USA : Starbucks boss to apologise after two black men arrested while waiting

[arista]

[The CEO Kevin Johnson says the
coffee chain offers its "deepest apologies"
and will do "whatever we can to make things right".
Mr Johnson said he hoped to "meet personally with the two men who
were arrested to offer a face-to-face apology".
He said the company intended to "investigate the pertinent facts and make
any necessary changes to our practices
that would help prevent such an occurrence from ever happening again".]



Video on this link
https://news.sky.com/story/starbucks-ceo-to-apologise-after-two-black-men-arrested-while-waiting-11332497


Good the CEO
is dealing with this mess

[montblanc]

horrible

a lot of people sit in starbucks without buying anything

[Beso]

Thats a bit much.

[montblanc]

Thats a bit much.

no it itsn’t bc it’s completely unfair :skull:

[Beso]

no it itsn’t bc it’s completely unfair :skull:

Indeed...your point is:shrug:

[montblanc]

Indeed...your point is:shrug:

they were literally ARRESTED for waiting in a starbucks, most likely because their race

[Niamh.]

they were literally ARRESTED for waiting in a starbucks, most likely because their race

One of the men just had a look of resignation on his face like he's just used to stuff like that happening, that's sad

[montblanc]

One of the men just had a look of resignation on his face like he's just used to stuff like that happening, that's sad

it honestly breaks my heart

[Jason.]

It's incredibly tragic things like this still happen in 2018.

[chuff me dizzy]

Nothing to do with skin colour,more a case of bad attitude got them arrested ,they went in Starbucks to use the toilet, something that is against shop rules, they were refused and refused to leave ...............

http://www.phillyvoice.com/starbucks-arrest-philadelphia-center-city-police-investigating/

[montblanc]

Nothing to do with skin colour,more a case of bad attitude got them arrested ,they went in Starbucks to use the toilet, something that is against shop rules, they were refused and refused to leave ...............

http://www.phillyvoice.com/starbucks-arrest-philadelphia-center-city-police-investigating/

where in that article does it say ‘bad attitude’? if they were denied access to the restroom fair enough but why were they asked to leave after that?

again, many people, including me, have sat in a starbucks without purchasing anything

[chuff me dizzy]

where in that article does it say ‘bad attitude’? if they were denied access to the restroom fair enough but why were they asked to leave after that?

again, many people, including me, have sat in a starbucks without purchasing anything

my opinion is bad attitude, you cannot just use a toilet which is for paying customers, be asked to leave and refuse

[montblanc]

my opinion is bad attitude, you cannot just use a toilet which is for paying customers, be asked to leave and refuse

but WHY were they asked to leave after being denied to use the toilet?

[Jason.]

my opinion is bad attitude, you cannot just use a toilet which is for paying customers, be asked to leave and refuse

Except the article states nothing about them being asked to leave after being denied access to the toilet. Fair enough if it's only for paying customers, but then being arrested just for sitting down while waiting for a friend to arrive is a completely different story.

[chuff me dizzy]

but WHY were they asked to leave after being denied to use the toilet?

Because they were not buying anything

[montblanc]

Because they were not buying anything

but you don’t have to buy anything to be able to sit in starbucks

[chuff me dizzy]

but you don’t have to buy anything to be able to sit in starbucks

Says who ?

[chuff me dizzy]

I don't know why the race was mentioned in the first place. Race has got zero impact in the story apart from people who choose to use the race card. If the two men were intending using the toilet before buying something then fair enough, Starbucks failed (I don't know anyone who buys a coffee then takes it in the toilet with them). I know what you mean regarding the deliberate use of the facilities but again, we don't have the full details.

[arista]

Says who ?

USA Starbucks

They were waiting for another person to arrive.

[chuff me dizzy]

USA Starbucks

They were waiting for another person to arrive.

They came in and asked to use the toilet,they were refused ,no one knows if they got stroppy with the staff,but making an issue out of it and claiming its racist is a tad pathetic

[Maru]

I've had meetings in Starbucks before, and I don't always buy anything. In fact, I used to eat my lunch in there all the time... the only time they're fussy is when you're squatting with a laptop for an extended amount of time hooked up to juice, don't buy anything and the place is super busy.

[Ashley.]

I don't know why the race was mentioned in the first place. Race has got zero impact in the story apart from people who choose to use the race card. If the two men were intending using the toilet before buying something then fair enough, Starbucks failed (I don't know anyone who buys a coffee then takes it in the toilet with them). I know what you mean regarding the deliberate use of the facilities but again, we don't have the full details.

Black men are far more likely to be stopped by the police, searched, or arrested, than any other group. That's why race is being mentioned. That's the issue. And I believe that if it had been two white men, the police wouldn't have been called in the first place.

[Niamh.]

Black men are far more likely to be stopped by the police, searched, or arrested, than any other group. That's why race is being mentioned. That's the issue. And I believe that if it had been two white men, the police wouldn't have been called in the first place.

and they probably would have allowed them use the toilet too. I've often used the toilet in places like that and have never been told I couldn't

[user104658]

Their real crime was not ordering a caramel machiatto. I'd have arrested them too.

(But no, I don't let non customers use the toilets. We're not allowed because we kept finding needles in the cistern. FUUU I really hate my job :joker: )

[Maru]

According to a witness, they were in the shop for only 15 minutes before police were called. Which if true, is beyond ridiculous.

[Crimson Dynamo]

so staff thought they looked dodgy and called the cops?

bearing in mind where the store is perhaps the staff had a right to be wary?

impossible to really say when you have only one side of the story

still lets get the banners out and march..


:idc:

[Niamh.]

so staff thought they looked dodgy and called the cops?

bearing in mind where the store is perhaps the staff had a right to be wary?

impossible to really say when you have only one side of the story

still lets get the banners out and march..


:idc:

Yes i think this is the main problem LT............ :laugh:

[Mystic Mock]

Nothing to do with skin colour,more a case of bad attitude got them arrested ,they went in Starbucks to use the toilet, something that is against shop rules, they were refused and refused to leave ...............

http://www.phillyvoice.com/starbucks-arrest-philadelphia-center-city-police-investigating/

Shouldn't the Toilet be open to everybody though?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Shouldn't the Toilet be open to everybody though?

of course not, its for folk in the shop who buy sh1t

[Oliver_W]

Shouldn't the Toilet be open to everybody though?

It should be up to the business whether or not "everybody" can use the toilet. Especially in examples like TS' workplace where they find needles.

[Mystic Mock]

of course not, its for folk in the shop who buy sh1t

Every shop that I've ever been allows the Toilet to be accessible to anybody.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes i think this is the main problem LT............ :laugh:

i dont see what is the problem calling the cops on a couple of dodgy men, i guess the problem is why were they subsequently arrested unless they cheeked the cops or refused to leave when asked?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Every shop that I've ever been allows the Toilet to be accessible to anybody.

er no i dont think so

that is what council provided public lavatories are for

[Mystic Mock]

It should be up to the business whether or not "everybody" can use the toilet. Especially in examples like TS' workplace where they find needles.

But what if you really need to go?:laugh:

I get the argument as to why not everybody is allowed to use the Toilet, but overall I feel that the majority are being punished for the minority that do use the Toilets for plonking needles in them.

[Niamh.]

i dont see what is the problem calling the cops on a couple of dodgy men, i guess the problem is why were they subsequently arrested unless they cheeked the cops or refused to leave when asked?

Yes you don't see the problem, I know

[Mystic Mock]

er no i dont think so

that is what council provided public lavatories are for

Well I've never been in a Starbuck's, but in every shop that I've ever been in has allowed me to use the Toilets, I should know as I've been in them and it was okay'd by staff.

[Nicky91]

oh god, but anyway even negative attention still is attention for Starbucks

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes you don't see the problem, I know

Oh wait they are black so they cant be up to no good?

I doubt the staff saw colour, well done them keeping customers safe


I hope they get a bonus for vigilance

[Niamh.]

Oh wait they are black so they cant be up to no good?

I doubt the staff saw colour, well done them keeping customers safe


I hope they get a bonus for vigilance

I'm sure you do

[user104658]

Well I've never been in a Starbuck's, but in every shop that I've ever been in has allowed me to use the Toilets, I should know as I've been in them and it was okay'd by staff.

To be fair though... when I say that our toilets are "customers only" that's really just the official line. If you, or anyone else here, walked in I almost certainly would let you use the toilet no problem. "Customers Only" really means "Staff's Discretion", I suppose.

Then again, I obviously wouldn't racially profile anyone. If I'm not letting you in, it's because you're drunk or on something else.

[bots]

Well I've never been in a Starbuck's, but in every shop that I've ever been in has allowed me to use the Toilets, I should know as I've been in them and it was okay'd by staff.

Many shops, pubs etc have signs up saying for paying customers only. I would say it's probably a 50/50 split.

[Mystic Mock]

To be fair though... when I say that our toilets are "customers only" that's really just the official line. If you, or anyone else here, walked in I almost certainly would let you use the toilet no problem. "Customers Only" really means "Staff's Discretion", I suppose.

Then again, I obviously wouldn't racially profile anyone. If I'm not letting you in, it's because you're drunk or on something else.

Oh I get not wanting to invite trouble into your shop, like personally I wouldn't want Drunks or Druggies going into a Shop that I worked at if they're just gonna cause trouble.

[Mystic Mock]

Many shops, pubs etc have signs up saying for paying customers only. I would say it's probably a 50/50 split.

Maybe I've just not noticed before in Shops because I normally go into Shops to buy stuff?

[Crimson Dynamo]

its junkies that are the main problem and coke users

[Mystic Mock]

its junkies that are the main problem and coke users

But I love my junk.:hehe:

[user104658]

its junkies that are the main problem and coke users

I dunno. The heroin users sometimes fall asleep in there or leave drug paraphernalia and yes, that's bad but... ... ... ... it's the drunks that ****ing piss and sh*t up the walls / in the sink / just everywhere. Which IMO is worse.

