Advocacy & Safety - no bicycles in the drive-thru

i've had varying success with drive-thrus...

In Texas (mostly Austin and Houston) about half the time they just looked at me really funny and served me and about half the time refused to serve me quoting 'corporate policy' and would require that i come inside (i often had no lock so i would bring it inside and sometimes got trouble with that too). A few times late at night when inside was closed i was simply refused service - one time as i was arguing that as a cyclist i had the same road rights as a car and should thus be able to use the drive-thru and should not have to go home and then get my car and drive 2 blocks to the Taco Bell to get served, some guy waiting behind me just said 'jump in' and i ordered from his car and then got back on my bike...

in Massachusetts i usually got served in the drive-thru, but i think only b/c bikes were so rare the workers weren't aware of 'corporate policy' and i of course never reminded them.

in bike-friendly Portland most of the drive-thrus quoted their 'corporate policy' of no bicycles in the drive-thru b/c of 'safety issues' which they were never too clear on.

i iniquired as to what this means and was told that cyclists or pedestrians were a robbery threat to the workers --- come on how is it easier to pull a gun on someone or threaten someone from a bicycle than from a motor vehicle? the only difference is that the car SHOULD have a license plate, but anyone robbing a drive-thru should be smart enough to cover or change the plate (uh, well, maybe not?)

anyway, with a particulat Taco Bell right by my house in Portland i was about 90% refused service except for when one guy was working and his manager wasn't there (he was a cyclist). one time late at night when only the drive-thru was open i was refused service and i had to ride home, get in my car, drive 4 blocks and was then served ---- but i find that utterly ridiculous, especially as i believe in using cars as little as possible in urban areas and their policy REQUIRES that i use my car, regardless of how convenient walking or cycling may be.

then i wrote to the Taco Bell Corporate office since i was told that was who made the rule. they sent back some generic form letter "thank you for your input and we value your business and your comments and will look into it..."

Does anyone know the real reason why the general policy is 'no bikes in the drive-thru'? i suspect that they are afraid of a liablity suit if some idiot car driver runs over a cyclist, but the risks are no greater than riding your bike on the road (less b/c speeds are so low)

as an aside, when i used to use my motorcycle i was NEVER refused service. if it's a safety issue, how are bicycles and motorcyles so different? (yes, motorcycles are registered and should have a valid plate)

It is a misguided "safety" issue. If the motorist behind you allows the car to roll forward into you, Taco Bell/whatever believes the company will be held liable, as the owner or leaseholder of the premises. To me, the motorist would clearly be 100 percent liable in such a case.

I strongly believe bicyclists (and pedestrians, for that matter) should be served at all drive-up / drive-through windows, particularly during extended hours when the main lobby is closed. A possible strategy would be to sit at the window, holding up traffic if necessary, until they serve you or call the police. If a car drives up behind you, explain to the motorist that the jerk at the window is refusing to serve you, and ask to piggy-back your order onto his. Keep writing letters to corporate management and local branch management, and enlist the aid of other cyclists to join the fight. Boycotts are great. I would absolutely love to see someone with a mobility scooter make this into an ADA issue!

Anyone ever have any experience riding their bike up to a bank drive-up/through? I do it all the time, and have yet to have a problem getting service at my bank. There is how ever a sign that says no walk-ups.

b_rider,

i have had good luck at the bank. Usually they don't say anything since your business is very important to a bank.

The few times when i was given a problem, i made a reference to my valuing their service which includes using the drive-thru window on my bicycle - i think one time it lasted a little longer until threatened to pull my account and made some off-hand remark as to my deposit amount that would go to another bank and and then they shut up (i don't enjoy pulling the 'money' thing but if it helps cyclists, then OK)

Taco Bell and cycling? Why would you want to eat that stuff?

I tried walking up to a drive-thru window at a bank after the lobby was closed. I was refused service. The reason was safety. They said a vehicle pulling up behind me may not see me (expecting to see another car) and might hit me.

