A chocolate shop denied use of their bathroom to a little girl who had diarrhea.
5 Comments
Leave a comment
March 2010
Recent Entries
- The three purposes of the federal income tax law
- Businesses will spend about 3.4 billion man-hours and individuals about 1.7 billion hours figuring out their taxes this year.…
- By Mike | Comments (5)
- Progress of a different sort
- You know we have reached a level of decadence seldom seen in the history of the West when our women…
- By Mike | Comments (0)
- And police wonder why the public rarely trusts them
- But there is some good news to report here, too. The Maryland state law, as noted, is the first…
- By Mike | Comments (4)
Subscribe
Advertisements
Monthly Archives
- March 2010 (11)
- February 2010 (17)
- January 2010 (15)
- December 2009 (9)
- November 2009 (2)
- October 2009 (16)
- September 2009 (29)
- August 2009 (22)
- July 2009 (18)
- June 2009 (32)
- May 2009 (38)
- April 2009 (41)
- March 2009 (43)
- February 2009 (51)
- January 2009 (51)
- December 2008 (44)
- November 2008 (52)
- October 2008 (58)
- September 2008 (51)
- August 2008 (53)
- July 2008 (44)
- June 2008 (46)
- May 2008 (36)
- April 2008 (38)
- March 2008 (68)
- February 2008 (44)
- January 2008 (56)
- December 2007 (45)
- November 2007 (18)
- October 2007 (41)
- September 2007 (40)
- August 2007 (24)
- July 2007 (35)
- June 2007 (43)
- May 2007 (36)
- April 2007 (33)
- March 2007 (50)
- February 2007 (54)
- January 2007 (54)
- December 2006 (43)
- November 2006 (31)
- October 2006 (37)
- September 2006 (30)
- August 2006 (52)
- July 2006 (36)
- June 2006 (30)
- May 2006 (58)
- April 2006 (47)
- March 2006 (60)
- February 2006 (65)
- January 2006 (17)
- December 2005 (20)
- November 2005 (4)
OpenID accepted here
Learn more about OpenID
After checking out the 1-year chart, it doesn't surprise me that this place's customer service sucks.
Any speculators out there might want to short it.
That's particularly low.
This is a case of the market operating as it should. The store should be free to deny its restroom facilities to anyone it chooses to deny them to and the mother of that little girl is free to tell the whole world about it and cause the store to lose customers.
On the one hand, it was really lousy of them to not allow that little girl to go; on the other hand, if the girl and mom had gone to the employee bathroom and tripped over something, etc. and sued the place, their insurance might not have covered it and they could lose their business.
Even so, human decency should have prevailed and they should have let the girl use the bathroom.
Difster,
I saw this on Reddit, which once again reminded me that there are two sides to the story. I don't know that I believe it anymore than the consumerist article. I'm just saying that the Consumerist didn't get the other side of the story.