[montblanc]

i dont see what is the problem calling the cops on a couple of dodgy men, i guess the problem is why were they subsequently arrested unless they cheeked the cops or refused to leave when asked?

so it's ok to call the police if you think someone is 'dodgy'

they're weren't disturbing anyone, the people around them even said so

[montblanc]

i'm confused at a few of the people in this thread saying that they were 'dodgy' or had 'bad attitudes'

the people around them were very confused as to why they were being arrested so surely if they were any of those things, the bystanders wouldn't be so adamant in displaying how unfortunate their arrest was

[Crimson Dynamo]

so it's ok to call the police if you think someone is 'dodgy'

they're weren't disturbing anyone, the people around them even said so

Yes, staff were worried for customers safety - could be pickpockets or the like or terrorists regardless of race.

Always be vigilant that is what we are told

[Amy Jade]

I use the toilets in the starbucks in town all the time without buying anything. I never knew you couldn't.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I use the toilets in the starbucks in town all the time without buying anything. I never knew you couldn't.

Its for customers, do you let people use your loo at home off the street?

[Amy Jade]

Its for customers, do you let people use your loo at home off the street?

Depends who it is, I let the sky man who was fitting something next door come in for a wee the other week and the post lady who delivers around here comes in sometimes too...although I technically know her she used to be my dinnerlady so thats cheating I guess

Plus I have asked in Starbucks and never been refused.

[Amy Jade]

I go for a wee in maccys too if I am out in town. Always cleaner than waiting til I get to the next bar!

[Beso]

What about hoodies Ts..whats the opinion on those?

[LukeB]

I use the toilets in the starbucks in town all the time without buying anything. I never knew you couldn't.

Same :worry:, i only go when i need to because who would want to piss themselves in public?

[montblanc]

What about hoodies Ts..whats the opinion on those?

i don't see a problem

[montblanc]

Yes, staff were worried for customers safety - could be pickpockets or the like or terrorists regardless of race.

Always be vigilant that is what we are told

ok so from your perspective, what makes these particular individuals 'worrying'

[Amy Jade]

Same :worry:, i only go when i need to because who would want to piss themselves in public?

If I worked somewhere and somebody needed the toilet I would let them even if the policy was buy or no loos. Why would you make somebody suffer?

[Crimson Dynamo]

ok so from your perspective, what makes these particular individuals 'worrying'

you need to address that question to the worried employees who saw fit to alert law enforcement

[LukeB]

If I worked somewhere and somebody needed the toilet I would let them even if the policy was buy or no loos. Why would you make somebody suffer?

Me too. No one deserves the embarrassment if they peed/pooed themselves which could lead to them having a rash and the public close by don't deserve to smell what they did either, very unhygienic.

When you have to go you have to go, i'm sure people would want to hold whatever they need but sometimes you can't and you don't have long.

[montblanc]

you need to address that question to the worried employees who saw fit to alert law enforcement

i guess

but i still think this had racial undertones with it but fair enough

[Denver]

They came in and asked to use the toilet,they were refused ,no one knows if they got stroppy with the staff,but making an issue out of it and claiming its racist is a tad pathetic

So you are saying you made up what ypou posted earlier to defend racism?

[Denver]

That boss should be sacked named and shamed

[chuff me dizzy]

So you are saying you made up what ypou posted earlier to defend racism?

Can you please find and quote on where i defended racism ? and you can also show proof this was about race and not attitude,... Thank you :love:

[Denver]

Can you please find and quote on where i defended racism ? and you can also show proof this was about race and not attitude,... Thank you :love:

Did you not say they had a bad attitude and were asked to leave? Did you not then post later that nobody knows if they threw a strop

[Crimson Dynamo]

That boss should be sacked named and shamed

For?

[Denver]

For?

Clear racism

[Twosugars]

you need to address that question to the worried employees who saw fit to alert law enforcement

I think the CEO reaction means the staff had no reason to get them arrested. Otherwise there would be no scandal.

[chuff me dizzy]

Did you not say they had a bad attitude and were asked to leave? Did you not then post later that nobody knows if they threw a strop

I said it could have been a bad attitude problem that got them arrested and if you watched the video its clear they are bloody arrogant ,did you find the post from me about race ?

[chuff me dizzy]

Clear racism

And your proof is ?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Clear racism

They called the cops because they were asked to leave and would not, the lady was worried

its nowt to do with race

[Denver]

I said it could have been a bad attitude problem that got them arrested and if you watched the video its clear they are bloody arrogant ,did you find the post from me about race ?

And your proof is ?

Do you see the part where the white man was asking why they were being arrested and saying they did nothing wrong? Or did you choose to just ignore that part?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I said it could have been a bad attitude problem that got them arrested and if you watched the video its clear they are bloody arrogant ,did you find the post from me about race ?

sitting on a seat for ages, ordering nothing, denying people a seat, absolutely vile behavoir

[chuff me dizzy]

They called the cops because they were asked to leave and would not, the lady was worried

its nowt to do with race

Exactly LT ,but the truth doesn't sit well with people with agendas !! Sad isn't it ?

[montblanc]

Do you see the part where the white man was asking why they were being arrested and saying they did nothing wrong? Or did you choose to just ignore that part?

exactly what i've been saying

saying that they have a 'bad attitude' is an unfair assumption especially when the bystanders around them said otherwise

[chuff me dizzy]

Do you see the part where the white man was asking why they were being arrested and saying they did nothing wrong? Or did you choose to just ignore that part?

Did you find the post where I defended racism yet ? come on chop chop Ive not got all night, places to go,people to see

[Denver]

It was in your attitude

[Denver]

Racists should face the death penalty tbh scummiest people on earth

[Crimson Dynamo]

Racists should face the death penalty tbh scummiest people on earth

and this was the point where your arguments all fell apart...

:facepalm:

[Beso]

Do you see the part where the white man was asking why they were being arrested and saying they did nothing wrong? Or did you choose to just ignore that part?

Their friend hadnt been there b4 the cops arrived, he knows diddly.

[Denver]

I'm sorry but you are a white British male you have never suffered any sort of prejudice in life

[Amy Jade]

Why was the woman worried by the way? Other patrons were saying they did not desrve arresting, they seemingly adhered to the 'policy' that you cannot use the toilets if you do not buy anything and they were simply waiting for someone...why was the person worried??

[Denver]

Why was the woman worried by the way? Other patrons were saying they did not desrve arresting, they seemingly adhered to the 'policy' that you cannot use the toilets if you do not buy anything and they were simply waiting for someone...why was the person worried??

Because there black

[Beso]

I'm sorry but you are a white British male you have never suffered any sort of prejudice in life

Im a white scottish male....and yes we have...by you lot..if you are english...do we bleat on and on about it?




Well aye, we do.:joker:

[Denver]

Ypou don't get discriminatied against in the 1st few seconds of being seen

[chuff me dizzy]

I'm sorry but you are a white British male you have never suffered any sort of prejudice in life

I think its your attitude that causes any prejudice you claim to have had sunbeam ,nothing to do with skin colour

[Amy Jade]

Because there black

I mean it seems that way but a lot of the replies here seem to say the person was worried so called the police. Why was she worried all they did was sat waiting for a friend. What is worrying about that?

[chuff me dizzy]

and this was the point where your arguments all fell apart...

:facepalm:

Wow just wow :shocked:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Why was the woman worried by the way? Other patrons were saying they did not desrve arresting, they seemingly adhered to the 'policy' that you cannot use the toilets if you do not buy anything and they were simply waiting for someone...why was the person worried??

Again you would need to ask her but something about them made her worried enough to call the cops.

I think the 2 men need to have a good hard look at their demeanor and attitude if you ask me

[Denver]

I think its your attitude that causes any prejudice you claim to have had sunbeam ,nothing to do with skin colour

Would you call the police on an old woman who came in because she needed a sit down? Or is the hotline only for POC?

[Twosugars]

Racists should face the death penalty tbh scummiest people on earth

wouldn't go that far, but it is one of the stupidest prejudices there is.
I even don't like the terms: black and white, and their stark opposition to one another. We are not fooking white - we are beige, they are not fooking black, but different shades of brown. Brown and beige - already it sounds better and is less of an issue.

[Amy Jade]

Again you would need to ask her but something about them made her worried enough to call the cops.

I think the 2 men need to have a good hard look at their demeanor and attitude if you ask me

You have absoloutely no proof their demeanor or attitude were negative or bad though do you? You won't let anyone assume it was a a race thing but you freely assume the two black men were at fault because they have bad attitudes? Hmm :think:

[chuff me dizzy]

You have absoloutely no proof their demeanor or attitude were negative or bad though do you? You won't let anyone assume it was a a race thing but you freely assume the two black men were at fault because they have bad attitudes? Hmm :think:

And YOU have no proof it was because they were black either

[Amy Jade]

And YOU have no proof it was because they were black either

I didn't say it was? but it certainly indicates to that though.

You're the one actually trying to push your thoughts as facts not me.

[chuff me dizzy]

I didn't say it was? but it certainly indicates to that though.

You're the one actually trying to push your thoughts as facts not me.

Not a fact

[Amy Jade]

Not a fact

Neither is it a fact they had a bad attitude but you are saying they did. Any proof?

[chuff me dizzy]

Neither is it a fact they had a bad attitude but you are saying they did. Any proof?

They got arrested Will that do ? or what about .... They refused to leave when asked ?

[montblanc]

Again you would need to ask her but something about them made her worried enough to call the cops.

