A genetic syndrome has left Illinois resident Dawn Larson without hands or fully developed arms.
Larson has learned to lead a full life by using her feet. She’s even able to drive.
She says she’s never had a problem in public until she went through a McDonald’s drive-thru in Rockford last fall. Normally, Larson first gives the cashier her debit card to pay for the order and then grabs the food and drink with both feet.
But at McDonald’s she said they took her money at one window but wouldn’t give her the food at the next window. Larson says she felt degraded.
“She was asking for no special accommodations, she just wanted to be treated like everyone else. And that’s where I believe McDonald’s certainly violated her rights,” said Laurel Wykes Smith, Dawn’s Attorney.
What no Seat Belt laws out there?
Yeah, how does she steer that car?
Whatever, this is just disgusting. I’m not a big fan of people who sue McDonald’s because they’re too stupid to know that spilling hot coffee on their pussy is going to hurt, but this is just wrong. That “associate” should be fired, and McD’s should have to pay something for employing a Cro-Magnon imbecile like that.
Been through all the mainstreaming battles with one member of my immediate family. Mickey D doesn’t stand a chance – and probably will smack the manager upside the head for allowing stupid decisions, anyway.
But, then – doesn’t this sort of endorse the definition of MacJob?
I don’t believe anyone is dim enough to not see the righteousness of her cause – but it’s early yet…
Well, they’ve been serving people without taste buds for years…
I wonder if she can operate an iPhone on AT&T’s wifi network in McDonalds?
4—I’ll take that bet. She smells like a professional litigator to me. Article has few details, but to be “virtuous” I think she should have contacted MdDonalds first to provide information and a request for immediate change.
After an appropriate promise and time to implement, if no change, then sue. Short of that==her behavior is self serving. (no pun intended)
What a great idea to have this woman driving. Is the DMV in her state crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is no way it is safe to drive with only one foot on the wheel!
she already paid – what’s the problem?
#7, Why should she jump through hoops to get the same service “normal” people get without thinking about it.
If she was turned away because she wore a burka it would be the same thing. Or if she was turned away because she was a Native American. Or her TB was acute and she was coughing all over everyone.
OK, well that last one,…
She should get free everything for life just for her impressive motivation, determination, and awesomeness. If only more people were so determined…
10—You’re missing the point. She didn’t get service like everyone else. Now==what should she do?
Now, she should do whatever she feels like doing. If I were interested in advancing the cause of disabled people, I would try to educate. But I’m not so motivated. I am a self centered slug. So I would sue.
The sub-text of the story is that she is virtuous and the ignorant McD chain is evil. Simple story lines, for simple people.
The lady is fully capable, probably more capable than some of the posters.
She’s not handicapped, just different. The difference was discriminated against and I think she has a strong case.
If I remember correctly this happened to her at TWO different McDonald’s so called resturants.
Well you’ve got to hand it to her.. she doesn’t pussyfoot around.
What is it with these minimum wage McDonald’s employees anyway? Don’t they realize they ARE the $15.5 billion Corporation?
Well, maybe give them a break considering this obviously is the first time the woman has ever gone to a McDonald’s.
RBG
A better version of this story:
http://tinyurl.com/2hbmxm
Anyone care to provide some insights into the Mc-D’s worker that refused her service?
[Please use TinyUrl.com for overly long URLs. – ed.]
#2 – Hey Mustard… You know I side with you on issues from time to time and so let me implore you, as one rational being to another, learn the backstory and details to that MickyD’s Coffee case before you start slandering the poor old woman who was victimized by the idiots at McDonalds…
The urban folklore of that case and the reality are two completely different things.
======
#3 – But, then – doesn’t this sort of endorse the definition of MacJob?
Comment by moss — 7/5/2007 @ 10:21 am
No… It does, however, endorse the definition of McJob… But it in no way defines those who work at Apple.
