Sounds to me then the reform bill didn't do anything. Can't hail a bill if it's filled with loopholes

I agree, but with 80 to 90% of politicians being attorneys it's difficult to get it done.

Sounds like a good idea to me.

Yes another useless law. Will be enforced like the law outlawing males from using a female bathroom and vice versa even on a golf course.

Photo op.?

Are the bathrooms on the golf courses multi-user like those at the squares where there might be two people in one at the same time? Or are just worried about catching cooties?

Ha! This comment could be added to 90% of the posts on this forum! :evil6:

NO! Gasp! You can't be serious. 🙈🙉🙊

Food Act
 

With all the issues in Florida today, this is what they work on........simple minded people...........glad his next job will be at Disney as Goofy

How will this affect Florida residents making an order through a food delivery app?
For starters, Floridians will no longer see different prices listed on delivery apps from the restaurant's menu. They will not be allowed to inflate, decrease, or alter a food service establishment’s pricing unless it is already agreed upon.

Additionally, customers will have more communication with establishments during the preparation of orders, during delivery and for up to two hours after a courier picks up the order. The law also states delivery firms must provide consumers with a way to express order concerns directly with the restaurants."


Your browser is not supported | tallahassee.com[/QUOTE]

That statement is an oxymoron. Floridians *WILL* see different prices if it has been agreed upon with the restaurant. The delivery platform can no longer unilaterally increase food prices in order to hide fees BUT they can charge those fees to the restaurant which might agree to increase food prices to cover them.

That is not what the bill says.
Today, customers can have as much communication with the restaurant as they want; there is nothing preventing me from picking up the phone and calling. What the bill does is provide the customer's contact information to the restaurant so that the restaurant can initiate a contact. It isn't that I need to order anonymously but I just don't see the value to me to have the restaurant calling me while I am eating.

Second, the law does not state that delivery firms must provide a way to express order concerns directly with the restaurants. I can already do that, I pick up a phone and express my concerns. What the law states in 4(d) is that the delivery platform must provide a mechanism for the consumer to express order concerns directly to the platform. I don't quite understand what this means, I thought I could already comment on the Uber Eats or DoorDash service, but it is between the consumer and the service not the consumer and the restaurant.


Text of the bill itself

[QUOTE=Bill14564;2319479]That statement is an oxymoron. Floridians *WILL* see different prices if it has been agreed upon with the restaurant. The delivery platform can no longer unilaterally increase food prices in order to hide fees BUT they can charge those fees to the restaurant which might agree to increase food prices to cover them.



That is not what the bill says.
Today, customers can have as much communication with the restaurant as they want; there is nothing preventing me from picking up the phone and calling. What the bill does is provide the customer's contact information to the restaurant so that the restaurant can initiate a contact. It isn't that I need to order anonymously but I just don't see the value to me to have the restaurant calling me while I am eating.

Second, the law does not state that delivery firms must provide a way to express order concerns directly with the restaurants. I can already do that, I pick up a phone and express my concerns. What the law states in 4(d) is that the delivery platform must provide a mechanism for the consumer to express order concerns directly to the platform. I don't quite understand what this means, I thought I could already comment on the Uber Eats or DoorDash service, but it is between the consumer and the service not the consumer and the restaurant.

Translation....many quality establishments that have always done it right will eventually go back to take out/pick up only....by the customer. Too much bureaucratic BS.

Just eat it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2mU6USTBRE

Maybe it not big problem around here. Funny how law works isn’t it. :sad:

I don't believe I have ever used a delivery service. I don't like the business model of charging the restaurant, charging me, and then expecting me to pay (tip) the driver. This just seems like a lot of money for coming up with the idea of having an app.

I know profit margins are tight in the restaurant business so I would rather spend money on the restaurant rather than the app developer. I know of one restaurant here than can take online orders through a delivery service. I suspect they get charged a fee for every order that comes in that way, even if I drive to the restaurant and pick it up myself. I now phone in my order to avoid costing the restaurant that fee.

Eat-in or carryout/pickup for me.

If you’re a consumer who doesn’t use the delivery service you don’t give a hoot about the Bill. If you do use the service like thousands of Floridians do, the Bill is meaningful. So lose the “Shrugs”. It matters to many users.

Each bathroom is a "one-holer"... Meaning single user...

So, I'm going with the "Cooties" reason...

We used to have the ‘p*ss trough’ communal concept at Fenway Park. Nobody got hurt as far as I know. Sorry, I digress....

I remember them at the old RFK Stadium in DC, when I was a kid...

It was hell if you had a "shy bladder"...

I'm sure there was some "emotional damage" done... :loco: