your business. Seriously, using the McDonald's drive thru is not your right and is not protected under any government legislature.

    "It's not appropriate for a hearing-impaired person to be forced to go inside because of their disability, when ... other drive-thru, fast-food restaurants have a policy to allow deaf and hard-of-hearing people to order at the drive-thru window." Mora James - Attorney

    Maybe she should be going to one of these drive-thrus?
    • jlebrech, on 07/17/2008, -5/+30that's what free competitions is for, i agree with you.

      if your favourite store isnt providing you with the right service, you are free to go elsewhere.
      but i understand that some people can only pallet mcdonalds, and they should really be suing for creating a dependency.
      • Drahkar, on 07/17/2008, -6/+41I agree too. This lawsuit is stupid. I feel for her frustration, but the Disability act merely states that a location give people with disabilities a means of making use of their service. They have that. They have the means for them to walk into the store and buy it. The act doesn't say that they have to make sure every little detail of their company is designed specifically for disable people.

        As it stands the people at that store were rude and I certainly can't blame her for taking her business elsewhere, but this lawsuit is just another example of how people think they can get money for nothing. She wasn't traumatized or injure. She can easily go on with her life just as she was before. So what I see is just another person trying to abuse the system for free money.
    • nonymous666, on 07/17/2008, -3/+25Agreed. The drive through is a convenience; it's not the only way of ordering food. I don't think that disabilities act says that everybody needs to have access to the same conveniences, provided merely as a nicety, as everybody else.
      • jamesdew, on 07/17/2008, -2/+7Well I don't know about the US act but the UK Disabilities act says exactly that. If a service is provided to the able bodied it must also be provided to the disabled.

        For example if you have a pub with 2 floors. It is not good enough to provide wheelchair access simply to the ground floor you must provide access to all parts of the pub for all people including the disabled.

        In another example in a workplace you cannot simply add a disabled ramp to the back of the building if this causes extra inconvenience vs the experience of able bodied persons.

        So I believe the principle here (assuming some similarities between the UK and US law) is that since able hearing persons are provided the added convenience of a drive through service McDonalds should ensure this same level of service is available to her.
        In this case I would agree since it really isnt inconvenient for McDonalds to just take her order at the window. Anyway what is the point of order at mic systems. Usually the same person you just spoke to takes your money and tells you to go to the next window so I fail to see how the mic system is more efficient that doing the transaction face to face.
    • Ouze, on 07/17/2008, -28/+19This is not a free market issue. Mcdonalds is licenced to do business in this country and that includes complying with the law. In this particular case, they appear to be in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title 3, as it applies to dining establishments. Whether or not coming into the store or not is a reasonable accomodation is really a question for the jury, but calling "free market" for every time a business does something wrong is inherently *****, and you know it on some level.

      If you go to Walmart, and you get $50 worth of stuff, and then when your credit card statement comes you find out they billed you $150, and that the store has been doing that for every sale for everyone that month, do you go "oh well, that's a free market at work, i'll go to Target instead" - or do you call your AG? If you bought some frozen burgers and found they had cut the meat with wood chips, would you just buy a different brand, or would you litigate? None of those are perfect analogies, and no analogy ever is, but the point is you already expect and need some level of governmental oversight in a free market in other for it to function.
      • Meep3D, on 07/17/2008, -7/+12"None of those are perfect analogies"

        Straw men is the term you are looking for.
      • MortVent, on 07/17/2008, -3/+15They have means to order for the disabled, the drive through is not it.

        Is there an option available?

        In this case it's more complaining they couldn't get the wheelchair in one door, while there is one with a ramp and handicapped spots a few feet down...
      • enclaved, on 07/17/2008, -5/+6No it's not

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
      • Ouze, on 07/17/2008, -5/+3@MortVent - Whether coming in the store constitutes "reasonable accommodation" is really the crux. I could agree with either way of the decision, but it is a point that could be argued.

        However, your example, if anything - that some stores in the area made this reasonable accommodation while this one actively refused - reinforces, in fact, that this was willful discrimination.
      • MortVent, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8If I only put one ramp to a door and all the others put 2 it isn't discrimination.

        If a store turns away anyone that just drives up to the window and does not use the order system, it isn't discrimination.

        Reasonable accommodations is not giving preferential treatment to one group because of disability.
      • Ouze, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4@MortVent - I misunderstood your original statement (I thought you meant another restaraunt, not another door in the same one). You're right.
      • drmangrum, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4You need to read up on the ADA before you make such comments. Mcdonalds is NOT in clear violation. They gave her a method to place her order. She refused to do it. Autistic kids or not, she COULD have walked inside. It may be more of a hassle, but chances are she would get her order correct. It's not fair to other people who are waiting to order in the drive through because she can't understand the operator when her order is read back.

