I've won a case against McDonald's

- Canadians are wacky in general. Ever read Heart lyrics?

- I only make fun of Dark in a loving manner. I believe if someone is goofy, they have to accept the consequences of it.

- I can only imagine the sheer horror of being too thin. It must be truly awful. Thankfully this is something which I never have to worry about.

The Buffalo Chicken Conspiracy wrote:

- I only make fun of Dark in a loving manner. I believe if someone is goofy, they have to accept the consequences of it.

And here's a thread where I asked why people made fun of him:

http://www.queenzone.com/queen/forum/topic_view.asp?Q_FORUM_ID=3&Q_FORUM_NAME=Personal&Q_FORUM_TOPIC_ID=333826&TOPIC_SUBJECT=Questions+for+Inu+Yasha

That was obviously before I joined in. It just depends on my mood.. I have bipolar disorder you know, so I'm more likely to inhumorate someone at their expense when I'm in a manic phase.

The Buffalo Chicken Conspiracy wrote:

inhumorate someone

inhumorate (also 'inhumourate', British spelling), inhumorated, inhumoration, inhumorating
verb: To make fun of; to use humor at the expense of someone

"I only inhumorate him out of love"

"Put it this way: I cannot do multitasking all at once in a short time, and they forced me to do a lot of things at once in strict timings"

- a job where you have to multitask, and where there are deadlines? Your right dark, that sounds totally unreasonable.

You're one sick fuck

Agujero del asno

Hmmm ... Someone who makes Dark look like a saint. Imagine that. I thought I had seen everything. The real Peter North should sue the fiticious Peter North for defamation of character.

My issue with this is not the disease, but the exploitation of it.

..and claiming that the LD player is coincidental is classic Dark...

"they forced me to do a lot of things at once in strict timings"

er...that's what they ask everyone to do in a McDonald's. That's how they get (in their view) a consistent product.

For some reason Dark got plenty of congratulations and support. Seems many like treating the legal system as a lottery system.

Then there is that brilliant QZ Turd whose behavior unintentionally (??) tries to elicit sympathy for Dark.

For some reason Dark got plenty of congratulations and support. Seems many like treating the legal system as a lottery system.

Only thing is, I was not in it for the money, originally. I was in it to get my name cleared, and to get my job back...

I will tell you what the result is now, regardless of whether I am supposed to legally keep shut about it or not.

The original reason for the complaint I filed against them was that I felt I had been wrongfully dismissed based on a false report by a 'mystery shop customer' (the ones who do the surveys for certain intelligence companies) who I had served. I wanted to get my name cleared, which is not the end result as it is now.
I had written about the abuse relating to my condition as part of the letter I had submitted to the Alberta Human Rights Commission that started this whole case, which was a big part but not necessarily the only thing about this case (although my earlier posts may suggest otherwise).

And to give you more details about the multitasking bits and more, what I had done in the beginning when I got hired was tell my managers I started out with that I had Asperger's Syndrome and that I would be needing instructions in a simple order rather than in a 'complicated' order, and that I would probably need some help with the orders during peak customer periods. I had a little help for the first while, but then they started getting lazy and stopped giving me help, because they naturally assumed I could do it on my own, which was not true.

Eventually, I started becoming stressed out, and had a hard time trying to keep up with customers. Then I was fired after they had read the mystery customer's report online (btw. which is not available to the public - even I don't have access to that report), and they did not even give me a chance to explain what was really the case.

I had asked McD's for my job to be re-instated, only at a location in a new where I moved recently (Dec '03), when I was asked by them and by my conciliator for a way I thought we could settle this claim, and they said no.

So I did not have much choices for what I wanted to ask of McDonald's in order to settle the claim. I wanted to prove that they were wrong in firing me, and that I deserved some sort of settlement that would be fair to me.

So I made a counter-offer to McDonald's for them to give me 2-6 month's worth of pay and a letter of reference for future employers (reason for the letter is that because I had not been allowing people I've been handing in applications to to contact McDonald's for a reference, and I have not had success in even getting calls back for job interviews!), and so they offered me $500 minus taxes and the letter of reference, and so I accepted, and that's what I am getting.

So, for $500 Canadian, McDonalds doesn't have to admit any wrong doing?

This whole topic seems overblown for a 500 dollar settlement.

So, for $500 Canadian, McDonalds doesn't have to admit any wrong doing?

This whole topic seems overblown for a 500 dollar settlement.

Well, it's not $500 so that McDonald's does not have to admit any wrong doing. They offered $500 out of goodwill and to have something to settle the case between us, but it does not mean that it is a result of wrongdoing or anything like that.

But I thought I'd post about this because most people who go against McDonald's usually lose out, and I'm probably one of the few people these days who have had some sort of settlement made with McDonald's.

And I agree, this is overblown. (Either that, or people need something new to make fun of me over instead of my homophobia, autism card-playing, etc.)