I think the 2 men need to have a good hard look at their demeanor and attitude if you ask me

that's a very ignorant thing to say LT

[Crimson Dynamo]

You have absoloutely no proof their demeanor or attitude were negative or bad though do you? You won't let anyone assume it was a a race thing but you freely assume the two black men were at fault because they have bad attitudes? Hmm :think:

Yes i have

the lady employee called the police


simple as that

[Amy Jade]

They got arrested ? Will that do ? or what about .... They refused to leave when asked ?

They were standing up for their right to be in the shop, they had done no wrong to be asked to leave. So again, do you have proof they had a bad attitude or are you just presuming?

The fact the boss of the chain in question has said sorry speaks volumes.

[LukeB]

Yes i have

the lady employee called the police


simple as that

:joker:

is that all the evidence you got? oh dear. Anyone can ring the police over anything. You wasn't there and don't know what happened.

[Amy Jade]

Yes i have

the lady employee called the police


simple as that

The boss has apologised for her actions.

[chuff me dizzy]

They were standing up for their right to be in the shop, they had done no wrong to be asked to leave. So again, do you have proof they had a bad attitude or are you just presuming?

The fact the boss of the chain in question has said sorry speaks volumes.

They had no rights to use the toilet as they were not customers ,they had no right to plonk themselves down without being a customer ,the boss has said sorry because maybe his back was against the wall with idiots shouting racism

[montblanc]

They had no rights to use the toilet as they were not customers ,they had no right to plonk themselves down without being a customer ,the boss has said sorry because maybe his back was against the wall with idiots shouting racism

other people who weren't buying anything, who happened to be white, were also sitting there

they were even questioning it themselves

[Amy Jade]

They had no rights to use the toilet as they were not customers ,they had no right to plonk themselves down without being a customer ,the boss has said sorry because maybe his back was against the wall with idiots shouting racism

They were told not to use the toilets and didn't. If you look online there is no starbucks policy they can refuse you a seat. White customers in the shop were also sitting down without a drink too were the police called on them too?

Again you are presuming the boss has said sorry because he was 'against a wall' any proof of that, Chuff?

[Ashley.]

i'm confused at a few of the people in this thread saying that they were 'dodgy' or had 'bad attitudes'

the people around them were very confused as to why they were being arrested so surely if they were any of those things, the bystanders wouldn't be so adamant in displaying how unfortunate their arrest was

Yeah it's interesting. Nowhere in the article does it state the reason the police were called, or whether these two men were rude to staff/other customers. Witnesses state that they had done nothing wrong, Starbucks are apologising and have said that the police shouldn't have been called. Proof enough, but people are still trying to make out as though these men have done something wrong. Happens all the time.

[Shaun]

Yeah it's interesting. Nowhere in the article does it state the reason the police were called, or whether these two men were rude to staff/other customers. Witnesses state that they had done nothing wrong, Starbucks are apologising and have said that the police shouldn't have been called. Proof enough, but people are still trying to make out as though these men have done something wrong. Happens all the time.

Easier to shoe-horn recent news stories into their anti-police bashing, "anti-PC" agenda than it is to read the specifics of what happened, I guess.

[Amy Jade]

If they two guys were causing trouble and being rude I am sure none of the other customers would have sided with them either.

[Beso]

They refused to leave after the police had asked them to 3 times..they were then arrested and released without charge.

[Beso]

Neither is it a fact they had a bad attitude but you are saying they did. Any proof?

They refused to leave after the police had asked them to 3 times...thats a bad attitude.

[montblanc]

They refused to leave after the police had asked them to 3 times...thats a bad attitude.

but WHY were they asked to leave prior to that

'if you ask to use our restroom, we'll call the police on you' yeah that makes total sense

[Beso]

but WHY were they asked to leave prior to that

'if you ask to use our restroom, we'll call the police on you' yeah that makes total sense

They came in, asked to use the toilet...the lady used her judgement and said no..then followed up on that judgement by asking them to leave...they refused leaving her nonoption but to call the police.....


They then refused to leave 3 times when asked by the police so were arrested.


I think the womans judgement was spot on.

[Kazanne]

A lot of places don't like you using their toilets unless you patronise their business, I also feel a bit rude when I have done it , only ever do it when I've been desperate. but I would never just go and sit in a café etc , just to wait for someone , I would always buy something. This isn't about skin colour, it's about attitude.

[montblanc]

They came in, asked to use the toilet...the lady used her judgement and said no..then followed up on that judgement by asking them to leave...they refused leaving her nonoption but to call the police.....


They then refused to leave 3 times when asked by the police so were arrested.


I think the womans judgement was spot on.

well her 'judgement' obviously had some sort of hidden agenda behind it because if they were 'so suspicious', i sure the other people sitting in the cafe would've felt it

instead they were all questioning why they had been arrested for no reason at all

[montblanc]

A lot of places don't like you using their toilets unless you patronise their business, I also feel a bit rude when I have done it , only ever do it when I've been desperate but sometimes you just got to go. but I would never just go and sit in a café etc , just to wait for someone , I would always buy something. This isn't about skin colour, it's about attitude.

again with the attitude :laugh:

again, many other people were sitting without buying anything but they weren't arrested

[Beso]

And starbucks refused a police officer the use of thier facilities last year...

[Ashley.]

Again, the whole 'attitude' thing cropping up, despite no evidence suggesting that they had an attitude. So desperate to make these men look guilty, for what reason? :shrug:

[Kazanne]

again with the attitude :laugh:

again, many other people were sitting without buying anything but they weren't arrested

It comes down to manners , you either have them or you don't :wavey:

[montblanc]

And starbucks refused a police officer the use of thier facilities last year...

i don't see how that's not relevant to this discussion

if you're trying to compare that to this situation then was that police officer arrested?

[LukeB]

Again, the whole 'attitude' thing cropping up, despite no evidence suggesting that they had an attitude. So desperate to make these men look guilty, for what reason? :shrug:

But she phoned the police!!!

but yeah you're right, the desperation of trying to make these men look guilty is :unsure: strange.

but the reason is probably obvious.

[montblanc]

It comes down to manners , you either have them or you don't :wavey:

yeah but why were they singled out and arrested for it when other white people were doing the same thing?

[Beso]

i don't see how that's not relevant to this discussion

if you're trying to compare that to this situation then was that police officer arrested?



No, i think he had the decency to think of the paying customers, so he did what any decent person would by dropping it and leaving...

[Kazanne]

Again, the whole 'attitude' thing cropping up, despite no evidence suggesting that they had an attitude. So desperate to make these men look guilty, for what reason? :shrug:

They were asked to leave for a reason,they may know these men,they maybe trouble makers,none of us were there so we don't actually have any proof either way, but I really don't think they would have been asked to leave if something hadn't cracked off, what would be the point :? shrug: I may have no evidence of attitude just as you have no evidence of them doing nothing.

[Beso]

Again, the whole 'attitude' thing cropping up, despite no evidence suggesting that they had an attitude. So desperate to make these men look guilty, for what reason? :shrug:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ydr.com/amp/517779002

[Kazanne]

yeah but why were they singled out and arrested for it when other white people were doing the same thing?

Were you their ? I doubt it so you don't know that is fact, they could have said anything that people were not aware of,you don't call the police for nothing.

[montblanc]

They were asked to leave for a reason,they may know these men,they maybe trouble makers,none of us were there so we don't actually have any proof either way, but I really don't think they would have been asked to leave if something hadn't cracked off, what would be the point :? shrug: I may have no evidence of attitude just as you have no evidence of them doing nothing.

the other people around them said that they were doing nothing

and you saying that you "don't think they would have been asked to leave if something hadn't cracked off" is a bit ignorant as you're denying any possibly of some sort of prejudiced judgment against them (or anyone for that matter)

[Beso]

Were you their ? I doubt it so you don't know that is fact, they could have said anything that people were not aware of,you don't call the police for nothing.

The police were called because they refused to leave after being refused the toilet like the copper last year...he left though..sensible man.

[Ashley.]

They were asked to leave for a reason,they may know these men,they maybe trouble makers,none of us were there so we don't actually have any proof either way, but I really don't think they would have been asked to leave if something hadn't cracked off, what would be the point :? shrug: I may have no evidence of attitude just as you have no evidence of them doing nothing.

Witnesses stated that they'd done nothing wrong, they have no reason to lie/defend these men. Which is more evidence than you seem to be showing to back up your assumptions.

[montblanc]

Were you their ? I doubt it so you don't know that is fact, they could have said anything that people were not aware of,you don't call the police for nothing.

the white people around them said it themselves in the article

[Beso]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ydr.com/amp/517779002

[Denver]

Only people who hate the black race will think those men had a attitude

[Ashley.]

The police were called because they refused to leave after being refused the toilet like the copper last year...he left though..sensible man.

No, the police were called because the two men wouldn't leave. They never refused. Because they were never asked.

[Beso]

And YOU have no proof it was because they were black either

And nobody knows the ethnicity of the starbucks employee.:joker:

[Amy Jade]

They refused to leave after the police had asked them to 3 times...thats a bad attitude.

No it's not. They had done nothing wrong, why would they be asked to leave and other customers step up and say they did nothing wrong if they had?

Other customers were seated who had not paid for any goods either so why specifically pick on those two?

[montblanc]

And nobody knows the ethnicity of the starbucks employee.:joker:

it wouldn't matter

[Beso]

No, the police were called because the two men wouldn't leave. They never refused. Because they were never asked.

Thats not what the police commisioner is saying.....he is saying they refused...he is black.

[Denver]

80% of the American police are racist scum

[Kazanne]

the other people around them said that they were doing nothing

and you saying that you "don't think they would have been asked to leave if something hadn't cracked off" is a bit ignorant as you're denying any possibly of some sort of prejudiced judgment against them (or anyone for that matter)

They probably weren't doing 'nothing' but also no one knows if they said something to the staff or whoever reported them,or maybe they were just asked to leave as they weren't buying anything, there could be several reasons,I wasn't there, it's Starbucks call it's their shop I find it ignorant to assume that it was because they were 'black'. It could well be something as simple as Starbucks have a rule about the toilets being for customers only,lots of shops etc have that policy, I am not denying anything and neither am I assuming .

