There is a fascinating lawsuit in California where Anna Marie Phillips has sued A California woman P.F. Chang’s China Bistro Inc. for charming a dollar extra for gluten-free food. Phillips says that gluten diets are necessary for people with celiac disease and thus the added charge violates the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The lawsuit questions the basis for the charge which vegetables are gluten-free but are subject to the added charge. However, this is a relatively small charge and could be justified on the grounds of not just special ingredients but special preparation. The size of the charge is so small that the advantage will be with the restaurant. The chain can also point to the fact that it is ranked as the second most allergy-friendly restaurant by the website Allergy Eats. As shown above, it advertises its gluten-free approach. Moreover, a study by Canada’s Dalhousie Medical School found that all the commercially available products labeled gluten-free were 242 percent more expensive than comparable products. While this may also be due to inflated prices, it would work to the advantage of the restaurant chain.
The British Medical Journal found that it costs around $550 a year more to live gluten-free. It turns out that that amounts to $1.48 more per day, which is in line with the charge. Again, however, it will depend on the restaurant establishing a basis in the ingredients or the labor associated with the dishes.
Source: Yahoo
Pogo
Of course it should not be a legal issue. The customer is free to come and go as is the restaurant free to charge five bucks for a toothpick if it wishes. That goes without saying. Unless the TPOA gets wind of it.
Having said that the only issue is the credibility of the restaurant in picking nits. A buck for this and a buck for that against a cost of probably fifteen to twenty bucks a person for a full meal. The cost can’t be more than a few cents. Perhaps the fact that PF Chang picks nits to this degree would dissuade people from going there. A not that uncommon scenario, a group of six to eight adults, a revenue of perhaps $160, one of them is ticked off with the $1 charge, they go somewhere else, unconscious or conscious choice. Not a very astute move on the part of Mr. Chang. As for the person filing the charges, when they do lose in court, they should have to pay for ALL the costs.
issac – this woman has never eaten at an upscale restaurant. There everything is al a carte.
“It isn’t easy and this is why restaurants have the highest rate of failure as a business.”
Hillary!:
“‘I can’t be responsible for every under-capitalized small business in America.”
That is, courts and politicians seem blithely unaware of DBQ’s potent fact.
“…it makes a mockery of the entire legal system.”
I’m afraid the SCOTUS accomplished that long ago.
Costing out doesn’t mean averaging the costs across the menu.
In my other lost comments I remark that we used to own a deli and smoked food business.
To cost out the item, you figure what the cost of the ingredients are for each meal or each item. For instance the hamburger. How much does the meat cost per pound? What amount of meat do you use in the hamburger. Cost of mayo, mustard, lettuce, bread etc etc etc and how much of each ingredient do you use and what is the cost of the whole jar of mayo. You break it down into the units that used in the hamburger.
THEN…you break down the cost of labor to make the hamburger and the associated costs of labor such as payroll taxes.
You have to consider these things.
Variable costs: ingredients, labor and other items that change with volume or by units.
Fixed costs :Factored into each meal item you also have to break down and factor in your fixed overhead. Rent, Property Insurance. Some portion of utilities.
Then you also need to consider inflation and possible costs of ingredients going up and unexpected costs and build that into your margin.
It isn’t easy and this is why restaurants have the highest rate of failure as a business.
On every level I hope this is tossed and PF Chang is awarded damages.
If food preparation and cost is subject to lawsuits under ADA, we’re all doomed. It goes so far beyond what the intention of ADA and public accommodation laws are intended for it makes a mockery of the entire legal system.
WordPress ate another comment!
“PF Chang should have distributed any extra cost over the whole menu. I wager it would not have amounted to more than a few cents a dish.”
Maybe. Did you cost it out?
My point is, the decision should not be the court’s to make.
Pogo – the problem with costing out things across the menu is that then all things on the menu should be the same price, regardless. Caesar salad or filet mignon should be the same price.
Issac
My other comment seems to be lost so….
The extra costs of keeping, storing separate ingredients, preparing them separately so as to not cross contaminate not to mention the extra labor involved necessitate that the restaurant recoup those costs. Separate pans, storage bins, utensils. Then there is the additional expense of the specialty ingredients.
Sure…they can raise their prices on everyone else who doesn’t care about gluten to be able to provide dishes at a lower cost to those few who either DO have a condition or who are just following a fad. Why should they have to do this?
It isn’t easy to run a restaurant. The margin is thin and the labor costs are high and the cost of ingredients can make or break you.
I agree with Steve W. If you don’t want to pay extra, stay home and cook for yourself or go to a place that specializes in your dietary needs.
Dust Bunny Queen,
I retrieved your comment at 11:36.
Comment lost. Help?
Summarizing what others have said
1.)The $1 surcharge is small and can easily be justified by having to do separate preparation of the “gluten free” dish or by the extra cost of the “gluten free ” ingredients
Why should the rest of the patrons have to bear the cost of this specialty diet?
