The human right for McDonald's employees not to wash their hands

[scribblet]

This is unbelievable, words escape me, how could they rule such a thing when customer's health can be at stake. Another reason these HR tribunals are out to lunch.

http://ezralevant.com/2008/04/the-human-ri...-mcdonalds.html

The human right for McDonald's employees not to wash their hands

Don't eat at McDonald's on South West Marine Drive in Vancouver.

Listen. I love McDonald's, both for their food and for what they stand for philosophically. I thought that Super Size Me was a piece of anti-capitalist, anti-beef propaganda.

But when you're in Vancouver, skip the McDonald's on Marine Drive.

That's because the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal has ruled that one of the employees there has a human right not to wash her hands when working in their kitchen.

Beena Datt claimed that she developed a "skin condition" that meant she couldn't wash her hands in compliance with McDonald's hygiene policy. That's the same hygiene policy that makes McDonald's like an embassy to Canadians travelling overseas -- when you're in a Third World country, and tired of eating in hygiene-challenged local restaurants, you can count on a western standard of cleanliness and quality at McDonald's.

In B.C., McDonald's hygiene policy isn't just a matter of corporate pride. It's a matter of the law -- both the Health Act and the Food Premises Regulations. And then there's B.C.'s Food Protection Guidelines issued by the B.C. Centre for Disease Control. McDonald's subscribes to all of them. Hell, they probably helped write them.

cont...

[M.Dancer]

I avoid Mcdonald's mainly because of their philosophy "we serve well marketed crap". They can take almost any tantalizing dish and succesfully remove the natural flavour and replace it with McFlavour....

If the germs from the toilet don't kill you, the processed fats and cholesterol will...

[Canadian Blue]

Listen. I love McDonald's, both for their food and for what they stand for philosophically. I thought that Super Size Me was a piece of anti-capitalist, anti-beef propaganda.

I thought it showed that we have a choice when eating that shit. If we continue to eat it despite knowing that we're eating shit then so be it. I'm not sure what they stand for "philosophically" since their more or less just there to provide a service. As well the beef at McDicks is complete shit, and usually if I want a good burger I go home to the farm or perhaps eat one at an actual restaurant.

Either way, this ruling shows how idiotic human rights can get, especially when said human rights are risking another persons health.

[noahbody]

I wonder if they'll put up an "Over 1 billion contaminated" sign.

Edited April 16, 2008 by noahbody

[Drea]

Either way, this ruling shows how idiotic human rights can get, especially when said human rights are risking another persons health.

On the one hand they've banned people from smoking outside -- on the other hand Food Safe no longer means anything.

I haven't eaten at McD's since I saw the videos on You Tube.... ewwwwwww. I won't eat something that never ever "rots".

[DogOnPorch]

That's nuthin...

---------------------------------

Barf...

[eyeball]

Bad dog, bad.

[Qwerty]

This is the leftist wasteland we are creating. This is just the beginning, wait until we have polygamist marriages and Sahria Law's. Enjoy it, you've earned it.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Qwerty

[guyser]

Since she doesnt work there I see no problems , at least any more than normal bad hygiene. Bad decision though, would have been easy to pay for $20 worth of latex gloves.

[Drea]

This is the leftist wasteland we are creating. This is just the beginning, wait until we have polygamist marriages and Sahria Law's. Enjoy it, you've earned it.

There is an easy solution to the booga booga about Sharia law and polygamists... religion should never play a part of regular life. Keep your religion in your church, out of my government, my schools and out of my life.

And let's educate (no, really educate them, not just "read this pamphlet") newcomers (and some oldcomers) that women are equal citizens in this country.

Religion is why women across the world are treated like crap.

[Qwerty]

There is an easy solution to the booga booga about Sharia law and polygamists... religion should never play a part of regular life. Keep your religion in your church, out of my government, my schools and out of my life.

And let's educate (no, really educate them, not just "read this pamphlet") newcomers (and some oldcomers) that women are equal citizens in this country.

Religion is why women across the world are treated like crap.

Not every people are good for Canada Drea, simple as that.

Islamists come from a place where Religion and Government are intertwined as one entity. No one is going to change that by talking, impossible. It will take generations to breed that out of them.

I understand what you are saying though and I once thought similar to you but then I woke up and discovered the reality of our world and put this fantasy that everyone will get along to bed. It just cannot happen Drea. Islamists hold their religion more fiercely than Christians do, you're concentrating on the wrong side.

Hopefully one day you'll see that.

I whole heartedly agree with your last statement. It isn't the only reason but yes it does garner women as second class citizens much of the time and that is unfair as women have as much to contribute as men...

Edited April 16, 2008 by Qwerty

[Leafless]

Religion is why women across the world are treated like crap.

Prehistoric man was not religious and those same traits are carried on to-day, by some men.

[Drea]

Leafless -- how do you know?

as there are no written records of prehistory, how do you know?

The evidence suggests that women were not equal but revered as the makers of life.

We do not know for example, if women were hunters along with the men. It is not recorded one way or the other.

And I truly think that children were not raised by "couples" but by the entire community... this would free up mom and dad to hunt, build, gather etc while grandma, grandpa and the pregnant aunty and this disabled uncle would watch the kidlets.

The notion of "couples" and "ownership" of humans are new concepts in my opinion.

