TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › McDonalds should be ashamed of itself
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

McDonalds should be ashamed of itself

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McDona...oyee_0222.html

That poor kid. Just trying to do the 'right' thing & look what happens and the fabulously wealthy employer tries to slither out of it's moral obligation to a youngster who would be considered a hero by anyone with an ounce of brains or compassion!!

Kinda/sorta reminds me of when I sent to a local McDonalds to place an order and I vaguely complained about the raised prices and the manager [a punk kid himself] tried to blame the increase of $ on the raised minimum wage that recently went thru. I frowned and very strongly advised him that the increase was most probably due to the huge increase in transportation costs due to the spiraling gas prices [$4 a gallon] at that time.

Hummpt, corporate brainwashing or what? Man, I hope they get tons of bad press over this one.
post #2 of 22
Wow. I hope he is able to get the court to rule that McDonalds should pay. That's just ridiculous.
post #3 of 22
Oh my GOD!!! I can't believe McDonald's would do something so stupid! The I hope they sue McDonald's and get millions!!!!
post #4 of 22
It may not be up to McDonald's, worker's comp is a complicated mess in the best of situations. Their insurance carrier is likely who is not acknowledging the claim. The State should have a Board of Review, his case will be heard there.
post #5 of 22
As someone who works in Workers Compensation insurance, I agree this is likely the insurance carrier’s decision and may not be in the hands of McDonalds Corporation. Insurance companies are in the business of getting out of paying claims whenever possible, and will be sticklers about staying exactly to the letter of their policy no matter what the situation. If their policy reads that he is only due compensation if he was injured completing the duties assigned to him under this job title, this would not be one of them and therefore would be denied. If that is the case, his job description would have to include something about premise or patron security before they would cover it.

This is not to say I believe it is right. This employee will likely now have to fight the Workers Compensation company, then go after McDonalds for compensation if they don’t eventually pay out. Honestly McDonalds is such a big company that if their insurance didn’t want to pay I would think they would pay him anyway, just to avoid bad press.

But then again, McDonalds is so huge, they are betting that even bad press won’t keep customers for coming back for their $1 cheeseburgers and Big Macs eventually. Very sad really.
post #6 of 22
Gotta agree with the two previous posters - it's likely not up to McDonalds but their insurance carrier.

Most people have no idea how hard some of these insurance companies will fight to avoid paying out claims, even when the case seems cut and dried to the layman. And the employer really has no say - they can even back the employee in the case and still have it denied by the carrier.
post #7 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
And the employer really has no say - they can even back the employee in the case and still have it denied by the carrier.
Well, some of the blame can go to McDonalds. While McDonald’s can’t make the insurance company pay out, they could do it if the carrier denies the claim. The insurance company is there to protect McDonalds by paying out these claims for them when they arise but they are not the law of what is right and what is wrong. Just because their policy excludes this event does not mean McDonalds is not responsible for the damages to this young man. If they wanted to, they could still pay his damages "out of pocket" without the insurance company paying anything at all.
post #8 of 22
I don't give two hoots whether this is McDonalds OR their Workman's Comp
carrier.
They need to do the right thing and pay for this guys medical bills.

This is despicable.
post #9 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruiserMaiden View Post
Well, some of the blame can go to McDonalds. While McDonald’s can’t make the insurance company pay out, they could do it if the carrier denies the claim. The insurance company is there to protect McDonalds by paying out these claims for them when they arise but they are not the law of what is right and what is wrong. Just because their policy excludes this event does not mean McDonalds is not responsible for the damages to this young man. If they wanted to, they could still pay his damages "out of pocket" without the insurance company paying anything at all.

HEY, you beat me to it. You are absolutely right.

Legaly, sadly, does not always mean morally. McDonalds needs to do the MORALLY correct thing.
post #10 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
HEY, you beat me to it. You are absolutely right.

Legaly, sadly, does not always mean morally. McDonalds needs to do the MORALLY correct thing.
If McDonalds felt the need to do the morally correct thing, they wouldn't sell that junk they call food in the first place.

If McDonald's were to pay out-of-pocket for incidents like this, then they wouldn't probably have to pay for insurance at all which I'm sure is costing them big bucks.

I agree that Worker's Compensation should pay for this - I think it is their moral obligation to pay rather more than it is McDonalds.
post #11 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
If McDonalds felt the need to do the morally correct thing, they wouldn't sell that junk they call food in the first place.