2.) The woman suing should have to prove that she actually has this disease and NEEDS this dietary restriction. If not, then it is just a fad that she is following to look hip and “in”.
3, Restaurants operate on a very thin margin and an increase in costs of the food ingredients of just 3 to 5% can make a big difference. In addition the labor costs of having to prepare “separate” and specialty items decreases the ability of the restaurant to prepare the “normal” dishes for the rest of the patrons.
4.) the logistics in the kitchen to have special separate dishes requires more labor, more equipment, pans etc that need to be not cross contaminated with icky gluteny ingredients or accommodate someone who has picky or specialty dietary needs.
If your needs are that narrow or special, you should either eat at home or go to a restaurant that specializes in your dietary needs and you should be willing to pay for the extra accommodations.
We used to own and operate a smoked foods deli and wholesale business for a while, so, I am painfully aware of how hard it is to make a restaurant successful and what a very thin margin you operate on.
The lawsuit is stupid and a nuisance. It should be dismissed.
Dust Bunny Queen,
I retrieved your comment at 11:27.
Paul
If you order a hamburger with nothing but the meat then it should cost the same as one with lettuce, tomatoes, pickles, onions, mustard, ketchup, special sauce or any of the stuff that typically comes with a hamburger. If you want avocado then that is another burger at another price. My point is that it is counter productive for a restaurant to itemize stuff to that detail. It turns me off, might stay for the mean but consciously or unconsciously won’t come back. Menus with several dozen items make me visualize a guy in the back scooping everything out of one pot. Choice is not always a good thing when taken to excess. PF Chang should have distributed any extra cost over the whole menu. I wager it would not have amounted to more than a few cents a dish.
Side note, Napoleon passed many laws. One was that a restaurant had to serve, free of charge, bread and water. For the many years I lived in France I always appreciated the bowl of fresh French bread and the carafe of fresh water on the table when I sat down. Going back to North America it was a drag to have to ask for water. The explanation was that most people didn’t drink it, it was an unnecessary cost, gave dishwasher too much work. When you go to a restaurant the first ingredient for a pleasant meal is to be treated as number one.
‘When Stupids Collide’
issac – if a burger comes with a lot of stuff on it and I order it plain, I actually should get a discount since I am saving the business money for material and prep.
Frankly, as a Celiac myself, I’m angry this lady thinks I have a disability. Give me a break.
Restaurants will eventually throw their hands up in the air and just give up on gluten free – then I loose.
Pay the extra buck and thank them for offering the option. Otherwise, stay home and cook it yourself.
Isaac, restaurants restaurants operate on very small margins and have been impacted by increases in commodities prices that raise the cost of preparing food.
The question over who pays for gluten-free meals is a tough one. You suggest the price be borne by all its customers, effectively raising their prices, but that small change may be enough to drive people away.
It’s a tough call, ultimately one I think the owners should decide, not the courts.
It seems that the monetary issue is next to insignificant if not totally insignificant. PF Changs would do better to simply offer the choice and come across as accommodating and not nit picky. If it really hurt their bottom line, raise enough prices to offset an approximated loss by one dollar, or ten cents a meal over all. In my experience the most enjoyable restaurants are those that have the fewest dishes and the least complications. The more dishes the less attention by the chefs. The fewer dishes imply more attention, creativity, control, etc. If you want something in particular like something without stuff that you are allergic to, then ask. A decent restaurant will accommodate without the extra charge. Vegetarian simply means no meat and some stuff so don’t order the meat. Vegans have their own restaurants where one would probably be hard pressed to find a hamburger on the menu.
The lawsuit is stupid. PF Chang is stupid. ‘When Stupids Collide’, by Erwin Panofsky.
issac – if you go to a restaurant and custom order your hamburger, extra items can cost extra money. It is extra work. Personally, I think gluten free is a fad, but that is just me.
Most restaurants don’t have gluten free meals at all. So, nothing wrong with paying a buck to eat at a restaurant that is thoughtful enough to have gluten free entrees. What a ridiculous lawsuit.
I assume she’ll have to prove she has celiac disease rather than gluten intolerance or is gluten-free by choice.
Does the ADA’s rules mean all prices must be the same for equal access?
The majority of people eating gluten free are not people who have celiac disease. Indeed, celiac disease is serious and gluten must be removed from the diet or there are serious health risks. But, most of the people eating gluten free are trendy, hipsters. You know, the vegetarian, vegan, affected idiots.
Q: How do you know when an atheist, vegan, or cross trainer walks into a bar?
A: They will tell you within 2 minutes.
Correction: 1st paragraph, 1st sentence “charging” not “charming.”
It is an extra prep charge and certainly is allowable in my opinion.
Any Judge should dismiss this lawsuit on motion and award costs to the defendant.