This real life humor site has a situation that I’d like to ask about:
Anyone ever heard of a chain with that policy? Or, as I suspect given subsequent events, was the worker lying so they wouldn’t have to serve this group?
I HAVE heard that. A couple times, most recently from a co-worker who was told that at Starbucks.
I think it’s an insurance thing…having pedestrians routined in the drive through is dangerous.
No, not in A car, in THE car. As in “if you aren’t in the car that is at the drive-thru window, we won’t take/make your order.”
Assuming the story is true, I’d say the cashier just didn’t want to serve these people at all.
Not only have I heard it but I had to explain it to people when I worked the drive through. Among other things, it’s a lot easier for someone not in a car to reach in through the drive thru window.
Yes. The OP left off the end of the story, where once they did get everyone in the car, the drive-thru was suddenly closed.
The problem with the storyteller* in this case is that they should have just given the entire order without bothering to indicate any details. “I want 8 Whoppers**, etc.”
*presuming the story is true
** This is not an attempt to suggest that it was a Burger King, FTR.
Whoah, apparently no “Outstanding Reading Comprehension Prize” for me. Ok, well that’s a stupid policy.
That’s such a good possibility, I mentioned it in the last sentence of my OP! 
Oh, well, I’ve never heard that and it seems ridiculously easy to circumvent. “They decided they weren’t hungry but I want one with everything.”
How would they know who the person in the car was ordering for? OK, you’re alone in the car and you say “Give me three Belly Buster burgers, four Fatty Fish Sandwiches, seven orders of high-cholesterol fries (the ones they cook in lard) and seven super-diabetic sodas.” What are they going to do, ask you who you are buying for? You could just say, “Hey, I’m unusually hungry today,” or claim that you’re going to freeze the uneaten stuff for later. Would they require an affidavit that all the food is for you?
If there were such a policy, it would certainly make life hard for all the working moms and dads who pick up dinner for the family on the way home from work. I suspect that is a not-insignificant portion of many fast-food outlets’ business.
It can also be explained by the fact that minimum-wage workers who don’t understand the policy (and/or supervisors who don’t take a lot of time to train them) would rather disservice the customers than take a risk on losing their jobs for violating company policy.
I thought I was agreeing.
Note that the story is tagged “Lazy/Unhelpful” so even the site operator thinks that’s the case. (BTW, I think sites like this are brilliant in that they exist on user-generated content, although the site operator does have to filter through everything.)
I have had a Wendy’s refuse to serve me at the drive-thru when I was on a bicycle. And years later in a different city my bank refused to let me walk up to the drive thru to make a deposit.
Pay careful attention to the OP. All that is standard with drive-thrus. The situation in the OP is odd. Never heard if it.
Ok wait so how did this happen? Some guy orders a bunch of food and then the person asks, “is all this food for you??” and the guy says “No I’m bringing some of it home to my family” and then they say back “Oh well we can’t serve anyone who’s not in the car with you right now!”
This is just too silly to believe.
My guess is they tried to do separate orders which is a huge pain in the ass (but we would do it when I worked fast food a hundred years ago.)
IE: “For my first order I want… Whats that total? Ok, for my second order…” etc
Why in the WORLD would a guy buying food for other people not just put it all on one order? Are his friends the kinds of people who need every single receipt in their name for tax purposes or something?
You could just read the story instead of speculating. It’s not that long, and it’s really bleeding obvious that the workers just didn’t want to serve* those guys,* for whatever reason.
Well, they were Canadians, so that explains a lot.