First, thank you for calling me dumb.

 

And you know what, you protest your way and I will protest my way.

 

Did I say you were dumb, no, and you are fine to do as you please, but know you will have little impact to Yum brands.

Sounds like to me it wasn't a whole lot that could be embellished, it was a pretty simple event from the sounds of it. So for right now I will take what the article describes as a fairly accurate description of the event.

 

Kid walks away from the register...he isn't going to serve cops for whatever (likely twisted) reason. Ok. Fireable offense if it's my store? Probably. I sure would want to get his reasoning of why he did that though cause I'd really like to know his thought process.

 

What I can't believe many aren't pointing out are the kids in the kitchen saying they are going to "mess" with the cops. They are making the food. What do you think they meant by that? Stand back and make piggy faces at the cops from behind the counter? Sure.:sarcastic: More likely, those kids were quite possibly planning to put something in the cops' food. Spit in their drink...wipe a boggie on their taco. Heck, maybe one of them drops pants and leaves a "dookie swirly" in one of their burritos. And lets me honest, it's Taco Bell...it might take a little bit for one of them to notice that. Point is though, you want to retrain someone who quite possibly was going to taint food, just for the simple fact that the customers were policeman? God forbid someone walk in with a hated rival high school tee shirt on...who knows what those kids might put in those customers food. Point is there is no level of retraining for someone with that mindset. Sure they might grow up eventually and realize what a complete idiot they were, but AT A MINIMUM I'm not risking having those kids prepare food for me at my store, they be gone.

 

I want so bad to make comments on this post, but I've been dancing on that edge all week...so I will leave it as this: @lawildcat..please tell Big Man what bell he rang in this post :banana:

Did I say you were dumb, no, and you are fine to do as you please, but know you will have little impact to Yum brands.

 

Seriously? I thought the whole company was going to come tumbling down...

I don't even think the cops lied or embellished anything. I think the FOP spokesperson took what they said and built it up. I think he Lochted it.

 

We will be disagreeing on yet another one.

I want so bad to make comments on this post, but I've been dancing on that edge all week...so I will leave it as this: @lawildcat..please tell Big Man what bell he rang in this post :banana:

 

You tell me and I'll tell him... :idunno:

I hadn't realized until @rockmom's post that this story originated with the police union spokesman. Frankly, police union spox, as a "profession," have such little credibility with me that I can't help but re-interpret this story with a healthy dose of skepticism. I can't remember reading a statement from a union spox that offered any degree of nuance or prudence and quite a lot of them teeter on the edge of raving lunacy. I get that they are meant to be advocates for their members and that is their only constituency, but they do a disservice to those members when they universally offer knee-jerk hyperbole in support of their officers.

I want so bad to make comments on this post, but I've been dancing on that edge all week...so I will leave it as this: @lawildcat..please tell Big Man what bell he rang in this post :banana:

 

You tell me and I'll tell him... :idunno:

 

Ok, interest greatly piqued. Somebody spill it.

On the other hand, you can't fire them without proof they did what they are accused of.

 

Pretty sure Taco Bell has cameras. I also would take their word. That used to mean something.

Yes.

 

And you believe that works?

If anyone is going to boycott we need to add KFC and Pizza Hut to the list.

 

I rarely eat at any of those places but put me with a couple of others, if they keep those employees any Yum owned business will be a last resort only for me.

 

I believe Long John Silvers also is included.

That logic is kinda dumb honestly. Most of these places are franchise owned not corporate owned. Yum has very little direct involvement. I get it that their name is on the door but, that's like blaming Budweiser for every DUI that happens.

 

No it's really not. It's like not serving a group of individuals because they where a badge. Something few can do but many love to deliberate about how they can do it better.

You tell me and I'll tell him... :idunno:

 

Ok, interest greatly piqued. Somebody spill it.

 

Here's a hint, it's in the sentence below:

 

"Point is though, you want to retrain someone who quite possibly was going to taint food, just for the simple fact that the customers were policeman?"

Here's a hint, it's in the sentence below:

 

"Point is though, you want to retrain someone who quite possibly was going to taint food, just for the simple fact that the customers were policeman?"

 

I'm going to need some more hints and remember, I am a true blonde.

I hadn't realized until @rockmom's post that this story originated with the police union spokesman. Frankly, police union spox, as a "profession," have such little credibility with me that I can't help but re-interpret this story with a healthy dose of skepticism. I can't remember reading a statement from a union spox that offered any degree of nuance or prudence and quite a lot of them teeter on the edge of raving lunacy. I get that they are meant to be advocates for their members and that is their only constituency, but they do a disservice to those members when they universally offer knee-jerk hyperbole in support of their officers.

 

Sounds to me like every union rep ever.