        The ADA only states that companies have to make a reasonable accommodations to people with disabilities. Taking her fat ass into the restaurant and placing her order was more than reasonable.
      • sancho, on 07/17/2008, -2/+1"It's not fair to other people who are waiting to order in the drive through because she can't understand the operator when her order is read back."

        You need to understand the intent behind the ADA. It's not about being fair to everyone, it's about being more fair to a minority. Do you also think that it's unfair to all of the other customers when McDonald's has to consider the cost of having ramps, braille menus, and wheelchair parking when they price their food?

        I agree that McDonald's is not clearly violating the ADA, but they still may be violating it. This is really one of those cases that straddles the line, and it will be up to the courts to decide.
    • DestroyFascism, on 07/17/2008, -2/+25Why are people always bitching and suing?

      It's the new American business model, that's why.
      • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -3/+4Lawsuits are the most efficient way to keep big business in check. It's true that one of the side-effects are the many frivolous ones that we hear about.

        But, like in so many topics, we mostly only hear about the worst and most stupid suits, like the judge who sued the Korean dry cleaners for 50 million for ruining a pair of pants.

        99.9999999999999999999% or the lawsuits that you and I never hear about are NOT frivolous. They represent important issues that criminal law does not address.
      • kelmaster1, on 07/17/2008, -1/+3the ultimate leach off society!
    • jamdogg, on 07/17/2008, -4/+7I'm sure they are legally covered. Any private business has the right to refuse service to anyone at any time.
      McDonalds are within their rights as asshattish as they are.
      • Ouze, on 07/17/2008, -7/+3You are wrong. But, go ahead: open a business, put a sign in the window saying "blacks refused service", and see how it works out for you. You're legally OK, right?
      • tendonut, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8As someone said before, the only way this person is going to get any leverage in their case is if the jury decides that going INTO the McDonalds is or is not "making the service available". What about the people who are mentally disabled and can't operate a vehicle? Do you see them suing when they get the 2:00AM stoner munchies and will not be served at the drive-in window without a car? (Dining rooms usually close around 11:00PM or midnight)

        On a side note, why is someone who requires special service because they are hearing impaired using the damn drive-in anyways? Are they actually driving? Not being able to HEAR while driving is almost as dangerous as texting while driving, and that is soon to become illegal in NY State. I am always seeing old people blocking emergency vehicles because they can't hear the sirens that tell them to get the ***** out of the way.
      • jamdogg, on 07/17/2008, -2/+5@Ouze. Obviously, your sign would be racial discrimination which is illegal. But it is perfectly legal to say: "Unless you can stand on your head, balance two pints of beer on your feet and sing God Save The Queen backwards - you will not be served."
      • mahdaeng, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3@tendonut:

        Dugg for making the comparison (intended or not) between stoners and the mentally disabled.
    • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -2/+6Well, a business still has to conform to the ADA.. which is the main issue in this story.
      • thashiz, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2To be honest, in a lot of situations the ADA goes overboard. That may be an unpopular opinion, but if you look into it, a lot of the regulations are overkill.

        I believe Penn and Teller even had a "*****" episode about it.
    • Oddish, on 07/17/2008, -1/+5I completeley agree. Things are more complicated when you're disabled and we should all do our best to accommodate, but this is getting ridiculous. ***** this bitch!
    • p3ngwin, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7agreed.

      the bit that got me was:
      Mora James said. "It's not appropriate for a hearing-impaired person to be forced to go inside because of their disability, when ... ."

      apart from the possible case of inconsistency with the other drive ins (although again that is company discretion), the glaring consistency error i see in HER case is that it's believed McD's is "not appropriate" for asking her to go inside, yet SHE believes it's appropriate to expect custom service?

      don't like rules that are legally in place?
      get lost.
      it's called CHOICE.
      • WileEPeyote, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1"don't like rules that are legally in place?
        get lost.
        it's called CHOICE."

        Actually, if you think the rules are unjust, you should do something. I don't think her issue is that big a deal, but her CHOICE was to fight against what she believes is an injustice.

        In most countries, when two sides cannot agree they go through the court system. That is what it is for and that is what she has done.
    • falstaff, on 07/17/2008, -0/+7Not only that, but since the story clearly states that other McD's locations accomodate her, this is obviously not a problem with corporate. It's either poorly trained employees or a a franchisee at fault here. She (or more specifically, her lawyer) is just looking at the biggest pot of money and focusing the lawsuit there, however inapproporate it may be.
    • Ductapemaster, on 07/17/2008, -1/+7I don't understand why people these days think that every company out there must bend over backwards to cater to their needs...It's people like her that make those signs appear that warn you that your coffee is hot (no *****) and that concerts are loud and could hurt your ears.

