Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 97

Thread: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy Creek View Post
    No. The laws are in place to stop discrimination against people with disabilities.
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki97 View Post
    The ADA was passed in 1990. If we are to believe the owner of the establishment did not have the funds to bring his restroom into compliance in a span of 22 years, it sounds like the business wasn't going to be around long anyway.
    What both of you miss is that the ADA only requires New Buildings and Buildings which are undergoing renovation to meet its criteria. If you have a building built prior to the ADA and you don't renovate it, there is no requirement for you to be handicapped accessible.

  2. #12
    Guru
    Muddy Creek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 09:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,103

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    What both of you miss is that the ADA only requires New Buildings and Buildings which are undergoing renovation to meet its criteria. If you have a building built prior to the ADA and you don't renovate it, there is no requirement for you to be handicapped accessible.
    That's just not true. I think that's wrong on your part. Heres my link

    ADA Accessibility Guidelines

    . . .

    5. RESTAURANTS AND CAFETERIAS.

    5.1* General. Except as specified or modified in this section, restaurants and cafeterias shall comply with the requirements of section 4. Where fixed tables (or dining counters where food is consumed but there is no service) are provided, at least 5 percent, but not less than one, of the fixed tables (or a portion of the dining counter) shall be accessible and shall comply with 4.32 as required in 4.1.3(18). In establishments where separate areas are designated for smoking and non-smoking patrons, the required number of accessible fixed tables (or counters) shall be proportionally distributed between the smoking and non-smoking areas. In new construction, and where practicable in alterations, accessible fixed tables (or counters) shall be distributed throughout the space or facility. Appendix Note

    5.2 Counters and Bars. Where food or drink is served at counters exceeding 34 in (865 mm) in height for consumption by customers seated on stools or standing at the counter, a portion of the main counter which is 60 in (1525 mm) in length minimum shall be provided in compliance with 4.32 or service shall be available at accessible tables within the same area.

    . . .
    What's your source show? What am I missing?
    Alex Carey:

    ... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

    Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New

  3. #13
    Guru
    Muddy Creek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 09:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,103

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    What both of you miss is that the ADA only requires New Buildings and Buildings which are undergoing renovation to meet its criteria. If you have a building built prior to the ADA and you don't renovate it, there is no requirement for you to be handicapped accessible.
    That's just not true. I think that's wrong on your part. Heres my link

    ADA Accessibility Guidelines

    . . .

    5. RESTAURANTS AND CAFETERIAS.

    5.1* General. Except as specified or modified in this section, restaurants and cafeterias shall comply with the requirements of section 4. Where fixed tables (or dining counters where food is consumed but there is no service) are provided, at least 5 percent, but not less than one, of the fixed tables (or a portion of the dining counter) shall be accessible and shall comply with 4.32 as required in 4.1.3(18). In establishments where separate areas are designated for smoking and non-smoking patrons, the required number of accessible fixed tables (or counters) shall be proportionally distributed between the smoking and non-smoking areas. In new construction, and where practicable in alterations, accessible fixed tables (or counters) shall be distributed throughout the space or facility. Appendix Note

    5.2 Counters and Bars. Where food or drink is served at counters exceeding 34 in (865 mm) in height for consumption by customers seated on stools or standing at the counter, a portion of the main counter which is 60 in (1525 mm) in length minimum shall be provided in compliance with 4.32 or service shall be available at accessible tables within the same area.

    . . .
    What's your source show? What am I missing?
    Alex Carey:

    ... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

    Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New

  4. #14
    Sage
    AliHajiSheik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,369

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki97 View Post
    The ADA was passed in 1990. If we are to believe the owner of the establishment did not have the funds to bring his restroom into compliance in a span of 22 years, it sounds like the business wasn't going to be around long anyway.
    This assessment of the burger joints viability is based on how many years of running a business? Ever read a balance sheet or an income statement?

    Title III of the ADA is one of the worst written pieces of legislation. For new construction, I know of no argument that facilities should be accommodating, but existing facilities are the issue:

    I'll grab a quick quote from Wikipedia:
    "The statutory definition of "readily achievable" calls for a balancing test between the cost of the proposed "fix" and the wherewithal of the business and/or owners of the business. Thus, what might be "readily achievable" for a sophisticated and financially capable corporation might not be readily achievable for a small or local business."

  5. #15
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,520

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy Creek View Post
    That's just not true. I think that's wrong on your part. Heres my link

    ADA Accessibility Guidelines



    What's your source show? What am I missing?
    What you're missing is the actual text of the law.

    The only part of the ADA applicable to facilities in place and not altered before July 1992 has to do with "failure to remove":

    (iv) a failure to remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature, in existing facilities, and transportation barriers in existing vehicles and rail passenger cars used by an establishment for transporting individuals (not including barriers that can only be removed through the retrofitting of vehicles or rail passenger cars by the installation of a hydraulic or other lift), where such removal is readily achievable; and
    But as noted, only if it's "readily achievable."

