Mcdonalds_Hot_Coffee

Hot Coffee at McDonald’s McDonald’s serves coffee at scalding temperatures around 185 degrees Fahrenheit, significantly hotter than that of home-brewed coffee. McDonald’s has received over 700 hundred complaints from customers about burns from its coffee. In response to the complaints, McDonald’s put a warning label on its cups and designed a tighter-fitting lid for them. If McDonald’s continues to serve their coffee and such extreme temperatures, someone is going to be burned and get hurt to point that they will press charges against McDonald’s. McDonald’s must take action in order avoid a possible law suit. There are many people that could be affected by McDonald’s actions. On a personal level, the person that orders hot coffee & their family & friends, would be affected. On the other hand CEO’s, store managers, stock holders, & employees could be affected on a corporate level. Certain classes of people that consistently buy coffee from McDonald’s would be affected on a societal level. In order to solve the problem McDonald’s should either: 1) decrease the temperature of their coffee and tell customers they must take precautions to better protect their customers, 2) keep serving their coffee at the same temperature but give the customer greater warning of just how hot the coffee is both verbally and labeling on coffee cups, 3) keep serving the coffee at the same temperature but add a another hole on the opposite side of the drinking hole to be able to add sugar, creamer, etc. Alternative two suggests that McDonald’s should acknowledge that their coffee is indeed hotter than they average consumer would expect. One of Immanuel Kant’s most important philosophies is telling the truth. If McDonald’s shows that they are giving full disclosure to the excess temperature of their coffee both verbally and on the packaging, they would be telling the full truth to the customer. In order for McDonald’s to do their duty they would have to tell the truth even if this meant a few extra seconds to the customer at the drive-thru or inside. Kant also introduced categorical imperative. McDonald’s must do what is right no matter what. Part of categorical imperative is the fact that McDonald’s do as they wish others would do to them, also known as the golden rule. McDonald’s should expect to be warned if there is possible danger in products they order from other companies. They should reciprocate that same treatment towards their customers. The second part of categorical imperative also consists of the duty to treat their customers as means and not ends. They should look out for customers rather than focusing on their customers as merely money. Without disclosure of the temperature of their coffee, McDonald’s shows carelessness and minimal respect for their customers. Rather, they show by serving their coffee that all they want is their money and to increase coffee sells. From a libertarian point of view, McDonald’s can do as they please. Robert Nozick’s Theory of Justice suggests although they can try to help to solve the issue by adding a hole to the opposite side of the straw hole, they can serve the coffee at whatever temperature they want. If customers are buying their coffee, why change it' Nozick introduces negative and natural rights. McDonald’s negative rights say that they can act without outside influences. They should be able to serve their coffee and change cup design without the interference of customers suing them for their design. Nozick also argues that McDonald’s was entitled to their design because they rightfully made the money in order to make and sell their coffee. McDonald’s didn’t steal money from anyway in order to make and serve their coffee therefore they have entitlement to the design and sales of their coffee. Alternative one brings up a few constraints. Coffee is meant to be brewed at a high temperature to extract all the flavor. It is also supposed to be served at a high temperature to create the aroma of good coffee. If McDonald’s decreases the temperature of their coffee, they might not create the good coffee aroma to their customers and sales would decrease. Alternative two is the most expensive alternative. By telling customers verbally of the temperature of their coffee, it would slow down lines and drive-thrus. The longer it takes for customers to get what they want they the less they will go to McDonald’s. McDonald’s also risks the fact that employees might forget to tell customers the temperature of the coffee. This alternative also introduces a cup design and change cost. This is a very large change that must happen on a corporate level and could cost millions of dollars to implement new cups and warnings. Alternative three also is also expensive because of the new design and change of cups across the world. I am most persuaded by Kant that McDonald’s should inform their customers of what they are serving. Personally, I like to know what I am getting for my money. McDonald’s should warn customers of what they serve. I don’t want to be burned by a 49 cent cup of coffee that could lead to serious burns and drastic life changes. It seems simple just to say, “the coffee is really hot and it could burn you.” That phrase would wake me up better in the morning than the coffee itself.