If McDonald's were to pay out-of-pocket for incidents like this, then they wouldn't probably have to pay for insurance at all which I'm sure is costing them big bucks.

I agree that Worker's Compensation should pay for this - I think it is their moral obligation to pay rather more than it is McDonalds.
There is no choice with WC insurance. Federal law mandates that all employees are covered. Now as big as they are they could be self-insured. But that just means they keep the reserves like a insurance comp would and have a third party claims group handle the claims.

With WC there is always that question, was it work-related? In this case I can see some reasons why it might not be considered such. My opinion is that it is, protection of the customer arose from his employment. No, he didn't HAVE to do it for his job, but it was in his mind, part of it. But I'm no lawyer. It bet it gets settled and the WC comp pays.
post #12 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by CruiserMaiden View Post
As someone who works in Workers Compensation insurance, I agree this is likely the insurance carrier’s decision and may not be in the hands of McDonalds Corporation. Insurance companies are in the business of getting out of paying claims whenever possible, and will be sticklers about staying exactly to the letter of their policy no matter what the situation. If their policy reads that he is only due compensation if he was injured completing the duties assigned to him under this job title, this would not be one of them and therefore would be denied. If that is the case, his job description would have to include something about premise or patron security before they would cover it.

This is not to say I believe it is right. This employee will likely now have to fight the Workers Compensation company, then go after McDonalds for compensation if they don’t eventually pay out. Honestly McDonalds is such a big company that if their insurance didn’t want to pay I would think they would pay him anyway, just to avoid bad press.

But then again, McDonalds is so huge, they are betting that even bad press won’t keep customers for coming back for their $1 cheeseburgers and Big Macs eventually. Very sad really.
I agree with this, however denying this claim for Workers Comp will just give McDonald's a much higher bill in the end. The boy was at work, and no matter how, he will get the medical bills paid for... And now I have a feeling that McDonalds will pay much more than his bills... There are times that grays need to be seen; this is one of them.
The boy is a hero - now he is going to be a rich hero, and rightly so, IMO.
post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
If McDonalds felt the need to do the morally correct thing, they wouldn't sell that junk they call food in the first place.

If McDonald's were to pay out-of-pocket for incidents like this, then they wouldn't probably have to pay for insurance at all which I'm sure is costing them big bucks.

I agree that Worker's Compensation should pay for this - I think it is their moral obligation to pay rather more than it is McDonalds.
Are you serious? Really? What does paying for insurance have to do with this guy protecting a customer being violently assaulted in THEIR establishment?
I strongly disagree. McDonalds has the moral obligation here to pay.

We all know what we are eating when we go there, I, for one, don't anticipate being violently assaulted when I go there.

And I don't really think that "incidents like this" happen very often.
post #14 of 22
Just another reason why I've only eaten at McDonalds probably 1 time in the last 20 years - and the only reason I ate there then was because I was traveling, in a small town, it was the only thing open at 1AM, and I hadn't eaten since breakfast that morning. I hate McDonalds.

If Worker's Comp won't pay, then McDonalds should. He was employeed and working at this restaurant when he was shot. All he wants is money to cover his medical expenses. $300,000 is a drop in a bucket to them. Shame on the insurance company, shame on worker's comp, and shame on McDonalds.
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Are you serious? Really? What does paying for insurance have to do with this guy protecting a customer being violently assaulted in THEIR establishment?
I strongly disagree. McDonalds has the moral obligation here to pay.

We all know what we are eating when we go there, I, for one, don't anticipate being violently assaulted when I go there.

And I don't really think that "incidents like this" happen very often.
Yes, I was very serious! Really!! If McDonalds were to pay out-of-pocket for each and every incident in their multiple workplaces, then why would they need to bother paying high insurance premiums. Of course with Workers Comp I don't imagine they have any choice. They are probably required to pay into that.

Workers Comp is correct in that his injuries were not sustained while he was doing his prescribed work.

Now, having said that, I do think Workers' Comp should pay this young man for going above and beyond the call of duty just on moral grounds as others have said. Should McDonalds pay? I'm sort of on the fence with that one. If they do pay will this open up a big can of worms for others who think they are entitled to something? As a business owner, it is a touchy situation to be sure even though McDonalds is a large company and can probably well afford to pay this particular young man. I could see them balking in order not to set a precedence because once that happens where does it stop.
post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Yes, I was very serious! Really!! If McDonalds were to pay out-of-pocket for each and every incident in their multiple workplaces, then why would they need to bother paying high insurance premiums. Of course with Workers Comp I don't imagine they have any choice. They are probably required to pay into that.