[montblanc]

They probably weren't doing 'nothing' but also no one knows if they said something to the staff or whoever reported them,or maybe they were just asked to leave as they weren't buying anything, there could be several reasons,I wasn't there, it's Starbucks call it's their shop I find it ignorant to assume that it was because they were 'black'. It could well be something as simple as Starbucks have a rule about the toilets being for customers only,lots of shops etc have that policy, I am not denying anything and neither am I assuming .

if it even was that simple that doesn’t justify asking people to leave or arresting them if they had only asked to use the restroom

[Beso]

So you walk into a small shop and ask to use the bog but get told no its for paying customers only.....what do you do?

Walk out and try the next one?

Or stand about menacingly after being asked to leave....still obviously bursting on that pee you so desperately need that you couldnt take your pishyness away from everyone to the actual toilet toilet probably 20 yards away...


And if that bloke was meeting them, and not just talking out his arse causing more damage than good with his actions then am mary poppins.

[Kazanne]

if it even was that simple that doesn’t justify asking people to leave or arresting them if they had only asked to use the restroom

If it is their shop they have the right to ask anyone to leave and wasn't it the police who arrested them so are the police prejudiced aswell?

[Ashley.]

So you walk into a small shop and ask to use the bog but get told no its for paying customers only.....what do you do?

Walk out and try the next one?

Or stand about menacingly after being asked to leave....still obviously bursting on that pee you so desperately need that you couldnt take your pishyness away from everyone to the actual toilet toilet probably 20 yards away...


And if that bloke was meeting them, and not just talking out his arse causing more damage than good with his actions then am mary poppins.

They were sitting down, actually.

Who mentioned menacingly, anyway? No proof of that whatsoever.

[Beso]

They were sitting down, actually.

Who mentioned menacingly, anyway? No proof of that whatsoever.


Have you read the link i posted?

[Jamie89]

If they were a couple of elderly white ladies this would never have happened and you all know it. Racism doesn't have to be explicit for it to be obvious.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If they were a couple of elderly white ladies this would never have happened and you all know it. Racism doesn't have to be explicit for it to be obvious.

what a pointless comparison

if they were a couple of muslims with backpacks, what then?

or two schoolgirls

or ant and dec

get a grip

[AnnieK]

what a pointless comparison

if they were a couple of muslims with backpacks, what then?

or two schoolgirls

or ant and dec

get a grip


Could be an interesting experiment. Two old ladies, two muslims, two teenagers etc all hit different Starbucks at the same time asking to use the bathrooms without purchasing anything just to see what reaction they get. i would imagine the results would be illuminating.

[Niamh.]

Indeed

[Amy Jade]

Could be an interesting experiment. Two old ladies, two muslims, two teenagers etc all hit different Starbucks at the same time asking to use the bathrooms without purchasing anything just to see what reaction they get. i would imagine the results would be illuminating.

You may enjoy the youtube channel What Would You Do? Annie, they do experiments just like that so see how the public react.

[AnnieK]

You may enjoy the youtube channel What Would You Do? Annie, they do experiments just like that so see how the public react.

I'll check it out Amy, thanks :love:

[GiRTh]

You may enjoy the youtube channel What Would You Do? Annie, they do experiments just like that so see how the public react.8ABRlWybBqM

[Maru]

This story has a lot of emotional bias surrounding it, so I'll just cut to the chase. The lady who took the video is only just a bit overzealous. I read her twitter account and she's fully on board with making this into a political matter... Twitter is known for smear campaigns and this is not the exception, as she and others are intent on going after Starbucks and posting the business cards of the shop employees in order to encourage a witch hunt... Other people were on there posting they're cutting up gift cards, deleting apps, boycotting simply because Starbucks weren't quick enough to call it racial profiling, because they wanted a little time to investigate what actually happened and get all the facts first... that seems reasonable. Twitter's reaction? Not so much.

I see two sides to the reaction. One side wants to defend the shop staff no matter because there must be "some reason" these people were singled out and asked to leave... and the other side wants to get behind the underdog, because there's the emotional element to it, and because there's just "no good reason" they were removed from the shop...

What's true for both sides, is people are choosing to side with whichever they feel is the "good guy", i.e. whatever makes them feel good... in other words, we're playing judge, jury and executioner without all the facts... in either case, both conclusions are emotionally biased and we're not mind readers.

My thought, it's horrible bad customer service to call the police on someone who had only been in your shop for 15 minutes for "trespassing". Especially when coffee shops are common public meeting areas. Is it unreasonable to meet a client for example, in a public location, where other people often congregate and have small interviews and consultations? Or to exchange money? Or to meet a stranger for the first time? Was it racial profiling? Quite possibly. Can we know for sure? No. Maybe the manager woke up on the wrong side of the bed, went on a power trip that day after they didn't get their way... the patron's attitude may have very well been very rude, but how much of that rudeness was overly unreasonable? Or rather, how uncommon really is a sh***y customer? :laugh: Many people hate being told they can't use the bathroom if they're not paying customers. And staff always hate when customers come in and be complete d*cks. Still ridiculous to get the police involved when there was no obvious safety issue or any sort of altercation. So I think the mgr/staff may have bit off more than they could chew by calling the police, as they escalated a situation that could've easily been resolved with a compromise...

Ask yourself what would be reasonable for you. If you were only in a shop for 15 minutes, and you asked to use the bathroom while waiting for a friend, and you were refused and told to buy something or leave. You'd probably be pretty unhappy. Especially if you really had to pee.... but maybe you didn't feel like just leaving and wanted to make a point of it. Maybe the manager sees this and decides to go on a power trip and so the police are called because you dared to tell them in their shop where they should shove it and it becomes a battle of egos... this absolutely does happen in customer service and so I can see this also being a possibility. The low wage employee and the customer both thinking they have the upper hand in that battle and both deciding to stick it to one another. So rather than leave, the customers stick around to make a point...

99% of the time, it's not worth fighting the customer on a policy that could be relaxed. It's not worth the headache, it's not worth potentially escalating it and it's certainly not worth your job... so the fact that they go so far to fight the customer anyway and call the police instead, that makes me think the customer service at that Starbucks is total crap or that particular staff member are very unprofessional. Only because there's no other reason being given why the police were called. Did they break property? Did they scream at other customers? Oh they're just upset? So what? The staff could easily make an exception in that case to allow them RR access to deescalate the situation... and then soon they would be on their way and no longer a problem.

The police shouldn't be called in to solve such petty disputes. They could've handled it without the police being called... is my opinion.

[AnnieK]

ge7i60GuNRg

Illuminating.....if it wasn't so sadly real it would be funny.

[GiRTh]

Illuminating.....if it wasn't so sadly real it would be funny.
Posted a longer version that shows more responses.

[Maru]

8ABRlWybBqM

Good find

[GiRTh]

Good findActually I've posted this vid a few times over the years on the forum. As an experiment I think its flawed and I would encourage people to watch the longer vid to get a better perspective. I think we can all take from this vid that men are horny. :laugh: The guy who let her steal the bike in front of his wife. :joker:

[Maru]

Actually I've posted this vid a few times over the years on the forum. As an experiment I think its flawed and I would encourage people to watch the longer vid to get a better perspective. I think we can all take from this vid that men are horny. :laugh: The guy who let her steal the bike in front of his wife. :joker:

Yeah the one with the girl was pretty hilarious. :laugh: I can kind of relate. When I walk into Home Depot and pick up supplies, I'm asked by several employees (and other customers) if I need help and everyone is so gracious about it. I walk in with my husband and we spend the next 15 years looking for an associate to get some help.

[GiRTh]

They did one where a guy was harassing a woman in a bar, but I cant find it. It was quite enlightening the number of people who helped her.

sSFN_wPKuhM

This isnt the one I was referring to and its a bit off topic but well done to the people who helped her.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You're not a mod.

We have no Mods they all got sacked or resigned

Unless you know otherwise

[Maru]

ANOTHER Racially-Charged Starbucks Video Goes Viral
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29516/another-racially-charged-starbucks-video-goes-james-barrett

985896896433602565

[Maru]

Another perspective from a right-wing source...

WALSH: Here's Why You Shouldn't Necessarily Believe The Racism Claims Against Starbucks
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29525/walsh-starbucks-matt-walsh

Starbucks is in the process of being consumed by the liberal pitchfork mob it spent years placating. It's certainly tempting to sit back and enjoy the schadenfreude. But my disdain for pitchfork mobs is greater than my disdain for liberal corporations, so I will now do something I never thought I would do: defend Starbucks. Sort of.

Let's first take a look at the mess Starbucks has fallen into. The company is currently the subject of protests and boycotts and extremely bad press because of two "racist" incidents that occurred in two different locations over the span of a few days. It all started when a video surfaced of two black men being arrested at a store in Philadelphia. We were not given many details — and still we do not have many details — but the image of two black men being led out in cuffs was enough, in the minds of the mob, to prove bigotry. No other explanation has been entertained. No further evidence has been sought.

Then, on Monday, a video from a Starbucks in Los Angeles went viral. In this case, a black man was denied the code to the bathroom because he was not a paying customer. He then took out his phone and began filming. He discovered that a white man had been given access to the bathroom without buying anything, so he proceeded to berate the manager on duty (who was, by appearances, not white). Now that manager's face has been plastered everywhere online, and she has been labeled a bigot and a racist without anyone stopping to even consider what her side of the story might be.

