Mawkish1983 wrote:As some of you know I now work at McDudes* again. After trying to find work far and wide McDudes* was the only company to offer me a job.
Now, I have noticed at least one up-side to working there (where I mainly work in the kitchen): if you don't maintain some level of mindfulness, you get hurt. Yesterday, for example, I lost mindfulness and tripped over a bun tray that had been carelessly discarded. I was fortunate not to seriously injure myself considering the equipment in the kitchen I could have fallen on. Whilst working I am forced to be mindful simply because of the threat of injury. For me, this is good for practice.
On the other hand, McDudes* food is sold as a 'treat', not as food to be eaten every day. I see the same children come in day after day who have basically been abandoned by their pub-faring parents. They buy their dinner everyday from McDudes*. Despite the fact that McDudes* do offer healthy alterative food, it's rarely bought by these children. I can't help feeling I'm selling death to kids. We can offer the healthy options, but the children ultimately have the final choice and seem to always choose the fried food option.
So, I'm a little torn. I know I need to work to pay the bills, and unfortunately there is no alternative work currently available. I can find some personal benefit to working there, but at the same time see damage the company causes.
Do you think working for McDudes* is wrong livelihood?
* I don't want to get sued so the company name has been changed in this thread.
Mawkish1983 wrote:Do you think working for McDudes* is wrong livelihood?
Clueless Git wrote:Mawkish1983 wrote:Do you think working for McDudes* is wrong livelihood?
Can any role in a business that has no purpose but to profit from the intentionla killing of 450,000,000 per yer possibly be owt but wrong livelihood?
AN 4.235 Ariyamagga Sutta: The Noble Path wrote:"And what is kamma that is dark & bright with dark & bright result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates a bodily fabrication that is injurious & non-injurious ... a verbal fabrication that is injurious & non-injurious ... a mental fabrication that is injurious & non-injurious ... He rearises in an injurious & non-injurious world ... There he is touched by injurious & non-injurious contacts ... He experiences injurious & non-injurious feelings, pleasure mingled with pain, like those of human beings, some devas, and some beings in the lower realms. This is called kamma that is dark & bright with dark & bright result.
Right livelihood is concerned with ensuring that one earns one's living in a righteous way. For a lay disciple the Buddha teaches that wealth should be gained in accordance with certain standards. One should acquire it only by legal means, not illegally; one should acquire it peacefully, without coercion or violence; one should acquire it honestly, not by trickery or deceit; and one should acquire it in ways which do not entail harm and suffering for others.  The Buddha mentions five specific kinds of livelihood which bring harm to others and are therefore to be avoided: dealing in weapons, in living beings (including raising animals for slaughter as well as slave trade and prostitution), in meat production and butchery, in poisons, and in intoxicants (AN 5:177). He further names several dishonest means of gaining wealth which fall under wrong livelihood: practicing deceit, treachery, soothsaying, trickery, and usury (MN 117). Obviously any occupation that requires violation of right speech and right action is a wrong form of livelihood, but other occupations, such as selling weapons or intoxicants, may not violate those factors and yet be wrong because of their consequences for others.
-- Bhikkhu Bodhi: The Noble Eightfold Path: the way to the end of suffering: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... d.html#ch4
Ben wrote:Hi Mawkish
Like you, I am not able to work in my chosen field and I am currently enjoying working in the catering industry.
Your work does not constitute 'wrong livelihood'
In anticipation of any argument - merely flipping burgers does not constitute 'meat production'.
Mawkish - in relation to the other issue you have of young kids coming in and eating at your restaurant every night - its ultimately their decision. If it wasn't burgers and fries at your restaurant, it would be fish & chips or pizza or some other unhealthy product from another fast-food outlet down the road.
Khalil Bodhi wrote:If you were selling tobacco
BlackBird wrote:Khalil Bodhi wrote:If you were selling tobacco
I sell tobacco (working at a service station)
It's not 'wrong' livelihood, but I don't think it's 'right' either.