Re: McDonald's coffee

[Laurie Rubin <lmr -at- SYL -dot- NJ -dot- NEC -dot- COM>]

I thought this woman put the coffee between her legs to free her hands
while driving, because her son did not have a cup holder in his car (that
she was driving)!  I'd say that she willfully put herself into a sensitive
situation. I don't think she should have been awarded anything just
because she could not take responsibility for her own actions!!!

By the way, this is off the tech writing subject...

Laurie
  > >This is apparently why MacDonald's had to pay so much to that old lady who
> >spilled coffee in her lap--because the coffee did not say "Warning: Coffee
> is
> >hot!" (the cups now say this).

> This is not the reason for the huge jury award against McDonald's. On the
> surface it looks like a ludicrous award that the jury gave. But there must
> have been some reason, and there was. And it was a very good one.

> Here is the actual reason, and it had nothing to do with a lack of a warning
> label. See whether or not this changes your opinion about the jury award.

> We all know coffee is hot, or at least most people expect it to be. But there
> are limits to how hot it should be. Scalding is too hot and a company
> shouldn't be selling coffee exceptionally hot. So, why would McDonald's heat
> up their coffee beyond any drinkable limits and then hand it to someone?
> Simple. Profit. You see if you make coffee by super heating the water you can
> make more coffee from the package of beans. So, you get more coffee for less
> cost = more profit. Well, what if you manage to sell hundreds of millions of
> cups of coffee every year and can get 25% more product without spending any
> more money just by heating it up a lot hotter than most people expect.

> Most people when they order a cup of coffee expect to be able to hold the cup
> without it being so hot that you can't even hold the cup when it is handed to
> you. It was unclear whether or not the person dropped the cup after it was
> handed to them, or whether the person at the window handing out the coffee
> couldn't keep hold of it. The result was that the person received a splash of
> coffee that wasn't just hot, but was hotter than the hottest coffee you've
> ever held in your hand. And the coffee didn't land in her hand. And it was
> that hot on purpose. Considering those facts the jury found that McDonald's
> was in great error when they served that patron. And I agree with the jury
> completely and don't think the jury award was in the least unfair.