If more cyclists and pedestrians requested walk-up service, perhaps banks and fast food places would offer it. What a stir that would cause with motorists -- WALK-UP ONLY, no vehicles allowed. :D

Interesting timing for this thread. This weekend, I had just made a inquiry with my brother regarding this topic. I was wondering if McDonald's would serve me on my bicycle. He informed me that bicycles do not trip the sensor at the McDonald's he works at. I think that is bogus.

I am going to try it some time. I just didn't have time this weekend.

I don't see why it would be any more dangerous than on a motorcycle since most of us have a light on the back of the bike.


Originally posted by martin
Taco Bell and cycling? Why would you want to eat that stuff?

Well, if you got refried beans on the taco, that would be a way to keep cars from being behind you on your ride home. :D

There does seem to be a lot of variety in how corporations respond to bikes in the drive-through. On the listserve for my local bicycle coalition was this posting:

On 28 March, on my bike, I was refused service at the drive-up window at the Comerica Bank office on Winchester in San Jose. Bank personnel cited insurance reasons.

I sent a letter of complaint to the bank CEO. Subsequently, the regional VP looked into the situation and found no justification for the refusal. She has notified all branches that bike riders are to be accepted at drive-up windows.

Policies can be changed.
Making a little noise helps in some cases.

A hypothetical scenario:

A large group of cyclists who ride regularly every thursday afternoon/evening always end their ride at the same location, a local pizza parlor.

In this case, I think the owner/manager of that establishment would be bending over backwards to cater to those cyclists and make them feel comfortable. I think if cycling was more popular, more people would be competing for cyclists' business.

The fact that this "no bicycles in the drive-thru" (and "no bikes in parking lots," etc.) policy exists is a reflection of how unimiportant cycling is considered.

Kobyj, your brother's assertion is not bogus. My son also worked at a Mickey D's and he says the same thing. There is a weight sensor which notifies the attendant but there is also a video monitor. It's funny, my son and I had this same discussion yesterday. He asked me to pick up a fast food something so I stopped at a Wendy's. My order was taken, no problem. When I got to the drive through, the attendant actually laughed at me. Wendy's has a policy of nonservice to cyclists also but she served me just the same. She didn't know the reason for the policy either but obviously she didn't think of my bike as a serious legitimate form of transport.

This is a discrimination issue pure and simple but I don't know the basis for it.

Kathy

Originally posted by kobyj
Interesting timing for this thread. This weekend, I had just made a inquiry with my brother regarding this topic. I was wondering if McDonald's would serve me on my bicycle. He informed me that bicycles do not trip the sensor at the McDonald's he works at. I think that is bogus.

I am going to try it some time. I just didn't have time this weekend.

I don't see why it would be any more dangerous than on a motorcycle since most of us have a light on the back of the bike.



Well, if you got refried beans on the taco, that would be a way to keep cars from being behind you on your ride home. :D

Then get that traffic light magnet thing that I saw posted earlier :)

in regard to the sensors in the window i find them an inconvenience (that bikes don't trip them) but not much of a problem:

if it's crowded and there's a line, then just ask or wave to the car behind you to pull forward a bit, maybe even next to you and the sensor goes off -- they're waiting too so helping you order faster helps them get their food faster too. If there's nobody there then i ride up to the window and order. Then if there are cars ahead who have already ordered, i just wait a minute or 2 and then a car will usually pull up...

i've used the "car behind me to trip the sensor" technique often and then they think i've ordered from a car and then i wait the whole time and get to the window and am told "sorry, we don't serve bikes in the drive-thru". if the dining area is open then "you can come inside to pick up your order" but if it's not then just "sorry..."

i find the sensor a nuisance, but it's not so bad --- what is bad is when they refuse to serve you. For example, after returning from a MTB ride when i'm maybe really muddy and definitely dripping with sweat i just don't want to go inside. If i'm returning from a ride (rather than commuting somewhere) i usually don't have a lock and besides, it usually takes longer to lock the bike, go inside, order, unlock bike, etc... exactly the reason why cars are using the drive-thru -- convenience!

i've tried the 'stay in line and refuse to move until they serve you' tactic before and it sometimes works, but usually you just end up pissing off other people b/c you're blocking the whole drive-thru and looking like an idiot...

