Starbucks Sensitivity Training

by Jack

I’m sure you’ve all heard about the Philadelphia Starbucks incident, right? To recap, two black males asked to use the restroom. They were told by the mgr. that was for customers only. Since they were not buying anything, they were denied access. Then the two men decided to remain inside at a table for a friend who was going to meet them there. But, this was also met with “waiting inside is for customers only.” Then they refused to leave. Eventually the manager called the police who escorted them outside.

The manager declined to press charges, saying he just wanted removed. His view was Starbucks does not run a public restroom and the recent spate of people (homeless) abusing their private restroom has caused cleanup problems for the employees who try to keep them tidy… for customers. It was not a racial thing, the mgr. said.

Question, did they (Starbucks Corp) overreact by the CEO apologizing in person to the two men, then firing the manager and then shutting down all their coffee shops for 3 hours of specialized racial-bias education (sensitivity training)?

The two black men in question are now traumatized and say they were fearing for their lives. The Philadelphia Police Commission has issued an apology as well for his officers conduct in removing the two men. Question: Do you think they are really traumatized and suffering or are they looking for publicity and some payoff money?

This entry was posted in Morals and Ethics. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Starbucks Sensitivity Training

  1. TruthTopower says:

    The 2 men had been in the store for 2 mins when one asked to use the restroom. They said it was for paying customers. He said they were waiting for a friend and would wait to use it. They sat down.

    The friend came in whole police were there.

    other patrons were shocked and said they did nothing wrong.

    One white gentleman said he had been in there for 2 hours using wifi and bought nothing.

    Ya think when friend shows up to buy the coffee and have the meeting it could have all been resolved? No they were Black a crime to some in America.

  2. J. Soden says:

    Sheriff David Clarke tweeted this today:

    “Not too long ago a Philadelphia Starbucks refused to let a police officer use the restroom telling him it was for paying customers. Don’t remember Starbucks closing 8000 stores for sensitivity training toward police.”

    Starbucks is not on my menu either. . . .

    • Post Scripts says:

      I don’t use Starbucks, I prefer local shops. But, J. Soden you make a good point about the police. Nobody made much of a fuss over cops being blatantly discriminated against. The black customers, eh, I would say it was less obvious, if it was discrimination. I’ve heard other accounts that say there was a bit more to it than them being their for 2 minutes and getting the cops called on them. Maybe the manager was biased, maybe not, but I think in either case Starbucks overreacted and it’s going to cost them 9M bucks to close for training, which I think is stupid. There must be a better way and less costly way to train their people to be respectful and reasonable without regard to race, gender, occupation, etc. Glad I don’t own their stock. Poorly run company in my opinion!

  3. Libby says:

    That’s right, malign the afflicted. If the fellows are publicity seeking vermin, you don’t have to acknowledge some total creepiness in our society. Why can’t you just admit and accept that the whole thing was socially unacceptable? Why does it pain you so?

    I feel for the officers though. They was just, as the adage goes, just doing their jobs. My nephew got into a similar jam recently. Some dweeb insisted that some other dweeb, who banged on his car, be arrested. (Berkeley, don’t you know.) The arrestee resisted, and it got much too physical, and videotaped. But the poor officers are not allowed to say to the dweeb of a Starbuck’s manager: “Lady … you sure you wanna do this?” They just has to do they duty.

    • Post Scripts says:

      Libby, please understand… a police officer’s duty to act only extends to the limit of the law.

      By law, if the manager asks you to leave, you must leave. If you don’t, the owner has a right to call the police and make a citizen’s arrest. The cops then take you into custody and remove you, by force if necessary.

      Of course, once outside the officer can issue simply a summons to appear, so you don’t actually go to jail. This a cops discretion. But, without that “citizens arrest” the officer has NO DUTY to do anything. And legally can’t do anything because trespass is a misdemeanor committed outside his presence.

      About all the police can do with a citizen’s arrest is counsel the parties and try to reach an agreement to avoid further trouble.

      As for racial bias being used against the black guys, it very well could have been, but the law is still the law.

      However, during the course of the managers discussion with the men did they quietly tell her to F- off? Did their actions, appearance and overall demeanor intimidate the manager? Did she feel threatened?

      You don’t know this Libby and neither do I, because the lame media didn’t bother to tell us, and that was their bias showing.

      So we have to go with what we have before us and what is that?

      1. Starbucks did have a loitering policy.
      2. A manager has the right to ask a customer or a non-customer to leave if they feel it necessary to do.
      3. Forget the race part, the manager was a female, the two large men and they were uncooperative. They challenged her request to leave. That limits her options to backing down or calling the cops.

      Does this incident warrant the attention it is getting or is it being hyped for a hidden agenda? Has the CEO of Starbucks overreacted and if so, why? Should the manager have been fired or counselled? Are the two black guys making or about to make a bundle of cash for their role? Would that money motivate them to keep this incident racially charged? Does the money motivate the media to do things, like hype a story to get ratings?

      I would like to know the answers and if you are being fair and honest, you would want to know too.

  4. More Common Sense says:

    I was listening to the radio recently and the talk show host commented that it is common practice to not allow people to just sit in a restaurant without making a purchase. Since the men that were asked to leave didn’t make a purchase the talk show host asked if this also happen to all people no matter what their race was. If it did then there is no issue. So he asked his audience to call in if they had been asked to leave Starbucks and tell their story . One white gentleman called and said he was asked to leave a Starbucks in San Francisco. It was during Christmas time. He was in line talking with another customer, commenting on the fact that Starbucks had removed everything related to Christmas from their red coffee cup. When he got to the front of the line the barista was visibly upset with him but still took his order. When the barista ask the man’s name to be written on the red cup he said “Christmas”. It was very inventive but got him kicked out. Seems Starbucks isn’t very tolerant. Maybe the closure and retraining is necessary!

    • Libby says:

      That’s the thing, dweebly, especially with regards to Starbucks. You can almost, but not quite, condone the $5.00 coffee when all manner of truly obnoxious people consider it three hours rent on a table, while they play noisy video games on their laptops.

      Unhappily, in this instance, Starbucks own surveillance technology confirms that, was it 2 or 3? … minutes that elapsed between the guys arrival on the premises and the manager’s 911 call. Sucks, people … it sucks.

  5. Tina says:

    The company employees and managers aren’t in need of “sensitivity’ training, they just need to be properly trained! Proper training would result in every customer being treated equally and with respect.

    But one problem for even well trained employees is the homeless/derelict problem. The biggest issue is cleanliness for any store that serves food. The store in question apparently chose this policy due to the amount of time employees were spending trying to keep the bathroom clean. The extra stress couldn’t have helped the situation that the two black men ran into.

    Restricting the use of bathrooms to paying customers is not unusual but having a double standard is. Same for holding down a table while waiting for a friend. But it’s hard to enforce that rule when you also have a policy inviting people sit for hours using the stores wifi.

    We need refresher courses in old fashioned good manners and respect for (all) others. Thirty years of special rights, special excuses, and special entitlement has created a lot of confusion.

    The “traumatized” men, “fearing for their lives” are milking the experience and dramatizing beyond belief…and why not? Prez Obama and Eric Holder created a cottage industry of the traumatized black man. The David Hoggs of the world have shown there’s star power to be had not to mention a possible lawsuit.

    Starbucks is in survival mode…and why not? When people refuse to use common sense and good manners to resolve local issues decently, any business becomes vulnerable to the extreme lawsuit.

    Ever feel like America has been put through a shredder?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *