Come with Hot Coffee, I have to remove the system and if not explode.
Let's see, raise your hand all those who believe this, the Estates, the country is meaningless demands. Okay, now raise your hand if you have ever heard the story of the demand of hot coffee in the car. Yeah, man, legend has it that a woman bought a coffee, got into the car, placed it between the legs, it fell, burned and sued the company, earning hard everywhere. Sure some have heard.
All you have heard is a lie. One of the best public relations campaigns in recent years. Flip.
Lady of 80 years goes to McDonalds (who else) with his grandson, who is leading. The lady is passing, so we understand. Shop the Drive Through, which means from the car (one of these American customs that ... I will not judge, I will not judge) and ask for coffee of yore. The grandson also asks milk and sugar, because he knows the most and knows she making coffee that way. Take coffee, hands it to her grandmother and park, I repeat, park so that your grandmother can, quietly, add the seasonings. The grandmother put the coffee between my legs because, oddly enough in this country who have cars equipped for everything, the car sits her grandson does not have glasses. Open the lid. And flop, you drop the coffee in the legs. The lady started to scream.
coffee as McDonalds manuals, is 180-190 degrees Fahrenheit. I have become, are between 82 and 88 Celsius. An egg, come on. On the legs of an old woman. The film shows images of the burns, and are not at all pleasant. Come see me that in my grandfather or my grandmother and sets fire to the burger. Because yes, it's coffee, is hot. But it was third degree burns on his thigh. ¿What the hell does that to your esophagus if instead of tirártelo above what you swallow?? The lady and the family of the lady, tell McDonalds that 1) check your code and the temperature at which it must be the coffee because that is not normal, and 2) McDonalds tells you to pay medical expenses the elderly, totaling $ 10,000. McDonalds says it gives 800. Man, good. At the end of trial, of course. Olé for the world.
The jury (which is a party Justice of the pride that most Americans) decides that, after hearing testimony (including that of a boss of McDonalds, which reads that "Poor than swallow the coffee directly ") and see evidence that happy because of the coffee, McDonald's had accumulated more than 700 complaints (yes, seven hundred), indemnify the lady with $ 2.7 million in punitive damages. Plate. MacDonalds begins to tremble. Because (I learned a lot from this documentary right) punitive damages, as opposed to compensatory, come to serve as a lesson to the defendant to change its attitude (lease, to stop serving coffee that escaldaría a cat in seconds). The judge lowered the amount to 400,000 (that part I lost a little) but, before the ladies and their families appealed, apparently reached a secret agreement and that was that.
What is to study the marketing piece that brought the large corporations in the U.S. (and by extension the world) against the woman and began what is called "frivolous lawsuits." It was suggested that this was a crazy country, they all wanted money and all you had to protect companies from cranks who claim meaningless. Hence the Tort Reform (I have no no idea how to translate "tort" in English and, unless my good friend Paula read this and tell me if such thing exists in our laws, I doubt it so let me explain, I will continue without know.) The torts are exercised damage on a person because of negligence (or so) in civil suits (sorry the explanation is that the laws it is a mess). The Tort Reform, sponsored by large corporations, claroquesí, seeks to place limits on such claims, arguing that many of the objections raised in this country have no purpose and will cost lots of money to the state. The Tort Reform has not yet been approved.
From Tort Reform to pass Damages Caps, which is to say that put limits on the amount the plaintiff can win damages. And nationally the Tort Reform came face to face with many people, these Damages Caps have been approved in some states (Texas, expensive yes, minidot to know who was the Governor of those) and often refer to damage not economic. That is, if there is medical negligence, for example, you're deaf, the damage has occurred to leave you deaf, it is difficult to measure, is a non-economic damage and its "cost" is very subjective. Depends, as I tell you, the jury. Oh, the jury. Sure, they are proud of their juries but what use the jury if there is a cap that once the jury overflow, the judge will be applied? There went half constitution, according to critics of Tort Reform .
Here I am eating half documentary but let the final, since they are not sufficient to Damages Caps have been drawn worse sleeve: binding arbitration. As companies are being made with the piece demands poop them fall from time to time, more so than even many of saints They deserve it, because they have invented a thing called the "compulsory arbitration", including contracts galore. Contracts not only work but also on mobile, credit cards ... The happy arbitration is a clause, that no one, including me, learns that the sign says you agree to submit yourself to binding arbitration in case there is a problem in the company and give up your right to sue. Plate. The Constitution they spend there. If loads of contracts now have such clause, and a lot of people are unemployed, what do you think makes the most?
best and are the details arbitration. Ponte I sign it and behind T-Mobile sued. We go to arbitration where the arbitrator (judge) is 1) chosen by the company, 2) paid by the company and 3) free to explain why the decision in favor of those who take it. To put the icing on the cake, arbitration and resolution are secret. Ahem ... who believe that support most of these agreements? Minidot for believing that the judge wants to return to work and you're not going to put demands every day, but T-Mobile as it does have to defend several times a month.
And now, the example that makes the documentary, the case of Jamie Leigh Jones against Halliburton. Jamie worked for this company in Texas. After a year there, she was sent to Iraq, in theory, housed in a barracks with women. When you get there and ran into a herd of guys who lived in the same place where she was supposed to live, called his company and asked for compliance with the conditions that had been promised. Halliburton said "You'll get used ." Three days later he was drugged and raped by several of his colleagues. I save the details of those days, which are well explained in the film. The fact is that when Jamie decided to sue, he realized that he could not, that his contract the work sent directly to binding arbitration. With the help of a senator who championed their cause, and after much hard work, the latest I have is that you have been granted their day in court so you can take them to court as they deserve.
So come on, so is the calico here and there and everywhere. If Obama, which I trust blindly, he bumped with corporate America, with a system that has impeded progress in many of the things I wanted to change ... where do we go with the politicians who have given us? How mob as Mariano Rajoy, which shows a total disrespect to those who complain how is the situation and say we can not throw us out over politics? How mob as our president, the best thing he did was to approve gay marriage and half a lifetime ago and since then has returned to give foot with ball? With a mayor who is stealing and who continue to vote people of all ages and conditions?
How is the court, I think I'll just take the arm of Sunrise Number 1 and also go into space to see if ET makes me a little hole in his world.
0 comments:
Post a Comment