If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Food snatching cafeteria worker sent back to Lunch Lady Land   (cnn.com) divider line 72
    More: Followup, Lunch Lady Land, Utah, paid leave, cafeteria, KSL  
•       •       •

7108 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Feb 2014 at 9:05 AM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-01 02:45:36 PM
img.fark.net
 
2014-02-01 03:18:27 PM

Bathia_Mapes: BullBearMS: threw it away.

That's the part that bothered the most too.

What purpose did that serve other than to humiliate & embarrass the students?


Food safety. The same thing happens at McDonald's if you take up a hamburger with a pickle on it that was supposed to not have a pickle on it. It doesn't get returned to inventory to be given to somebody else who wanted a pickle. I agree though, that what should have happened is the kid keeps the food and the account goes ever further negative. They are then marked to not be able to even get the food the next time until the account is paid up.

Additionally, as somebody up thread noted, these are not poor kids. If they were, they would have been Free/Reduced kids and the government pays for them. Having worked at one of the major POS and menu planning vendors(pretty much the inventor) in the country AND having dealt directly with hundreds of K-12 districts acrossed the country, I can say from first hand knowledge that most don't allow negative balances on free/reduced kids. The full price kids usually are allowed as the food service directors know they will eventually get that money from those parents at the end of the year. If it is allowed to get that far. At any rate, any district that participates in the free/reduced program has to provide an alternate meal. These morans made the mistake of saying "no lunch for you" when they should have said "here's the lunch you will be getting because your parents haven't paid the bill on what you have already eaten instead of the lunch that YOU wanted." The bottom line is that we want to feed kids and if we just allowed non-poor parents to bilk the system, it jeopardizes that mission because here's a secret. The money that government pays the school to cover the free/reduced kids doesn't cover it. The schools NEED full price kids to keep afloat. It's why you will find that many food service directors are having a hard time with the new rules about the content of the meals. It's making it hard for them to compete for those food dollars from the full kids in the face of the alternatives by making them desirable.
 
2014-02-01 03:39:41 PM

cherryl taggart: BullBearMS: Really, the only part of this that outrages me is that they took the food away from the kids and then threw it away.

If the alternative is throwing food away, then let the kid eat the food and call the parents to let them know they need to send money.

What the hell happened to sending the kid to school with lunch money every day? We didn't need lunch accounts back in the get off my lawn days.

Because then you end up with the lunch lady who was skimming the cash register for years, like we had here in Atlanta.


Many schools have cashless lines as well. When you have to run a few hundred kids through and be able to meet the mandated (I think) 20 minutes of seat time for the kid, the last thing you want is Lil Johnny fumbling with 14 pennies and a few quarters at checkout. A lot of these weird-ass actions by schools is a direct result of rules sent down from Washington. When each rule is looked at in isolation, it would seem to make sense. But just like much of the other garbage that comes from central planners, when they all combine together where the rubber meets the road, we find that the tires get slashed.

Much like the Common Core issue, I think that the farther from the school the rules are made the worse the outcome is. I would tell a parent this. Ask yourself who cares for YOUR kid more, you or the teacher? Most people would say they do. The teacher I'm sure cares a great deal as they interact daily with kid but the parent wins. Now ask yourself this. Who cares for YOUR kid more, the teacher or the vice-principal? Who cares for YOUR kid more, the vice-principal or district superintendent? Who cares for YOUR kid more, the district superintendent or the guy at the top in your state? Who cares more for YOUR kid, the guy at the top of education in your state or the secretary of education in D.C.? Who cares more for YOUR kid the secretary of education or Obama? How many layers away from your kid do you go before you can't honestly say that the person even knows your kid exists? Why would you relinquish control of what happens at the school YOUR kid goes to and give it to somebody who doesn't and cannot care more for YOUR kid than you do?
 
2014-02-01 03:45:14 PM

walktoanarcade: Making children go hungry= coddling and paid leave


Kids had a snack instead of a full meal. What an outrage.

Sure it could have been handled better but let's not blow this out of proportion.
 
2014-02-01 03:58:26 PM

Benjimin_Dover: Much like the Common Core issue, I think that the farther from the school the rules are made the worse the outcome is.


While I'm not a parent and not really 'up' on the specifics of Common Core, I have encountered a great many people locally who went through the school system here and clearly either failed to meet the 'local' standards, or were probably passed through in spite of that. Mostly this has been through 'discussions' on the facebook page of the local fish-wrapper, but bear with me.

One of the most vocal local opponents of CC has absolutely terrible writing skills, to the point where I marked up one of her anti-CC posts with red in paint shop, and it was just hilarious how bad she was at it. I'm just kind of sad I never got to use it.

So to get back on topic, while I guess there are a lot of problems with CC, at least they are trying to put some effective standards in place...
 
