[One Degree]

http://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/2018/ ... fired.html

An off duty employee helped out at a Burger King. She and her manager were fired because customers complained.
What were they complaining about? She put on rubber gloves and helped out, but she was in shorts. This is not uncommon for a good employee. She should have been commended instead of fired imo.
I have actually thanked employees for doing this.
Your thoughts?

[MistyTiger]

An observer said she didn't wash her hands before putting on the gloves.

The thing about being off duty is that you shouldn't interfere unless it's a life or death situation as in the case where off duty law enforcement can save a kid from drowning or save someone on a plane. This was clearly not a life or death situation, it was just a long line.

It's not about being self-righteous, OneDegree. The issue is about sanitation and propriety. If you're off duty from the kitchen, you shouldn't be barging in unless the manager asks you to help out. As far as I can tell, no one asked her to help out and no one gave her the OK. She wasn't following protocol and it wasn't a big emergency. She didn't follow the rules.

I don't think the manager should have been fired. But this off duty employee...not sure. I do think though that she should have faced suspension or a pay cut so she would know that there are consequences for breaking rules.

[One Degree]

An observer said she didn't wash her hands before putting on the gloves.

The thing about being off duty is that you shouldn't interfere unless it's a life or death situation as in the case where off duty law enforcement can save a kid from drowning or save someone on a plane. This was clearly not a life or death situation, it was just a long line.

It's not about being self-righteous, OneDegree. The issue is about sanitation and propriety. If you're off duty from the kitchen, you shouldn't be barging in unless the manager asks you to help out. As far as I can tell, no one asked her to help out and no one gave her the OK. She wasn't following protocol and it wasn't a big emergency. She didn't follow the rules.

I don't think the manager should have been fired. But this off duty employee...not sure. I do think though that she should have faced suspension or a pay cut so she would know that there are consequences for breaking rules.

So you think her “sanitation and propriety” is determined by whether she is clocked in or not? She either follows safe food handling practice or she doesn’t. She put on gloves and there is no reason to believe she had feces on her hands just because she wasn’t clocked in. The health risk does not change due to her schedule.
“She didn’t follow the rules” sums up the problem. She violated the fantasy that people ‘on the clock’ are superior food handlers. Just nonsense.
We have created a world where an emploee’s value is determined by what is tweeted about them. Shame.

[SolarCross]

Doing business in the modern world means conforming to a million statutory legalisms and also legally anticipating a potentially infinite different ways of being sued. This woman just unwittingly opened the company up to a bunch of lawsuits. She's like a rookie soldier that thinks its okay to smoke a cigarette on the front lines at night while older vets know the glowing ember draws sniper fire.

[One Degree]

Doing business in the modern world means conforming to a million statutory legalisms and also legally anticipating a potentially infinite different ways of being sued. This woman just unwittingly opened the company up to a bunch of lawsuits. She's like a rookie soldier that thinks its okay to smoke a cigarette on the front lines at night while older vets know the glowing ember draws sniper fire.

What lawsuits?

[SolarCross]

What lawsuits?

Do you wait until you are shot in the head before you put out the ciggy?

[One Degree]

Do you wait until you are shot in the head before you put out the ciggy?

What?
There are no laws requiring you to wash your hands before putting on gloves. The only law is washing your hands after using the restroom and there is no way to legally enforce it. All this lady did was violate some people’s fantasy.
Nothing she did was wrong except volunteering to help out without pay. Insisting she be an automaton instead of a human with empathy for her fellow employees is really friggin’ sad.

[B0ycey]

From my understanding of this incident, she was tried of waiting in line and prepared her own order. I think that hasn't helped her out here. To a customer in the queue waiting, this is queue jumping. That and she has violated food hygiene standards, which again doesn't look good to an onlooker.

I suppose if she was working for the team, to get the queue down, although she violated food standards, perhaps firing her might seem harsh. A warning should have sufficed as she did have good intentions. If it was for her own benefit, she has little to complain about.

[MistyTiger]

Customer service is the worst part of a job. I hated dealing with customers so I understand how sucky it can get.

That said, those in customer service are trained to think that the customers are right and we shouldn't argue with them.

What can customer service say if customers are condemning them to the media?

I'm so glad that my current job is not so customer service centered. Sometimes you just want to make them disappear!

[One Degree]

From my understanding of this incident, she was tried of waiting in line and prepared her own order. I think that hasn't helped her out here. To a customer in the queue waiting, this is queue jumping. That and she has violated food hygiene standards, which again doesn't look good to an onlooker.

