The Burger Of Mandatory Binding Arbitration
If you step into this Whataburger in Kilgore, Texas, you automatically agree to the burger joint's mandatory arbitration clause. At least that's what the sign on the door says. According to Mother Jones:
Sorey says when he went in, he told a befuddled cashier that he didn't think that the arbitration notice was enforceable, that anyway he wasn't agreeing to it, and, "I need a taquito and a coffee." He says he sat down, watched some traffic, and ate his taquito. "I didn't choke, I didn't burn myself, and I didn't sue 'em," he reports.That's one burger that's hard to swallow. Might choke on your after you read this sign. That's one raw burger. Etc.
Eat Burger, Waive Right to Sue [Mother Jones]
(Photo: Dan Sorey)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam malesuada commodo erat et molestie. Duis pellentesque aliquam bibendum. Suspendisse venenatis lobortis eleifend. Mauris id est sed lectus convallis aliquam.
Post a comment
Comments:
Whataburger? More like WhataresturantI'mneverpatronizingagain.
What I want to know is:
What is wrong back there that they expect people to sue them about?
Sounds to me like they have a secret.
Well I can' blame them for wanting to avoid "I spilled coffee on myself so now I am suing you".
I only eat at places that i can sue.
I miss Whataburger.
@catdogpigduck: Agreed, It absolutely infuriates me when people are so lazy that they believe all responsibility can be resolved through a letter. Instead of having basic standards, such as serving food that won't immediately cause death or illness, they would rather pocket that extra $0.03. I hate people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.
I just had Whataburger for breakfast. Mmmmm...
I don't understand, how a private agreement can trump law? That's not logical.
@TMurphy: Change that to "I spilled 190 degree coffee that you had been repeatedly warned not to heat to scalding and then sued you after you refused to pay my medical bills." 190 degree liquids can cause third degree burns in less than 3 seconds. A third degree burn means flesh is charred all the way to the bone.
Maybe they are just poking fun of the absurdity of it all.
Hey I can dream, can't I?
...What I want to know is what made them create that notice.
Are they serving rats or something?
What if the person entering the store doesn't speak english? Or what if you go to a drive thru (do they have them? This chain isn't near where I live).
@chouchou: since when are lawyers logical? We are talking about a entire section of the human population whos sole existence is thanks to arguing illogical arguments.
As for how it trumps law... it cant, its unenforcible. But they are hoping you wont take them to court on it, and that if you do the judge will be some political appointee so fucking stupid as to agree with them and not with law. 99% of the population wont take them to court either.
@Ben Popken: 3rd degree burns just means the epidermis is burned through, not that it has burned all the way to the bone. "Dammit, Troy I'm a blogger, not a doctor!"
Also, the coffee is supposed to be 180-190 degrees and as is pointed out at Randy Cassingham's home of the True Stella Awards, [www.stellaawards.com] the injury rate for hot McDonald's coffee is 1 in 24M.
I grew up living less than two blocks from this Whataburger. It's a cool place, 50's decor, classic cars, Elvis memorabilia.
I have nothing to add to the discussion. I just thought it was strange that something from my hometown would end up on Consumerist.
Arbitration agreements/waivers, End User License Agreements that are 15 pages long and other shenanigans needs to stop. We need a judge to rule that such things are practically unenforcable. When it takes a panel of attorneys a month or more to come up with their EULA, you can't expect the average American consumer with an average reading level of the 7th grade to comprehend and understand in a few minutes (or less if walking in the door of the place).
I wouldn't eat in a restaurant that replaces a "welcome" sign with an arbitration notice.
These things remind of stuff kids would say in a school yard, like "no tag backs!"
But if I pay with a check that specifies (in micro print like the checks that enroll people in various credit monitoring or switch phone plans, etc) to the organization accepting the check, that the company withdraws all arbirtation clause, then what??? It seems that we are seriously close to needing this...
@Troy F.: Guess I was wrong, sounds more like she had a 4th degree burn. Your source says it should be maintained at at 180-185 degrees (how likely is it that you're going to get the 1st cup from a fresh pot at McDonalds?). The difference between coffee served at 180 degrees and 190 degrees is substantial. 190 degrees causes 3rd degree burns in 3 seconds. 180 degrees causes burns in 12-15 seconds. (source: WSJ)
Welcome to Whata-arbitration!
@TMurphy: @Troy F.: Off topic but have you actually seen the photos of the burns? They are awful plus the fact that McD had been warned about this several times...they deserved the penalty (which amounted to one days coffee sales in the U.S.).
Now, on topic...you know, this type of sign would make me turn around and go to Taco Bell.
@econobiker: I think you'd have a very strong case if you had checks printed with "By accepting payment you are waiving any right to mandatory binding arbitration"
I believe would legally bind them to not bind you.
