Let restaurants 'opt out' of handwashing after toilet to reduce regulatory burden

[Rusha]

It's common sense and decency to wash after using the restroom, anything less is insanely filthy.

Indeed ... and there should be a way to make sure the employees comply with such standards ... as well as severe penalties for any employer who fails to comply.

Sink cams ... in employee restrooms? :idunno:

 

[Rusha]

It is also common sense and important for personal hygiene to wash before using the restroom as well as after. Our hands are typically filthy before entering the restroom, so one would be wise to wash his hands before touching his body.

That ... and stay away from salad bars and buffets ...

Unfortunately it's not possible to regulate stupid customers who do not wash their hands.

 

[Ktoyou]

One of the many ridiculous things about it is that he's saying a restaurant should be able to opt out of required hand washing, you know to cut down on unnecessary regulations, but at the same time, he's saying the restaurant that opts out and doesn't require hand washing would be required to inform their customers. It's insane. He's proposing replacing one reasonable regulation with a different, completely ridiculous regulation, and he's framing it as if it would decrease regulation. It's total nonsense. People are becoming so consumed by this fantasy idea of no rules "freedom" that they're going completely insane.

It is a poor exchange, freedom from the little common sense rules, to sacrifice the real freedoms, to think freely, to be a discriminating thinker.

As you plainly see, to use the word 'discriminating' is a sentence brings censorship. This also alludes to the difference between a civic education and a liberal education. Funny, isn't it?

 

[Bright Raven]

Yuk!

 

[elohiym]

Hand washing by employees is one of those, which is why it was the absolute worst example he could have given.

Those regulations are ineffectual and violated constantly. Consequently, the CDC's Environmental Health Services (EHS) recommends restaurant management and food safety programs should, "Revise food-preparation activities to lower the number of needed handwashings." The study on hand-washing by the CDC is informative to this discussion.

 

[patrick jane]

Indeed ... and there should be a way to make sure the employees comply with such standards ... as well as severe penalties for any employer who fails to comply.

Sink cams ... in employee restrooms? :idunno:

I worked part time at Taco Bell as a 2nd job and they had us wash our hands in the kitchen after coming back from a break or the bathroom. Gloves also and if we touched anything but food with the gloves we had to wash hands and use new gloves. The one I worked at was very strict and all of us were servsafe certified.

 

[Stripe]

The only question is which.

This one quite clearly is completely useless.

 

[elohiym]

That ... and stay away from salad bars and buffets ...

Unfortunately it's not possible to regulate stupid customers who do not wash their hands.

There are other ways to spread disease in a restaurant, as well.

No doubt though, washing hands reduces risk.

:think: But then we touch the filthy doorknob unless we use a paper towel to turn the knob, if one is available. :chuckle:

 

[elohiym]

Sink cams ... in employee restrooms? :idunno:

The government can't monitor hand-washing, but it could require anti-microbial doorknobs and bathroom fixtures. Similar ideas are being implemented in hospitals. Also, the CDC made some recommendations in the study results I posted. Interestingly, they recommended tactically reducing the number of hand-washings required by regulations.

 

[zoo22]

Those regulations are ineffectual and violated constantly. Consequently, the CDC's Environmental Health Services (EHS) recommends restaurant management and food safety programs should, "Revise food-preparation activities to lower the number of needed handwashings." The study on hand-washing by the CDC is informative to this discussion.

Regulations violated constantly? That's weird, why in the world would a company not do what's right? Well, anyway, don't worry, "the market will take care of that." lain:

 

[ok doser]

Regulations violated constantly? That's weird, why in the world would a company not do what's right? Well, anyway, don't worry, "the market will take care of that." lain:

well, yeah

would you frequent a restaurant that had a reputation for making its customers sick?

 

[elohiym]

Regulations violated constantly? That's weird, why in the world would a company not do what's right?

Yes, violated constantly. Have you read the health department regulations of your state? The regulations in my state are being broken constantly. It may the employee not washing his hands twice, or the employee not reporting his infection, or the manager not notifying the state about the infection, or any number of things people should expect will happen constantly.

Well, anyway, don't worry, "the market will take care of that." lain:

One think I miss about NY is being able to get some good falafel. I ordered some falafel at a local Pita Pit restaurant in my small west coast town a few months back but couldn't get any toppings on it when I realized the glass separating the customers from the toppings bar had an opening at the height of adult mouths and noses. Customers were literally spraying their saliva into the toppings while I watched them order. It was disgusting. I never returned to the restaurant.

 

[kmoney]

He is clearly discussing a scenario where the regulation remains but a business is allowed to opt out provided they disclose they are opting out. Furthermore, the discussion was about "certain regulations" unrelated to hand-washing. How did hand-washing enter the discussion?

I would have asked that person how he knows the employee washed his hands? That would have hinted at the ineffectuality of the regulation. The state doesn't even monitor compliance of their hand-washing regulations much more than ensuring sinks and sanitizing agents are present. All restaurants are essentially opting out of the regulations every day, multiple times a day, without the public being aware. "Go see if that employee washes his hands the second time when gets behind the counter," I would have told him.

It's true that there is no easy way to verify compliance with the regulation about washing hands so you might consider it pointless. But what are the alternatives. Tillis' idea about opting out and posting a sign is stupid. Who would actually do that?

Having a regulation about washing hands at least makes employees think about it. They have to make a deliberate decision to ignore the sign, ignore the regulation. It might make some people wash their hands that otherwise wouldn't. How much good does it end up doing? :idunno:

But on the other hand, let's say the government removes that regulation. Most companies will probably keep the policy at least for PR purposes. There is still no way of knowing if anyone follows it. And employees would still have to make a deliberate decision to violate the company policy. Perhaps that would accomplish the same thing the gov't regulation does.