I suppose if she was working for the team, to get the queue down, although she violated food standards, perhaps firing her might seem harsh. A warning should have sufficed as she did have good intentions. If it was for her own benefit, she has little to complain about.

The article starts out giving that impression then admits she was helping prepare other orders. A customer refused her order being prepared by her. She did not violate any food standards I am aware of and I am certified as a food manager. The only possibility is her top was sleeveless and that was not mentioned.

[SolarCross]

What?
There are no laws requiring you to wash your hands before putting on gloves. The only law is washing your hands after using the restroom and there is no way to legally enforce it. All this lady did was violate some people’s fantasy.
Nothing she did was wrong except volunteering to help out without pay. Insisting she be an automaton instead of a human with empathy for her fellow employees is really friggin’ sad.

I get where you are coming from, I do, and of course this woman was being rather generous if anything. However what she did was mix up two different legal personas (authorised agent and un-authorised customer) which the company as a matter of legal self-preservation would be prefer to keep neatly separated. I think the real fault wasn't the unwashed hands so much as she wasn't in uniform (therefore displaying her authorised agent status) and wasn't actually within a contractual framework to serve food because she was off the clock.

[One Degree]

I get where you are coming from, I do, and of course this woman was being rather generous if anything. However what she did was mix up two different legal personas (authorised agent and un-authorised customer) which the company as a matter of legal self-preservation would be prefer to keep neatly separated. I think the real fault wasn't the unwashed hands so much as she wasn't in uniform (therefore displaying her authorised agent status) and wasn't actually within a contractual framework to serve food because she was off the clock.

How much do you want to bet Burger King has gung ho ‘teamwork’ indoctrination like most companies? Then she gets fired for believing it. This just demonstrates our society is based upon hypocrisy that no one can escape.

[B0ycey]

The article starts out giving that impression then admits she was helping prepare other orders. A customer refused her order being prepared by her. She did not violate any food standards I am aware of and I am certified as a food manager. The only possibility is her top was sleeveless and that was not mentioned.

I'm going by the tweet @One Degree. The devil is in the detail anyway. Why did she prepare food? Did she follow protocol under food handling standards? Were the customers happy to buy food that she prepared? Was there a crisis?

If the benefit was for herself, that is she was tried of waiting in line so she stepped in, then she has got little to complain about. If it was to help out as she is a team player, a warning would suffice. But we are talking about food handling anyway. Washing hands is important in preventing food poisoning from germs you cannot see like e-coli. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you do indeed need to wash your hands first before putting on gloves as you touch the outside of of one of them with your hand as you put the first one on btw.

[One Degree]

I'm going by the tweet @One Degree. The devil is in the detail anyway. Why did she prepare food? Did she follow protocol under food handling standards? Were the customers happy to buy food that she prepared? Was there a crisis?

If the benefit was for herself, that is she was tried of waiting in line so she stepped in, then she has got little to complain about. If it was to help out as she is a team player, a warning would suffice. But we are talking about food handling anyway. Washing hands is important in preventing food poisoning from germs you cannot see like e-coli. I don't know about the US, but in the UK, you do indeed need to wash your hands first before putting on gloves as you touch the outside of the with one hand as you put the first one on btw.

You can not monitor employees in the restroom to see if they wash their hands. If the U.K. has a law requiring you to wash your hands before putting on gloves, I would be surprised. In the US, employees must be certified and the certification is the only guarantee you have they will follow safe food practices other than random inspections. You must switch gloves when switching from handling different types of food. It would be impractical to require employees to wash their hands every time.
All of our safe food handling practices are based upon training, not whether you are clocked in. There is no practical way to enforce individual employees to follow safe practice. You must trust them to wash their hands after using the restroom which is the biggest health hazard and you have no control over it.
I encouraged my employees to use a hand washing sink viewable to the public, but I could not require them to do so.
Bottom line, this lady either practiced safe food handling or she didn’t. Her not being clocked in did not increase any health risks. She should not be punished just because customers have an unrealistic view of safe food handling. Unless she has feces on her hands, you are not in much danger.