      Sure McD's could have accommodated her by letting her order at the window or she could have just simply gone inside and ordered...it would have been a lot less effort than going to court over it!
    • BigDigg55, on 07/17/2008, -6/+2It's a law you dumb ass, not a consideration
    • WileEPeyote, on 07/17/2008, -4/+2Bringing lawsuits against companies is the only way to fight them. As much as it is McDonald's right to do things the way they want, it is her right to sue them over what she believes is a major issue.

      This is the country that capitalism has created...
    • Nonplussed, on 07/17/2008, -4/+3AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.
    • pciulla, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2MY question is...
      If see can't order from McDonald's drive thru....then why is see dirving a car? As I recall you need to here sirens and hooks....I should sue her for endangering me!
  • Semirhage527, on 07/16/2008, -3/+61Interesting, I was at McD's just yesterday and noticed a sign on the drive through saying that if I were hearing impaired, I could pull around to the window to order.
    • Monk22, on 07/16/2008, -1/+30many are franchised so they can set policy on their own to a degree.
    • lamiaconfitor, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5that would make sense...
    • kelmaster1, on 07/17/2008, -4/+2Ya bet there was one there, i bet this lady was probably an annoying bitch and her orders usually last about 10 to 15 minutes because she's deaf and probably old and senile. Basically, they all said "screw this old lady, she can go somewhere else", which is 100% legal. God I hate some old people.
    • mabhatter, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1I worked there for years and we had the same signs, with a picture menu for deaf and a braille sheet for the blind... don't know how out of date they were. So I know accommodation is company policy.

      I can understand the store workers getting upset when people simply drive up and don't try to use the box. It kills their times, backs up lines, and pisses off 20 cars behind.

      I can understand a mom with autistic kids using drive thru too. If she's in a hurry McD's may not be the best choice, but the ability to use the drive thru to just get the food without making all the other customer deal with her kids being dragged inside is what the store is there for! With Autistic kids, you can't just leave them sit for 5 minutes.. some places nowdays they can consider it "abandonment", and any more it's hard to get thru the order-in line in just a few minute too. Autistic kids do stupid stuff and need watched constantly anyway.
  • Quenlin, on 07/16/2008, -15/+134She did this just so be could bitch and whine and moan about it and file a frivolous lawsuit. She knew fine well that McDonalds had that policy, she knew fine well she had hearing problems, and she knew fine well that she could go inside and order it.
    • BenPresland, on 07/17/2008, -4/+20Fine well
    • XeRoX2k2, on 07/17/2008, -0/+12it's the american way,to sue when you don't get your way
    • blipblipbeep, on 07/17/2008, -8/+2You work there right?
    • Dimbleby, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Fine well? Is that the same as "Might could"? Oh, English language...how I loved thee so....
    • goonsquad, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1This is what's wrong with society today! Just because you have a disability doesn't mean the whole world has to bend the ***** backwards over for you! Grow up you stupid bitch!
    • apextek, on 07/18/2008, -2/+1i disagree, perhaps she does know fine and well, but filing this lawsuit isn't about monitory gain as much as it sets a president restaurants to accommodate disabled customers
  • ryan83189, on 07/16/2008, -10/+56Go in and order it. If it's crowded and you have to pull up to order, they won't have your food ready in time and it slows everyone down. It's faster and easier to just go in and order, hearing impaired or not.

    "Tumeh's lawsuit seeks to force McDonald's to make accommodations for hearing-impaired people to order food in restaurant drive-thrus." -Good for her, she is really just trying to help people, and if the suit wins, she was in the right all along.

    "She also seeks unspecified damages and attorney's fees. " -Oh, I get it now. (Well, it was my suspicion all along.)

    I wonder what the damages are for being denyed a Big Mac attack, if anything it's better for you than eating it, and giving it to your kids.


    • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -11/+1would have dugg you up until the second paragraph.
    • kelmaster1, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1Yes, but walking in to McDs would mean she would lose at life.... Wait, she is already at McDonalds....
      • djholybolt, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1anybody who eats at mcdonalds loses at life.
  • koft, on 07/17/2008, -9/+75I can't understand what they're saying at the drive through and I have damn good hearing. This lady is a total bitch, if you can't hear *****, walk into the ***** restaurant and place your order.
    • waynetheman, on 07/17/2008, -6/+13Or heck, just drive up to the window, and make them take your order there.