@Ben Popken: Why is it that people who complain about the coffee case actually know nothing about the case?
They should replace the sign with one that says that by entering you accept that any claims for injury or otherwise are limited to the cost of a burger. Seems just as enforceable
Whataburger=Whatawaste. I worked one for a couple of years while whittling at college. Was not fun mind you, but it was clean and well-kept for an older building.
This must be a wild card of a manager trying to keep the heat off of his back, only to get sunburn from home office. I just posted an inquiry to their PR department to see what they say about it.
Drive thru--just don't stick your hands in the window when you're handed your meal
i've heard of the restaurant that makes you sign a waiver to try their extremely hot, hot sauce, but this is rediculous. it worries me that this may be enforceable, and more restaurants may post these on their doors.
ARBITRATION NOTICE:
by reading this comment, you hereby agree to resolve any & all disputes with what i have to say, how i say it & who i say it to in binding arbitration. no suit or action may be filed in any state or federal court by you. i, however, can sue your pants off if you so much as THINK about suing me after reading this notice.
Hm, Whataburger and fancy ketchup... or mcdonalds. Tough choice. I'll take the arbitration agreement.
@Falconfire: @chouchou: How is it "illogical" for two parties to contractually agree to be bound by certain rules and not be bound by others, and what do lawyers have to do with it? This is a routine, even fundamental element of our society. In this case, parties don't have to play in the court system if they don't want to.
The problem with this ridiculous sign -- and half of the other instances where people "agree" to binfing arbitration, including EULAs -- is that there are certain requirements to enter into contracts that probably aren't met here, not to mention certain bars to the formation of contracts, like unconscionability.
now if i was whataburger, i'd certify all my store managers as arbitrators with the american mediation association & the arbitration could be solved on the spot. now that's customer service & a whole new revenue stream all rolled into one!
customer: i slipped on the wet floor.
manager: no you didn't. that'll be $179.50.
customer: this burger is raw.
manager: no it isn't. but now it's an additional $5.99.
@RogueSophist: Because you can not contractually agree to not be bound by federal/state/ or local laws. Thats illegal.
Binding Arbitration is exactly what it is. The only legal way to have arbitration is when a court decides its use is ok as no law has been violated. Its been let go for as long as it has because it used to be used for frivolous things like not getting the right part in a box, or not enough chicken nuggets. Now its being used for everything up to people being injured or KILLED. Thats not why arbitration exists nor is it what its for.
Reminds me of the Krusty Burger "Whatchamachicken" sandwich
How about companies just take responsibility when the mess up and we, the consumers only collect what is reasonably ours when those companies mess up.
@mrmysterious: Now that's crazy talk.
What's next, a line of fine print on the threshold of every Best Buy that says that by walking in you agree to hand over your firstborn son on his eighteenth birthday for five years of unpaid labor?
@mac-phisto: Sweet idea. Store Managers would then be WhataJudgeDredds, with at-the-cashier trials and verdicts. Awesome.
For much the same reason, I've always wanted to become the captain of a ship at sea, then I could invoke my own version of Maritime Justice whenever it pleased me.
@Buran: If it was a BS case, it would have not gone to trial. The case came down more to the safety of the coffee not the woman's burns.
@Falconfire: Dude, unless you're talking about a "federal, state, or local law" prohibiting binding arbitration, my point regarding freedom of contract -- and its limitations -- stands. Should binding arbitration be made illegal in some cases? Absolutely. Is it?
I'm as incensed as you about corporations abusing arbitration and taking advantage of hapless customers. But sweeping statements as to legality and logic don't further the dialogue, they just confuse it.
too bad I cant read the text because of the glare, I guess Im not liable over something I cant read!
@snoop-blog: I've seen hot source that requires a waiver to purchase. Fortunately, it's used as a marketing gimick. This What-a-bozo sounds like he's serious...
@spinachdip: SERIOUSLY. They also don't mention -
- Not just 3rd-degree burns, but third-degree burns that required skin grafts and daily physical therapy for several months
- Again, McDonald's had been warned repeatedly after similar, but less severe, incidents
- The woman and her lawyer initially approached McDonald's for medical bills alone - she was a waitress, as she had been for years, and had no health insurance (many tort lawyers note that a national health plan would cut back on litigation) - McDonald's refused (there's in-house counsel who lost his job, I bet)
- The massive award given by the jury was reduced to something more reasonable by the judge later (as usually happens in these sensationalized, ridiculous-jury-award cases - it is a sign of a problem in the system, but it is kept in check)
Also, for the person who noted it was hot coffee in a car - McDonald's is the one who served 190 degree coffee through a window, handing it to you in your car (in a cup with a lid that would come of if you looked at it hard enough).
Mmmm Whataburger.