Originally posted by nathank
i've tried the 'stay in line and refuse to move until they serve you' tactic before and it sometimes works, but usually you just end up pissing off other people b/c you're blocking the whole drive-thru and looking like an idiot...

NO!!!! The cyclist is NOT the one blocking the whole drive-through and looking like an idiot -- the person at the window is!


This is a significant, serious access issue for pedestrians, bicyclists, and possibly the disabled community. Anyone up for a Critical Mass at a drive-through? I would participate, but I rarely eat fast food and I do all my banking at an ATM inside my local supermarket, where I simply bring my bike indoors and NEVER get hassled. (Yes, I make a point to reward that store by buying alot of my groceries there!)

Another way to play this one is to get to know your city council members and to ask them to pass an ordinance banning drive-through windows which do not cater to pedestrians and bicyclists. This should get someone's attention ...




"Sorry, we don't serve Coloreds here."
"That's no problem, Ma'am. I just want chicken and cornbread."

Originally posted by oceanrider
When I got to the drive through, the attendant actually laughed at me. Wendy's has a policy of nonservice to cyclists...

This is a discrimination issue pure and simple but I don't know the basis for it.
I am not just a cyclist, I am a person. What difference does it make that I ride a bike?

The only difference I can see is that I might be more "discriminating" about eating junk, since I depend more on the physical performance of my body.

I'll try it one time.

If they don't serve up, I'll just stand there and shout:

"Give me the burger to give me death!"

Slightly off topic. I park my bike in a multi-level car park. I put my bike in the back of my wife's car (she drives to work). I usually just ride around the swinging arms and don't collect a ticket, this has worked for years. Then they got some new staff and one day the new guy was standing at the gate as I rode up, so I thought I should grab a ticket so he doesn't get upset. When I pushed the button for a ticket the digital display reads "No ticket without vehicle" the guy looks at me and says "don't bother with the ticket". So sometimes the sensors work to our benefit.

As far as not being served at drive thru's this is basic discrimination and legally they can't refuse service to a paying customer.:mad:

CHEERS.

Mark

I haven't done this very often, but I've never had a problem.

That said, my general feeling towards the 'company policy' excuse is that it is no reason at all. They just spout it as an excuse for doing or not doing something that they can't think of a good reason for.

Whatever happened to 'the customer is always right'?

Any minimum wage, pimple-faced git with a nametag and a bad attitude persists with the 'company policy' line with me, well, let's just say I can think of a few company policies of my own.

I’ve done my own mental map over Stockholm, covering all the places where I know I can just ride up to a hole in the wall and make my orders. My favourite was the Select store after midnight, when they closed the store and opened the window to take orders and then walk around in the shop themselves to pick up everything that you ordered. :)

Wow, I didn't realize this issue was that widepread. I had
never heard of others talk about it. I've never been
turned down, but have seen signs. On Saturdays my bank is
closed inside and only has drive though service. A sign
there says that only cars can use the drive thru. What
amazes me is that someone went to the trouble of ordering
that sign, but wouldn't have ever thought of replacing the
mid-seventies artsy design bike rack that I can't even lock
my bike to. The people who can use it have half their
front tire hanging out into the drive thru lane. The bank
did have a walk up window, but took it out.

So anyways, this IS a discrimination issue--without even
looking at bicyclists. We have A LOT of elderly and
developmentally/ physically disabled people in IC. We also
have a huge student population without cars. If a disabled
or elderly person who can't drive is refused service then
essentially it is because of their age or physical state.
I do believe there are laws against this. I also believe
that laws mandating the use of cars on publicly accessed
private property cannot possibly stand up to a legal
challenge. If it were a risk issue, then why wouldn't they
be able to discriminate against certain groups of people or
economic classes that may (supposedly) commit more crimes
in a certain area? "I'm sorry Sir, but because of your
nationality I can't serve you. In my ignorant opinion
you're just too high a risk for robbery." That is a
ridiculous proposition that I feel horrible about even
writing. How about banning older people from
establishments because they have a higher risk of slipping
on the tile floor and hurting themselves. Yeah try that
and see how long it takes the AARP to sue you. What we
need are some good lawyer bike advocates who know the
system, know constitutional law, and can help set
precedents that can be extended to all areas. Very few
businesses will change without being forced to. How many
wheelchair ramps were voluntarily installed? Half the
population of the South is African-American, did their
large numbers keep people from banning them from stores?
Nope, it took the freakin' Nat'l Guard to get the laws
enforced.

The problem with cyclists is that we "choose" to cycle. No
one will ever feel we don't deserve harassment. "If you
don't like the way I drive stay off the road/sidewalk
(whatever)." I have long hair and people have told me that
I deserve to be harassed and discriminated for it, because
it was my "choice", whereas people can't choose race etc.
Don't ever challenge anyone's societal norms or they will
make you pay dearly. And what could be more "normal" in
the free world than driving? What we need to do is change
those norms--and realistically it may take the power of law
to do that. That and a lot of kicking and screaming.

Clay

Thank you, Clay! (My 17-year-old son and my employer's Director of Engineering have long hair, too.) I would love to see cars-only access challenged as a blatant ADA violation.

I once Tried that trick to riding at a drive thru at Mcdonald, what do I get a very strange look and the employee was just staring at me like I came from Outer space, I gave my Order at the Order machine and When I was picking up the order he was asking wheres the car, I said I let the car behind me roll on the Sensor and then I place the Order she said get outta here or I call the police and I signaled to the driver who was kind enough to give me a favor to come to the window and everything was straigthen out but after the line up off car has already extended to the street

Originally posted by orguasch
she said get outta here or I call the police
Which proves it’s not a safety issue – what scares them is the things that diverge from the main course of life. Maybe especially in America, where the car culture is stronger than in Europe. I came to think about that crazy guy on a bike (http://www.crazyguyonabike.com) (our hero!) who had real problems finding a place to sleep, since people were so suspicious and so afraid when he asked if he could camp on their lawn.

I realize how unpopular my opinion is going to be, but...I disagree that it is a discrimination issue. McDonals/Taco Bell/You-name-it is not refusing you service. They are just telling you that they will serve you inside. While their reasons for the policy may be stupid, as long as they are not flat out telling you no, then I don't see what is illegal about it. I think of it as the same as my supermarket pharmacy telling me that I can't pay for my soda with my prescriptions, that I'll have to go wait in the ridiculously long lines at the front of the store.

Originally posted by Tina
I realize how unpopular my opinion is going to be, but...I disagree that it is a discrimination issue. McDonals/Taco Bell/You-name-it is not refusing you service. They are just telling you that they will serve you inside. While their reasons for the policy may be stupid, as long as they are not flat out telling you no, then I don't see what is illegal about it. I think of it as the same as my supermarket pharmacy telling me that I can't pay for my soda with my prescriptions, that I'll have to go wait in the ridiculously long lines at the front of the store.
Tina,
some of the drive thru restaurant will tell you to get inside the restaurant, but once your inside and you bring your bike inside they will tell that bike are not allowed inside, so we go back to were we started, see every motorised and the cops considered bike as another vehicle, but when your buying food at a drive thru, bike are not. so whats going on here, I'm I going crazy trying to understand the world or I' m really really crazy becuase I am riding my bike

This issue really grates me. After a ride stopped by fast food restaurant to take some food home. Well, feel insecure because they make me keep my bike outside and no where to lock it. So go inside and bunch of punky high school wrestlers there, making insane cracks about cyclists. Say nothing, but arch my back with hands behind head, and give them an obscene gesture. Told them, they saw wrong, it was a mistake.
Irony, their jerseys identified them as wrestlers- football players make lots of inuendo's about their sexuality ! I put on a pair of soccer shorts over my bike clothes. God, American youth can be immature punks.
So my point, like to use outside window, In Calif. we are considered a vehicle and yet have to go inside & sometimes get hassled there. Is there not some consumer agency of state to take this issue to. I think it discrimination.