      It's not hard. Really.

      We're in pretty bad shape if the first response someone has to fix something like this is to run to their lawyer.
      • koft, on 07/17/2008, -2/+5I don't know why you got dugg down for that, but it's true. On occasion I've done exactly that by request of the guy working the thing.
      • anachronaut, on 07/17/2008, -0/+6"Or heck, just drive up to the window, and make them take your order there."

        RTFA. "At least three times since September 2007 workers at a Lincoln McDonald's refused to let her place her order at the drive-thru window"

        She tried that and they wouldn't let her. Sheesh...
  • waydee, on 07/17/2008, -5/+97Oh for crying out loud, all she had to do was go inside to order her heart attack but instead she feels the only solution is to sue?

    "Unspecified damages"... what damages? her emotional wellbeing because she had to get out of her car to order a burger? throw this ***** out of court.
    • breadfred, on 07/17/2008, -4/+13Well she has autistic children, according to the website. Isn't autism one of these stamps being put on kids with behavioral problems because their parents can't be bothered to look after them properly (like playing with them and giving them decent food)? I am not saying that is the case here, but is fairly often misdiagnosed, even self-diagnosed.
      This self-righteous bitch needs a good slapping.
      • Paranor01, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Autism, if being misdiagnosed, that neurologist got his degree in a box of Cracker Jack's. Autism is a neuro-chemical and a neuro-physical disorder which makes the brain speed up and slow down in different area's. It also denies use of other area's, like the speech center, when called upon. In Canada, it takes 6 professionals to diagnose Autism. Hard to have them all wrong.

        Plus, from personal experience from dealing with Autistic children, you can't leave them alone, especially in a car.

        However, that being said. She should have just told them "i'll see you at the window". Autistic care is very expensive, sounds like she's trying to find the easy way to pay for it.
    • kelmaster1, on 07/17/2008, -0/+5If she's hearing impaired, eats at McDs, does this kind of *****, I'm guessing she's fat, old and ugly.. aka the triple threat. Triple threats are dangerous because they're generally souless beings whos only purpose in life is to leech of others and off society, draining the goodwill and souls of those who come in contact with her.

      So basically she has nothing in her life to do except look for ways she can suck the life out of anything she comes in contact with. Succubus is back!
  • heliox, on 07/17/2008, -15/+64Your deaf. The world is unfair. Deal with it.
    • Zarokima, on 07/17/2008, -4/+37And you're grammar skills suck.
      • tyleredw, on 07/17/2008, -3/+22I really hope that was on purpose.
      • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -7/+0deal with it.
      • Zarokima, on 07/17/2008, -1/+12tylerdw: it was. I actually had to edit twice due to not getting it wrong at first...and then not getting wrong again. I blame my English teachers for that.
      • TJMcWhiskers, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1mm hmm
      • heliox, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1Okay...YOU'RE...

        ***** grammar nazi bitch
    • sockpuppets, on 07/17/2008, -2/+12You're right. We all have our handicaps. Deal with it.
  • charm803, on 07/17/2008, -9/+21I used to work at Jack in the Box and it was not a problem to let deaf people order at the window instead of the speaker.

    We only had two regular customers, but we let them know that it would take a while longer and they would park in the waiting spot.

    I don't see why the workers at McDonald's didn't just take the order. Is the lawsuit worth it? No. Even other local McDonald's were able to accommodate her, so it's obviously just lack of training on the owner's part.

    Not only do they get a law suit, but now they probably lost a regular customer. Way to pay the bills, kid.

    • yacks, on 07/17/2008, -1/+11oh im sure they didn't lose a regular customer.. she'll be back for more.
    • G-RaZoR, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2I highly doubt the McD owner works there, most owners own multiple units and hire managers. I would imagine managing a McD is actually a busy job. Just saying.

      Besides, how do we actually know they didn't do everything correctly?
  • edwardmluk, on 07/17/2008, -10/+31Why take your kids to McDonalds? Sack it off and cook them a decent meal...
    • sh04, on 07/17/2008, -0/+8But then she won't hear the stove timer ding. And then she will burn dinner. And then she will sue Stouffer's for not accomodating for her disability.