======
#4 – I’m surprised the YOU don’t believe that at least one person out there wouldn’t side with the armless woman. I never thought you had that much faith in the species 🙂
======
#10 – Why should she jump through hoops to get the same service “normal” people get without thinking about it.
She’s armless… not legless. She can jump just fine 🙂
(sorry… I felt compelled to say that)
=======
#12 – The sub-text of the story is that she is virtuous and the ignorant McD chain is evil. Simple story lines, for simple people.
I don’t know if she’s virtuous or if McD’s is ignorant. In fact, many previous cases have proven the McD’s is fully aware of when they act unethically, so I do tend to believe they are evil…
However… While I have no qualms about this lawsuit, I find it amazingly hard to believe this is an institutional problem as opposed to the random chance of getting two separate drive thru attendants on two separate occasions who were so poorly adapted socially that they just couldn’t process an armless woman.
McD’s isn’t known for its hiring of Mensa candidates…
I mean, who would write a policy that restricts service to armless women? (Perhaps Lauren would know?)
#16 — “Anyone care to provide some insights into the Mc-D’s worker that refused her service?”
From the article: “What’s the matter with you? . . . You ain’t got no arms. … Let me see your arms,”
Sounds like an uneducated black person to me. I would have politely replied, “What’s the matter with you? You ain’t got no education?”
Nice find, Arrius.
I believe McDonald’s as a corporation would be appalled at the woman’s treatment.
McDonald’s owes her far more than a $10 certificate.
Plus an apology.
McDonalds should have clearly understood policies in place for such eventualities including discretely getting a manager for anything the employee can’t handle or is out of the ordinary.
The definition of being an individual is that they have the personal freedom to do anything they want in spite of policies, laws, training, contracts, etc.
No corporation should have to answer for an individual’s unexpected personal bad behavior.
McDonald’s should be liable if it can be shown that their lack of procedural training contributed to the situation.
McDonald’s should offer a reasonable settlement, privately, in order not to encourage copy-cats.
Why do I believe that no reasonable settlement would be accepted?
The woman should be able to sue society for producing such idiots, not McDonald’s.
The server should be personally liable to some degree.
But then maybe I’m not the guy to ask about this. I get nauseous when faced with a McDonald’s server with a stud poking into their snot-laced nose while I’m ordering my McFilet with extra sauce.
RBG
19—Boy, you are posting all over the place on this one. First, yes, nice find Arrius. Always good to have “some” facts before spouting//err, posting.
If McD is not liable, nor should be liable, they should not settle at all. Any settlement encourages lawsuits.
All lawsuits and their outcome should be public information.
I am sure McD’s official position is “Get the money from all customers and be nice to them so they come back.” Trouble is, they hire and will only pay for kids, retards, and old folks. Perhaps their liability, if any, should lie in their hiring practice as opposed to their formal (self centered) service to all policy?
I unstand your “sue society” as total hyperbole? To the degree it is, yes, I agree.
The server should be liable to all degree. What at all should limit his/her liability?
You eat at McD? – – – weird!
People who grow up without arms learn to make do with their legs and feet. They manage to lead full lives. Here’s a video of one armless mother showing how she diapers her infant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9KRRJUFxdY
32 – Mister Mustard – I love your comments, but really – McDonald’s corporate sets superheated, exploding coffee as an “acceptable risk” and then, when a coffee explodes in a womans lap and burns off her labia, you blame HER for suing? Get serious.
20. “You eat at McD? – – – weird!”
I have it on good authority… apparently not so.
15 is sarcasm. No one should confuse a server’s attitude with the official corporation POV.
Second para is me thinking the woman has gone to MCDonald’s all her life. This must be a “one-off” situation. (Not withstanding full story.) Shouldn’t be too surprising that it’s going to be shocking to someone, somewhere with minimal life experience.
You know, maybe I should learn to forget the witty sarcasms.
19. Is just spreading the blame.
Whether McDonald’s itself is to blame or not, I think it is just good corporate policy to try to make things right for a wronged customer. But I’m talking hundreds of dollars, not millions.
