We reserve the right to refuse service

[Pengwuino]

"We reserve the right to refuse service"

On a side note from my last thread... I've always wondered exactly why people can refuse service to people at say, restaurants. We have all these civil rights laws and such that makes it so that anyone can walk into a business such as a restaurant or hotel or whatever... yet people are still allowed to say they can refuse service? What's the actual technical boundaries of both of the rules/laws?

 

[Danger]

I don't know how it works stateside, but in Canada any business is the property of the owner. Anyone can be denied access without a reason being given. If he/she refuses to leave, he/she is charged with a minimum of trespassing. Depending upon circumstances, other more serious charges might be layed.

 

[Dawguard]

The refusing service statement is used so that an establishment can expel someone, even if they haven't broken any formal rules. For example, if you're a rich restraurant, and someone comes in talking loudly and being obnoxious to other customers, then the owners can chuck them out. I don't know the exact legality of race, but I haven't heard of any recent case of people being expelled due to race, and I'm sure that if a resautant started doing that they would be sued. With the current tempermant of America, only an idiot would kick people out for being another race. Honestly, I don't think the details of the law would matter in a case like that, the restaurant would loose no matter what.

 

[Cyrus]

Even if they did kick out people by race, the most a lawsuit could do is allow them access to the store, not any monetary retributions.

 

[Curious3141]

Even if they did kick out people by race, the most a lawsuit could do is allow them access to the store, not any monetary retributions.

Hopefully, the public exposure would drive the restaurant out of business.

 

[Cyrus]

There are many a country club like that in America still. One college too, all still in business.

 

[iansmith]

I don't know the exact legality of race, but I haven't heard of any recent case of people being expelled due to race, and I'm sure that if a resautant started doing that they would be sued. With the current tempermant of America, only an idiot would kick people out for being another race. Honestly, I don't think the details of the law would matter in a case like that, the restaurant would loose no matter what.

The "right to refuse service" issue is more related to religious diet requirement. For example, we had a muslim in our lab and everytimes he went to Subway, he ask the person preparing his sub to change his gloves to ensure that none of food was contaminated with pork products. Not everyone complied and we often hear about his frustration in the lab. In his mind, the customer is always right and the person that did not change his gloves was discriminating and to a certain extent a racist. However, we counter argue that subway did not have to comply with his request and he was free not to go to Subway.

 

[Pengwuino]

The customers always right in a BUSINESS sense, but not a LEGAL sense. That's what you should tell that person.

 

[Curious3141]

There are many a country club like that in America still. One college too, all still in business.

What, you mean, they have an overt "whites only" policy ?!

 

[Pengwuino]

What, you mean, they have an overt "whites only" policy ?!

Hell there are all-black colleges too. Unfortunately I think my university employs the "drunks-only" policy.

 

[Curious3141]

Hell there are all-black colleges too. Unfortunately I think my university employs the "drunks-only" policy.

That doesn't answer the question. I asked specifically if there were all-white colleges or country clubs. As a stated requirement for enrolment/membership.

All-black institutions *are* discrimination, but they are tolerated by many because minorities can get away with a lot more than the majority.

But that's not what I asked - are there indeed all white institutions in America ? Yes or no, and if the former, please identify them.

 

[Cyrus]

Those are all black schools because they were not allowed to go to a "white" school.

That doesn't answer the question. I asked specifically if there were all-white colleges or country clubs. As a stated requirement for enrolment/membership.

Yes, there are a few. They won't write it in the rules, but it will be a hush hush policy.

 

[shmoe]

For example, we had a muslim in our lab and everytimes he went to Subway, he ask the person preparing his sub to change his cloves to ensure that none of fodd was contaminated with pork products..

This doesn't seem like an unreasonable request. Subway employees aren't paid enough to go out of their way to be reasonable though.

 

[franznietzsche]

The refusing service statement is used so that an establishment can expel someone, even if they haven't broken any formal rules. For example, if you're a rich restraurant, and someone comes in talking loudly and being obnoxious to other customers, then the owners can chuck them out. I don't know the exact legality of race, but I haven't heard of any recent case of people being expelled due to race, and I'm sure that if a resautant started doing that they would be sued. With the current tempermant of America, only an idiot would kick people out for being another race. Honestly, I don't think the details of the law would matter in a case like that, the restaurant would loose no matter what.

