Posted on 03/22/2014 8:39:25 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
A new Maryland bill would let counties require each restaurant to have a staff member trained on food allergens, ready to advise customers. Is the measure needed?
County governments may soon have authority to make restaurants accommodate customers with food allergies.
A new bill would let counties require each restaurant to have a staff member trained on food allergens, ready to advise customers, reports WJLA TV. The bill would also require restaurants statewide to encourage customers to notify servers about their food allergies.
The Senate passed the measure 33-14 Monday evening. A similar bill is pending in a House committee.
Restaurants could post an advisory on the menu, asking customers with allergies to notify their servers. Or the server could ask before taking customers' orders, says CBS DC.
The Senate version, introduced by Sen. Jamie Raskin of Montgomery County, would not apply to service stations or vendors at carnivals and fairs.
The Glorious Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Maryland seems absolutely bound and determined to self-destruct.
“You are a camel nosing into a tent.”
This proposed law stops moonbat lawsuits. It bats the camel on the nose.
There’s common sense on the part of the patron and the restaurant and onerous requirements imposed by a state government full of individuals that have never run a business in their lives. That’s the central point.
“onerous requirements”
Having food servers be made aware of the food allergy issues you know little about, is onerous? Education in an area that you don’t know about is bad?
If the patron says he can’t eat legumes, the food server should know what legumes are.
When someone who can't swim arrives at the crowded beach, should there be a sign posted telling people who can't swim that they must inform the lifeguard?
If you are allergic to eggs and inform the waitress, does this absolve you of culpability when you order an omelet, or do you demand the restaurant to prepare an omelet without eggs?
Why is personal responsibility an antiquated concept?
“...have a staff member trained on food allergens, ready to advise customers...”
Customer: “I’m allergic to this.”
Staff member: “Then don’t eat that.”
“Why is personal responsibility an antiquated concept? “
Informed personal responsibility. You can see the water, but don’t know if there are almonds in your muffin, or walnuts in your pesto. Personal responsibility has to extend to the food server, who should know what they are putting on the table.
I would have the victim / allergy person fill out massive numbers of legal papers before agreeing to treat / feed them.
You’re practically requiring said food server to have an M.D. I would consider myself lucky to have a waiter who spoke and understood rudimentary English. What are you gonna do about ones who don’t ? This law will do nothing but force restaurants out of business, something Democrat laws are excellent at doing.
You should stick to triple-washed celery and carrot sticks. The rest of the world should not have to subsidize your personal need to harass restaurant workers with your muffin and pesto inquisitions.
And then you’d have to convey the entire set of ingredients to the customer, something that many restaurants consider privileged information (and probably something the waiter might not even know).
Will these people be licensed to practice medicine?
Love the idea! Somewhere between the muffin and pesto inquisitions, haul out a thick stack of consent forms and waivers. Maybe a full psych evaluation to confirm the allergy victim is mentally competent to sign the forms.
People with food allergy issues have quite the idea about their own food allergies. They will know what questions to ask, because they will be asking them; wait staff and cooking staff are not altogether uninformed about what is in what, and they do talk to each other, so none of the servers really need to attempt to read minds. The state does not need to interfere; it only does so because it wants to, not because it has to, and as things always fall out when the state steps in, there will be a bigger mess than if they did not leave well enough alone.
Equating personal taste with allergies is an apples/oranges comparison. And does the state also have to step in with regards to matters having to do with how spicy a certain food dish is, really?
Such a seriously bad idea. I have to avoid eating wheat gluten.
Waiters can’t describe the daily special half the time, but they’re supposed to keep me from getting violently ill? What about people who die from peanut exposure? They’d be nuts to put their trust in a waiter.
It isn’t their job, anyway. My health, my concern, my decisions.
Right, because people with food allergies just have no clue what to order or what to ask the staff, or who in the restaurant to ask. And the state has to mandate it, for reasons inexplicable.
It’s not sane to put the onus on a waiter. Never mind the state getting involved to put such an onus on such people unfairly.
In order to advise a customer on allergies and food in the restaurant, the customer would already know what he is allergic to, no?
Menus generally describe what is in a dish so the customer would know if it contained stuff he was allergic to.
The advice would be “Don’t eat that food.” Doh.
I see what you did there. ;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.