this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
453 points (97.3% liked)
People Twitter
7019 readers
1285 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Untrained Customers 'helping' sounds like an imsurance liability nightmare.
I wouldn't trust a customer to have clean enough hands to roll flatware. Which would be more helpful than crowding the pickup window or drinks booth with strangers.
Folks who want counter service better skip table service places.
I was just thinking this would make a good scamming scheme, team up with someone spill hot coffee over them when doing this, sue the restaurant for damages.
Liability for what exactly? If he's only handling his own dishes carrying them to the table then the end result is exactly the same as if he handled them at the table.
Slip and fall, for one.
He can just as easily do that walking across the dining room to the bathroom regardless of who brings his food to his table, it changes absolutely nothing about the risk involved or the legal liability.
While holding hot food? Surrounded by other guests? Doing the work that the restaurant employee was meant to do?
Just sit down and let them do their job. They don't want your help, I promise you.
Being surrounded by hot food and other guests is unavoidable in a restaurant dining area, that's kinda the point of the space. Yes actually hot food can be spilled onto a customer by a different customer walking through the dining area for any reason at all, not exclusive to this scenario. I'm not concerned at all with who was "meant" to do the work, as long as the employee in question still gets paid the end result is the same. It's weird behavior for sure, but not necessarily harmful or malicious.
Real weird hill to die on...
Yes, but the court probably would be when someone inevitably sues the restaurant. What if you spill your hot food on a third party? Some guest that was dining and had nothing to do with your stupid little gesture? Who do they sue when their genitals are burnt off?
There's a reason why liability insurance exists.
Not half as weird as the commenters here making shit up to justify getting mad about a relatively innocuous behavior, yourself included. He could just as easily bump into someone and spill food on them while walking across the dining area for any reason, him carrying his own plate changes absolutely nothing. And if the food was hot enough to geld someone then the restaurant is going to get sued for serving it at absurdly unsafe temperatures, and they'll deserve it, that also has fuck all to do with this guy carrying his own plate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premises_liability
It's a simple as doing everything in your power to lower the chances of being sued for anything. And allowing untrained, random people to come in and upset the workflow, get in the way of actual employees, handle food that they've not been trained to handle, etc. etc. etc., then you're adding to that liability. It's really that simple.
The food doesn't need to be unsafe to get burned by it, or have you never seen fajitas served at a restaurant? Do they deserve it for flaunting their extra hot foods?
Nothing in this wiki article proves me wrong, any injury to himself or other customers could just as easily occur without him carrying his own plate and the legal liability sitiation for it would be completely unchanged. And it is absolutely not simple, try actually reading the article you linked.
There is no evidence that he was carrying fajitas or anything else served on a scalding hot piece of metal, you can plainly see a normal plate in his hand. And yeah actually serving food on a scalding hot piece of metal is fundamentally fucking unsafe. There is no evidence he got in any employees way or disrupted any workflow. There is no evidence that he isn't trained, dude could just as easily be a food service employee himself. Quit making shit up and just admit you don't know enough to judge.
It's about a business owner reducing liability. It's really that simple. It doesn't have to make sense to you, and it might even be overcautious. But it's how you protect your business from stupid bullshit like that.
Here is an entire wiki article on slip and fall, a type of premises liability: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slip_and_fall
You're also seemingly missing the fact that people don't necessarily need some airtight case, just being sued costs time and money in and of itself even if you win as a defendant. Which is why you do things to reduce the possibility of being sued. Such as not allowing non-employees to deliver food to tables, regardless of how hot it might be.
"they represent a highly complex and dynamic area of tort law. They pose especially complex legal issues"
Like I said, not simple at all. If the business owner wants to reduce liability they should definitely not be serving anything on a scalding hot piece of metal. A customer spilling any amount of non-scalding food onto another customer will absolutely not result in a successful lawsuit, at worst they might have to comp a meal or two. Feel free to try finding even a single example to the contrary, I'm open to being proven wrong.
They also reduce their liability by only allowing trained employees to handle food.
I am not a lawyer, I have no idea if the lawsuit would be successful. But the outcome isn't really important to this discussion when the act of being sued in and of itself costs time and money and business owners do everything they can to avoid it.
I can't speak with confidence about the legal situation in other countries, but in the US frivolous lawsuits are routinely punished by having the plaintiff cover the defendant's legal costs plus compensation for their trouble. Avoiding liability in general is still best practice, but there's no significant risk of liability from actions taken by a customer in the dining area, customers are supposed to be there and nobody could reasonably expect the restaurant owner/management to predict and/or control the behavior of all of their customers. The customer would be held responsible for their actions and would be on the hook for any damages.
No way. He could spill hot food on a guest at another table, a staff member, or trip and hurt himself and sue.
He could do literally any of those things from his own table or while walking to the bathroom, the insurance/liability situation would be completely unchanged
Yeah, but in this case, the waiter will be given problems by the manager.
The restaurant is managing their liabilities, but the waiter needs to manage their own too, instead of just the restaurant's.
This is the first good point anyone's brought up so far, the legal liability implications for carrying a plate across the room to his table are negligible but management don't need legal justification for being assholes to their staff.
Nah. A folk like that can really can do a lot more damage standing and imitating workers than sitting at their own table.
Anyway, Amnesigenic, it's not hard to tell you've never been held responsible for an operation, perhaps not even your own actions. Sorry your joke broke down when it hit consequences town. Btw I suggest reading at least ONE ToS all the way through.
Anyway, definitely an air raid siren. Guy acts like Player 1 and doesn't even understand how the world works well enough to participate in a way that doesn't mess up everyone else's day. Just so he and princess of the week can feel special for ten minutes? Stay home and cook ig?
Nothing about the post implies he's imitating the employees in any way beyond carrying his own plate. Idk what you mean by "consequences town" the only consequence for me so far has been responding to/correcting people who are hellbent on assuming bad things about this person for which we have no evidence. You are unique in that you weren't satisfied making things up about him and felt compelled to imagine negative shit about me as well.