No. Its a private establishment they have the right to only let in whoever they want. Just as a liquor store can refuse to let minors enter (not that they do since they usually sell other things as well), a privately owned restaurant can keep anyone out for any reason. There would be no grounds for a lawsuit whatsoever.

 

[Danger]

This doesn't seem like an unreasonable request. Subway employees aren't paid enough to go out of their way to be reasonable though.

With no religious aspect whatsoever, I make a similar request upon occasion. If something that I eat has been in contact with a shrimp, it could kill me. It doesn't seem to me that making the same request based upon religious beliefs should be any less valid. (And for the record, in my town, Subway employees change their gloves between every sandwich, even if two are going to the same customer.)

 

[Rach3]

...he ask the person preparing his sub to change his cloves to ensure...

With no religious aspect whatsoever, I make a similar request upon occasion. If something that I eat has been in contact with a shrimp, it could kill me. It doesn't seem to me that making the same request based upon religious beliefs should be any less valid. (And for the record, in my town, Subway employees change their gloves between every sandwich, even if two are going to the same customer.)

Oh, "gloves"! Iansmith said "cloves" and I was very confused.

 

[Curious3141]

Yes, there are a few. They won't write it in the rules, but it will be a hush hush policy.

Terrible. But who am I to make a fuss - in Singapore, we have all-Chinese schools, where minorities (Indians and Malays) are almost never admitted. The whole culture of the school is predominantly slanted to the Chinese way. This in itself is not a bad thing, but a lot of the students coming out of such a system are overtly racist. A lot of the top leaders' children go to these schools.

I heard a story about an Indian teacher who managed to get a teaching job at that school. He kept in good "favor" with the class by making racist jokes demeaning his own ethnicity. That's the stupidest, most degrading conduct that I've heard of from a teacher.

The Singapore government makes all these arrogant statements about racial equality and coexistence, but the practices it often endorses give the lie to them.

 

[shmoe]

Oh, "gloves"! Iansmith said "cloves" and I was very confused.

At first I thought he meant "cloes" and this was perhaps a little unreasonable. Then I realized that "cloes" isn't how you spell "clothes", and that he must have meant "gloves". A shame, as for a moment I thought his labmate had some success getting subway employees to strip upon demand.

 

[Moonbear]

With no religious aspect whatsoever, I make a similar request upon occasion. If something that I eat has been in contact with a shrimp, it could kill me. It doesn't seem to me that making the same request based upon religious beliefs should be any less valid. (And for the record, in my town, Subway employees change their gloves between every sandwich, even if two are going to the same customer.)

Well, anything that gets them to change their gloves once in a while is a good thing. If they touch anything other than food, they should change their gloves, but they don't always do that. I'm just happy if they change their gloves after picking their nose. I don't know why iansmith's labmate thinks changing gloves is enough to ensure no pork products came in contact with his food though. Does he really think they're that careful about putting the food out into the trays in the first place?

 

[moose]

If I ran a business, I could refuse to sell anything to all members of the ____ (fill in the blank) race. Or I could refuse service to anyone who wore white shirts, it doesn't matter.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

...In the 1960's, the Unruh Civil Rights Act was interpreted to provide broad protection from arbitrary discrimination by business owners. Cases decided during that era held that business owners could not discriminate, for example, against hippies, police officers, homosexuals or Republicans, solely because of who they were.

...In cases in which the patron is not a member of a federally protected class, the question generally turns on whether the business's refusal of service was arbitrary, or whether the business had a specific interest in refusing service. For example, in a recent case, a California court decided that a motorcycle club had no discrimination claim against a sports bar that had denied members admission to the bar because they refused to remove their "colors" or patches, which signified club membership. The court held that the refusal of service was not based on the club members' unconventional dress, but was to protect a legitimate business interest in preventing fights between rival club members.

On the other hand, a California court decided that a restaurant owner could not refuse to seat a gay couple in a semi-private booth where its policy was to only seat two people of the opposite sex in such booths. There was no legitimate business reason for the refusal of service, and so the discrimination was arbitrary and unlawful. [continued]

http://www.legalzoom.com/articles/article_content/article13721.html

 

[moose]

That's stupid...