Assumed ingredients in food/drink ordered?

Del2005 wrote: »

You never mentioned vegan. You said can I substitute non dairy milk in a coffee which implies that you are operating a vegan premises but want to trick customers into trying something they don't want. If I went into a premises that wasn't obviously vegan, and why would I think that a coffee shop is vegan?, and they didn't tell me that they were I wouldn't be a happy customer and you know how many people tell of bad experiences. Just like when I found out that my sister only buys decaf tea I wasn't impressed and I've stopped drinking tea in her house, she's of course free to buy what she wants but she, or you, have no right to make decisions for me without asking first.

You run a delivery business would you be happy if your diesel supplier suddenly changed it for kerosene without telling you?

witchgirl26 wrote: »

I know a lot of people who order their coffees with a variety of different "milks" because they like them or see them as a better alternative for them. That's their choice. What I disagree with is putting these into coffees without asking the patron (who is paying at the end of the day) if they want them or not.

Again - you wouldn't add an animal product to a vegitarian/vegan order so why do the reverse?

Course people in vegan cafes who are ordering drinks know that there isn't going to be normal milk - that would just be a given. And you accept that by walking into a vegan cafe. It is not a given though in a Starbucks that when you order a coffee with milk, it would be served with a milk substitute.



In that case everyone would have to specify what they wanted and which type of milk. Instead of it being the norm that standard milk is what the majority want (and that is true) and that variants are available but must be requested. I have to do it all the time with my intolerance and same with friends who are vegetarians but it doesn't bother any of us as we know we're the minority.

And I do wholeheartedly agree that calling soy, almond etc "milk" causes more confusion and that they have nothing to do with milk.

Yes initially I just wanted to find out the legal side of things as to the assumption of ingredients based on a name and then to assess the practicality and sense of using a plant milk as a default. I think assumption is the issue here and that might become more prevalent as the advantages of plant foods over animal foods becomes more well known, that there will be more and more coffee and food shops that are vegan, but not obviously, like the one linked to above.

There's no trick or deceiving, it's simply a barista preparing a beverage to a level they believe to be the best and representative of their establishment and the ethos behind it. It's not a decision being made for you, it's you either asking for tea at your sisters, or asking for a beverage at an establishment. If it's not what you assumed it to be, then it's not that the decision was made for you, it's just that you didn't specify your particular preference when asking.

I don't think the kerosene/diesel is a good comparison given kerosene will damage the vehicle. To reference it to vehicles, I guess it's like Tesla doing away with offering leather interiors?

Yes it's certainly true that regular milk meant for cows babies is currently the highest in demand, that doesn't mean it should be the norm though and it's actually against most people's moral principles without them even knowing so I certainly believe getting to a stage where people shouldn't assume ingredients and should notify staff of their preference or particulars is actually a positive thing.

Graham wrote: »

I'm not entirely convinced the patrons of a vegan establishments are particularly representative of anything other than the patrons of vegan establishments.

Their opinions would be unlikely to extrapolate across the larger population.

Yeah, there's definitely a higher probability the patrons will have a preference for plant alternatives in a vegan place, but from what I've heard, those who have been unaware of the type of establishment they are ordering from and then find out they only have choices of plant milk, it seems a lot are happy to try it anyway.

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well the liquid extracted from the flesh of a coconut has been referenced to as coconut milk for I don't know how long. I think it's a practical name for it and any plant derived milky (that's been established as ok to use earlier int he thread ) substance, even if it's not scientifically accurate and I think this impending restriction on its use is clutching at straws by whatever lobbyists introduced it.

So maybe Plant milky is ok :pac:

dee_mc wrote: »

You can dismiss people's misconceptions of veganism all you like but at the end of the day, a person's experience of veganism is informed by the vegans they encounter.
I worked with a militant vegan who enjoyed sitting at the staff room dining table and shreiking at someone who was innocently eating a chicken salad all about battery hens and even pulling up youtube vids to illustrate her point. Horrid comments about 'hen's periods' to someone discussing recipes that used eggs. I'm sensible enough to know that she was just a rude person who couldn't effectively communicate the (valid, reasonable, commendable) vegan message, but if you spoke to others in the room who might never have knowingly encountered another vegan, the chances are they have a distorted and negative view of veganism.
Maybe instead of dismissing the misconceptions as ignorance on the part of non-vegans, address the fact that a small number of vegans can give the rest of them a bad name!
Havjng said that, if i were you I wouldn't avoid the vegan label as such. I know of a vegan restaurant that does a roaring trade and that counts many meat eaters and non-vegans as customers because the food is damn good and the coffee is excellent. Word gets round, especially where great coffee is concerned. Strive for excellence instead of getting caught up in semantics.

And this is exactly my point of why some producers may not want to shout about being vegan as it can make someone think of what may have been only one extreme vegan they knew, it's still enough to make them subconsciously think they don't want to be like them so they push the idea away. Language is very important and proper references such as animal flesh, secretions and chicken's periods certainly have their place in conveying what they really are, but timing and knowing your audience is very important. Someone like your colleague will do more damage than good making people associate what is really quite a simple concept, with militant, extreme behaviour. Everyone eats non vegan food and almost everyone is against animal cruelty. It's just about aligning lifestyle with the simple value of whether causing harm where harm isn't needed is wrong.

Yeah the vegan label definitely works in favour of businesses too. I'd have my own approach which I think would work, but there's no doubt it increases sales for businesses.

Is the restaurant you're referring to in Dublin?