  • Mootabolife, on 07/17/2008, -3/+14And then?...
  • uptown, on 07/17/2008, -7/+104I HATE people like this ...
    • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -4/+5Look, just because they can't hear doesn't mean you should hate them. Jeez!
      • ronaldinho, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2I hate them because they are suing over stupid things. Restaurants get to set up their own policies and systems, and if you don't like it, go somewhere else. And another point: the thing is, if it's the kind of drive-thru I'm thinking of, where you place your order to a speaker box first and THEN getting the food from a person at the drive-thru window, the employees will never know if you are hearing-impaired and wearing a hearing aid if they can't see you. I'm no fan of McDonald's food (at least in US), but got to say, throw this case out of court.
  • grimfandango, on 07/17/2008, -6/+23more proof that western civilization is screwed :(
    • meghalc, on 07/17/2008, -0/+12***** dont drag other nations into this mess!

      It should be "more proof U.S.A. is screwed."
    • darthludi, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Nope, just the U.S.
      See: Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants, "Stella Award"
    • Paranor01, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Western Civilization? has that happened yet?
  • Seantacular, on 07/17/2008, -6/+8Just leave the kids in the car and leave the windows down...
    • Relikh, on 07/17/2008, -1/+14Are you kidding me? Didn't you read the article? They're autistic!!! If she leaves them alone for more than 5 minutes at a time their heads could spontaneously explode.
    • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4have your kids order the food.
    • Dimbleby, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Leave the windows UP you mean! (i keed, i keed)
    • mabhatter, on 07/18/2008, -0/+1In many places "concerned" citizens will call Child Protective Services if you make your kids wait in the car 5 minutes. My wife has been approached several times by people for leaving the kids for the 2 minutes to pay the gas station attendant. Autistic kids are highly unpredictable and you can't leave them alone... they do stupid stuff like play in traffic because they wanted to chase a puppy. It's not bad parenting, they're just kids that take a lot of attention.
  • OutLawSuit, on 07/17/2008, -0/+9How this ends up all depends on what the ADA says.

    Honestly something doesn't seem right about this story. Won't she also have to prove this actually occurred and was not just some misunderstanding? Not to mention having hearing difficulties shouldn't make ordering anymore difficult, just shout what you want into the speaker then see if your order is correct on the screen or just pull through once you give your order, can verify order at window; I do that all the time. Something seems really odd here.
    • secrity, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I think that having a screen is one of the ways to reasonably accomodate her disability. If there were a screen, then there wouldn't have been a problem. The McD's near me took those screens out.
  • seriouslyorange, on 07/17/2008, -3/+12i mean, its not like the hamburglar stole her hearing. she aint rly got that much to complain about
    • herschman321, on 07/17/2008, -1/+2yeah he did, didnt you read the article?
  • angrynorwegian, on 07/17/2008, -5/+48McDonalds isn't required to sell her anything.
    • shark72, on 07/17/2008, -6/+4She's filing suit claiming discrimination under the ADA.

      Discriminating against deaf people isn't as much as a problem for most people here as would be, say, discriminating against black people by refusing to serve them in the drive through. But it's still discrimination.
      • MortVent, on 07/17/2008, -3/+16Nope imho it's screaming they couldn't get the wheelchair in one door, when the other door has a ramp

  • meghalc, on 07/17/2008, -19/+4Dont tell me non of you are looking for a reason to sue one of the large corporations to get rich. Oh yes, I forgot this is Digg, where we have the worlds most honest people lol... ;)
  • jman583, on 07/17/2008, -5/+29"Tumeh's lawsuit seeks to force McDonald's to make accommodations for hearing-impaired people to order food in restaurant drive-thrus."
    I have thought of the perfect accommodations for her: walk inside the McDonalds.
  • Poco, on 07/17/2008, -4/+7They should just close their drive thru (I had to work hard not to write "through"). Then there is no discrimination.
  • waynetheman, on 07/17/2008, -5/+38And she has some sort of human right to eat at that McDonald's because... ?

    Or, more to the point... why would she keep going back if they gave her bad service? Even if she won, what, is she going to CONTINUE to try to go there? She'd actually trust any of the food they gave her after she tried to sue them?

    And to think that our society (read: the Americans with Disabilities Act) actually encourages this kind of nonsense.
    • yacks, on 07/17/2008, -0/+18look into lawsuits about mirrors in the bathroom being 6 inches too high in regards to ADA.. Why the hell do we even need a mirror in the bathroom? to make sure we didn't piss or ***** on our face??
    • maximize, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2i'll never read your comments and drink soda at the same time again.

