Barefoot baby ousted from Burger King

[ShopGurlaholic]

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32320373/ns/us_news-life/

Fast-food chain admits it went too far in ousting Missouri family
The Associated Press
updated 5:34 p.m. ET, Thurs., Aug 6, 2009

SUNSET HILLS, Mo. - Like most restaurants, the Burger King in this St. Louis suburb has a no shoes, no shirt, no service policy.
And baby, do they enforce it.
Too much so, the company admitted, after apologizing for restaurant workers who asked a mother to leave because her 6-month-old wasn't wearing shoes.
Jennifer Frederich, her mother and Frederich's infant daughter, Kaylin, stopped at the Burger King in Sunset Hills on Sunday. The baby was shoeless — Frederich figured tiny baby feet were immune from the rule.
But workers told the family to leave because the shoeless baby was violating a health code. In fact, shoelessness is not a health code violation in St. Louis County.
Frederich told KTVI-TV that she and her mother ate hurriedly and left before they could be kicked out. Frederich did not have a listed phone number, and The Associated Press could not reach her for comment.
Burger King released a statement Thursday indicating workers had taken the no shoes, no service policy too far.
"Our franchisee, which independently owns and operates this restaurant, apologizes for this guest's experience," the statement read. "The franchisee is retraining his restaurant team on the proper use of the 'no shoes' policy."

The franchise owner also contacted Frederich to apologize in person.
Frederich told the TV station the flap was a bit overblown, and she hoped no one would be fired. But she appreciated Burger King's apology.
Burger King, based in Miami, is the nation's second-largest hamburger chain, with 11,800 restaurants worldwide.

[HauteMama]

I'm glad that everyone realizes this was an error and no one is really outraged about it. The employee was wrong, and as long as the manager admits that and will retrain the employees and apologized to the customer, then this shouldn't be made into a big deal.

[Bella]

^ I agree. It's kind of funny actually. Can you imagine being told that..

[Cindi]

It is kinda gross to see bare feet while you are eating, even tiny ones. But I do think they took it too far. I mean a 6 month old??

[kate83675]

Well, really! They have the cutest little shoes for babies now!!! What was that mother thinking??

[SOLIDGOLD2]

Originally Posted by Cindi

It is kinda gross to see bare feet while you are eating, even tiny ones. But I do think they took it too far. I mean a 6 month old??

how is it gross?
it's baby feet, nothing gross about it...maybe if it had poop on it then it would be gross lol

[Bella]

I've seen some pretty dirty toddler feet. It's amazing some parents let their little ones walk around shoeless. This was a baby, so I assume he/she was being carried or in a seat/stroller. Regardless, it's Burger King! That's the part that gets me.

[Glamfoxx]

I can't believe a baby got bounced from BK for being barefoot.

[IFFAH]

^Me too. She's only a baby.

[Danica]

My daughter goes everywhere barefoot. If they cannot walk how can their feet be dirty, and baby feet are the cutest in the world.

[Jahpson]

ok, the employees weren't very smart.

[domlee]

Originally Posted by Danica

My daughter goes everywhere barefoot. If they cannot walk how can their feet be dirty, and baby feet are the cutest in the world.

Well, what happens is the parents will put their baby up on the table and the baby would be walking on the same surfaces where people eat their food from. I've seen it, and I can understand the need for the basic rule. *Worse, I've seen patrons change their baby's diaper on the table. Ewwww...

It is a bit extreme to ask for a baby to have shoes. But I understand the need for the basic rule as a form of legality.

[~Fabulousity~]

6 month olds can't walk so why would they be required to wear shoes, this is just ridiculous.

[bagaholic85]

Originally Posted by domlee

Well, what happens is the parents will put their baby up on the table and the baby would be walking on the same surfaces where people eat their food from. I've seen it, and I can understand the need for the basic rule. *Worse, I've seen patrons change their baby's diaper on the table. Ewwww... It is a bit extreme to ask for a baby to have shoes. But I understand the need for the basic rule as a form of legality.

honestly, i would bet most babies' feet have LESS germs on them than most peoples' hands. think about how many germ infested areas your fingers touch before you sit down to eat at the table, including money, door knobs, etc. a babies foot touches what, their car seat? id rather have a baby's foot "walking" (if you can even call it that) on a table than most peoples fingers. plus, the employees are supposed to wipe down the tables between patrons anyway. a diaper change is a different story though...

[domlee]

I agree w/ you, but I will say that tables frequently don't get wiped down between tables. And that is assuming they are using a proper cleaning agent, not a diluted mix of cleaning solvents.