Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PETRUS

(3,678 posts)
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:18 PM Jan 2013

Judge rules for Domino's in contraception coverage case

The founder of Domino's Pizza won't be subject to a new federal health care law requiring contraception coverage for employees while a lawsuit he filed challenging the new mandate is pending, a judge has ruled.

<snip>

Monaghan offers health insurance that excludes contraception and abortion for employees...

Read more: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130101/METRO/301010354#ixzz2GhiKYeoC

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
2. from the article
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:34 PM
Jan 2013

Zatkoff's ruling halts enforcement of the mandate against Monaghan and his property management company, of which he is the sole owner and shareholder.

Domino's Farms Corp. manages an office complex owned by Monaghan and is not affiliated with Domino's Pizza. Monaghan sold the pizza company in 1998.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130101/METRO/301010354#ixzz2GkZSR2FK

Occulus

(20,599 posts)
10. The company is choosing to follow his fucked-up so-called "morality"
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 08:26 PM
Jan 2013

which was a practice he started. That makes this his baby, regardless of whether he sold it or not.

PETRUS

(3,678 posts)
4. The beauty here is that it's a swipe at both women AND the working class!
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:43 PM
Jan 2013

That's gotta be worth like at least twenty bonus points.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
7. Former Baskin Robbins Employee Orders Drone Strike In Afghanistan
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 03:01 PM
Jan 2013

Kinda odd that the article doesn't mention that he sold the pizza company years ago, and that the company in question is not the pizza company, until a couple of paragraphs down.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,320 posts)
9. Yeah - "Domino's" will be taken by everyone to mean the pizza company
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 08:16 PM
Jan 2013

and they've worded the first paragraph to keep up that impression. The sign of a journalist/paper more interested in people reading the article than being properly informed by it?

Occulus

(20,599 posts)
11. By choosing that name for the office park, he clearly intended an implied association
Tue Jan 1, 2013, 08:30 PM
Jan 2013

in the public mind.

Now the pizza chain rightly gets the bad press too. As. It. Should.

Response to PETRUS (Original post)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Judge rules for Domino's ...