Was This A Process Foul?

Business By tdovewings Updated 1 May 2012 , 6:18pm by labelle24

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 1:32am
post #31 of 57

I certainly see where you're coming from, from the perspective of business ethics and contract law. Since I identified with the customer I suppose my choice was driven more from my personal morality, which saw the restrictions of the other baker as the greater breach of ethics.

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 1:40am
post #32 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by QTCakes1

You are constantly preaching about copyright laws. When someone on here says,"What's the big deal. It's not like the licensed company is going to find out", you are one of the first to preach "Just cause the company won't find out it is still wrong. That is still unethical of you to do".



I do my best to stick to spreading information about facts, laws and the pragmatic risks of breaking laws. For example, when people say it's not a big deal to violate copyright (e.g. they are making a cake that will never leave their house and no one will be taking pictures), I say it is still against the law but realistically there is very little chance of getting caught. People can then make up their own mind as to if they still want to do it.

If anything, I try to stay neutral on the topic of ethics, simply because it is so subjective. I don't recall ever telling someone else what they did was unethical.

But your characterization of me does work well as a straw man, I'll give you that.

BlakesCakes Posted 1 May 2012 , 1:43am
post #33 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

And as someone with food allergies myself, I was thoroughly disgusted with the other baker who refused to accommodate a food-allergic guest of their customer AND refused to allow them to accommodate the guest on their own.

That bride asked us to make the main cake too but we already had too many orders for that weekend. Everything worked out for the best...the guests actually preferred our gluten-free/nut-free cake to the "real" wedding cake, and the bride was very appreciative.

Call me what you will (I'm not seeing the connection between this and health inspections or copyright), but I stand by my decision and I would do it again in a heartbeat.




I, myself, am sick to death of "rationalizers".

The bride was wrong to sign a contract with a baker who couldn't accommodate ALL of her requirements. The bride was wrong to even ASK you to collude with her to violate her signed contract. No one at her wedding would have DIED without having a piece of cake. Of course she was "appreciative"...........she was chuffed because she "got over" on the other baker
.
YOU were wrong to go along with the plot. You were wrong to have aided and abetted her.

You know full well that not every baker can accommodate gluten-free/nut free requests for a multitude of reasons, including not just liability but also for a genuine concern about the well-being of the allergic individual.

Every baker has a right to their own legal policies--no one forced the bride to sign that baker's contract. And no matter how indignant you were about those policies that hit too close to home, you should have said thanks, but no thanks.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Period.
Rae

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 1:52am
post #34 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

You know full well that not every baker can accommodate gluten-free/nut free requests for a multitude of reasons, including not just liability but also for a genuine concern about the well-being of the allergic individual.



I absolutely agree that not every baker can accommodate food allergy requests (in fact it's at the core of our business plan). What I do not agree with is not allowing the customer to bring another cake that can meet those requests. I seriously doubt it would ever get that far, but such a clause could potentially violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Usually when a sole source clause is discussed here, most people explain that they have an exception for food allergies, so thankfully this is usually not an issue.

Quote:
Quote:

Every baker has a right to their own legal policies--no one forced the bride to sign that baker's contract.



Again I agree, ideally the bride would not have signed the contract in the first place or would have backed out and found a different baker. The bride explained to me that she did not know about the food allergy requirement when she signed the contract, and she could not find another reputable baker that had availability.

I had a feeling this would spark an interesting discussion, it certainly didn't disappoint. icon_biggrin.gif

BlakesCakes Posted 1 May 2012 , 2:11am
post #35 of 57

Glad you've finally admitted in writing that your goal is to stir up trouble and sit back and watch. I've always suspected as much.

Well, knowing now how you're thriving on reading your own manure..............I'm out.

Enjoy your malodorous meal.

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 2:46am
post #36 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Glad you've finally admitted in writing that your goal is to stir up trouble and sit back and watch.



I believe you misinterpreted my post...I just thought my situation was interesting and on-topic so I posted it. My goal is not to "stir up trouble", it's to have an interesting conversation, and as you can see I'm certainly not "sitting back and watching". icon_smile.gif

Osgirl Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:00am
post #37 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

I certainly see where you're coming from, from the perspective of business ethics and contract law. Since I identified with the customer I suppose my choice was driven more from my personal morality, which saw the restrictions of the other baker as the greater breach of ethics.




The restrictions of the other baker was the greater breach of ethics? That is hilarious! If she couldn't accommodate, she couldn't accommodate. That is no breach of ethics.

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:07am
post #38 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osgirl

Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

I certainly see where you're coming from, from the perspective of business ethics and contract law. Since I identified with the customer I suppose my choice was driven more from my personal morality, which saw the restrictions of the other baker as the greater breach of ethics.



The restrictions of the other baker was the greater breach of ethics? That is hilarious! If she couldn't accommodate, she couldn't accommodate. That is no breach of ethics.



To clarify, I was referring to the sole source clause preventing the customer from accommodating the food-allergic guest themselves, not that the baker could not create a safe cake for the customer (which is perfectly understandable).

It's one thing to tell a customer you don't feel comfortable baking a cake that meets their allergy requirements. It's quite another to tell the customer that no one else is allowed to serve a cake that meets their allergy requirements at their event.

sugarpixy Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:37am
post #39 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Glad you've finally admitted in writing that your goal is to stir up trouble and sit back and watch.


I believe you misinterpreted my post...I just thought my situation was interesting and on-topic so I posted it. My goal is not to "stir up trouble", it's to have an interesting conversation, and as you can see I'm certainly not "sitting back and watching". icon_smile.gif


I love seeing the cake photos of other members. Sharing is what it is all about. Please share some photos so that we may enjoy your work as well as your words icon_smile.gif

BlakesCakes Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:48am
post #40 of 57

Here, let me jump in:

http://www.allergyfriendlypastries.com/aboutus.html

http://www.flickr.com/people/jasonkraft/

Rae

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:48am
post #41 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugarpixy

I love seeing the cake photos of other members. Sharing is what it is all about. Please share some photos so that we may enjoy your work as well as your words icon_smile.gif



I have zero baking or decorating talent, I stick to the business side so I'm afraid I can only contribute words.

From the looks of this thread a few people might think I contribute too much. icon_wink.gif

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:53am
post #42 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Here, let me jump in:

http://www.allergyfriendlypastries.com/aboutus.html

http://www.flickr.com/people/jasonkraft/



Yep, that was our business (until we sold it) and that is the link to my personal flickr account. The cakes on those sites were baked and decorated by my very talented wife, Amanda.

I don't really think this is the appropriate place to share pictures though, there is a separate section of the site for that.

BlakesCakes Posted 1 May 2012 , 3:59am
post #43 of 57

I'm sure she meant that perhaps you should post some in your profile, as most of us do or have done, so that readers can click on the "photos" button at the bottom of your posts.

Of course, you're only supposed to post photos of YOUR own work. That is the rule.............

Rae

sugarpixy Posted 1 May 2012 , 4:02am
post #44 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason_kraft

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakesCakes

Here, let me jump in:

http://www.allergyfriendlypastries.com/aboutus.html

http://www.flickr.com/people/jasonkraft/


Yep, that was our business (until we sold it) and that is the link to my personal flickr account. The cakes on those sites were baked and decorated by my very talented wife, Amanda.

I don't really think this is the appropriate place to share pictures though, there is a separate section of the site for that.


Pictures are shared in members profiles. The reference was to pictures contained in the profile, and obviously not a request to share pictures in a thread icon_wink.gif

cakelady2266 Posted 1 May 2012 , 4:10am
post #45 of 57

If I had the slightest inkling it was gonna be this good on CC tonight I would have made popcorn.

OP you were not wrong gifting the cake to your cousin. IF there had been any sole provider agreement or contract between the baker and the bride, the bride violated the bakers wishes, not you. IF there was such an agreement and you were aware of it then sidestepped it, that would be unethical. But you didn't know so don't beat yourself up over it.

Jason, I am truly surprised that you see no wrongness in knowingly providing goods when there is a standing sole provider contract in play. That's like saying contracts are just sheets of paper with no real meaning. It's a little underhanded.

AZCouture Posted 1 May 2012 , 6:04am
post #46 of 57

Oh I have nothing to add to this other than a very immature ROFLMAO. That's ok, cause this is awesome.

FleurDeCake Posted 1 May 2012 , 6:56am
post #47 of 57

Now children cant we all just play nice ... take a chill pill already ... Jason I look forward to your posts as they are always very informative and I certainly dont find them judgemental ... and Rae you too are very knowledgable .I have learned so much from all of the talented people here and am so very grateful. The one thing I could never understand about the forums here on CC is that some of seem to get so touchy about certain circumstances when all any of want to do is learn and share ... As for the OP I don't see how anyone could possibly dictate what her gift to the couple should be .

carmijok Posted 1 May 2012 , 9:33am
post #48 of 57

All I can say is if I had a baker that was so hoity-toity as to dictate what cakes could be provided at MY wedding, unless their name was Ron Ben Israel, I would tell that baker to take a flying leap into a big batch of buttercream!

I swear I've never heard such BS in my life. And yes you can jump down my throat and start screaming 'liabilities' and legalities and all the usual crap, but the bottom line is you're providing a cake, not the Mona Lisa.

I worked for a bakery that sometimes did groom's cakes when another baker did the wedding cake and vice versa. No one got their nose out of joint. I did a grooms cake for a bride who decided at the last minute she wanted one. And yes...'gasp!' I used the school logo without getting written permission from the grand poo-bah of copyright law. And I would do it again. That's me...rebel without a clause! (and by the way, I was told later that everyone liked my cake better!)

OP...you did nothing wrong. You provided a lovely gift. And the rest of you provided me a good laugh!

JamAndButtercream Posted 1 May 2012 , 9:50am
post #49 of 57

The OP was not at fault because she was not told of the situation.

I agree that the fault lies with the bride because she shouldn't have had another cake from two different people if this piece of contract with in place.

Maybe the bride was unaware of this part of the contract she signed with the baker and wanted a grooms cake but couldn't afford it, so she asked her cousin who could do it for free.

I can understand this lengthy discussion from both points of view, from a brides point of view, "If I want two cakes from two different people that's up to me" but I can also see it from a bakers point of view "If there's a problem with one cake and guests get sick, how will they know it wasn't my cake??" etc etc.

Panel7124 Posted 1 May 2012 , 10:52am
post #50 of 57

How do they know it wasn't meat, fish, rotten veggies icon_smile.gif or other stuff at the reception?

costumeczar Posted 1 May 2012 , 11:34am
post #51 of 57

This is why I don't do random groom's cakes http://www.acaketorememberva.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-i-dont-do-random-grooms-cakes.html

The OP wasn't wrong to provide a cake. IF there was a sole-provider clause, and nobody knows whether that was the case, it's the bride's problem.

I'm surprised at Jason too, though. I can see your perspective, but the bride wasn't forced to book with someone who had a sole-provider clause, so that's her problem. If you know about it you shouldn't encourage her to violate that, because the wedding cake baker might be the person who WOULD walk away with the cake if they saw another cake there! It's like the people who move into a neighborhood with a neighborhood association then complain about the rules they have. Nobody forces you to move in and sign the agreement, so don't complain when you're expected to abide by the details of what you signed.

I had one groom who kept emailing me about making him a groom's cake when I wasn't doing the wedding cake. I told him I'd do it at the rehearsal but not the reception, and told him the reasons. He agreed, then after three or four emails he let slip "We have no intention of serving it at the rehearsal, we're going to take it to the reception." Okay, dumbass, then I'm not doing the cake. He got all offended when I told him that I wouldn't do it. Too bad, don't try to put one over on me then tell me about it, genius, I don't play that.

ChristineCMC Posted 1 May 2012 , 11:55am
post #52 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by carmijok

All I can say is if I had a baker that was so hoity-toity as to dictate what cakes could be provided at MY wedding, unless their name was Ron Ben Israel, I would tell that baker to take a flying leap into a big batch of buttercream!

I swear I've never heard such BS in my life. And yes you can jump down my throat and start screaming 'liabilities' and legalities and all the usual crap, but the bottom line is you're providing a cake, not the Mona Lisa.

I worked for a bakery that sometimes did groom's cakes when another baker did the wedding cake and vice versa. No one got their nose out of joint. I did a grooms cake for a bride who decided at the last minute she wanted one. And yes...'gasp!' I used the school logo without getting written permission from the grand poo-bah of copyright law. And I would do it again. That's me...rebel without a clause! (and by the way, I was told later that everyone liked my cake better!)

OP...you did nothing wrong. You provided a lovely gift. And the rest of you provided me a good laugh!




What she saidicon_smile.gifthumbs_up.gif

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 4:01pm
post #53 of 57

The bride in the situation I posted was an adult and able to make her own decisions. When people post here asking about copyright and legal issues, I don't lecture them on ethics or tell them what they absolutely must or must not do, I give them the relevant facts, laws, and risks, then let them make up their own mind. Same deal with this customer, my job was to provide a cake, not be the contract law police.

Before the bride found us, the groom's sister was planning on bringing a gluten-free/nut-free cake anyway so her kid could actually eat dessert at the reception, so the sole source clause would have been violated regardless of whether or not we provided a cake.

IMO the greater good was served by providing a cake the groom's niece could eat. It's fine if your opinion differs, but like I said before ethics is a deeply personal and subjective topic, so trying to impose your own ethics on other adults is an exercise is futility.

jgifford Posted 1 May 2012 , 5:43pm
post #54 of 57

IMO, Jason, I think they've got you by the short hairs. The groom's sister bringing a gluten free/nut free cake for her daughter is just a tad bit different than providing a groom's cake for the guests.

We all greatly appreciate your vast knowledge and expertise and your willingness to share without condescension, but this has allowed us to see a different side of you. You're not going to convince anyone now that you're not human like the rest of us.

thumbs_up.gif

jason_kraft Posted 1 May 2012 , 5:49pm
post #55 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgifford

IMO, Jason, I think they've got you by the short hairs. The groom's sister bringing a gluten free/nut free cake for her daughter is just a tad bit different than providing a groom's cake for the guests.



To clarify, the impression the bride gave me was that the groom's sister would make a regular size cake (probably a quarter sheet) which would be served at the venue alongside the regular cake, not just an individual cake.

From the perspective of a sole source baker I don't think a homemade cake served at the reception would be preferable to a cake brought by a licensed and inspected bakery.

jgifford Posted 1 May 2012 , 6:00pm
post #56 of 57

Ok, Jason. icon_wink.gif

To me, it's all academic anyway. Until I read it here, I had never heard of a sole provider clause. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that's common practice in my part of the world.

labelle24 Posted 1 May 2012 , 6:18pm
post #57 of 57

first let me start by saying....LOL

ok, now that that's done, I do have an exclusivity clause in my contract. The number 1 reason being, I don't want my customer buying some dry frozen grocery store sheet cake to supplement a smaller cake that I have provided. When people ask them, "Who made the cake?", they're going to refer to my business, not Giantmart USA. So if the guests eat the megastore cake and it is horrible, guess what, I just lost a potential customer. I do, on the flip side, provide kitchen cakes for cutting at a discount, so I am happy to work with them if it is a matter of budget. Also, if they have cake needs that I am not able to fulfill (i.e. allergies etc), they are welcome to "walk" and find another baker who is able to accommodate their needs, I don't have a gun to their head forcing them to sign my contract.

That being said, it was not the OP's job to seek out permission from the other bakery, that was the bride's responsibility. But I can put myself in the other baker's shoes and see why they may have been taken aback had their been a legal contract in place.

Quote by @%username% on %date%

%body%