Originally posted by Tina
I realize how unpopular my opinion is going to be, but...I disagree that it is a discrimination issue. McDonals/Taco Bell/You-name-it is not refusing you service. They are just telling you that they will serve you inside.

Tina, when the main bank/restaurant is closed and the extended-hours drive-through is open, they ARE refusing me service. Personally, because of excessive emissions (a health issue for customers and employees) and fuel wastage from idling engines, I strongly favor a mandate banning all drive-through windows and encouraging their replacement with walk-up windows.

Originally posted by John E
I strongly favor a mandate banning all drive-through windows and encouraging their replacement with walk-up windows.

My local bank recently took out the walk up window and replaced it with an ATM. Talk about regression. I have not tried to bike through the drive-up on Saturday (when the inside is closed), but I certainly would have a good argument if they refused me service.

I can recall a couple of experiences that taught them a lesson. Ever get on a really difficult- hot ride, you are sweating like crazy. no drive thru available . Sweat just dripping off your forehead, and you smell like dirty underwear. that is a great time to stand in a bank line on Saturday. Let the sweat just drip on the counter, they are gonna be that way.
I can recall after a jog running into a convenience store- those who cut in front me, regretted it. Kept moving ahead of me, I kept getting closer. Served them right, they were in a hurry. They don't like looks of cyclists just say cant use the drive up and I would not bother to cover up with my soccer shorts under these circumstances. could appologize for not being able to use the drive up window. That would be good.
Heah, we all have moments when we feel like being jerks.

Hi CZ,

Last Saturday, I attended the Hetchins Heaven vintage bike swap meet, get-together, and 23-mile ride (Fallbrook High School, Olive Hill, Pala Mesa, Winter Haven -- your town is a splendid place to ride!).

First to you "Dutchy", in the US companies reserve the right to refuse service to anyone so it isn't illegal for them to refuse service.

Second to everyone: The reason drive-thrus in the US won't serve potential customers not in automobiles is because of our lawsuit culture. Many people don't hold the guilty accountable, but instead look for the wealthiest entity in the area and attach blame to them. Unfortunately we don't have the same rule as the UK does (I don't know exactly what it is, but it is something along the lines of the loser having to pay the defendant for the frivolous law suit they bring). Since we have a 'nothing to lose' attitude most companies will pay a settlement instead of paying lawyers to win a ridiculous case.

Legality-wise it's not discrimination because you are not permanantly attached to the bike like skin color, a wheelchair, or sexual preference(?), etc.

I think it is silly that they won't serve cyclists and I have placed an order for a guy on a bike once because of it. I just drive my automobile to the drive-thru so I don't have to deal with the nonsense. I choose my battle and this is one I don't choose because in Texas we love our cars and ain't going to give them up. Just send them a letter/e-mail telling them you're going to boycott and do it. You could try organizing a widespread boycott, but be careful because if it takes off you could get into trouble for what is generally called a "secondary boycott". I guess cycling is more of a hobby than a lifestyle to me; it would be nice to be able to ride my bike to work and school, but it is so humid here for so much of the year that it just isn't practical.

John You must have passed me by. I was out riding with my Fallbrook bike group. Saw a bunch of cyclists that AM. But often due. Yes, Fallbrook has great routes. Hope you got up Lilac climb and went over Schearer's grade. Loop around W. Lilac towards Valley Center is a favorite. Atop a crest. Great climb and scenery. glad you got here.

