Chick-fil-A would be required to open on Sundays under new bill

You are playing the game where you present CFA as the victim of some evil anti-Christian conspiracy

 

Perhaps you can answer this question then. Why is this law being proposed when there is absolutely no need for it? It's already been shown that it is impossible to go through the thruway in any day of the week and not get food.

 

Why would I know that? And what does my post have to do with you?

Nope.

 

Bingo!

 

If you believe that, then you also believe it of LGBTQIA+ when they complain about being targeted? How about BLM? Or does this only apply to certain groups...that happen to be "on the right side of the aisle"?

 

Funny how you had to cut part of my post out in order to post this.

 

In your opinion there is no need for it.

You are not part of the NY legislature, you have no part in running the rest stops on the NY Thruway, you do not travel the NY thruway.

In fact at the beginning of this thread you thought this law was about New York CITY.

 

I've already proved that there is no need for it. The bill was supposedly made to ensure that everyone had access to food along the thruway every day of the week. I've shown that it is impossible to not be able to get food at any day of the week along the thruway. With your help mind you. Even with in the time limit that truckers are under when driving (you can drive the entire thruway in under 10 hours). No opinion needed to prove that their claim is BS.

So...again... Why is this law being proposed when there is absolutely no need for it?

 

It's in the justification section of the memo.

https://nyassembly.gov/leg/?default...6&term=2023&Summary=Y&Actions=Y&Memo=Y&Text=Y

 

That is not part of the LAW

The claim was that CfA was mentioned in the LAW.

 

Because the authority in charge of the stops on the New York thruway want to be sure that all options are available 7 days a week.

If Chik Fil A does not want to be open seven days a week they are not required to bid for the contract.

 

I'm sure that there are other restaurants in the same area as Chick-filet. I don't even like Chick Filet but I support their right to be closed on Sunday. There are a lot of people who do not remember the "Blue Laws" of the south. That is when almost all stores closed on Sunday. I wish they would bring them back.

 

I support their right to be closed on Sunday too IF the holder of their lease has no problem with it.

I also support the right of the lease holder to demand that stores and restaurants on their property operate during hours that the lease holder designates.

No one is forcing any store into a situation that they are against. If being open on Sunday is against your policy then don't sign a lease that says you have to open on Sunday. It's that simple.

 

Let's put it a different way.

Let's say this bill says that the amount of any future lease will be at least double what businesses are now paying. Would you object to that? That's all this is. Instead of an increase in the dollar amount the "increase" in the lease payments is that you now have to be open on Sunday.

 

Pretty sure that they wouldn't. They may have been grand-fathered in as pre-existing stores.

 

They have been. Chik Fil A stores currently operating under a lease signed before this law would still be allowed to close on Sunday. After the law goes into a effect all future contracts will include the stipulation that the business must be open 7 days a week.

 

I believe they can remain closed on Sundays as the bill is for future contracts

Blue laws existed in the North East too.

 

picking nits. The point was that Chik Fil A was the purpose for the law and they stated as much in the justification. What they left out of the law was minimum hours or what services had to be provided. Per this law, they can open for one hour on Sunday and provide the service of a place to sit and use of the restroom.

 

False. The bill itself say's what its purpose is. You can read the bill in the link provided in the OP.

I have shown that to be a BS excuse. So again, I ask... Why is this law being proposed when there is absolutely no need for it?

Except that the lease holder in this case is not some private individual. If it was, I'd think it would be stupid of them to do, but I sure wouldn't be arguing about it to this extent. In this case the lease holder is the government. A government that has specifically targeted one store both in the bill, and in their public objections to Chick-fil-A supposed "discrimination of the LGBTQIA+ community" being allowed on the thruway.

 

I just don't see how this could actually pass. The contracts have already been signed, with NY knowing what Chic's policies were.

 

AGAIN

This would not apply to already signed contracts. This applies to FUTURE contracts.

 

You've not "shown" that it is a BS excuse. You've given reasons why you THINK it's a BS excuse. I disagree with you.

 

So, you deny simple math?

 

People....per the bill...

"This legislation will ensure that all future contracts for food conces-
sions at transportation facilities owned by the Thruway Authority, as
well as the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, will be required
to operate seven days a week, with an exclusion to temporary concessions
such as farmers markets or local vendors."

§ 3. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall
21 have become a law and shall apply to contracts entered into on and after
22 such date

So, any current contract is not affected by this bill. As such any Chick-fil-A that is currently under contract can still close on Sundays.

 

So when renewals come up what happens then?