Does this mean I can sue Woolworths?
Posted on 09/09/2009 10:39:43 AM PDT by Fenhalls555
Abercrombie and Fitch has been fined $115,264 for discrimination, four years after employees at the Mall of America store refused to allow a family member to accompany an autistic girl into a fitting room.
Judge Kathleen Sheehy, an administrative law judge, found that the retailer had discriminated against the 14-year-old girl, in violation of state statutes. Sheehy ordered the fine this month, after the retailer repeatedly refused to respond to the daughter's mother's request for an apology and denied engaging in discriminatory practices.
The retailer has appealed, charging that the fine is excessive.
The judge found that the girl, whose name has not been identified, suffered mental anguish as a result of the incident.
A psychologist who interviewed the autistic girl said she reported feeling "bad," "scared," and "nervous." The girl told the psychologist, "It's all my fault. I hate autism." She added, "I am a misfit at Abercrombie."
(Excerpt) Read more at minnesota.publicradio.org ...
I would not shop at A&F because of their advertising. I stopped shopping at the Gap when they would not let me go into the dressing room with my daughter when she was young.
what a bunch of Pissa’s. Abercrombie and Fitch is that retailer that uses practically soft porn ads on their bags to market clothing right?
They are a morally degenerate company with advertising so reprehensible that it's surprising they wouldn't allow more than one person in a dressing room.
Sounds like a loss prevention issue. Shop lifting is a big problem.
Store policy is store policy.
Suck it up and move on.
Well, GAP stands for Gay And Proud so I dont shop there. And neither have I ever worn A&F clothes in my life.
Well, now she’s a rich ‘misfit at Abercrombie’s’. That sounds like a sequel to ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’.
At first, I thought it was too bad A&F wasn’t hit with a fine so high it would force them out of business but after getting more facts of the case, it seems A&F is the victim here. They allowed the parents the opportunity to take home all the clothes they wanted just to try on - they trusted the disabled girl and her sister and mother quite a lot actually. I’m disappointed that the mother of the disable girl is just looking for a crusade to go on.
A&F probably has that rule in place to prevent patrons from engaging in sex on A&F premises.
That seems excessive, how does not allowing multiple people go into a single dressing room equate to $115,264? With multiple people in a dressing room designed for one, A&F opens themselves up to liability issues, shoplifting, sexual abuse and every other lawsuit you can think of. Why $115,264? Why not $78, or $298,432?
Rules are rules, if you don't like the store's policy regarding dressing rooms, shop elsewhere. They were not denied the ability to buy clothes. If you can't try the clothes on in the store, you could buy them, take them home and if they don't fit, return them. This seems frivilous and targetted at A&F because they are large. Seems like someone fishing for a paycheck.
Yep. There isn't $10 worth of harm here, let alone over $100k. In her position, I would boycott A&F (oops, they're already on my "DO NOT SHOP THERE" list), encourage others to do the same, and move on with my life. Raising an autistic daughter should leave this mother too busy for litigation silliness, and I'm disappointed to see that she's willing to waste her time grubbing for money in court instead of spending it wisely with her own child.
Store policy...
“The company’s associate handbook states that only one person is allowed in a fitting room at a time, but adds, “Some exceptions to this rule include parents with their kids and a disabled person’s assistant.” The company designed the policy to reduce theft.”
I’d blame the $9.00 an hour employees not the chain itself.
I don’t like A&F’s attitude and snobbishness, but I’d guess there could be questions of legal liability in allowing an adult to accompany a child into a dressing room - stores aren’t equipped to verify that an adult is actually a child’s parent, after all. I’d blame this on trial lawyers forcing clothing stores to protect themselves, rather than on Abercrombie and Finch.
Girls and women go into dressing rooms with each other ALL the time. I go in with my 17 y.o.
I would never let my daughter buy clothes at A&F, because of their ads - but maybe those ads have led to recreational use of the dressing rooms.
Does this mean I can sue Woolworths?
Well, GAP stands for Gay And Proud so I dont shop there.
______
LOL. An internet rumor debunked 13 years ago.
http://www.snopes.com/business/names/gap.asp
Except that under the ADA retailers are not allowed to adopt policies that discriminate against individuals with disabilities.
And while it was the employee who decided that disability meant "visible disability," the employer is liable for the misdeeds of its employees. Based upon what I read, had A&F adopted a more conciliatory attitude, rather than forcing litigation, the suit and the fines might have gone away.
I have all the compassion in the world for an autistic teen who realizes that, in order to fit in, her clothing must come from a certain retail establishment. It's a big deal that she recognizes anything about social "correctness." Convincing a neurotypical teen that she doesn't need to shop at A&F in order to fit in is probably pretty tough. I can't imagine trying to make that point to an autistic individual.
I'd be interested in knowing what "other facts" exist. I don't buy that they were willing to let her take home anything that she wanted in order to try it on. How does that serve loss prevention policies? And who has the authority to grant that privilege but not permit sisters into a dressing room with one another. Sure, they'd let her buy it, take it home, and return it. But that's darn inconvenient. And unworkable for somebody like me who is a cash shopper and can't afford that kind of procedure.
By the way, I was just at Abercrombie (not A&F) and accompanied my children into their respective dressing rooms. I did leave my bags outside though.
Folks with physical handicaps are one thing.
They deserve accomodation and respect.
This high-fashion shopper had no “visible disability” per the report.
Why should she be allowed to do whatever she wishes at the threat of lawsuit?
Store policy is store policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.