I normally don't say reply to these kinds of posts. But, there are a few things about the Stella Liebeck lawsuit against McDonald's that most people don't know. And, for whatever reason tonight, I just feel like mentioning this.
Stella Liebeck did, in fact, sue McDonald's and win a judgement because she burned herself with a cup of McDonald's coffee. It was a cup of scalding coffee in a disposable cup, and she placed it between her legs at the drive through. When she drove away, the her thighs pushed together and the top of the cup came of. The coffee scalded her.
Here are some things most people don't know about this.
Stella had to have skin graphs on her thighs due to the severity of the burns.
Prior to her incident, there had been more than 700 complaints to various agencies about the extreme temperature of McDonald's coffee. Now, when you think of the number of people who go to the drive through and get coffee, 700 complaints might not seem like a huge number. But it's important to remember that generally it's believed that for every formal complaint, there are usually tens or hundreds of others who had the same complaint but never bothered to say anything.
So, it's reasonable to assume that thre were at least seven thousand other instances where McDonald's coffee burned people.
Now, here's the part that most people don't understand; and this came out at the trial. McDonald's kept the coffee in their coffee pots at an extremely high temperature. At trial, McDonald's executives said they did that because it was more cost effective to essentially keep the coffee boiling than to replace coffee that was too cold for some customers.
In fact, McDonald's coffee was kept at a temperature that was far greater than industry standards. And it was kept hotter than what is generally viewed to be safe by those same standards. That means it was unsafe for workers, customers and anyone who might come in contact with that scalding liquid.
Was Stella stupid to put the cup between her legs? Yes. But the real question is, was McDonald's negligent for keeping the coffee too hot? After 700 documented complaints, a jury decided yes, McDonald's was negligent.
Remember, this is a case in which a huge, multi-national corporation decided, based on economics, that it made more sense to risk the health of their customers rather than make coffee more often.
Also, they were handing this scalding liquid out to people driving in cars, often with children in them. Think about that for a minute, if there was a small fender bender right outide the golden arches, and that coffee hit a child in the face requiring skin graphs...would people feel the same way about the verdict?
This is one of those cases where the facts are pretty solid. McDonald's was wrong. Unfortunatley, a black, female senior citizen was scarred for life because of the decision of a huge corporation.
Personally, I think the verdict was about right.
Just my thoughts.
Brutal
__________________
"Don't worry, I won't bite...oh, wait a minute, I forgot, yes I will."
www.brutalmaster.com
|