Workers Comp is correct in that his injuries were not sustained while he was doing his prescribed work.

Now, having said that, I do think Workers' Comp should pay this young man for going above and beyond the call of duty just on moral grounds as others have said. Should McDonalds pay? I'm sort of on the fence with that one. If they do pay will this open up a big can of worms for others who think they are entitled to something? As a business owner, it is a touchy situation to be sure even though McDonalds is a large company and can probably well afford to pay this particular young man. I could see them balking in order not to set a precedence because once that happens where does it stop.
Pardon me if I consider this situation just a tad more than an everyday "incident"

Maybe some people think that the employee should have just dialed 911 and then just stood and watched the dude beat the crap out of the poor woman while waiting for the cops to arrive. To bad if she was dead by the time the cops got there, at least he would have been doing his "prescribed" work.

Not trying to offend here.
post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Pardon me if I consider this situation just a tad more than an everyday "incident"

Maybe some people think that the employee should have just dialed 911 and then just stood and watched the dude beat the crap out of the poor woman while waiting for the cops to arrive. To bad if she was dead by the time the cops got there, at least he would have been doing his "prescribed" work.

Not trying to offend here.
No offense taken Cindy. I don't consider this an everyday incident either - not sure where you picked that up or if it's just something that sounded good to you.

Everyone needs to know that if they choose to get involved as this young man did, there is a good chance of being badly hurt or even killed themselves. This is a risk they take when they make the choice to intervene.

If you speak to any law enforcement people, they will tell you it is better to call 911 and let the professionals handle the situation. Now, having said that, I too would probably have intervened - yes, even an old lady like me, but then I also know Judo, Ju Jitsu and some Aikido from my younger days that may still serve me well and I can fight dirty. Fortunately for us folks in Canada, getting hurt wouldn't have the same implications as for you US folks. Our medical costs would be covered under government plans. The only thing we need Workers' Comp for is the pay we would lose while off work.

And, as I have already said (probably more than once), it would be a nice moral thing for Workers Comp to pay his medical expenses for sure. If Workers Comp do not come through I'm betting McDonalds will come through and do the right thing.
post #18 of 22
I remember better times. I remember when being a Good Samaritan was a good thing. I remember when being a Good Samaritan was commendable.
I remember when Good Samaritans were looked on as heroes. That was a simpler, better time than what we live in now.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I remember better times. I remember when being a Good Samaritan was a good thing. I remember when being a Good Samaritan was commendable.
I remember when Good Samaritans were looked on as heroes. That was a simpler, better time than what we live in now.
That's all true. But in those better times, everyone wasn't carrying concealed weapons either so it was usually safer for one or two people to confront someone like that and hold them until the police came. Nowadays one is more likely to just get shot.
post #20 of 22
But yet the greater percentage of America just keeps right on eating there....What's wrong with this picture??? Why go to such lengths to complain about something that we as a society have created? Stop patronizing the place & eating the garbage & then you will have a right to complain.
post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShopCat View Post
But yet the greater percentage of America just keeps right on eating there....What's wrong with this picture??? Why go to such lengths to complain about something that we as a society have created? Stop patronizing the place & eating the garbage & then you will have a right to complain.
Now there's a wonderful solution. That would probably also stop some of the obesity in our young children that is getting more and more out of control. Maybe moms would start cooking good healthy food at home and wouldn't that be awesome! It probably takes less time to cook a good healthy dinner than driving to a McDonald's, finding a parking spot (if not using the drive-thru), going inside and choosing your poison, eating the poison and driving back home. I make a good healthy dinner every night in 30-40 minutes. It's not that tough.
post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Now there's a wonderful solution. That would probably also stop some of the obesity in our young children that is getting more and more out of control. Maybe moms would start cooking good healthy food at home and wouldn't that be awesome! It probably takes less time to cook a good healthy dinner than driving to a McDonald's, finding a parking spot (if not using the drive-thru), going inside and choosing your poison, eating the poison and driving back home. I make a good healthy dinner every night in 30-40 minutes. It's not that tough.
You are so right, & please don't get me started!
It's not that hard to at least make an effort to eat better food instead of taking the easy way out. I grew up in a household where dinner was actually cooked & eaten with the rest of my family members at the table! And my Mom was single with 4 kids.
I could go on & on about the subject, but if you can find the book "Fast Food Nation", it's a great read.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Breaking Mews
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Breaking Mews › McDonalds should be ashamed of itself