Starbucks apologizes after employee calls cops on black men waiting at a table. - Sensationalist Headlines

A lot of the replies in this topic were as if the cops were instantly called without the staff prior engaging to the loiterers. Stop trying to play dumb and skirt around the truth. They were trespassing and refused to leave the premise after they were requested so by staff.

"entitlement" Yeah, expecting equal treatment under the law is such entitlement. I'd like to imagine if I were jaywalking with a group of friends and had the police called on me for it. How entitled would I or anyone else who gets upset be if I were the only one to get in trouble out the entire group because I was a dark? Enforce the rules all you'd like, but once you've star selectively picking who you want to kick out, then you're in the wrong.

Law says you can't loiter. They were treated equal as even the police had asked them to leave and they refused.

Are you ignoring the point I'm trying to make?

I'm ignoring everything you try to say because it's based on emotions and feelings. They were fully within their legal right to ask them to leave and then call the police as they refused, then the police politely asked them to vacate the premises which they refused. I have no further opinion on this.

So what your saying is that is it perfectly fine for an employee of an establishment to be picky and choosy with who they decide to enforce a rule on, even if it happens to only happen to the black visitors instead of the white ones who have loitered there a lot longer. But then you say it's illegal for selective enforcement to be based on race...?

https://nytimes.com/2018/04/17/business/starbucks-arrests-racial-bias.html Seems someone within the company believes there's a problem somewhere.

Regardless if this helps the problem or not.. that's a lot of money. Not only in the price of training alone, but shutting down 8,000 stores for a whole day.

Or they’re a responsible company that don’t want to see this happening again, even if it’s a one-off thing in an otherwise really good track-record.

You seem to be operating under the assumption that they were picking and choosing black people to leave the restaurant in this sort of situation. Can you provide evidence of that claim?

Ohoho my man if you think that, as in the perosn who you're responding to's example, that you can kick out only black patrons who violate a rule and not get deep dicked by the law you're delusional.

I understand Joules' point, especially because we don't know if this is a bias thing. I'm sure there's a chance for it, but if you honestly think there's anyway in Hell that two white guys getting arrested for trespassing in a Starbucks will make it into the News, you're delusional. Bottom-line is that if it was because they were black, it's dickish and unjustified, but if they did it without bias, it's dickish and justified. Dick move either way, but I can't tell enough from the story and I don't think anyone knows the legal history of the particular store and employees well enough to make judgements on anyone involved's racial biases.

They were trespassing. Why apologize?

How naive can you get

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk_6AH55CBs

The other white witnesses who posted the video in the first place. Still ignoring the issue mentioned above. Also checking out this guy's channel, it's not telling me great things about him or his biases: "MUELLER NEEDS TO GO RIGHT NOW!!", "liberals this", "black people that", him complaining on Fox news because there wasn't a flag in his son's classroom... yeah.

Mate look I'm try not to patronize you, I know you worked for Overkill but have you worked in a customer service role before? You're expected to uphold unbiased views and present a clean image of the company when dealing with customers, since you ARE the company in the customer's eyes-- and a lot of customers buy into that. Don't know how many times I've had to explain to people that I am not the corporate machine whose uniform I wear.

What about the other white witnesses? Did they also not order anything? Were they there for the same amount of time? Etc. Can you answer those questions? If not, then it's a meaningless answer to the question. With that said, even if everything was exactly the same, that's still a single example, in a single location. It's not anywhere near representative enough to make generalized claims.

Philadelphia Starbucks arrests Lauren said another woman had entered the Starbucks minutes before the men were arrested and was given the bathroom code without having to buy anything and that another person in the restaurant at the time of the incident "announced that she had been sitting at Starbucks for the past couple of hours without buying anything." 2:14 - 2:40 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVKZqbzDUl4

I work at a Burger King across the street from a high school, and lots of kids congregate there. Oftentimes they get very rowdy so we ask them to keep it down and buy something or leave, but as long as they're being chill we usually let them hang out before or after school for a few hours. As long as they aren't disturbing the other customers we don't really care. Doing this to two adults who didn't buy anything but were being peaceful and minding their own business? I can't imagine ever doing that at our restaurant. Especially in Philly where the weather has been taking turns and people just wanna get out of the cold and snow for a few minutes while they wait for the bus or something. Something is really fucked up here.

Getting into the details doesn't really matter, but I'll ask anyway: Was the lady who came to use the restroom someone the Starbucks people recognized? Did she tell them she needed to use it before buying something? Did she buy something after using the restroom? Was the lady who had been sitting there for a few hours with a group who had bought something? Were these men known for coming in and never buying anything? These are really the basic kinds of questions that would need to be asked before coming to any conclusions. These aren't crazy questions. These aren't even unlikely situations that provide alternative explanations. With all that said, did you read the second part of my post? This is still a single situation at a single location.

Why are you bringing up my previous job as if that has any correlation? I did a lot of community interaction, no customer service (and thank fuck that I didn’t) but I’m fully aware that employees are “expected” to represent the company. All I’m saying is that it’s total bullshit that this is the case, that a company (especially one as large and with as many employees as Starbucks for instance) is expected to be held responsible when ONE of their employees steps out of line. I don’t agree with it. I’ve had my fair share of terrible interactions with baristas in coffee shops but I still go to those coffee shops and I don’t think worse of the companies that run them because that’s an insanely narrow-minded thing to do.

I bring it up just to make it clear I'm legitimately not trying to patronize you and make it clear that I'm actually willing to take on your side of the story, rather than just go "lol what ru stupid dont u work tier 14 custserv 9019, prole???".

This is a non story without reaching for racism.

im very glad you've decided you're the arbiter on what is and isnt racist

Not really as I posted a police commissioner explaining what really happened and how it was completely justified. But if what you say is true, I would be doing the same thing by judging this is racist. Then I'm certainly not the person in this thread that you should say that to.

Kind of relevant since people are trying to figure out if Starbucks ever enforces its policies. This happened back in 2015 in the same city. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Post-Alleging-that-Center-City-Starbucks-Refused-to-Let-Officer-Used-Restroom-Goes-Viral-327183651.html