      last line = epic win
  • atgmac, on 07/17/2008, -2/+19They're not making you eat there, just go elsewhere. That's how capitalism works. If one cafe provides something that another doesn't, you take your business elsewhere. Then when McDonalds see that they are loosing money, they implement the thing that the other cafe has to get back their business. Or maybe they won't but you won't care because you'll be eating at the other cafe.
    • Paranor01, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4That's how capitalism works, but we're talking about America; the home of the "i've been personally wronged so i'm sueing you for all you have" version of capitalism (for excellent examples, please see RIAA and MPAA).
  • mickoneill30, on 07/17/2008, -2/+11Sure. McDonalds should just sell you the food wherever you want to be served. If she walked into the outlet would she be complaining if they won't take her order at her table or the front door. They have designated areas for the jobs. Their jobs are cookie cutter jobs. Thinking outside the box isn't an option. If you want service go to somewhere that you pay for service. Here you're paying for cheap crappy food to be served quickly.
  • rockstar1o9, on 07/17/2008, -8/+32Should the deaf be driving? I mean it's illegal (in Cali) to drive listening to music through headphones. I'd assume the same concept would apply with the deaf (can't hear horns, the sound of cars breaking, people yelling, emergency sirens, etc)
    • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -6/+4Deaf people are allowed to drive. Or more precisely, being deaf is not a legal cause to disallow someone to drive.

      In most states, maybe all, anyone able to pass the exams gets a driver's license. The lack of hearing is easily compensated for by paying more attention visually.
    • Zarokima, on 07/17/2008, -7/+7http://www.mirrorofjustice.com/Discrimination-Law/ ... (ignore the obvious error in word choice, pay attention to the content)

      Where as deaf people generally have better sight that can make up for the lack of hearing ability, people who can hear do not have that, so driving with headphones would definitely inhibit their driving ability.
    • maximize, on 07/17/2008, -3/+5this comment is for the two people above:

      sure their vision might be better, because their body has to adapt...
      but they still can't hear.

      they can't hear an emergency vehicle speeding behind them and they won't move, then someone dies because it's their fault.
      • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3I would hope they would check the rearview every once in a while.
    • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -3/+4@maximize.
      You are stating opinion. I was pointing out what I understand of the law, from my extensive training in law as a tv baby.

      Having said that, I know many deaf people. Many of them drive, LEGALLY. I am not discussing opinion when I say this. I am talking fact.

      I'll say it again, for YOU and the hard of hearing:
      "DEAF PEOPLE CAN DRIVE LEGALLY, LIKE YOU AND ME, THEY ONLY NEED TO GET A DRIVER'S LICENSE BY PASSING ALL APPROPRIATE TESTS."
      • djepik, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3I believe the question was: " *Should* the deaf be driving?" Yeah it's legal, but it's also legal for me to ride my hoverboard over private property, because I never touch the property.

        What I'm trying to say is that this law has not been addressed yet, which is what rockstar1o9 was trying to get at.
      • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2I seriously doubt that the idea of deaf drivers is an under-pondered phenomenon.

        I do not have blind trust in authority, but I do feel that we can rest assured that we do not need a ban on deaf drivers.

        Seeing how embedded automobile use is in our society, you are being very silly comparing this to hoverboards. If being deaf was a clear cause of bad driving then it would have been outlawed a long time ago. We are not talking about a new phenomenon here. We are talking about an activity that is extremely regulated, and has been so almost since it's conception, more than 80 years ago.
  • mycatsasha, on 07/17/2008, -3/+20They don't make accommodations to allow blind people to drive. Someone should sue the auto industry.
    • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -5/+3Deaf people can drive in most states without any provisions.
    • wc3452, on 07/17/2008, -6/+6They also don't make accommodations for Asians and women.
  • Sillywombat, on 07/17/2008, -5/+47Its like suing nintendo because you dont have any fingers...
    • cbartlett, on 07/17/2008, -1/+6They really should accommodate we fingerless people more. It's very difficult to hold a Wiimote without straps and tape which is unfairly embarrassing.
      • Skorme, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1How does home row work for you on your keyboard?
  • malonesm, on 07/17/2008, -4/+10You talk into a box! what does ordering have to do with her ability to hear?
    • G-RaZoR, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2Yeah, they put your order on the screen.

      What hogwash.
    • marx2k, on 07/17/2008, -1/+8"Hello and welcome to McDonalds... what would you like to order?"

      "Wawaawwwaaaaaaaaa mooommaaaawaaaawoooommmamamaawaaa"

      "A double quarter pounder with cheese. Would you like anything else with that?"

      "Mooooowaaaaaeeeoooomomuuuuwaaaoommmiuommmaaaa"

      "An extra large fries. Got ya. Please drive around"
  • kylere, on 07/17/2008, -0/+13You can vote with your dollars or you can sue for dollars. Good people vote with their dollars.
  • Red1Delta, on 07/17/2008, -3/+12In recent news I'm suing digg because I was digging all the articles and comments and my mouse broke and i have a finger injury.
  • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -13/+10I like the fact that people can sue companies. If you ask me this is not a frivolous lawsuit. It's a way of telling the high-ups in MickeyDs that some stores are not meeting commonly accepted standards.
    • prophet5, on 07/17/2008, -4/+2I'd say you're stupid, but you're probably too stupid to understand me.