Wow, how cool. I am the only one among my friends who has had this happen to me. I tried to order at a Jack In The Box (sorry, but a jumbo jack w/o mayo, cheese or onions kicks butt) and the wouldn't even open their window ... simply pointed to the sign. I would love to see this changed. Jerks :irritated
As for banks, I have never had a problem .. the tellers actually seem to like it.

Originally posted by Bucko
1) in the US companies reserve the right to refuse service to anyone so it isn't illegal for them to refuse service.

2) The reason drive-thrus in the US won't serve potential customers not in automobiles is because of our lawsuit culture. Many people don't hold the guilty accountable

3) Legality-wise it's not discrimination because you are not permanantly attached to the bike like skin color, a wheelchair,

4) I choose my battle and this is one I don't choose because in Texas we love our cars and ain't going to give them up.

5) You could try organizing a widespread boycott, but be careful because if it takes off you could get into trouble for what is generally called a "secondary boycott".


1) agreed
2) agreed
3) Although I see your point, we diverge here. Requiring one to arrive by car to receive extended-hours service disciminates against those who are financially, physically, or legally unable to operate a motor vehicle. Bicyclists are legitimate road users and legitimate, paying customers, and we need to fight against any policy which attempts to undermine this.
4) No one is asking anyone to give up their cars.
5) What is a "secondary boycott"? A customer's right to boycott has to be as fundamental as a business' right to refuse service to anyone.

Originally posted by John E



3) Although I see your point, we diverge here. Requiring one to arrive by car to receive extended-hours service disciminates against those who are financially, physically, or legally unable to operate a motor vehicle. Bicyclists are legitimate road users and legitimate, paying customers, and we need to fight against any policy which attempts to undermine this.


Discrimination exists on a financial level, but it is still not illegal.

I don't belong to a country club, because I don't have enough money.
I don't own a lightspeed titanium, because I don't have enough money. It's still not discrimination.

Also, our legal entitlement to the road ends at the road. Unless your drive-through occupies a portion of the street, it remains private property.

Don't take this wrong, I am not trying take your words out of context. I would like to throw my fist in the air and shout "power to the cyclist", but unless there is an army of attorneys or lobbyists that think this needs changed, the freemdom of enterprise will determine it's own rules.

I agree that you must take your business elsewhere. The AFL-CIO is very successful in publishing a boycott list for bad labor practices. Such a list could be successful if bicyclists had the solidarity to boycott.

You know Iowa, there are more of us than we realize. If only we were more effectively organized. Anyone belong to the American League of Bicyclists. Get their letter with Lance's name on the front. I need think about their function a little more than I do.
I belong to the Adventure Cycling Assoc. but they do not really lobby for us? Heah, the US is the land of lobbyists. Nothing gets done without them. !

I hate to be a thorn in the side ( :) ) but I've heard almost every
excuse for discriminating against someone because they happen to be different. It's only when YOU are discriminated against that you notice how stupid all the arguments are.

Remember, the word, "discrimination" meant something entirely different before the civil rights movement. At one time, it was perfectly legal to discriminate against African Americans, the handicapped, or women. Just because it's legal to do something does not make it right.

Originally posted by IowaParamedic
Discrimination exists on a financial level, but it is still not illegal.

Also, our legal entitlement to the road ends at the road. Unless your drive-through occupies a portion of the street, it remains private property.

I can plead my case without invoking financial discrimination. Plenty of people can afford a car, but physically or legally cannot or should not drive (at the risk of generating business for you). The Americans with Disabilities Act does apply to private property.

Originally posted by cyclezealot
You know Iowa, there are more of us than we realize. If only we were more effectively organized. Anyone belong to the American League of Bicyclists. Get their letter with Lance's name on the front. I need think about their function a little more than I do.
I belong to the Adventure Cycling Assoc. but they do not really lobby for us? Heah, the US is the land of lobbyists. Nothing gets done without them. !