2014-02-01 04:01:53 PM

Bathia_Mapes: BullBearMS: threw it away.

That's the part that bothered the most too.

What purpose did that serve other than to humiliate & embarrass the students?


Add me to the list of people who don't understand the thought involved in throwing away the food. Let the kids eat it. It was their mistake it was served when it should not have been.
 
2014-02-01 04:07:06 PM

ladyfortuna: Benjimin_Dover: Much like the Common Core issue, I think that the farther from the school the rules are made the worse the outcome is.

While I'm not a parent and not really 'up' on the specifics of Common Core, I have encountered a great many people locally who went through the school system here and clearly either failed to meet the 'local' standards, or were probably passed through in spite of that. Mostly this has been through 'discussions' on the facebook page of the local fish-wrapper, but bear with me.

One of the most vocal local opponents of CC has absolutely terrible writing skills, to the point where I marked up one of her anti-CC posts with red in paint shop, and it was just hilarious how bad she was at it. I'm just kind of sad I never got to use it.

So to get back on topic, while I guess there are a lot of problems with CC, at least they are trying to put some effective standards in place...


Yeah, I agree that if a school is bad then it needs to be taken over if the parents are not doing their job of making it do a good job. Of course many problems at many schools are precisely because the parents can't do anything about it by rules that have been forced down from above. Many anti CC people are against it because they think it is the work of the devil or some such. I'm more against it because one size fits all almost never in any context ever works. Ever. Our kids deserve better.
 
2014-02-01 04:39:04 PM

palelizard: Her daughter, Sophia Isom, recounted how she was met by a district nutrition manager who confiscated her school lunch and threw it away, the station reported.

Wait.  So the school threw out the food anyway, which means they lost/spent the money on the food anyway? So the net effect was the kid didn't eat their meal (I see they got fruit and milk, so not completely hungry), and the school can't charge the parents for the meal?  Farking brilliant.

All this served to do was embarrass some kids and cost the school money.  They should be fired.


This is why, as I've become older, I no longer trust anyone who promotes an action based on the reasoning "It's the principle of the thing".  That usually is a sign that their idea is bullshiat and they have no legitimate reason for what they are doing.

In this case, taking food directly from these kids like that only makes sense if the sole purpose was to prove to the parents they will pay or the kids won't get food.  That principle is so important to them that they'd rather throw food in the trash than let kids eat it.  They're be willing to lose money to prove how serious they are about not losing money.
 
2014-02-01 06:02:21 PM

DrewCurtisJr: walktoanarcade: Making children go hungry= coddling and paid leave

Kids had a snack instead of a full meal. What an outrage.

Sure it could have been handled better but let's not blow this out of proportion.


The difference between a snack and a full meal can mean health problems and can possibly cause a child to act out.    In fact, that's common.
 
2014-02-01 06:37:16 PM

Interceptor1: Maybe they should spend a bit more time figuring out why the kids account was empty? Parents need to be responsible too you know.


What is this "account" you speak of? I recall we could buy a ticket daily or a week at a time.
 
2014-02-01 07:03:25 PM

walktoanarcade: The difference between a snack and a full meal can mean health problems and can possibly cause a child to act out.    In fact, that's common.


No it won't. Skipping lunch one day will not lead to health problems unless the child has some kind of medical condition.
 
2014-02-01 07:16:16 PM

DrewCurtisJr: walktoanarcade: The difference between a snack and a full meal can mean health problems and can possibly cause a child to act out.    In fact, that's common.

No it won't. Skipping lunch one day will not lead to health problems unless the child has some kind of medical condition.

Heh, many do, you honestly want to take that risk? Haven't we read enough stories where some fool breaks up a child's dietary routine with dire consequences?

And kids do act out all the time because they haven't been fed enough or have been only fed garbage.

A child that's eaten just an apple with a small carton of milk can't compete with their better fed peers.
 
2014-02-01 07:20:07 PM

walktoanarcade: DrewCurtisJr: walktoanarcade: The difference between a snack and a full meal can mean health problems and can possibly cause a child to act out.    In fact, that's common.

No it won't. Skipping lunch one day will not lead to health problems unless the child has some kind of medical condition.
Heh, many do, you honestly want to take that risk? Haven't we read enough stories where some fool breaks up a child's dietary routine with dire consequences?

And kids do act out all the time because they haven't been fed enough or have been only fed garbage.

A child that's eaten just an apple with a small carton of milk can't compete with their better fed peers.


Competing for what?  Fattest kid in class?
 
2014-02-01 07:25:07 PM

Ironman273: It seems to me that they're being punished(?) for getting caught, not for taking the food away.


Isn't this how it always is when "fiscal conservatism" is punished.
 
2014-02-01 07:27:59 PM

Benjimin_Dover: walktoanarcade: DrewCurtisJr: walktoanarcade: The difference between a snack and a full meal can mean health problems and can possibly cause a child to act out.    In fact, that's common.

No it won't. Skipping lunch one day will not lead to health problems unless the child has some kind of medical condition.
Heh, many do, you honestly want to take that risk? Haven't we read enough stories where some fool breaks up a child's dietary routine with dire consequences?

And kids do act out all the time because they haven't been fed enough or have been only fed garbage.

A child that's eaten just an apple with a small carton of milk can't compete with their better fed peers.

Competing for what?  Fattest kid in class?


They need more than an either or situation in a dietary setting to stay awake through tedious and boring classes and for long term concentration.

Sure, they kid who just drank a soda and ate a Snickers(mmmmm) may have some cheap energy, but it'll burn off quickly leaving them feeling drained, versus the child who ate a well balanced meal.

Tortoise and the hare.
 
2014-02-01 07:33:54 PM

walktoanarcade: Heh, many do, you honestly want to take that risk? Haven't we read enough stories where some fool breaks up a child's dietary routine with dire consequences?


Actually I can't remember reading any stories like that. If a kid really has a condition that serious you shouldn't be trusting the school cafeteria anyway. The kid usually has a specially prepared meal.

walktoanarcade: And kids do act out all the time because they haven't been fed enough or have been only fed garbage.

A child that's eaten just an apple with a small carton of milk can't compete with their better fed peers.


You really think we would have survived as a species if skipping a meal every once in a while was so traumatic on the body?
 
2014-02-01 07:40:32 PM
DrewCurtisJr:

You really think we would have survived as a species if skipping a meal every once in a while was so traumatic on the body?

It is pretty harsh on the body, yes. Sometimes a lot harsher on children with sharper immune systems that can overreact.   Things add up and take their toll, and all we can do is strive for an all-around approach to health, look both ways before crossing, no don't trust "Uncle Morty" and his van of wonderment, and do try to get all your vitamins and essential minerals to keep the doctor office visits at bay.
 
2014-02-01 08:46:44 PM

walktoanarcade: It is pretty harsh on the body, yes. Sometimes a lot harsher on children with sharper immune systems that can overreact.


Well we are just going to have to disagree. But I guarantee you that one instance of having a lunch of "only" 180 calories vs. 500+ calories never caused any health issues in otherwise healthy children. Probably did them some good.
 
2014-02-01 09:50:10 PM

baconbeard: "Paid leave". How is that a consequence?


Hey, it's worked for the police so far!!!!
 
2014-02-01 11:14:11 PM

DrewCurtisJr: walktoanarcade: It is pretty harsh on the body, yes. Sometimes a lot harsher on children with sharper immune systems that can overreact.

Well we are just going to have to disagree. But I guarantee you that one instance of having a lunch of "only" 180 calories vs. 500+ calories never caused any health issues in otherwise healthy children. Probably did them some good.


I barely knew any kids who actually ate during school hours at all.  Most of the geeky types went to the library instead, to avoid certain other groups of students.
 
2014-02-01 11:22:05 PM

KidneyStone: ChubbyTiger: Interceptor1: Maybe they should spend a bit more time figuring out why the kids account was empty? Parents need to be responsible too you know.

For some, it was probably just bad luck. If the school failed to alert the parents, many probably didn't notice.

Horseshiat. The systems send multiple alerts to parents. It's almost impossible not to know the account is low.

Oh the outrage over this.


Horseshiat right back at ya. My kid's school uses myschoolbucks.com to track accounts. I logged on the other day to see her balance and it had been in the negative for several weeks for the price of about four lunches. Never got a single notice. But they aren't assholes at her school, so that might be why my kid could still eat lunch with a negative balance.
 
2014-02-02 09:57:13 AM

Mr. Cat Poop: KidneyStone: ChubbyTiger: Interceptor1: Maybe they should spend a bit more time figuring out why the kids account was empty? Parents need to be responsible too you know.

For some, it was probably just bad luck. If the school failed to alert the parents, many probably didn't notice.

Horseshiat. The systems send multiple alerts to parents. It's almost impossible not to know the account is low.

Oh the outrage over this.

Horseshiat right back at ya. My kid's school uses myschoolbucks.com to track accounts. I logged on the other day to see her balance and it had been in the negative for several weeks for the price of about four lunches. Never got a single notice. But they aren't assholes at her school, so that might be why my kid could still eat lunch with a negative balance.


The food service director sets when a parent/guardian gets notified. In addition, the parent can set their own rules of when they get notified. And how about this one. Why are you allowing the balance to go negative at all? Why are you waiting for a notification that it goes negative before you check it? Why have you not set it up to auto replenish where you set the trigger for when it replenishes and to how much? I would think that if a parent is lazy, that he/she would opt for the lazy auto option. I know I do on my easypass.
 
Displayed 22 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report