Starbucks accused of violating Americans with Disabilities Act by charging extra for non-dairy - eviltoast
  • SirSamuel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    TBH, not much, except that in the case of dairy and gluten intolerance there’s a case to be made for reasonable accommodation under the ADA. The rest of his comments were increasingly silly

    Also there’s many things wrong with American disability law, social safety nets, and the complete dysfunction of what passes for “healthcare”. Splitting hairs on what constitutes a disability is emblematic of these failings.

    • Today@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I was just 90 percent goofing and ‘what abouting.’ It’s only an issue because we have milk alternatives. Dairy bothers me but i don’t care for the alt milks so i mostly order tea. If i really want a coffee i get a small splash of milk and deal with the consequences. Also, there’s a whole thing with whether it’s milk sugar or milk fat or A1/A2 that bothers people - so sometimes skim milk or A2 milk is less upsetting and no more expensive.

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Hmm with all due respect I’m leaning towards not liking this lawsuit. Similar to splitting hairs on what constitutes a disability, I think calling an allergy a disability cheapens the system.

      I think what would be “most fair” in this scenario would be for healthcare to cover lactaid like it does with epipens, etc.

      For the record, I am pro-ADA and pro-nationalised healthcare. I just feel like this lawsuit is frivilous