I'm not sure that Lance would eat at any place that has a drive-thru window. Unless we're talking about a different Lance.

andy

Originally posted by John E


3) Although I see your point, we diverge here. Requiring one to arrive by car to receive extended-hours service disciminates against those who are financially, physically, or legally unable to operate a motor vehicle. Bicyclists are legitimate road users and legitimate, paying customers, and we need to fight against any policy which attempts to undermine this......


BTW, what happens in those places if a pedestrian comes to be served when only the drive-through is open? Do they send that person home?


And finally a question to bicyclists who use (or want to use) drive-through windows. Where are you eating your meal afterwards? I am mostly puzzled because the few times I have been interested in junk food, I prefer to stop and get off the bike so I go inside.

Regards,

Michel Gagnon

Originally posted by mgagnonlv
BTW, what happens in those places if a pedestrian comes to be served when only the drive-through is open? Do they send that person home?

Yes, they most certainly do (been there, done that). Otherwise, leaning the bike against the wall and walking up to the window would give us an easy solution.

It's not just fast food restaurants, it's also financial institutions.

By the way, one CAN buy real food, including baked potatoes, salads, orange juice, etc. at most of these emporia.

And finally a question to bicyclists who use (or want to use) drive-through windows. Where are you eating your meal afterwards? I am mostly puzzled because the few times I have been interested in junk food, I prefer to stop and get off the bike so I go inside.

either at home or at my desk or sometimes in the park...

i guess i'm as puzzled by the question: are you implying that most car drivers who order in the drive-thru eat in the car? i know some do and i've done that on a road trip or in a major hurry, but more often picked it up to eat somewhere else...

Originally posted by nathank

[I asked: Where do you eat the stuff?]

either at home or at my desk or sometimes in the park...

i guess i'm as puzzled by the question: are you implying that most car drivers who order in the drive-thru eat in the car? i know some do and i've done that on a road trip or in a major hurry, but more often picked it up to eat somewhere else...

I haven't made an official survey, but I would say that most stuff bought at drive-through windows is eaten in the car. Sometimes in the parking lot, but most often on the road. Hamburger eating while driving happens often (not only at red lights), and french-fries eating or coffee drinking is fairly common. Hence my query: I don't think I would eat while biking, nor stopped in the parking lot (some places have picnic tables that are washed once a year), and if I were to carry the lunch home, it would be cold and even less appetizing.

BTW, our drive-through food outlets are typically MacDonalds and the like. No fancy or even "standard" restaurant amongst them. As for drive-through banks, the idea was tried some 20-25 years ago but never got off the ground; there are still one or two in the entire Montréal area (in the suburbs). Banking machines have replaced all drive-through banks, and all these are for pedestrians.

Regards,

Michel Gagnon
Montréal (Québec, Canada)

Originally posted by John E

3) Although I see your point, we diverge here. Requiring one to arrive by car to receive extended-hours service disciminates against those who are financially, physically, or legally unable to operate a motor vehicle. Bicyclists are legitimate road users and legitimate, paying customers, and we need to fight against any policy which attempts to undermine this.
4) No one is asking anyone to give up their cars.
5) What is a "secondary boycott"? A customer's right to boycott has to be as fundamental as a business' right to refuse service to anyone.

3) There are a lot of things that people who don't have a lot of money cannot do and it isn't discrimination it's a spill-over effect of capitalism. Not everyone on this BB owns a $3000 bike. As far as being unable to operate a motor vehicle because of legal reasons convicted felons are not allowed to vote. There are subtle differences between rights and priveleges.

4) I know - I'm just saying that some people will just drive their automobiles instead of 'fighting the power'. It is completely ridiculous, but corporations can, unfortunately, afford to piss off a certain percentage of the population.

