Legal Battle Over Vegan Milk Surcharge
A recent class action lawsuit against Dunkin’ Donuts challenges the legality of extra charges for vegan milk. The case, filed in California, alleges violations of anti-discrimination laws, impacting consumers with lactose intolerance and milk allergies.
Discrimination Allegations
The lawsuit argues that Dunkin’ discriminates against those with recognized disabilities by imposing surcharges ranging from 50¢ to $2.15 for non-dairy milk. This, the plaintiffs claim, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and state-level laws.
Financial Impact on Consumers
Surcharges for plant-based milk can make up a substantial portion of Dunkin’s $3.25 drink prices. While the chain freely substitutes dairy options without additional cost, the lawsuit alleges a financial gain of over $250 million from discriminatory surcharges.
Lactose Intolerance Statistics
Lactose intolerance affects 30 to 50 million Americans, with up to 48% experiencing some form of intolerance. Plaintiffs argue that their impaired ability to engage in major life activities due to lactose intolerance justifies choosing non-dairy options. Dunkin’s surcharges worsen the financial burden on these customers.
Ethical Concerns
Amanda Howell from the Animal Legal Defense Fund emphasizes the ethical implications of charging extra for non-dairy options. She believes such practices hinder sustainable and ethical consumer choices, reinforcing the status quo.
Legal Precedents
Howell draws parallels with past cases where the Department of Justice mandated non-allergenic options, asserting that laws against surcharges for disabilities are established. The lawsuit could prompt businesses to reassess their practices and potentially lead lawmakers to clarify regulations.
Impact on Consumer Choices
PETA supports the ADA-based claim, highlighting the disproportionate impact of surcharges on non-white consumers. Charging extra for vegan milks, the organization argues, penalizes those who choose dairy-free options and contributes to environmental degradation.
Starbucks Comparison
The Dunkin’ lawsuit adds to the ongoing discourse on Starbucks’ vegan milk surcharge. In the UK, Starbucks dropped these surcharges in 2022 after public pressure. PETA suggests the Dunkin’ case could influence Starbucks, which currently operates over 16,000 locations in the US.
Call for Change
PETA and Howell argue that upcharging for vegan products is unreasonable, promoting cruelty, environmental degradation, and ill health. They stress the need for affordable and accessible dairy-free options for everyone.
Conclusion
The Dunkin’ lawsuit signifies a crucial step in challenging discriminatory surcharges. If successful, it could set a precedent for other companies, encouraging ethical and sustainable choices while making them financially accessible to all consumers. The legal landscape in the food industry, particularly regarding the rights of individuals with disabilities, is evolving, and this case might act as a catalyst for positive change.