RBG
#19 – Why do I believe that no reasonable settlement would be accepted?
Because you automatically assume the worst about people? (I’m just guessing) 🙂
The woman should be able to sue society for producing such idiots, not McDonald’s.
Well good. We agree that individual people have a right to address grievances through a court.
The server should be personally liable to some degree.
I suppose I agree philosophically, but we are talking about a person with a literal McJob. If held liable, how will they make restitution?
No… their punishment is that when this is over, they will have to work at Hardee’s.
Interesting posts.
What is funny is I agree with the post above, it sounds as if this was likely an overweight black lady for a numerber of reasons, quickly those would be: over weight black women are numerous in the world and numerous at Mc-D’s, secondly over weight black women are often rude, thrid, these words sound most likely to come from an over weight black lady. Finally, and most interesting, is that its likely since the article goes out of its way to neither show the lady or discuss her in any way (the lady that works the window). It should be a simple matter of news reporting to mention something about the antagonist.
Finally, and most importantly, the actions of this worker should be a lesson to her to learn manners that are obviously missing. More important than some lesson MCDs should learn (they cant control all the idiots in their employ 100% of the time.) Her lack of manners (lack of responsibility, lack of personal control or view) might speak to why she works a MCDs window.
I’m annoyed at this.
It’s pretty easy to jump on McDonald’s for this but what exactly are they supposed to do?
On the one hand people seem to be happy when McDonald’s is sued for someone getting hot coffee spilled all over them. On the other hand people get ticked off when they get cold coffee.
Basically, you’ve got a woman who really ought to get served, but if one of the workers there accidentally spill something on the woman then they face legal retribution for the sole reason that McDonald’s has deep pockets. People (jury) will look at the McDonald’s employees as, “How stupid could you be handing a (or whatever) to a woman with no arms?”
I don’t see this as a problem with McDonald’s or the woman but as a problem with out idiotic legal system that rewards people out of ‘distributing the wealth’ instead of right or wrong. So you end up with idiotic decisions being made just because people and corporations don’t want to go through the legal shit.
It’s one thing is someone is given an opportunity to make a decision and they make the wrong one. It’s another thing to give someone an opportunity to make a decision and they’ll be wrong no matter what they do.
I’m not blaming the woman here, just society and the judicial system.
You don’t have to be a idiot to work at McDonald’s but it helps
Side issue here for OFTLO and TJG, since it’s been brought up twice now, and it is McDonald’s we’re talking about here…
This is my understanding about that famous coffee lawsuit: The woman, an adult, who is assumed by any reasonable person to know that coffee is very hot, ordered coffee. They gave it to her, and she – not McDonald’s – placed this cup of what she knew to be very hot liquid between her own legs. In a car. A moving car, at that. She was burned.
Am I in error? If so, please indicate where I have been lead astray.
>>Hey Mustard
OK, Mr. Moss. I will admit that I don’t know much about the coffee-on-pussy lawsuit beyond what Jay Leno and David Letterman had to say about it. Perhaps the lady did have a valid complaint. So I will rephrase, and say “I’m not a big fan of gratuitous litigation, even if the aforementioned lawsuit was not gratuitous”. How about that?
I’m no big fan of McDonald’s either, and in this case, I think they ought to be hammered.
Bobbo could you come up with another user name? You’re embarrassing the clowns.
>>I get nauseous when faced with a McDonald’s server with a stud
>>poking into their snot-laced nose while I’m ordering my McFilet
>>with extra sauce.
I’m with you on that one, RBG. When I was in my fast-food employment years, you used to have to look “nice” to show up at work. No long hair, no jailhouse tats, no tramp stamps, no metal shit sticking out of your face. Just one of the many reasons I no longer patronize those places.
Plus, what the fuck is up with the speakers at their drive throughs? We put a man on the moon in 1969, and (at least as of a couple of years ago, the last time I drove through), the technology for clear communications from 30 feet away was beyond McD’s???