Back eons ago I doubt if anyone cared who fathered a child as long as there were children being produced, it made no difference if mom and dad were a couple or not.

[Canadian Blue]

Prehistoric man was not religious and those same traits are carried on to-day, by some men.

Wrong, prehistoric man created religion to explain the world.

[guyser]

Islamists come from a place where Religion and Government are intertwined as one entity. No one is going to change that by talking, impossible. It will take generations to breed that out of them.

Explain Turkey then please.

[Qwerty]

Explain Turkey then please.

We are talking about Canada as this is a Canadian Political forum.

Anymore spamming of my posts will be reported.

Add something or don't post.

Thanks.

[M.Dancer]

We are talking about Canada as this is a Canadian Political forum.

Anymore spamming of my posts will be reported.

Add something or don't post.

Thanks.

teh

Could you perhaps get back to the topic and stop spamming the threads with your moronic xenophobia. The topic is the quarter ponder with jizz

[Canadian Blue]

Anymore spamming of my posts will be reported.

You do realize this is a discussion forum right? Why don't you explain why a Muslim country like Turkey has been able to be successful and secular?

Go ahead and report the member, I'm sure you'll get quite the response.

[guyser]

Why don't you explain why a Muslim country like Turkey has been able to be successful and secular?

Which was the question in the first place. I wonder why he thinks it spam to ask a question about his post. Probably because he cant answer it.

Go ahead and report the member, I'm sure you'll get quite the response.

Likely.Thanks Blue.

[Qwerty]

Read the topic please. Does it have anything to do with Turkey? No.

BTW fyi Turkey is hardly secular. What's on their flag? They have a Islamic democracy, that's what they call it. It's an oxymoron if you ask me but w/e.

Therefore you are spamming kid.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Qwerty

[segnosaur]

This is unbelievable, words escape me, how could they rule such a thing when customer's health can be at stake. Another reason these HR tribunals are out to lunch.

...

The human right for McDonald's employees not to wash their hands

Ok, I did a little research into this particular issue.

I do agree, human rights tribunals are out to lunch, and I think they made the wrong decision here, although not exactly for the reasons stated above.

The HR tribunal did not necessarily rule that she didn't have to wash her hands when handling food. What they are claiming is that McDonald's didn't make the effort to try to find alternate work for her to do at the restaurant. (i.e. if she couldn't wash her hands enough to qualify her to handle the food, she should (in theory) be allowed to work the drive-through or do some other work at the restaurant.

That in itself is a bad ruling... I know people who work at McDonalds; people there are often required to be flexible (able to handle more than 1 task), so having an employee who lacks that flexibility would be a detriment.

So the human rights tribunal does deserve criticism, but for reasons other than that stated by Ezra Lavant.

[Qwerty]

Ok, I did a little research into this particular issue.

I do agree, human rights tribunals are out to lunch, and I think they made the wrong decision here, although not exactly for the reasons stated above.

The HR tribunal did not necessarily rule that she didn't have to wash her hands when handling food. What they are claiming is that McDonald's didn't make the effort to try to find alternate work for her to do at the restaurant. (i.e. if she couldn't wash her hands enough to qualify her to handle the food, she should (in theory) be allowed to work the drive-through or do some other work at the restaurant.

That in itself is a bad ruling... I know people who work at McDonalds; people there are often required to be flexible (able to handle more than 1 task), so having an employee who lacks that flexibility would be a detriment.

So the human rights tribunal does deserve criticism, but for reasons other than that stated by Ezra Lavant.

They should just keep that person on toilet and table scrubbing duty.

McDonalds' Canada cannot seriously expect to have this person handling Canadians' food can they?

I mean this isn't the third world here where we tolerate germs in our food we eat clean food here in the civilized world.

Edited April 16, 2008 by Qwerty

[scribblet]

Ok, I did a little research into this particular issue.

-----

That in itself is a bad ruling... I know people who work at McDonalds; people there are often required to be flexible (able to handle more than 1 task), so having an employee who lacks that flexibility would be a detriment.

So the human rights tribunal does deserve criticism, but for reasons other than that stated by Ezra Lavant.

Thanks for the info. I also understand the woman had a skin condition, in which case she shouldn't be working with food anyway.

Whether or not we eat there isn't the issue, it's really another example of how far overboard our human wrongs tribunals are going.

[guyser]

They should just keep that person on toilet and table scrubbing duty.

McDonalds' Canada cannot seriously expect to have this person handling Canadians' food can they?

Reading my boy reading....she does not work there anymore.

I mean this isn't the third world here where we tolerate germs in our food we eat clean food here in the civilized world.

Never worked in a restaurant have you?

Ever stopped to wonder why Toronto has the health dept posting coloured signs in the window...you know red green and yellow ones?

[guyser]

Ok, I did a little research into this particular issue.

I do agree, human rights tribunals are out to lunch, and I think they made the wrong decision here, although not exactly for the reasons stated above.

So the human rights tribunal does deserve criticism, but for reasons other than that stated by Ezra Lavant.

Smells kind of like the U of Michigan imbroglio from last year. Everyone cursing muslims for wanting a foot bath but forgetting that they had initially asked to pay for the installation.

In this case she won due to no attempt to placate her condition. Still bad, thanks for finding that out.