      When you're bitching that food is too expensive, just remember that it is attitudes like yours that are the CAUSE of it. If they pay out a large settlement, McDonalds will just charge MORE for their food to cover the cost.

      Ass-clown!
      • lnf69, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2Yes, name calling is a true sign of higher intelligence.

        The prices Mickydees charges have very little to do with corporate legal costs and everything to do with the market in general. They have a business plan that includes selling food as fast as possible for as cheaply as possible. When I talk about "cheaply" I am not talking about the costs. I am talking about what the market will sustain.

        The day Mickydees can not sell a meal at a cost lower than what most can afford, will be the day the company goes belly up. If the legal costs become too great to be covered by product sales, then rest assured the company would change methods.

        But as you say, I am too stupid to understand anything you might have to teach me.

        Good night and good luck.
    • sure13, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3"It's a way of telling the high-ups in MickeyDs that some stores are not meeting commonly accepted standards."

      Another way of telling the high-ups would be to write them a letter. Brilliant!
      • lnf69, on 07/18/2008, -1/+1Yes, I agree, that should be first. But I can understand an assumption that nothing will get their attention better then a lawsuit.

        We can talk about the waste of our tax dollars in managing frivolous lawsuits in our courts all we want. But the past fifty years of American history teaches us that ONLY way to have some leverage on how large companies operate is through civil suits the have the potential of causing financial damage. Have a look at things like asbestos, legionnaires disease and many many other issues.
  • wc3452, on 07/17/2008, -2/+17I live in Lincoln and to my knowledge all of the mcdonalds have a screen at the drive thru speaker that lists what you've ordered. "Other McDonald's restaurants in Lincoln have accommodated Tumeh, Mora James said." So then go to those McDonalds? I mean Lincoln isn't that big and if she knew that particular McDonalds was a hassle at the drive thru then she should have gone inside. Is a Big Mac really worth the risk of being denied service at the drive thru when she could have easily gone inside?
    • shark72, on 07/17/2008, -7/+3When evaluating cases of discrimination it's useful to try the test on another group. I'm guessing you don't have too much sympathy for discrimination against deaf people -- fair enough -- but insert "black" into the scenario and I think the general reaction would be different. If your black friend was repeatedly denied service at a particular McDonald's, would you advise them to suck it up and just go to another McDonald's, or would you make noise about it?

      Again, I understand that there's apparently a world of difference between discriminating against deaf people vs. discriminating against people of a particular race, and the sentiment here on digg is that deaf people (or at least this particular deaf woman) shouldn't complain so much. But I argue that discrimination is discrimination.
      • MortVent, on 07/17/2008, -2/+4Do they turn away anyone driving up to the window and ordering? If so it's not discrimination

        The other is arguing that because all these other stores have 2 ramps, and this one has 1 then it's discrimination against wheelchair users...

        Disabled does not mean bend over backwards and provide preferential treatment

    • maximize, on 07/17/2008, -3/+1no, shes just lazy.

      it's ok to discriminate against the lazy.... because well what are they going to do? sue me I guess.
  • bobbknight, on 07/17/2008, -3/+22The ADA is a bad ***** law, just ask Penn and Teller.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT2YET6sg5I
  • alaskanassassin, on 07/17/2008, -2/+8this is just a ploy to get free mcdonalds for life.
  • palewook, on 07/17/2008, -2/+16reasonable accommodations. this lawsuit is crap. next a blind person will be suing McDonalds for having doors..
  • tedrock, on 07/17/2008, -10/+9In response to all the people that didn't read the article. She can't go inside because of her autistic kids. It would be better for everyone if she'd just take her order at the window. So stop saying "Don't be lazy go inside".
  • sanjito, on 07/17/2008, -2/+9From what I have seen lately, mcD's know has a screen that has the total and the order right on it. Unless she is blind as well, then she should have no problem using the drive thru.
    • LtSiver, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3The only problem with this logic is that if she is blind, she should NOT be driving. If you cannot see, you cannot be behind the wheel.
      • mahdaeng, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1But isn't that discrimination against the seeing-impaired?

        :^)
    • secrity, on 07/17/2008, -1/+1Only some of them have it, and many of them are broken. The McD near me used to have them; they have since been removed.
  • Lovebunnie, on 07/17/2008, -5/+2Maybe because she was yelling at em because of her hearing?