Inu Yasha wrote:

For some reason Dark got plenty of congratulations and support. Seems many like treating the legal system as a lottery system.

Only thing is, I was not in it for the money, originally. I was in it to get my name cleared, and to get my job back...

I will tell you what the result is now, regardless of whether I am supposed to legally keep shut about it or not.

The original reason for the complaint I filed against them was that I felt I had been wrongfully dismissed based on a false report by a 'mystery shop customer' (the ones who do the surveys for certain intelligence companies) who I had served. I wanted to get my name cleared, which is not the end result as it is now.
I had written about the abuse relating to my condition as part of the letter I had submitted to the Alberta Human Rights Commission that started this whole case, which was a big part but not necessarily the only thing about this case (although my earlier posts may suggest otherwise).

And to give you more details about the multitasking bits and more, what I had done in the beginning when I got hired was tell my managers I started out with that I had Asperger's Syndrome and that I would be needing instructions in a simple order rather than in a 'complicated' order, and that I would probably need some help with the orders during peak customer periods. I had a little help for the first while, but then they started getting lazy and stopped giving me help, because they naturally assumed I could do it on my own, which was not true.

Eventually, I started becoming stressed out, and had a hard time trying to keep up with customers. Then I was fired after they had read the mystery customer's report online (btw. which is not available to the public - even I don't have access to that report), and they did not even give me a chance to explain what was really the case.

I had asked McD's for my job to be re-instated, only at a location in a new where I moved recently (Dec '03), when I was asked by them and by my conciliator for a way I thought we could settle this claim, and they said no.

So I did not have much choices for what I wanted to ask of McDonald's in order to settle the claim. I wanted to prove that they were wrong in firing me, and that I deserved some sort of settlement that would be fair to me.

So I made a counter-offer to McDonald's for them to give me 2-6 month's worth of pay and a letter of reference for future employers (reason for the letter is that because I had not been allowing people I've been handing in applications to to contact McDonald's for a reference, and I have not had success in even getting calls back for job interviews!), and so they offered me $500 minus taxes and the letter of reference, and so I accepted, and that's what I am getting.

you want fries with that isnt too hard to ask :)

NoOneButYou1975 wrote:

Inu Yasha wrote:

For some reason Dark got plenty of congratulations and support. Seems many like treating the legal system as a lottery system.

Only thing is, I was not in it for the money, originally. I was in it to get my name cleared, and to get my job back...

I will tell you what the result is now, regardless of whether I am supposed to legally keep shut about it or not.

The original reason for the complaint I filed against them was that I felt I had been wrongfully dismissed based on a false report by a 'mystery shop customer' (the ones who do the surveys for certain intelligence companies) who I had served. I wanted to get my name cleared, which is not the end result as it is now.
I had written about the abuse relating to my condition as part of the letter I had submitted to the Alberta Human Rights Commission that started this whole case, which was a big part but not necessarily the only thing about this case (although my earlier posts may suggest otherwise).

And to give you more details about the multitasking bits and more, what I had done in the beginning when I got hired was tell my managers I started out with that I had Asperger's Syndrome and that I would be needing instructions in a simple order rather than in a 'complicated' order, and that I would probably need some help with the orders during peak customer periods. I had a little help for the first while, but then they started getting lazy and stopped giving me help, because they naturally assumed I could do it on my own, which was not true.

Eventually, I started becoming stressed out, and had a hard time trying to keep up with customers. Then I was fired after they had read the mystery customer's report online (btw. which is not available to the public - even I don't have access to that report), and they did not even give me a chance to explain what was really the case.

I had asked McD's for my job to be re-instated, only at a location in a new where I moved recently (Dec '03), when I was asked by them and by my conciliator for a way I thought we could settle this claim, and they said no.

So I did not have much choices for what I wanted to ask of McDonald's in order to settle the claim. I wanted to prove that they were wrong in firing me, and that I deserved some sort of settlement that would be fair to me.

So I made a counter-offer to McDonald's for them to give me 2-6 month's worth of pay and a letter of reference for future employers (reason for the letter is that because I had not been allowing people I've been handing in applications to to contact McDonald's for a reference, and I have not had success in even getting calls back for job interviews!), and so they offered me $500 minus taxes and the letter of reference, and so I accepted, and that's what I am getting.

you want fries with that isnt too hard to ask :)

I think I will further abuse the Quote function.

If you haven't seen the Mystery Shopper Report (and each McDOnald's & Burger King in this country has each report sent to them, so that they can be celebrated/appealed/learnt from as necessary), how do you know it was false?

If you became stressed as a result of your managers naively believing that after settling in and (presumably) demonstrating some ability to do the job, you would be able to tackle more advanced tasks, isn't it possible that the report is correct (assuming it is negative about your behaviour)?

Furthermore, if this report highlights an inability to perform the job as specified, aren't they correct to discipline you?