Germaphobe victorious in human rights ruling
In a case that raises questions about how far businesses should be obligated to accommodate customers’ needs, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has awarded $12,000 to a man with obsessive-compulsive disorder because his neighbourhood restaurant stopped fulfilling his special requests, including that his water be served without a lemon or straw.
The decision released this week found the man “suffered injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect” after the restaurant refused to make “very simple accommodations” and after the manager made “hurtful” comments to him.
One hospitality industry expert said the outcome did not surprise him and should serve as a warning to managers to be more attuned to their guests’ wishes.
“The door is open with respect to the risk of discriminating against people for any reason,” said Don Longchamps, a professor of hotel and restaurant management at Algonquin College in Ottawa.
“Responsibility (to accommodate) will never be lessened. It will only be increased with time.”
The complainant, identified only by his initials P.G., testified he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and germaphobia.
He said he and his spouse were weekly customers at the Baton Rouge steak house in Oakville, Ont., and that until September 2013, the staff had no problem accommodating his special requests.
Staff would try to seat him in the same booth each time, away from other patrons; clean the vinyl seats before he sat down; bring his cutlery on a plate; serve his water without a lemon or straw; serve bread in a basket with a napkin; and serve his baked potato in the way he liked.
In the fall of 2013, however, the restaurant changed ownership and the couple was not getting the same level of service it had come to expect. Water was being served with a lemon slice and straw, for instance.
Things came to a head during a visit in December 2013. The complainant testified he and his spouse were ignored for 45 minutes and the food took forever to come. He said the manager eventually came out and told him he was “high maintenance” and the staff no longer wanted to serve him.
He claimed the manager uttered words to the effect: “Now I know why the police shoot crazy people like you.”
The manager then allegedly ordered him out of the restaurant — didn’t even care if the bill was paid — and told him not to return.
Tribunal adjudicator Brian Cook said he found the complainant to be credible and said the case was “somewhat analogous” to previous cases in which restaurants had denied access to customers who had a service animal or guide dog.
“The situation in this case is somewhat more complex … because here the applicant was initially accommodated. He was able to disclose his disability-related needs and developed a trust that he would be treated with respect. That trust was then undermined.”
Daniel Grainger, a spokesman for Imvescor Restaurant Group Inc., which oversees the Baton Rouge chain, said Thursday the franchise owner in question went into bankruptcy and is no longer there. But he said it’s the company’s expectation customers will be treated with respect and diversity will be embraced. If, for some reason, someone’s special needs cannot be met, the reasons should be explained in a polite manner.
The case highlights the need for front-line staff to be trained in “soft skills,” such as empathy, said Brian Heasman, a hospitality and tourism management professor at Ryerson University.
“You don’t know the challenges facing guests,” he said.
It’s hard not to sympathize with the complainant since he had come to expect a certain level of accommodation, said Joe Mariani, another Algonquin College professor, noting, however, that restaurants should be allowed some discretion if they feel an undue burden is being placed on them. Had the complainant not been accommodated from the outset, Mariani said, “it’s not like (he was) going to starve and (he couldn’t) go anywhere else.”