5) The exact definition of secondary boycott is: "a boycott of an employer with which a union does not have a dispute that is intended to induce the employer to cease doing business with another employer with which the union does have a dispute." Basically, if you don't work for one of the fast food chains the restaurant hasn't mistreated you as an employee so you're not really supposed to cause trouble for them. An example is the NAACP trying to get tourists to not patronize businesses in South Carolina because of the Confederate flag flap. They weren't mistreated as employees of the state so they aren't supposed to try to prevent others from purchasing services from a 'third party.

Unfortunately I'm too much of a fast food junkie to boycott businesses and I do feel that it is pretty futile for the most part so I'll choose other battles.

Originally posted by Bucko


3) There are a lot of things that people who don't have a lot of money cannot do and it isn't discrimination it's a spill-over effect of capitalism. Not everyone on this BB owns a $3000 bike
Discrimination based on income level is perhaps the most basic, universal and ancient form of discrimination. Capitalism did not give birth to this most ancient of ills.

This type of discrimination is based on hypocrisy. You have something I want (money,) so I will treat you well.

The true measure of character is treating the poor man as if he were rich.

It seems a strange policy, since a large portion of their customers are under the driving age.

Kids go up to KFC, Maccas and that on Friday and Saturday nights all the time in Australia - what's the big deal ?

Drive through banks, eh ? What a relic of a bygone era ! Don't they have ATMs and EFTPOS in America ?

As far as being unable to operate a motor vehicle because of legal reasons convicted felons are not allowed to vote

First, just because you have been convicted of a felony does not mean you can not vote. It may mean you can not vote for a specific time frame, but you do not necessarily lose the ability to vote for life.

Next, there are many reasons you may not be able to drive a car, but you can ride a bike. For example eyesight comes to mind, seeing things at 70mph is a little harder than at 10mph, and you do not have to pass an eye exam to legally ride a bike. There are also health reasons such as epilepsy (sp?) etc which may prohibit getting a drivers license but not riding. The mentally challenged may also not be able to get a license. One might not be old enough to legally drive but be old enough to ride a bike. How about someone who lost their license for whatever reason but still has to get to work etc somehow and now rides a bike.

There are a ton of other reasons why one might not be able to get a license to drive but could operate a bicycle. To some people the bike may be the only means of transportation available to them.

One other question, it was stated that companies reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. How about because someone is black? Because of their age? Sex? Religion? Hair color? What exactly can they refuse service for? What if your religion prohibits the use of motor vehicles? (Dont the Amish have this problem?)

Allan

Originally posted by b_rider
Anyone ever have any experience riding their bike up to a bank drive-up/through? I do it all the time, and have yet to have a problem getting service at my bank. There is how ever a sign that says no walk-ups.

http://www.neebu.net/~khuon/albums/visual_tao_of_cycling/PICT0001.jpg

Originally posted by Flea77
One other question, it was stated that companies reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. How about because someone is black? Because of their age? Sex? Religion? Hair color? What exactly can they refuse service for? What if your religion prohibits the use of motor vehicles? (Dont the Amish have this problem?)

Allan

That's silly. The drive-thru is meant for cars. Should people be allowed to walk through the drive-thru? Should skateboarders be allowed to roll through? I for one think they might as well allow bikes, but in reality how will you carry food with you as you ride? Most people who use the drive-thru with their car intended to eat in the car.

Most people who use the drive-thru with their car intended to eat in the car.

I can not count the number of times I have been through a drive thru, however probably less than 1% of those times resulted in me eating in the car. Most people I know use the drive-thru to get food quickly and head home to eat it.

My point remains though. A bicycle is a vehicle according to the law and give all the same rights and responsibilities as a car. Why are businesses allowed to curb those rights on their property? And if you say the whole bit about the businesses doing whatever they want, we go back to "can they discriminate based on skin color or religion?"

Allan

Originally posted by Flea77
Most people I know use the drive-thru to get food quickly and head home to eat it.

I go through the drive-thru on the way home so I'm not dripping mud all over the middle of the restaurant after a six hour mountain bike ride and not because I intend to eat the food in the automobile.