In addition, the argument that the customer is minimally exposed is, to me, an incredibly selfish argument. Yes you the customer may be less exposed, but at the expense of the driver (who now goes to multiple restaurants and multiple houses), and the restaurant (who also has to interact with those drivers).
I personally do carry out from restaurants, and done properly, carry the same risk exposure as delivery to the customer (e.g. putting the food in the trunk of your car, placing the order in the front door and allowing you to get it at a safe distance).
https://www.vox.com/recode/2019/8/20/20825937/doordash-tippi...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/charlesradclyffe/2018/10/16/tip...
And have manipulated search rankings to force people to use their service when they think they are talking to the restaurant:
https://www.wxyz.com/news/doordash-is-delivering-food-withou...
Than bully restaurants:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2020/04/14/doordash-gru...
I an good conscious can't use them.
In addition, the argument that the customer is minimally exposed is, to me, an incredibly selfish argument. Yes you the customer may be less exposed, but at the expense of the driver (who now goes to multiple restaurants and multiple houses), and the restaurant (who also has to interact with those drivers).
I personally do carry out from restaurants, and done properly, carry the same risk exposure as delivery to the customer (e.g. putting the food in the trunk of your car, placing the order in the front door and allowing you to get it at a safe distance).