Perhaps racism is really the culprit in both cases. Perhaps it is the culprit in one and not the other. But a rational and honest person would want to consider the entire context of these incidents before accusing anyone of something as serious as racism. It is just unfortunate that there aren't very many rational or honest people left in America. And there are none at all in a pitchfork mob.

The situation in Philadelphia obviously looks quite bad, but looks — especially the look of a viral video devoid of context — can be deceptive. Here is the missing context (or some of it, anyway): the two men were sitting in the store, taking up seats, without having actually purchased anything. That is, technically, loitering and trespassing. It just so happens that the Starbucks in Philadelphia has a policy against loitering. Loitering is apparently a significant problem at that location and the manager says that she has had some tense moments with loiterers in the past, including one incident where someone chased her around the store after refusing to leave.

The store employees tried to deal with the men peacefully. The men were informed that only customers can sit at the tables or use the restrooms — which is, again, a policy that this particular establishment has a history of enforcing — but the two refused to abide by the policy. When they were told that the police would have to be called, they responded, "Go ahead and call the police. We don't care."

The police arrived and negotiated with the men for several minutes. Still they would not leave. Finally the officers arrested them because there was literally no other option. A police officer cannot just allow someone to trespass on private property. If a trespasser will not clear off the premises, the police cannot say, "Well, okay, then. Never mind." They must uphold the law.

Of course it is claimed that white people loiter in Starbucks all the time without being asked to leave. This must prove that these men were singled out for their race. Perhaps it does. But if the men were arrested for "being black in Starbucks," you'd think there must be many similar stories from that same Starbucks location. Presumably, the Starbucks in Philadelphia has hundreds of black patrons come in and out every single week. If the manager is so uncontrollably racist that she actually called the cops on two black men simply because they are black, why didn't she do the same with any of the hundreds or thousands of other black customers she's seen in the store?

And here's another question: Has this manager ever done the same to white people? She says she has enforced the loitering rule plenty of times in the past. Were they always black people? If she has done exactly the same to people of her own race, wouldn't that disprove racism with absolute certainty? Are we sure that the loitering policy at the Starbucks in Philadelphia was enforced based on skin color? How are we sure? Does someone have proof?

The bathroom incident in Los Angeles is even murkier. It is standard policy in almost any urban restaurant or store of any kind to give bathroom privileges only to paying customers. Just last week I was refused the restroom at a cafe in D.C. because I hadn't purchased anything. So, I purchased something. It never occurred to me that my rights may have been infringed upon.

It is not necessarily significant that a white man had been able to use the restroom even as a black man was not. It could be evidence of racism, or it could simply be that the white man is a regular customer and the staff knew he would buy something. Regular customers often enjoy special privilege, regardless of their race. It could also be that he was given the restroom code by an employee who was more lax about the rules, and the black man was refused the code by an employee who was not so lax. Either of these explanations seem more plausible than the idea that a non-white woman working at a Starbucks in Los Angeles is racist against black people. Again, if that's the case, one must wonder how she has functioned at a store where an extremely high percentage of the customers are racial minorities. Was this her first day on the job? And her first day in Los Angeles?

Perhaps it was. Perhaps she's a filthy racist. Perhaps the manager in Philadelphia is a filthy racist. But I have seen no evidence to support those charges. And until someone can provide some, I won't be grabbing my pitchfork. And neither should you.

The difficult part for me is that because we were not present ourselves when these videos and incidents were recorded, we are going off hearsay. So we don't know if there are any inconsistencies to the story. We just know what is being presented... and I think boycotts/pitchfork mobs and Twitter witch hunts are bad examples of public discourse and is bad for democracy.

On the other hand, we should talk about these topics, because of course profiling exists and if we just allow our institutions to function without any any scrutiny, then that profiling goes from bad to worse in those instances... but it is a problem when are looking for perceived violations of social norms underneath every rock... surely we're all capable of profiling someone, or excluding others on a subconscious basis, and we're not perfect. Of course, we have to discriminate in order to filter things... which leads to inevitable blind spots, ingrained biases, if we always think those prejudices can be supported by social justice. Just as an example.

[user104658]

See... I doubt they were stopped from using the bathroom and sitting in because they were black. It's likely because the manager thought they might be "trouble".

So the only question of racism is; did the manager suspect they might be trouble because they are black... Or for unrelated reasons? And, well... There's just not enough footage available to make that call.

[Twosugars]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/17/starbucks-racism-training-close-stores-may-us
The employee doesn't work there anymore
All Starbucks staff in 8000 US coffee shops will have race bias training
Looks like it was about them being black

[Marsh.]

my opinion is bad attitude, you cannot just use a toilet which is for paying customers, be asked to leave and refuse

Nice try.
You don't get arrested for a bad attitude nor using a toilet.

[Marsh.]

no one knows if they got stroppy with the staff,but making an issue out of it and claiming its racist is a tad pathetic

nobody knows including you yet you feel compelled quite strongly to insist it wasn't race related for no other reason than you don't believe racism exists. Probably because you've never experienced it.

[Marsh.]

so staff thought they looked dodgy and called the cops?

bearing in mind where the store is perhaps the staff had a right to be wary?

impossible to really say when you have only one side of the story

still lets get the banners out and march..


:idc:

If "looking dodgy" was a valid reason for being arrested then most of the population would be in jail.

[Marsh.]

Yes, staff were worried for customers safety - could be pickpockets or the like or terrorists regardless of race.

Always be vigilant that is what we are told

Those terrorists! Coming over here and using our toilets!!!

[Marsh.]

Its for customers, do you let people use your loo at home off the street?

No but I doubt her house is open to the public like, say, a shop.

[Marsh.]

Same :worry:, i only go when i need to because who would want to piss themselves in public?

Raph.

[Marsh.]

sitting on a seat for ages, ordering nothing, denying people a seat, absolutely vile behavoir

At worst, it's rude.

Certainly not a police matter.

[Marsh.]

They got arrested Will that do ? or what about .... They refused to leave when asked ?

No because you don't get arrested for a bad attitude.

Otherwise this whole forum would be doing life.

[arista]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/17/starbucks-racism-training-close-stores-may-us
The employee doesn't work there anymore
All Starbucks staff in 8000 US coffee shops will have race bias training
Looks like it was about them being black


Yes a Afternoon of Proper training

[user104658]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/17/starbucks-racism-training-close-stores-may-us
The employee doesn't work there anymore
All Starbucks staff in 8000 US coffee shops will have race bias training
Looks like it was about them being blackAgain, not necessarily, Starbucks are having a PR nightmare over this and need to be "seen to be doing something". It doesn't really matter what actually happened at this point.

That said; extra training in impartiality can only be a good thing. If done well, of course. Most of the time these training days are a bit of a patronising waste of time...

[Beso]

At worst, it's rude.

Certainly not a police matter.

But once they refused to leave the attendent had no other option but to think of the paying customers enjoyment and call the police.

They also asked them to leave...3 times....the police then had no other option but arrest them.


This simply would not have happened if the 2 blokes had done the decent thing.

[Ammi]

...I do agree with TS on this story../...incident ...in that I’m not sure racial profiling does apply...in the 911 call which was made, there was no ethnic mentioning at all...it wasn’t an ‘anxious’ call either....more just, they haven’t bought anything, have refused a request to leave etc...I don’t know what to do, can you help me please, can you come...really just at a loss of handling a situation, so called the police...which has obviously escalated it even further...not just with the two men’s awful experience but with racial profiling being immediately assumed as well in the media etc...


...it’s good that there is training happening now ...which I think should also be general de-escalating training as well...they appeared to be non-offensive, non threatening, not hostile in any way etc..so basic training should have resolved the ‘issue’ so easily without calling on police time...especially as it was a manager, I believe....the person the other staff would have called for any perceived delicate situation...and just basically and seemingly no clue themselves...for such a big chain organisation, it’s quite unbelievable really...Starbucks did leave themselves open to and invited this kind of negativity with the protests by lack of training of staff...anyways, I’m only going on the little bits I’ve seen and my own perceptions, which could be completely wrong also...

[Ammi]

But once they refused to leave the attendent had no other option but to think of the paying customers enjoyment and call the police.

They also asked them to leave...3 times....the police then had no other option but arrest them.


This simply would not have happened if the 2 blokes had done the decent thing.

...but then it just flips round and round though, Parmy...the two guys may have left without anything escalating in any way and done ‘the decent thing’... had training been given to staff on how to ask people to leave if they’re not paying customers etc..?...(..also there has to be consistency in that as well obviously, which I’m assuming there would be..)...but for a manager’s ‘option’ with non threatening, non hostile people etc..(..which all have said the two men were..)...to be to make a police call, is just really bad training because training surely would always cover those people ‘who had refused to leave if asked to do so’....

[Ammi]

...I don’t blame them for not ordering...Starbucks is pretty grim for the cost of it...

[Beso]

...but then it just flips round and round though, Parmy...the two guys may have left without anything escalating in any way and done ‘the decent thing’... had training been given to staff on how to ask people to leave if they’re not paying customers etc..?...(..also there has to be consistency in that as well obviously, which I’m assuming there would be..)...but for a manager’s ‘option’ with non threatening, non hostile people etc..(..which all have said the two men were..)...to be to make a police call, is just really bad training because training surely would always cover those people ‘who had refused to leave if asked to do so’....


All the talk of "call the police".. isnt as bad as it sounds..the officers on bikes are probably designated to that mall anyway..so for the manager it didnt seem like a big deal to get them to come and sort it..plus with it being in america you aint going to risk a lawsuit on yourself.

I find it really strange that you wouldnt leave when requested to by the police...to me those actions should have been followed up by a struggle with the police....but they just peacefully got up and left...


Luckily miss political antagonist was on hand with her camera and twitter page....her timing has a lot to be desired though..she missed 15 minutes worth.

[Ammi]

All the talk of "call the police".. isnt as bad as it sounds..the officers on bikes are probably designated to that mall anyway..so for the manager it didnt seem like a big deal to get them to come and sort it..plus with it being in america you aint going to risk a lawsuit on yourself.

I find it really strange that you wouldnt leave when requested to by the police...to me those actions should have been followed up by a struggle with the police....but they just peacefully got up and left...


Luckily miss political antagonist was on hand with her camera and twitter page....her timing has a lot to be desired though..she missed 15 minutes worth.

....hmmmm I don’t know actually, Parmy...I did read an article...sorry I’m not good at finding links again...but one of the police officers said they didn’t feel they should have been called to the ‘situation’, a personal statement from one involved..?...but as they were called, obviously they had to go...

[Ammi]

...I guess what could also be perceived as ‘strange’...is that Starbucks immediately wanted to meet with the two men as well and apologise and address their training methods and introduce new training etc...so I don’t think it’s very clear cut whether they themselves believe an element of racial profiling was perhaps involved with this unfortunate incident and why it escalated to what it became...

[user104658]

...I guess what could also be perceived as ‘strange’...is that Starbucks immediately wanted to meet with the two men as well and apologise and address their training methods and introduce new training etc...so I don’t think it’s very clear cut whether they themselves believe an element of racial profiling was perhaps involved with this unfortunate incident and why it escalated to what it became...

Yes, it comes across as an admission of guilt, but I still don't think it really means anything at all; Starbucks would still be doing this whether they thought it was racial profiling or not. It's gone globally viral... they HAVE to be seen to do something.

[user104658]

...I don’t blame them for not ordering...Starbucks is pretty grim for the cost of it...

:nono:

How dare you. Caramel Machiattos are amazing. And caramel frapachino on a hot summer day. Mmm. Their soya latte is also randomly delicious :think:.

That said, it's not as good as my home made fresh ground coffee :hee:. But other than that... none of the other high street coffee places are ever as good as Starbucks. And independent cafes... like 1 in 10 makes a good coffee. The rest serve you a cup of dishwater!

[Ammi]

Yes, it comes across as an admission of guilt, but I still don't think it really means anything at all; Starbucks would still be doing this whether they thought it was racial profiling or not. It's gone globally viral... they HAVE to be seen to do something.

..yeah I do realise that ‘seen to be doing something’ is a thing as well TS and maybe the reason ...but I don’t think the perception is any less ‘strange’ than the refusal by the guys when asked to leave if they did feel racial profiling was apparahent to them and happening to them ....if others also had been known to not order etc and just wait for someone and also be known to use bathroom facilities...but themselves the only two that led to police being called....or even being told ‘no you can’t’ in the first place...all ‘stranges’ hold the same weight value, I feel..:laugh:...

[Ammi]

:nono:

How dare you. Caramel Machiattos are amazing. And caramel frapachino on a hot summer day. Mmm. Their soya latte is also randomly delicious :think:.

That said, it's not as good as my home made fresh ground coffee :hee:. But other than that... none of the other high street coffee places are ever as good as Starbucks. And independent cafes... like 1 in 10 makes a good coffee. The rest serve you a cup of dishwater!

..I absolutely dare, that’s the badass I am..:pipe:...I’m not really a huge coffee drinker../..fan...just to disappoint you further, TS...still water on a hot summer day is where I’m at, not caramel frapachino...

[user104658]

I’m not really a huge coffee drinker../..fan..

Get out :hmph:

[Ammi]

Get out :hmph:

....prejudice../..intolerance..:laugh:...

[user104658]

....prejudice../..intolerance..:laugh:...

https://www.imageupload.co.uk/images/2018/04/18/gdcoffee.png

[Oliver_W]

So men being taken out of a shop has sparked protests. Because of course.

Protesters gathered at a Philadelphia Starbucks on Sunday and planned to regroup again on Monday morning after two black men were arrested there last week when they allegedly refused to leave. (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/protests-follow-outrage-after-two-black-men-arrested-philly-starbucks-n866141)

Demonstrators carried megaphones and signs that said phrases like, “Too Little Too Latte,” and confronted the employees behind the register, according to NBC Philadelphia.

[user104658]

confronted the employees behind the register

Who had absolutely nothing to do with any of it and don't get paid anywhere NEAR enough to deal with that **** :think:

Too Little Too Latte

:hehe:

[Niamh.]

“Too Little Too Latte,”

:laugh2: genius

[Marsh.]

But once they refused to leave the attendent had no other option but to think of the paying customers enjoyment and call the police.

They also asked them to leave...3 times....the police then had no other option but arrest them.


This simply would not have happened if the 2 blokes had done the decent thing.Why would they need to leave?
Starbucks don't have a policy preventing someone sitting down in the shop. Especially when waiting for someone else.

[Beso]

Who had absolutely nothing to do with any of it and don't get paid anywhere NEAR enough to deal with that **** :think:



:hehe:

So call the police...and around and around we go.

[Beso]

Why would they need to leave?
Starbucks don't have a policy preventing someone sitting down in the shop. Especially when waiting for someone else.

Cause they were asked to......starbucks did the exact same thing to a uniformed officer but he had the decency to leave when asked...

[Oliver_W]

So call the police...and around and around we go.

Oh god, there's gonna be loads of "sit ins" aren't there, where saddoes are gonna spend ages filling the place by taking up tables without buying anything....

[Beso]

Oh god, there's gonna be loads of "sit ins" aren't there, where saddoes are gonna spend ages filling the place by taking up tables without buying anything....

Then it will all be as staged as this made up bollocks.

[Maru]

Hearsay obviously but would be hilarious if true...

Philadelphia Starbucks Customer: Supposedly Racist Manager 'Is An SJW Feminist Of The Highest Order'
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29557/philadelphia-starbucks-customer-supposedly-racist-ben-shapiro

On Tuesday, Starbucks announced a national day of retraining for all of its employees in the wake of a supposedly racist incident: a Philadelphia store manager named Holly calling the police on two black men for allegedly loitering, after refusing them access to the restroom since they had not bought anything. Holly, the media claimed, was obviously acting out of racial intent.

The same day as Starbucks’ announcement, a listener to my show emailed me from Philadelphia to talk about Holly. According to the listener, who regularly frequents the now-infamous Philadelphia Starbucks in question, “I don’t know what happened last week with the two guys. I wasn’t there. But I highly doubt that she saw the two men and decided to call the police based solely on the fact that they are black.”

Why not? According to this patron, “From my observations and interactions with her, I was actually under the impression that Holly is an SJW feminist of the highest order. Once I even overheard her scorn a male barista for not using the proper neutral pronouns with somebody. That's why this whole situation is so shocking to me! Even though I did not agree with her and all the SJW pins that adorn her beanie, I think calling her a racist all over the news and doxing her name, address, phone, family, etc. is disgusting.”

This patron explained that Holly “is not racist and doesn’t deserve what is happening to her here in Philly.” The patrons of the Starbucks are “both black and white, and I’ve personally seen Holly give the oh-so-coveted restroom code to both black and white people, patrons and non-patrons. I’ve seen her train both black and white staff members and she has been nothing but nice to everyone, and I’ve never witnessed any racist behavior.”

The patron added, “I may not agree with the way she carries herself with the colorful hair and the hippie pins, but I can recognize when someone is doing their job well.”

This customer also points out that if Holly were truly racist, she’d “have to be on the phone all day calling the cops on every other patron,” since Philadelphia is so heavily minority.

I mean it would not be surprising I guess, given the company's values. But goes to show, that none of us are immune to a good ol' fashion witch hunt... I mean literally any of us could fall victim, regardless of our "reputation"... doesn't mean much on Twitter or to the mainstream media.

[Maru]

And BTW, the CEO of Starbucks has doubled-down...

Starbucks' Schultz Throws Employee Under The Bus, Then Personally Drives Bus Over Her
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29596/starbucks-schultz-throws-employee-under-bus-then-james-barrett

"There's no doubt in my mind that the reason that they (police) were called was because they were African American," Schultz told host Gayle King Wednesday. "That's not who Starbucks is."

Though he declared definitively that the former manger's actions were motivated by racism, Schultz noted that Holly said she was "interested" in sitting down with the two men, which the executive said offered a chance for some much-needed "reconciliation" after the "reprehensible" series of actions.

[Maru]

985642512206491649

985643888999362560

This is apparently now a "challenge"... he did it to prove a point, but still

[Oliver_W]

Taking advantage of the stupid isn't nice, Hotep!

[Marsh.]

Cause they were asked to......starbucks did the exact same thing to a uniformed officer but he had the decency to leave when asked...And that is an arrestable offence?

Please. :rolleyes:

[Beso]

And that is an arrestable offence?

Please. :rolleyes:

The 3 time refusal was the offence...the cops hands werr tied by these ignorant pigs.

[Marsh.]

The 3 time refusal was the offence...the cops hands werr tied by these ignorant pigs.What an absolute waste of police time.

[Nicky91]

What an absolute waste of police time.

and not to think how embarrassing for the police either :joker:

[Oliver_W]

Hearsay obviously but would be hilarious if true...

Philadelphia Starbucks Customer: Supposedly Racist Manager 'Is An SJW Feminist Of The Highest Order'
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29557/philadelphia-starbucks-customer-supposedly-racist-ben-shapiro



I mean it would not be surprising I guess, given the company's values. But goes to show, that none of us are immune to a good ol' fashion witch hunt... I mean literally any of us could fall victim, regardless of our "reputation"... doesn't mean much on Twitter or to the mainstream media.

To be fair SJWs often seem passively racist, with bigotry of low expectations. Two pieces of rhetoric I've seen is "voter ID is racist because POC can't afford to buy a drivers license" and "suggesting a nice day in the park is white privilege because POC can't afford to travel" ....

[Beso]

What an absolute waste of police time.

Yeah, i must admit im surprised nobody has pulled these 2 morons up for that.

[Twosugars]

they should get free coffee from starbucks for life

[Nicky91]

they should get free coffee from starbucks for life

https://i.gifer.com/1N67.gif

this would be their day then :fan:

[Beso]

they should get free coffee from starbucks for life

I think a passkey for all starbucks shop toilets would be more rewarding for these 2 cheapskates.

[Twosugars]

I think a passkey for all starbucks shop toilets would be more rewarding for these 2 cheapskates.
it's a code, not a passkey, but yes, that too
they'd need it after all that free coffee

[Ashley.]

I mean, even "refusing to leave" can't be taken literally without having all of the facts. It could have easily been a case of these men wanting to know why they were being treated that way before they just up and left the place, purely trying to protest their innocence which isn't moronic or displaying a "bad attitude" but actually completely normal. But then, perhaps they did physically refuse to leave. But we don't know the details.

Either way, I think people are moving away from the real issue and probably the reason why this thread was created, and the story has become so popular... which is racial bias. It exists and is a big thing. The employee called the police because she didn't want these men in the shop. There's no point saying, essentially, that 'they probably deserved it'. There's no point bringing up the fact that they refused to leave the shop when the police asked them to. Because we don't know the nature of the arrest. What we do know is that there was some racial bias involved here and, fair enough if you don't believe it's an issue but I don't think it's worth denying that it didn't happen.

[user104658]

What we do know is that there was some racial bias involved here

How do we know that? The video doesn't show racial bias, and that's the only first hand source we have. I'm not saying there isn't likely to have been racial bias, or that we shouldn't suspect racial bias, but we definitely don't "know" that there was racial bias...

[Twosugars]

of course there is a race bias
In some ways they were lucky, was it a drive-thru and they were in a car, they police would probably shoot them dead first and ask the questions later

[Beso]

of course there is a race bias
In some ways they were lucky, was it a drive-thru and they were in a car, they police would probably shoot them dead first and ask the questions later

Stupidest post this year.

[Nicky91]

Stupidest post this year.

:laugh3:

[Twosugars]

:laugh3:
:fist: how could you, Nicky! I thought you were my friend :bawling:

don't encourage parmnion :inamood:

[Twosugars]

Stupidest post this year.

jealous?

some of your posts are up there too :whistle:

[Nicky91]

:fist: how could you, Nicky! I thought you were my friend :bawling:

don't encourage parmnion :inamood:

we friends, i never knew :hehe:


relax sweetie, it's too warm to get stressed

[Twosugars]

we friends, i never knew :hehe:


relax sweetie, it's too warm to get stressed

I asked you once if you were ok after you posted something stupid about putin and trump :hehe: i thought that made us friends :laugh:

[Nicky91]

I asked you once if you were ok after you posted something stupid about putin and trump :hehe: i thought that made us friends :laugh:

yes we are friends okay :hug:

[Twosugars]

yes we are friends okay :hug:
:hug:
now I can relax
yeah, you're right, it is bloody hot today

[Oliver_W]

of course there is a race bias
In some ways they were lucky, was it a drive-thru and they were in a car, they police would probably shoot them dead first and ask the questions later

How do you know there was racial bias?

[Twosugars]

Stupidest post this year.

not so stupid after all,
here's the interview with the two guys

Black men arrested at Philadelphia Starbucks feared for their lives
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/19/starbucks-black-men-feared-for-lives-philadelphia

[Marsh.]

Yeah, i must admit im surprised nobody has pulled these 2 morons up for that.I'm sure there's another section of the police force designed and paid to deal with that.

You know, because they don't have anything better to do?

[Niamh.]

not so stupid after all,
here's the interview with the two guys

Black men arrested at Philadelphia Starbucks feared for their lives
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/19/starbucks-black-men-feared-for-lives-philadelphia

They sound like they have a good attitude to the whole scenario actually, wanting to be involved with helping to change mindsets rather than encouraging people to boycott

[Oliver_W]

not so stupid after all,
here's the interview with the two guys

Black men arrested at Philadelphia Starbucks feared for their lives
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/19/starbucks-black-men-feared-for-lives-philadelphia

Which paragraph confirms there was a racial bias?

[arista]

This is why Starbucks USA
is in a rush to retrain everyone...

[Maru]

Apparently they never did fire the manager.

[Maru]

NWOz3OZ6J9M

[Maru]

Starbucks’ muddled ‘community culture’ was a contributing factor in arrest of two black men
https://www.marketwatch.com/Story/starbucks-muddled-community-culture-was-a-contributing-factor-in-arrest-of-two-black-men-2018-04-16?&siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo

Starbucks has tried to be open to the community, but that may have been a factor in last week;’s racial incident.

Starbucks Corp. doesn’t just sell coffee. It sells the idea that it is a community meeting space where people are invited to gather whether they’re consuming Starbucks products the whole time or not.

That community culture may have set the stage for the company’s latest public relations crisis — the arrest of two black men in a Philadelphia café.

“Part of what has created this conundrum for them and the opportunity to make these stupid mistakes is they want to be a community center so that people aren’t always holding something that they’ve bought,” said Mark Lipton, graduate professor of management at the New School, author, and c-level business consultant. “There are consequences they have to be mindful of.”

To be sure, no one MarketWatch spoke with, including Lipton, discounts the racism involved in this case.

“This is not new. Blacks have been getting thrown out of restaurants far more than whites have for decades,” Lipton points out. Even Starbucks SBUX, -0.99% Chief Executive Kevin Johnson reiterated the company’s firm stance “against discrimination or racial profiling” in one of his statements over the weekend.

Moreover, the experts said that social media and the tireless work of groups like Black Lives Matter have not only spread information about these incidents but keep the attention focused on them.

“Black Lives Matter is doing a great job of keeping the heat on these events when they happen,” Lipton said.

Data provided by Sprout Social, a social-media marketing management and intelligence tool, shows that 46% of consumers have used social media to “call out” brands, and four in five think social media has increased business accountability.

But according to Lipton, the issue here is “contextual.” Starbucks has fostered an open environment in its stores, and front-line managers are responsible for making decisions in those locations.

“If you want to be a community, you better figure out in the confines of that store what community means and what it takes to maintain a safe, comfortable community,” Lipton said.

He highlighted Johnson’s call for more training to avoid “unconscious bias” during an interview this morning on ABC News’ “Good Morning America.” Lipton said he thinks the bigger issue is that a manager is responsible for making decisions in the moment, and companies have to be sure they have the right people for the job.

“Maybe it’s not only to Johnson’s point of throwing more implicit-bias training, but in the selection of who they have in a managerial role in their store at any given moment,” Lipton said. He suggested that companies ask, “[H]ave we looked at all the dimensions of their human interaction skills and if we have to pay more money to get those [qualified] people, we will.”

With so many consumer-facing workers — Johnson said there are “28,000 stores around the world” during his interview — it’s difficult, if not impossible, to control everything.

“To expect a company to have absolute control over its employees is not only unrealistic, it’s also antithetical to what Starbucks is striving for,” said Greg Portell, lead retail practice partner at A.T. Kearney, a global strategy-management consulting firm.

Both Portell and Lipton, as well as the “GMA” anchors, said they think the company responded well. In addition to the interview Monday morning, Starbucks issued three statements, including one from Johnson apologizing and calling the incident “reprehensible,” on Saturday and Sunday.

Further coverage from “GMA” said the manager who called the police on the two men “no longer works for the company.” MarketWatch was in touch with Starbucks for further comment or an update but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Matt Rizzetta, chief executive of North 6th Agency, a PR and social-media organization, said he thinks Starbucks reacted too slowly.

“With Starbucks, the incident happened on Thursday and the first statement wasn’t until Saturday,” he said. “This is a serious incident and there’s a disgraceful act that took place at one of your locations that reeks of racial insensitivity. That’s unacceptable.”

However, companies might want to slow down to make sure that systems are in place to avoid such incidents. He said that communication clearly broke down somewhere between the corporate level and the franchise level

“There’s an exaggerated premium on speed and sometimes they don’t think about common sense checks and balances,” he said. Rizzetta stressed the need for “common sense” more than once in his comments with MarketWatch.

“Obviously, any company of any size who’s worth anything needs to embrace diversity and an inclusive workforce,” he added.

In recent months, there have been other racial incidents that drew both anger and outrage from consumers, such as an ad from H&M Hennes & Mauritz AB HMB, -0.42% that featured a black child wearing a sweatshirt that said “coolest monkey in the jungle” and a Heineken ad with the tagline “Sometimes, lighter is better.”

Experts pulled no punches calling those incidents “tone deaf” and downright “stupid.” But they also differentiated between those incidents and this most recent one at Starbucks.

“[It] is an abject failure of management that those products/ads somehow got through the design process,” said The New School’s Lipton, talking about the H&M and Heineken examples. “It speaks volumes about the ad agencies and the designers who are hired.”

On the other hand, experts gave Starbucks credit for trying to be a good actor on different fronts, even attempting to tackle race in the past.

Ultimately, incidents such as these can have an impact on the balance sheet, with customers calling for boycotts, protesting, and in some cases deciding not to patronize the offending companies any longer.

“The behavior of the brand is the brand,” Lipton said. “In my head, I have rebranded what those organizations stand for. I have to assume that there are tens of thousands who feel that way.”

Starbucks shares closed Monday up 0.3%, and are up 3.5% for the year so far. The S&P 500 index SPX, -0.86% is up 0.2% in 2018.

[Maru]

g715BkFMY4k
:joker:

This so well made. Where did they find someone to match his voice... he even mentions TS' favorite drink :love:

[Alf]

Look like a couple of loitering, Trespassers to me. How was this an international news story?

[Marsh.]

"Trespassing"

:joker:

[montblanc]

not trespassing at a starbucks

[Nicky91]

Look like a couple of loitering, Trespassers to me. How was this an international news story?

well, i am shocked that this was allowed as a international news story cause most news in USA is Always about Trump :joker: :joker:

[Alf]

"Trespassing"

:joker:What else could you call somebody who refused to become a customer and then refused to leave the premises when asked?

And they were arrested for trespassing. So what else would you call it?

[Marsh.]

What else could you call somebody who refused to become a customer and then refused to leave the premises when asked?

And they were arrested for trespassing. So what else would you call it?A waste of police time I call it.

[Oliver_W]

It's a mountain out of a molehill all round - they didn't necessarily need to be removed by the police, but the media bumming them for it is quite unnecessary.

[Maru]

What else could you call somebody who refused to become a customer and then refused to leave the premises when asked?

And they were arrested for trespassing. So what else would you call it?

Basically, yeah.

Starbucks could've come back and said "Um... well, at some locations, we do have to do something about trespassers as it's a bit of a problem. And this was policy" ... and maybe that was a poor one and would create problems anyway given the mixed messaging they send about their business model (community meeting area, etc)... The outrage machine was out in full force though when they were simply just saying they were still investigating, they were being thrown under the bus by the social justice mob... so they panicked.

So they labeled it as racial profiling in the affirmative in order to make the story go away quicker. The problem is, it stirred various bees nest around social media (always social media...), and so here we are disagreeing with each other along partisan lines again...Keeping in mind, they didn't even fire the manager. She still works with them.

[Alf]

A waste of police time I call it.I agree it was that, and all because they wouldn't make a purchase and become a customer which would have given them access to Starbucks facilities.

I hear they sell sticks of gum in those places over there, why didn't they buy one of them and become a customer? or if not, why not just leave when asked too?

[Maru]

A waste of police time I call it.

Agreed. I think police have much better things to do than deal with Starbucks ****ty policies.


They need to make clear if they're going to as a rest stop or not. But they won't, because as soon they announce this, they will have to cater to every abusive use of this no purchase necessary rule... it's not a good business model, but they want to encourage as many people as possible to stop by and maybe buy something... so they keep it in the grey

If they say, well we're restricting use of our coffee shops to people who only buy our overpriced coffee... then that's going to put more of negative focus on the more capitalistic traits of the brand. .. People who follow brands think they're member of a tribe... they'd like to think they are patronizing a company that is that is socially conscience... otherwise it's just another capitalistic chain store... nothing special there :shrug:

And tbf, I do like Starbucks though I rarely patronize there since I started making my own lattes. They're in it to make money though... but yeah, I've used their shops without buying anything... but this was a mall. I think stand-alone stores though, I feel compelled to buy to use up their table space, so I buy... if I didn't and someone asked me to buy something, I would. They are in the trenches just as much as I am when it comes to dealing with clients and forcing difficult policies...

[Nicky91]

A waste of police time I call it.

they come because it's Starbucks, where they usually eat their donuts and drink their coffee from so it was important for the police ;) :joker:

[Maru]

they come because it's Starbucks, where they usually eat their donuts* and drink their coffee from so it was important for the police ;) :joker:

They should name them "donots", Nicky...

[Marsh.]

I agree it was that, and all because they wouldn't make a purchase and become a customer which would have given them access to Starbucks facilities.

I hear they sell sticks of gum in those places over there, why didn't they buy one of them and become a customer? or if not, why not just leave when asked too?Because they were being picked out for the way they look and nothing else. Others aren't treated in such a way and you're not telling me they're the first guys to go and use a shop toilet without buying anything or sit down in a public space whilst waiting for someone.

The manager making more work for themselves than is at all necessary.

[Alf]

Because they were being picked out for the way they look and nothing else. Others aren't treated in such a way and you're not telling me they're the first guys to go and use a shop toilet without buying anything or sit down in a public space whilst waiting for someone.

The manager making more work for themselves than is at all necessary.They looked quite normal to me, so I don't agree with your theory.

And if what you mean by the way they looked was that they was Black, then wouldn't every Black person who has ever entered that shop recieve the same treatment?

[arista]

A waste of police time I call it.


Yes Push Bike Cops
first there.

The Manager or Supervisor
on that day, should be sent to work at Head Office
or even Fired.

[Twosugars]

it all happened for the best.
anything that highlights a possibility of casual racism is raising awareness and forcing companies etc to clarify their policies
if they allow no purchase visitors then you can't eject people at random unless there're clear reasons like bad or suspicious behaviour
that was not the case here as far as we know

[Marsh.]

They looked quite normal to me, so I don't agree with your theory.

And if what you mean by the way they looked was that they was Black, then wouldn't every Black person who has ever entered that shop recieve the same treatment?Who said anything about black?

Whether it was their skin colour, the look of their face, the clothes they were wearing, the way they walked or whatever they were discriminated against because they'll be far from the first to sit down and wait for friends or use the facilities without actually buying anything. Yet, they're not calling the police out to every incident.

They don't even have the back up of these people's behaviour being antisocial as it wasn't.

A complete and utter waste of police time and a ridiculously judgemental manager.

[Alf]

Who said anything about black?

Whether it was their skin colour, the look of their face, the clothes they were wearing, the way they walked or whatever they were discriminated against because they'll be far from the first to sit down and wait for friends or use the facilities without actually buying anything. Yet, they're not calling the police out to every incident.

They don't even have the back up of these people's behaviour being antisocial as it wasn't.

A complete and utter waste of police time and a ridiculously judgemental manager.A statement from the Philadelphia Police commissioner at 3.50 in this video. I can see grounds for anti-social behavior from his statement, particularly when they wasn't gonna get arrested but were instead just asked to leave the premises.

TXQUAeGSVNU

[Marsh.]

He can see grounds for discrimination seeing as he apologised for such.

[Ammi]

...this is quite a good, balanced article about the arrests, I think...

As a native Philadelphian and frequent Starbucks customer, I was deeply disappointed by the arrest of two black men charged with "trespassing" in a local store. I was not surprised by the subsequent call for a national boycott of America’s favorite coffee shop as the public response. The issue of black men being arrested for unfair and unjust reasons at inequitable rates is a sensitive topic in this country. It is fair to expect that people want answers, solutions, and justice. I do too.

However, I patronized Starbucks this past weekend. Let me tell you why. I remembered the company’s 2015 Race Together campaign, the in-store initiative designed to stimulate conversation, compassion, and most importantly, positive action on race in America. The campaign failed epically. The execution was awkward and uncomfortable for baristas and customers. Regardless, I applaud Starbucks for being the only company to take a public stance on the issue of racism and implement action to help address it.

I have been closely following Starbucks’ response to this crisis. Racism is an issue that isn’t going away and consumer brands will remain vulnerable to scrutiny as it relates to discrimination. There are lessons we can learn from Starbucks’ approach:

Understand how critical a sensitive tone is in messaging
I was disappointed by the company’s first response delivered via Twitter. While it was timely and did convey the obligatory apology and promise of policy review; it fell flat for a community frustrated by racial inequalities. It lacked empathy and avoided the issue of race altogether. The tweet failed to reinforce Starbucks’ mission to help make the world a better place and its desire to nurture the human spirit.

Engage the CEO publicly to demonstrate a sincere commitment to resolving the issue
Starbucks released a strong video statement featuring CEO Kevin Johnson. He expressed regret using phrases such as, "disheartening situation," "reprehensible outcome," and "deepest apologies." He accepted full responsibility for the incident and outlined specific actions the company would take to rebuild trust and revise company policies. Johnson traveled to Philadelphia and offered a personal apology to the two men arrested. He also asked for their assistance in addressing this societal issue moving forward.

Leverage positive proof points
Starbucks has a track record of authentic commitment to diversity and inclusion to reinforce. That record is supported by partnering with basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson in 1998 to open 105 stores in underserved markets; making Mellody Hobson, a nationally respected financial expert, whose personal mantra is to be "color brave," a member of the board of the directors; and hiring Rosalind Brewer, an African-American former CEO of Sam’s Club, as its COO.

Overall, I am impressed with how Starbucks has handled this crisis. It has expressed regrets and accountability, met with key stakeholders, willingly participated in media interviews, and apologized to the unfairly charged men. They also implemented actions for internal change, including plans to close 8,000 stores for a day of racial bias training.

However, their work is not done. They will have to establish long-term strategies internally and externally to rebuild and maintain the trust of African-American consumers. I will continue to monitor their actions and hope they live up to the brand I believe them to be.


Read more at https://www.prweek.com/article/1462692/learn-starbucks-racially-charged-pr-crisis#4pj0E2hkjF35pvfR.99



...I do feel also that Starbucks have ‘handled this crisis impressively’ as the article states...they’ve made all of the right movements, done all of the right things, said all of the right words etc...the more I think about it though, the more I feel..(...imo obviously...)...that prejudiced profiling was shown in asking the men to leave when no disturbance or uneasiness was being caused in them being there...these things have to be consistent as a policy...and from so many comments from ‘Starbucks frequenters’...their experiences have not been the same at all..no asking to leave if restroom requests have been made when a purchase hasn’t been made...or if they’ve been waiting without making purchases...so nothing about this incident from the off would appear consistent with company policy and staff procedures within that...I would have thought ‘trespassing’ goes beyond individual company policy anyway...as it’s a legal law break...and in a public coffee shop or premises, would there not have to be trespassing signs up, stating when/reasons a trespassing would be seen to be happening...so everyone is aware if a law is being broken and that arrests and charges could be a possibility...laws have to be clear also, surely...anyways, Starbucks appear to be addressing it all, which is a good thing....

[arista]

"Starbucks appear to be addressing it all, which is a good thing...."

Yes Ammi
they want to stay in business.