[B0ycey]

You can not monitor employees in the restroom to see if they wash their hands. If the U.K. has a law requiring you to wash your hands before putting on gloves, I would be surprised. In the US, employees must be certified and the certification is the only guarantee you have they will follow safe food practices other than random inspections. You must switch gloves when switching from handling different types of food. It would be impractical to require employees to wash their hands every time.
All of our safe food handling practices are based upon training, not whether you are clocked in. There is no practical way to enforce individual employees to follow safe practice. You must trust them to wash their hands after using the restroom which is the biggest health hazard and you have no control over it.
I encouraged my employees to use a hand washing sink viewable to the public, but I could not require them to do so.
Bottom line, this lady either practiced safe food handling or she didn’t. Her not being clocked in did not increase any health risks. She should not be punished just because customers have an unrealistic view of safe food handling. Unless she has feces on her hands, you are not in much danger.

Not only are you meant to wash your hands before putting on gloves, you need to wear an apron and clean clothing too. Fuckin' Limeys hey One Degree.

Nonetheless, we all know that the chances of every food handler following the correct procedures in the UK/US - or anywhere else on the planet, is not happening. But if you are caught with evidence (video or photo say), you are going to get punished. The lady was caught by such a method. So she was at least going to get in trouble to some extent by just that. And not following such practices does increase the chances of an e-coli breakout in your restaurant btw.

[One Degree]

Not only are you meant to wash your hands before putting on gloves, you need to wear an apron and clean clothing too. Fuckin' Limeys hey One Degree.

Nonetheless, we all know that the chances of every food handler following the correct procedures in the UK/US - or anywhere else on the planet, is not happening. But if you are caught with evidence (video or photo say), you are going to get punished. The lady was caught by such a method. So she was at least going to get in trouble to some extent by just that. And not following such practices does increase the chances of an e-coli breakout in your restaurant btw.

You are assuming she violated some health standard. If she did, none was mentioned. She was not fired for health violations. She was fired for working for free.

[B0ycey]

...She was not fired for health violations. She was fired for working for free.

She was fired for violating the companies policies, not for working for free. I suspect that does include how to handle food actually.

If she put on a uniform, I suspect there would have been no issue with her 'working for free' btw. And we still can't establish whether this act was for her own benefit either. The article certainly implies it.

[One Degree]

She was fired for violating the companies policies, not for working for free. I suspect that does include how to handle food actually.

If she put on a uniform, I suspect there would have been no issue with her 'working for free' btw. And we still can't establish whether this act was for her own benefit either. The article certainly implies it.

My guess would be the company policy was being behind the counter while off duty. This is more of an anti theft policy than a health issue. It is also a policy that is usually never enforced if the manager is present.
Another example:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/21/oh ... ealed.html
Death row inmate’s sentence commuted because his ‘terrible childhood’ was not brought out. This does not change who he is or what he did. Keeping him alive serves no purpose. What’s the point?
Just a meaningless concession to some self righteous ideal.

[B0ycey]

My guess would be the company policy was being behind the counter while off duty. This is more of an anti theft policy than a health issue. It is also a policy that is usually never enforced if the manager is present.

This is an assumption. It may have been an issue, which again is against the companies policy. Either way, she was still fired for violating the companies policies whether it was for hygiene, security (or both) or anything else that was in the employee handbook.

Another example:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/07/21/oh ... ealed.html
Death row inmate’s sentence commuted because his ‘terrible childhood’ was not brought out. This does not change who he is or what he did. Keeping him alive serves no purpose. What’s the point?
Just a meaningless concession to some self righteous ideal.

You know you are taking to an American when they complain the death penalty wasn't executed.

If there is any doubt in the prosecution of a suspect in regards to their death, you should not even consider fulfilling their punishment. That is common sense. Not self righteousness.

[One Degree]

This is an assumption. It may have been an issue, which again is against the companies policy. Either way, she was still fired for violating the companies policies whether it was for hygiene, security (or both) or anything else that was in the employee handbook.



You know you are taking to an American when they complain the death penalty wasn't executed.

If there is any doubt in the prosecution of a suspect in regards to their death, you should not even consider fulfilling their punishment. That is common sense. Not self righteousness.

She was fired for getting media attention. That’s all it takes today. Ostracism by twitter is our new legal system.
It is definitely self righteous nonsense to believe criminals should be considered victims of their childhood. Duh, well raised people seldom commit violent crimes. Criminals are a threat that any sane person should want eliminated, not excused. Virtually every horrific crime in the news is committed by a serial offender that the self righteous believed deserved another chance. It is insane to promote returning criminals to society. They don’t go to prison in the first place until they have had multiple chances. 40% are sociopaths.