But since we have it, what's the point in removing it?

 

[kmoney]

well, yeah

would you frequent a restaurant that had a reputation for making its customers sick?

No. But if there are easy, common sense things you can do to preemptively strike against making customers sick...

Not saying this particular rule about handwashing absolutely meets that criteria, but the market isn't the final answer to everything.

 

[elohiym]

It's true that there is no easy way to verify compliance with the regulation about washing hands so you might consider it pointless. But what are the alternatives. Tillis' idea about opting out and posting a sign is stupid. Who would actually do that?

I don't consider hand-washing pointless and neither does Tillis. He wasn't making a serious suggestion to do that, just using an intentionally ridiculous illustration to try and make a point. I suggested some things, like antimicrobial doorknobs and fixtures, and also pointed out the CDC study that recommended a tactical reduction in hand-washing to increase hand-washing compliance.

Having a regulation about washing hands at least makes employees think about it. They have to make a deliberate decision to ignore the sign, ignore the regulation. It might make some people wash their hands that otherwise wouldn't. How much good does it end up doing? :idunno:

The sign is for customers, not employees. It makes customers feel like the employees are practice hand-washing, which gives them a false sense of security. The signs should say, "Wash your hands BEFORE and AFTER using the restroom." The regulations should require that, too, don't you think?

But on the other hand, let's say the government removes that regulation. Most companies will probably keep the policy at least for PR purposes. There is still no way of knowing if anyone follows it. And employees would still have to make a deliberate decision to violate the company policy. Perhaps that would accomplish the same thing the gov't regulation does.

But since we have it, what's the point in removing it?

Nobody wants to remove signs or abrogate the regulations. He was making a point about opting out of certain regulations as long as the business gives disclosure. It would help if we knew what the "certain regulations" were that he was discussing when someone trying to make a point asked him about the need to have mandatory hand-washing regulations in restaurants.

 

[kmoney]

I don't consider hand-washing pointless and neither does Tillis. He wasn't making a serious suggestion to do that, just using an intentionally ridiculous illustration to try and make a point. I suggested some things, like antimicrobial doorknobs and fixtures, and also pointed out the CDC study that recommended a tactical reduction in hand-washing to increase hand-washing compliance.

I meant the regulation being pointless, not washing hands.

The sign is for customers, not employees. It makes customers feel like the employees are practice hand-washing, which gives them a false sense of security. The signs should say, "Wash your hands BEFORE and AFTER using the restroom." The regulations should require that, too, don't you think?

I agree the sign is mostly for customers. I have no opinion on washing before also. If the purpose is to ensure sanitary hands for handling food I'm not sure what washing before would do.

Nobody wants to remove signs or abrogate the regulations. He was making a point about opting out of certain regulations as long as the business gives disclosure. It would help if we knew what the "certain regulations" were that he was discussing when someone trying to make a point asked him about the need to have mandatory hand-washing regulations in restaurants.

He gave a speech somewhere and referenced the Starbucks incident. While it's true that someone prompted him about the handwashing at Starbucks, he made the speech at a later date and could have given another example. The fact that he didn't might mean something.

In this example the idea of opting out with disclosure is stupid. Perhaps it would make sense for other regulations. :idunno:

 

[elohiym]

I meant the regulation being pointless, not washing hands.

I believe I spoke to the ineffectuality of the regulation, which I believe is somewhat self-evident by the lack of adequate surveillance, not any alleged pointlessness of the regulation; and my opinion is based on the hand-washing regulations in my state and the study I posted from the CDC.

I agree the sign is mostly for customers. I have no opinion on washing before also. If the purpose is to ensure sanitary hands for handling food I'm not sure what washing before would do.

Why do you believe your hands are sanitary before you touch your parts? The food service worker may have been handling raw meat before he touches himself, the restroom doorknob or other bathroom fixtures.

He gave a speech somewhere and referenced the Starbucks incident. While it's true that someone prompted him about the handwashing at Starbucks, he made the speech at a later date and could have given another example. The fact that he didn't might mean something.

In this example the idea of opting out with disclosure is stupid. Perhaps it would make sense for other regulations. :idunno:

Maybe so. We're all entitled to our opinion. You have mine now.

 

[zoo22]

Not saying this particular rule about handwashing absolutely meets that criteria, but the market isn't the final answer to everything.

If the market was a good final answer, there wouldn't need to be a regulation requiring employees at a restaurant to wash their hands at all.

I think that the "the market will make it right" folks are deluded.

"We don't need no governmenting telling us that restaurant employees have to wash their hands! Give us back our GOD GIVEN FREEDOM to not wash our hands after we use the toilet when we're serving people food. The customer can figure it out for themselves if the servers hands are covered in urine! Give them that FREEDOM. The market will make it right!"

PS: "And take down those stoplights too! Give us back our FREEDOM to go through an intersection when WE choose for ourselves. We don't need to be on some government-regulated timer telling us when we can stop or go! Stop these FREEDOM restricting regulations YOU REGULATION LOVING FREEDOM HATERS!!"

 

[elohiym]

"We don't need no governmenting telling us restaurant employees have to wash their hands! Give us back our GOD GIVEN FREEDOM to not wash our hands after we use the toilet when we're serving people food. The customer can figure it out for themselves if the servers hands are covered in urine! Give them that FREEDOM. The market will make it right!"

Nobody is arguing that, and I'm pretty sure most people don't get urine on their fingers when they use the restroom. :chuckle:

 

[Town Heretic]

Nobody is arguing that, and I'm pretty sure most people don't get urine on their fingers when they use the restroom. :chuckle:

Urine is sterile anyway. The danger is from another waste product and from contacting surfaces where people who aren't as hygenic have placed their own hands.