this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
578 points (96.0% liked)

News

36965 readers
2023 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The relevant regulation is Title III of the ADA, which is the part that applies to private businesses.

36.307 Accessible or special goods:

(a) This part does not require a public accommodation to alter its inventory to include accessible or special goods that are designed for, or facilitate use by, individuals with disabilities.

(b) A public accommodation shall order accessible or special goods at the request of an individual with disabilities, if, in the normal course of its operation, it makes special orders on request for unstocked goods, and if the accessible or special goods can be obtained from a supplier with whom the public accommodation customarily does business.

(c) Examples of accessible or special goods include items such as Brailled versions of books, books on audio cassettes, closed-captioned video tapes, special sizes or lines of clothing, and special foods to meet particular dietary needs.

From my understanding Starbucks is not required to offer non-dairy milk. As they do not do special inventory orders for customers, they could remove the non-dairy milk options from the menu without violating the ADA.

But because Starbucks currently offers non-dairy milk, those options are subject to the ADA, specifically:

36.301(c) Charges.

A public accommodation may not impose a surcharge on a particular individual with a disability or any group of individuals with disabilities to cover the costs of measures, such as the provision of auxiliary aids, barrier removal, alternatives to barrier removal, and reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, that are required to provide that individual or group with the nondiscriminatory treatment required by the Act or this part.

In my amateur reasercher's opinion, this case seems sound. Charging extra for milk alternatives is probably a violation of the ADA.

[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It seems not a slam dunk here, to me, specifically because of the first section. Starbucks is not required to offer non-dairy milk as an accommodation, according to your first quote.

Since Starbucks is not required to offer non-dairy milk, that last paragraph doesn't apply at all, because they aren't charging more for a required accommodation.

[–] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

My conclusion is that the case has merit, and is not frivolous. I don't want to conclude anything beyond that, because that's what courts and lawyers are for, and I am neither.

If this were a slam dunk, starbucks would have probably chosen to either not charge, or not offer non-dairy milk. It will be interesting to see how this case proceeds.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago

It wouldn't change their inventory at all though.

[–] maryjayjay@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You make really good points. But I'm going to call out this point...

But because Starbucks currently offers non-dairy milk, those options are subject to the ADA, specifically:

Oat milk is not milk. It's a completely different product made from grain, not mammals. If I'm lactose intolerant at a bar can I request vodka? It has about as much relation to cow's milk as oat milk. In fact, I think vodka arguably closer to oat milk than cow's milk. The only reasonable one for one replacement for cows milk is lactase treated cow's milk. Anything else is not comparable.

Or, what if Starbucks stocked lactase treated goat's milk. Is that a substitute for cow's milk? It's much more similar to cow's milk than oat milk.