    -_-
  • FURBjr, on 07/17/2008, -7/+7As an anarcho-capitalist, I say if McDonald's doesn't want to serve deaf people at their drive through window, that is their business. However, I will choose a different restaurant when traveling through this area on my way from Utah to Saint Paul for the Republican National Convention/Ron Paul Rally.
    • prophet5, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Buried for mentioning that ass-tart Ron Paul. Take off your tinfoil hat, you *****.
  • lx45803, on 07/17/2008, -2/+6On one hand, just give her a ***** burger. That extra minute you get to throw all the food in the bag doesn't help you that much time-wise.
    On the other hand, it's not her right to be served at that McDonald's. They can serve anyone they want, and also not serve the one's they don't want. You *never* have a right to do business with someone.
    • DoTheFandango, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4Except if the have a disability thanks to the ADA law.
      • shark72, on 07/17/2008, -0/+3There are also equal housing laws that state that you have to treat everybody equally when renting or selling them property.

        As for discriminating by race... in many places it's not illegal to discriminate on race at a food establishment, but it'll get you into hot water fast on the civil side. Denny's was sued several times over this.
  • macneib, on 07/17/2008, -5/+4Total *****...
  • lot665, on 07/17/2008, -1/+10nothing a little mcclosed captioning won't fix
  • thephosphorbox, on 07/17/2008, -1/+10Once I got to the part about "unspecified damages", I stopped reading. It'd be one thing if she was genuinely trying to help out other people with disabilities, but of course, its always about money. F her, the courts shouldn't even entertain this nonsense.
  • martyfarty, on 07/17/2008, -2/+10What a lazy cow! Rather than walking 10 yards into the restaurant to order her food, she chose to sue them. Only in America
    • fray97, on 07/17/2008, -2/+2There are lazy fat people in a lot of countries
  • Pahtcub, on 07/17/2008, -0/+21It's not like any of the rest of us can hear anything from that box either.
  • meangreenbean, on 07/17/2008, -7/+1I thought you needed to pass a hearing test to get a driver's license in the first place!
    • Ricemanstm, on 07/17/2008, -0/+2Huh? You're gonna have to type louder, I can't hear you! :-)
  • Zippo, on 07/17/2008, -2/+14She should also sue radio stations for not broadcasting hearing-impared-friendly programs and music.
  • maximize, on 07/17/2008, -4/+6I work at Subway and I get customers like this all the time. They think it's their right to order food and bitch us around. I have to refuse service to a lot of people all the time. The managers even tell us we are allowed to if we feel it is necessary.

    Also why do people say they are allergic to tomatoes, so they ask me to change my little glove thingys, then they ask to put red hots on their sub. Red hots contain tomatoes.

    Why are people so stupid?

    • copaceticZ, on 07/17/2008, -2/+3actually people don't change those gloves anywhere near as often as they are supposed to....If i see you ***** with the register with your gloves on or reuse them after using the register it ***** makes me want to puke.
      • PubeStache, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1How are you going to know?
      • boostfiend, on 07/17/2008, -0/+4People with mysophobia make me want to puke.
      • acliffhang3r, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1So what? c'mon man up a little bit. The unlikely event of a little stomach infection won't kill you. God! people have become such pussies. I am sure you're the type that washes your hands 10 times compulsively before you place anything into the fab lab, clean room that is your mouth. I was like you when I was a kid but now.. I am just awesome.

        Also this lady thinks having autistics for children makes her special.
      • copaceticZ, on 07/17/2008, -0/+1I do wash my hands regularly but i am no germaphobe I'm just saying most of these idiots might as well not wear those ***** gloves because even though they cost 1 cent a piece or less they are always trying to save money by not changing them as often as necessary. I remember i used to work at a bagel shop and the manager would be like you use too many gloves and i'd be like no i use the proper amount when i make a bagel sandwich and then i go to the cash register to ring up an item those gloves are no longer good anymore. period.
  • fray97, on 07/17/2008, -5/+4Companies have the right to refuse service to anyone.
    • secrity, on 07/17/2008, -1/+4The inability to discriminate trumps the right to refuse service to anyone. There may also be other public accomodation laws that would apply.
  • Sunnygurm, on 07/17/2008, -5/+5Wow...just wow. It seems people sue for any reason these days.

    Honestly, this is the equivalent of a blind person complaining that the movie theatre plays bad movies.

    If you can't hear worth *****, how are you supposed to order at the drive thru? Is this woman going to sue her phone company as well?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 105 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.