    What's "readily achievable"? That, too, is defined within the law.

    (9) Readily achievable
    The term "readily achievable" means easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. In determining whether an action is readily achievable, factors to be considered include

    (A) the nature and cost of the action needed under this chapter;
    (B) the overall financial resources of the facility or facilities involved in the action; the number of persons employed at such facility; the effect on expenses and resources, or the impact otherwise of such action upon the operation of the facility;
    (C) the overall financial resources of the covered entity; the overall size of the business of a covered entity with respect to the number of its employees; the number, type, and location of its facilities; and
    (D) the type of operation or operations of the covered entity, including the composition, structure, and functions of the workforce of such entity; the geographic separateness, administrative or fiscal relationship of the facility or facilities in question to the covered entity.
    In this case, given the criteria, it appears that the accommodation may indeed NOT be "readily achievable," but it also appears that the owner doesn't have the resources to fight the lawsuit.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #16
    Guru
    Muddy Creek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 09:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,103

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by AliHajiSheik View Post
    This assessment of the burger joints viability is based on how many years of running a business? Ever read a balance sheet or an income statement?

    Title III of the ADA is one of the worst written pieces of legislation. For new construction, I know of no argument that facilities should be accommodating, but existing facilities are the issue:

    I'll grab a quick quote from Wikipedia:
    "The statutory definition of "readily achievable" calls for a balancing test between the cost of the proposed "fix" and the wherewithal of the business and/or owners of the business. Thus, what might be "readily achievable" for a sophisticated and financially capable corporation might not be readily achievable for a small or local business."
    And yet, there are guidelines for businesses who find this access to difficult to do.

    ADA: The Limits of Accommodation

    . . .

    Undue hardship. The burden of proof is on the employer to show that an accommodation request is too expensive, too difficult or too disruptive. There is no monetary limit on accommodation, and undue hardship cases are generally decided on a case-by-case basis. What is considered unreasonable varies greatly and depends on the size and resources of the company. To argue that an accommodation would cause your company an undue hardship, you must have supporting data in the following areas:

    The nature and net cost of the accommodation needed. The cost is the actual cost to your company. Specific federal tax credits and deductions are available for accommodations (see below). If you qualify for a tax break or partial funding, only the net cost to you should be considered.

    Various financial factors. The financial resources of the facility making the accommodation, the number of employees at the facility and the financial impact of the accommodation all can be considered.

    . . .
    Alex Carey:

    ... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

    Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New

  7. #17
    Guru
    Muddy Creek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 09:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,103

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    What you're missing is the actual text of the law.

    The only part of the ADA applicable to facilities in place and not altered before July 1992 has to do with "failure to remove":



    But as noted, only if it's "readily achievable."

    What's "readily achievable"? That, too, is defined within the law.



    In this case, given the criteria, it appears that the accommodation may indeed NOT be "readily achievable," but it also appears that the owner doesn't have the resources to fight the lawsuit.


    As are filing hardships with the government evidenced in my last post. Bottomline is, if you serve the pubic, you can't discriminate.
    Alex Carey:

    ... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

    Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy Creek View Post
    What's your source show? What am I missing?
    How about Section 1 of your same source. Literally the first text in the statute.....

    This document contains scoping and technical requirements for accessibility to buildings and facilities by individuals with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. These scoping and technical requirements are to be applied during the design, construction, and alteration of buildings and facilities covered by titles II and III of the ADA to the extent required by regulations issued by Federal agencies, including the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation, under the ADA.
    The statute does not require the retrofitting of existing facilities, unless the facility is being altered. Once the building is being materially altered in such a way that the Building Department becomes involved, the entire building must be brought into compliance with the ADA. As for how I know this?...... I've worked for a Commercial Architect.

  9. #19
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:03 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,520

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Muddy Creek View Post
    As are filing hardships with the government evidenced in my last post. Bottomline is, if you serve the pubic, you can't discriminate.
    I see; I give you the actual law, instead of your "guidelines," and your response is "nuh-uh." You responded to it within a minute, so I doubt very much you even read the post.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #20
    Guru
    Muddy Creek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 09:02 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,103

    Re: Landmark calif. Burger joint forced to shut down over ada lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger View Post
    How about Section 1 of your same source. Literally the first text in the statute.....



    The statute does not require the retrofitting of existing facilities, unless the facility is being altered. Once the building is being materially altered in such a way that the Building Department becomes involved, the entire building must be brought into compliance with the ADA. As for how I know this?...... I've worked for a Commercial Architect.
    Me, too. And that's not true.

    There's something undefensible in using yourself as a source. how about a link?
    Alex Carey:

    ... the 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.

    Australian social scientist, quoted by Noam Chomsky in World Orders Old and New

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •