OK, I will take the time to explain how you got duped by the bad journalism of the article.
“The representative confirmed to him that the Israeli license was an acceptable form of ID.”
The journalist let stand this false claim without doing the 15 seconds of research that would have proven the statement only partially true.
Avis accepts an Israeli drivers license as valid documentation.
But it alone is not sufficient to secure a rental.
As per company policy, all foreigners are required to provide a passport or international drivers license.
The customer did not provide one to the customer representative at the office.
He only offered to give one later after complaining on the phone to national.
In other words he threw a fit and tried to bully the customer agent at the office into violating company policy and her training, and accepting the israeli drivers license alone.
This is confirmed by the wife’s statement in the article —
“There was no way they would rent a car with that license. There was no way to reason with them.”
Yes how very unreasonable for the agent to follow her training and enforce her companies policy.
This is a hoax story and the claims of discrimination are totally fraudulent
Sorry, but I'll take the word of a Fordham law graduate and SVP of a major pharmaceutical company over that of the bitch in question, especially seeing that she is suing her last employer (Bloomingdale's) over equal pay.
That was a well written explanation. Thank you.
I will now defer deciding if Avis was in the right or the wrong until more facts come out.
It’s not necessarily a hoax story.
The Israeli claims he provided what he was asked to provide in the past. It’s entirely possible that the Avis locations he rented from before never asked for a passport or international license. Either because they weren’t aware of/weren’t following the policy or because the policy changed.
So the guy shows up and gets asked for additional documentation that he wasn’t asked for before. He assumes it’s because he’s Israeli, and pitches a fit. Which given the whole BDS thing, which hes most certainly aware of as a pharm exec, is understandable. The location management sticks to policy, and their leadership backs them up.
IOW both sides probably have a point here.