Started By
Message
locked post

Dunkin Donuts accused of discrimination for charging extra for non-dairy milk alternatives

Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:23 am
Posted by dcrews
Houston, TX
Member since Feb 2011
31207 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:23 am
LINK


quote:

Dunkin' is facing a class action lawsuit asking for at least $5 million in damages from a group of plaintiffs accusing the coffee giant of discriminating against customers who suffer from lactose intolerance and milk allergies by charging them extra for non-diary alternatives.

The 25-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California, says when the plaintiffs visited Dunkin’ coffee shops, they "ordered drinks that included milk as part of the regular menu item" and were charged up to $2.15 for them to be made with non-dairy alternatives, "specifically soy, oat, coconut, or almond ‘milk.’"

It continues to say that Dunkin’ will modify its "regular beverage offerings to remove caffeine or make caffeine-free beverages at no additional charge for persons with a variety of conditions, including hypertension," and will alter the sugar content of drinks "for those persons with diabetes or who need to control weight."



quote:

"Plaintiffs... seek declaratory and injunctive relief to ensure that Defendant charges the same price to lactose intolerant customers and customers with milk allergies for the same menu items as regular customers and that it does not add a Surcharge for Non-Dairy Alternatives such as soy, almond, coconut, oat, or other lactose-free ‘milk," the lawsuit also says.



Would absolutely suck to be lactose intolerant, but it costs more to accommodate you as a customer. Why wouldn't they charge you more?

ETA:

Separate Source

quote:

Oat- and plant-based milk in general costs more than cow’s milk. In 2022, retail data showed that plant-based milk cost an average of $7.87 a gallon compared to $4.21 a gallon for cow’s milk, said Daniel Gertner, business analyst at The Good Food Institute.


This post was edited on 1/24/24 at 11:30 am
Posted by El Segundo Guy
SE OK
Member since Aug 2014
10793 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:25 am to
Screw all of them. If you can't drink coffee black then don't drink coffee.
Posted by Powerman
Member since Jan 2004
164704 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:27 am to
They could charge them the same price and not provide any creamer of any type

Problem solved
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
44031 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:28 am to
What's the cost of milk?

What's the cost of the alternatives?

If the alternatives cost more, you charge more.

God I can't wait until this country collapses under the weight of the massive victim class that makes up the majority of the population now.
Posted by BigBinBR
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2023
7283 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:29 am to
quote:

modify its "regular beverage offerings to remove caffeine or make caffeine-free beverages at no additional charge for persons with a variety of conditions, including hypertension," and will alter the sugar content of drinks "for those persons with diabetes or who need to control weight."


So their argument is that Dunkin will remove stuff for free, but won’t remove and then replace with a more expensive item for free?

That’s a terrible argument.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
101545 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:31 am to


Caffeinated and decaffeinated are entire product lines which are offered.

If one or the other is no longer profitable, they will be dropped.



Alternatives to their standard creamer? Those are special demands which require stocking ingredients just for that use.

This is not McD charging extra for mayo on a burger since they already have it around for a chicken sandwich. And no one has sued them over charging extra for special orders IIRC.
Posted by tiggerthetooth
Big Momma's House
Member since Oct 2010
62881 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:32 am to
These are the selfish pieces of shite that ruin society. There is NO reality in which everyone is perfectly equal. It is an impossible bar that will NEVER be met and the lunatics that believe there is some magic utopia where there are zero differences between people need serious mental help.



If you're fat you are not the same as a skinny person. You will experience reality completely different and it will cost society more resources to accommodate you.
Posted by Sidicous
NELA
Member since Aug 2015
18624 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:33 am to
quote:

. Why wouldn't they charge you more?

If the customer orders a product for a price then THAT product is what they should receive. However, the plaintiffs class did NOT order the advertised product, plaintiffs ordered a similar one with a different price.
Posted by EZE Tiger Fan
Member since Jul 2004
54177 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:33 am to
quote:

So their argument is that Dunkin will remove stuff for free, but won’t remove and then replace with a more expensive item for free?


Only in America.

fricking lawyers are the worst.
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
129846 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:33 am to
Maybe those bigots should be more tolerant of the toe-lacking .
Posted by BilbeauTBaggins
probably stuck in traffic
Member since May 2021
7089 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:34 am to
quote:

So their argument is that Dunkin will remove stuff for free, but won’t remove and then replace with a more expensive item for free?

That’s a terrible argument.

No, the problem is that some members of society see that a voluntary purchase is a necessity.
Posted by JTM72
BR, LA.
Member since Mar 2014
1244 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:34 am to
quote:

If you can't drink coffee black then don't drink coffee.


This is such a dumb take about coffee. Can someone explain the thinking behind this?? No different than adding salt, tony's or any other seasoning to food, or drinking sweet tea vs unsweetened tea. What is so bad about adding sugar or cream to coffee.. "If you add seasoning to your food then don't eat food" - sounds silly doesn't it?

I drink my coffee all ways. If its some good percolated coffee, I won't add anything into it. At work, sometimes i add just sugar, or just cream, sometimes both.


Tho I don't get all the fuss about charging more for non dairy options. If it costs more to procure, which I'm sure it does, then they have all the right in the world to charge more. Seems like a bunch of Karens and Soy boys are bitching about their coffee costing more because they prefer something that's not as common as dairy as a creamer. Not to mention, they could just make their coffee at home.
This post was edited on 1/24/24 at 11:40 am
Posted by dcrews
Houston, TX
Member since Feb 2011
31207 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:34 am to
quote:

They could charge them the same price and not provide any creamer of any type


This was my initial reaction.

Problem is, they would still say Dunkin is being discriminatory by not offering ANY alternatives.

At which point, you either cave or don't offer any dairy options at all. The latter is going to cost you more in lost customers than the lawsuit.
Posted by LSUweights
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2014
3569 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:44 am to
Lit Pizza and their $4 upcharge for cauliflower crust
Posted by rundmcrun
Member since Jan 2024
300 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:46 am to
This has zero chance in court.

Just hoping Dunkin throws them a couple mil to go away.
Posted by JetsetNuggs
Member since Jun 2014
14916 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:49 am to
It's obvious with stories like this that there are a large amount of people that don't understand/don't want to understand business
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
101545 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:51 am to
quote:

don't want to understand business


This is correct

They think it should be a flat fee for a pizza and that they should be able to get 50 toppings, extra cheese, and stuffed crust for no additional charge and that the business should eat the cost.
Posted by RougeDawg
Member since Jul 2016
6789 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:56 am to
Lawyers are killing this country. Any person with a shred of ethics tells someone to GTFO wanting to sue for this.
Posted by biglego
San Francisco
Member since Nov 2007
79974 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:59 am to
Imagine being the lawyer who concocted this bullshite case. Like what it must be like to be a scumbag and to be ok with being a scumbag.
Posted by rundmcrun
Member since Jan 2024
300 posts
Posted on 1/24/24 at 11:59 am to
quote:

Any person with a shred of ethics tells someone to GTFO wanting to sue for this.


There needs to be consequences for frivolous lawsuits.

I'd be fine with being fined a large percentage of the damages asked for.

What's the downside?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram