Thanks for clarifying, now things are a bit more clear. However, you're still getting paid not doing it for charity. I understand the contract doesn't say you have to accommodate them, but it is their human right to expect to be fed. Now with that said, if you're going to be a soldier you're probably going to have to eat anything you can find in sticky situations or you'll starve. However, that doesn't mean they should throw their human rights out the window when not in the training field. If I was serving and the food company refused to feed me a proper vegetarian meal(I'm not even vegetarian, but for the sake of the argument let's assume I am), then I would take it up with my superior. I can guarantee you they wouldn't want a lawsuit on their hands, so they would just fire you and get a company that will do that. I know you said your company does do that, but out of the kindness of their hearts. And THAT is what bothers me. It shouldn't be that way. Your company should have in the contract that they're expected to accommodate people with different dietary needs. It shocks me that the government was so careless. Hopefully that will change in the future and soldiers will be treated with the respect they deserve.
I will agree with you that everyone has that basic human right to get what they asked for especially when it comes to eating. And, honestly, it's really unfortunate that the contracts are basically all numbers and not taking into account people's dietary needs. The government really doesn't care, which is really stupid. But, in this case, and in any case really, people should be grateful for the food that they are getting, shouldn't they? That's probably my biggest thing with all of this. Some people that we serve sometimes walk out of the kitchen when they see the food, ITS PERFECTLY GOOD FOOD, but won't take it because they don't like it (not that they can't have it, just don't like it). In that case, should we make them something else, just so that we can feed everyone? There's only so much we can do as people. I know everyone has done this and, at least for me, know the guilt behind not taking food when someone else in the world could have the same exact food and gratefully take it. And, this also leads us to waste food because people will not eat it because they simply don't like it. I don't get that.
Yes, having a contract and not including dietary needs is a problem, and yes, we should already be doing that, which is why we keep on coming back with them, because they like when we try to feed everyone to their dietary needs. Now, let me ask you this: Let's say at the start of the contract, we find that 10 out of 200 young people are vegetarians right? We agreed to make a veggie option for those people, so we get the right amount of food based on this fact and our budget is spent. Let's say down the road, a couple days later, we have superiors coming up to us saying that we now have 25 vegetarians. Being that we accommodate them, my boss spends more money out of his own pocket and gets the food necessary for the extra 15 people to eat. Now, right before we leave, the day before, let's say a couple more, say 5 come saying that they have 'converted', what do we do now? We already overbudget and have food we are not using. By your argument, its okay! Just buy some food for them so that they have their basic needs met. And we do that, every single time. Now, the company has less money because we tried to accommodate everyone. If that continues, we would go out of business and other companies who do not provide a veggie option will come in. What do we do then?
At the end of the day, when people are not grateful for what they are receiving, I'm disgusted by that. That's probably the root of my rant.
Last edited: