Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Burger King pays out $3m to gay couple beaten by staff

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Good for them, but what’s with the disproportionate amount of money awarded?

    Kinda makes me want to buy a plane ticket to the States, get gay bashed, sue, take the damages and retire to Réunion.

    And in the process I could prove the trickle down economics works by buying painted shells and fish and… whatever the local savages are up to these days.

    Sorry for the rant but I really, really detest their compensation system!

    1. Lucius, as someone who’s lived in Réunion and has family there, I resent that bit about that place. Maybe you could start a tourism helicopter business instead, those work marvels.

      1. Can’t believe I got told off by a local person. For a motherfrakkin’ free plug!

        How the hell am I supposed to express my emotions of pity if there are no poor places left on this planet?!

    2. Have you ever been gay bashed? Well I have and it changed my life forever and not in a good way. I had post traumatic stress, panic attacks and became an agrphobe afraid to leave my home. Don’t tell me the United States over compensates. You have no idea what the beating will do to these mens mental state. Burger King is responsible for the actions of the employees while at work.

      1. So you’re saying an insane amount of money would alleviate your symptoms? Wouldn’t you just be stuck at home, still with your PTSD and agoraphobia, only this time ordering ridiculous things off ebay all day?

        The compensation should “only” cover the costs of litigation, work absence, medical treatment and possible future psychiatric help. Maybe a few extra bucks for that ice cream or a dinner to celebrate the victory.

        In my opinion, even more disturbing than the gay bashing event itself is people thinking of a trolley dash while the courtroom seat is still hot.

        1. That’s according to you. Ideally, the bigger the company, the bigger should be the punishment in a form of a compensation. If you don’t apply it that way, the bigger the company, the easier it will laugh out the (comparatively) little compensations it has to pay for the people that were damaged for its policies or lack of. So that is a way to force the company into granting a fair response to what happened so it never happens again, instead of absorbing the cost as just another economical little detail.
          You can debate who should receive the money, whether the state –representing all the people- or the victims, or the amount of the split. But you can’t say it’s the same to fine a little shop than a huge company.
          Yet another debate is when the company had all their policies right and an employee acted out of the blue like a loony, but this was clearly not the case.

  2. Lucious
    Why? It’s not being payed by the taxpayer. It comes out of the company’s profits.
    It sends a clear message.

  3. I say send the culprits to jail let them become a commodity in there … And give the victims 10$ million in compensation of company profits.

    I’ll never look same way at a burger king :(

  4. I’m astonished that it got that far… surely any company as high profile as Burger King would want to put clear blue water between itself and a bunch of violently homophobic employees.
    The article doesn’t mention if they were sacked or even disciplined, but I would sincerely hope so.

  5. Where is the statement from Burger king regarding the present employment status of the manager and the staff who committed the asault? Are they still working for Burger King? A disgrace if they are!Where is the apollogy to the LGBT community? What are they doing as a company to stop this happening again? The fine is great but lots of unanswered questions!

  6. Burger King’s new slogan “Have it your way… but not feckin’ queer, you can’t have that”

  7. Lucio Buffone 28 Feb 2011, 9:09pm

    John, if you read the article, you will see that the Burger Kings were a franchise, and it was the franchisee that was sued. Why is no one questioning why two 40 year old gays, thought it was acceptable to eat in Burger King anyway? Yuk

    1. So you think it’s not ok to eat at Burger King? Not everyone wants to pay for fine dining restaurant food. Maybe they just wanted a quick burger to go. I just find it amazing that you’re such a food snob.

    2. I may also point out, and few people are aware of this, but Burger King is a British company and a wholly owned subsidiary of Grand metropolitan Holdings Ltd.

      1. A food snob who’s more concerned about where they ate than what happened to them at the hands and feet of the staff there. Charming Lucio, charming.

    3. stupid comment

  8. martyn notman 28 Feb 2011, 10:22pm

    totally appalling! im shocked theres nothing come from Burger King to apologise (and hopefully strip these scumbags of their franchise).
    Unlikely to happen in my nearest BK over here..everyone that works there is about 200 stone and could never catch me..

  9. Steve@GayWebHosting 28 Feb 2011, 10:22pm

    @JT1962

    Completely agree with you… What is it with some gay folk? We are all supposed to fit into the stereotype… Fine dining, gym-bunnies, scene queens, living in flash studio apartments overlooking the Thames…

    Some of us live in a more real world and would appreciate being able to grab a quick burger without being abused and bashed?

    I agree with the commenter who said that it was not the taxpayer who had to pay the compensation so what is the problem? The franchise holder should have had to pay MORE in fact.. This kind of behaviour should not be tolerated.

    I also would like to know what Burger Kings view about this franchise holder is… Have the employees (including a manager who should know better) been sacked?

    That would perhaps have been a better way to finish the article rather than going onto some old story about another gay restaurant employee which was not related to Burger King!

  10. One additional punishment needed – send these creeps to chop chop square in Riyhad Saudi Arabia.

    Go and watch the saudis solve our problems. Just dont eat that day unless you are used to blood and guts.

  11. Jock S. Trap 1 Mar 2011, 8:17am

    What a disturbing story. Such open hatred. I doubt $3m will erase the memory but it goes some way to showing companies that employing thugs is a call you have to take responsibilty for.

    Lucius

    Don’t you think these amounts awarded need to be high to show people this kind of behaviour cannot be acceptable.

    1. No, it demonstrates what a complete farce the American legal system is.
      You don’t win by justice, you win on how good your lawyer is.
      Ask OJ Simpson.

  12. Kinda makes me want to buy a plane ticket to the States, get gay bashed, sue, take the damages and retire to Réunion

    a rather, silly and juvenile comment from someone who has never had the misfortune of being beaten up for being gay. Shame on you!

    1. Misfortune here, fortune in the States. That’s the whole issue, genius. No one was condoning gay bashing, just the litigation part…

      1. Sister Mary Clarence 2 Mar 2011, 10:29am

        Lucius, the settlement was awarded by the court, and included $1.7 million in punitive damages. This settlement was determined by the court not by the victims.

        The amount the victims were suing for, following the criminal conviction of two of the eight members of staff, who it is reported assaulted them, for aggravated assault, doesn’t appear to have been published but it may well have been substantially different from the settlement amount.

        The restaurant franchisee doesn’t not appear to have been making any public comments on the issue i.e. no apology, similarly the franchiser, Burger King seems to have been similarly quiet. Although Burger King did not own the restaurant it has got Burger King on the door and was selling the Burger King product, and I would I think ‘reasonably’ customers could expect that if the Burger King brand name faces potential damage, they would act in a way to reduce damage to the brand.

        What is notable here is that there don’t seem to be any damage lim

        1. Jock S. Trap 2 Mar 2011, 10:41am

          Too many companies try to use cope outs to protect them from action of their staff. I think it’s a sign too many companies have gotten too big that customer service no longer exists for most. Not much emphasis on the ‘precious’ customer too much emphasis on the profits though.

  13. And the police charged the customers with assault????? Did I read that right??? So glad I only had to spend 3 years living in NJ!

    1. Jock S. Trap 3 Mar 2011, 3:05pm

      Yeah I think in the US they charge the Gay victim until absolute proof it was others coz homophobia is cool dude….Not!!

    2. actually it was harrasment

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all