Leftist Starbucks finds itself in the sites of liberal ire

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

911 is for emergencies where someone's saftey is in immediate jeopardy.

No it's the “F” not. You, as in typical fashion, have no “F” ing clue what you're talking about and just make crap up on the fly.

Regardless, the woman demonstrated self-control, ethics, and morality by upholding and enforcing company policy. Those are the pillars upon which civilization is formed and maintained,not that I would expect you to understand that. She was transparent in her behavior, but has been crucified by men. Pathetic.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

911 is for emergencies where someone's saftey is in immediate jeopardy.

No it's the ____ not. You, as in typical fashion, have no ____ ing clue what you're talking about and just make ____ up on the fly.

I want to be cautious because I know there are variations in local 911 systems, but not only is 911 specifically for emergencies, it's generally regarded as a legal problem when people try to use it for anything other than that purpose. That's why when 911 answers here locally, the very first thing they say is, "What's your emergency?"

I went to look up what the law is like in Philadelphia for misuse of 911 systems and what penalties there might be. The very first hit was this article on the PFD trying to crack-down on people calling 911 for non-emergency reasons:

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2016/0 ... 911-calls/

The next was a US Department of Justice report on misuse and abuse of 911 systems:

https://cops.usdoj.gov/html/cd_rom/inac ... eof911.pdf

It specifically addresses the problem of people calling 911 for non-emergency reasons at a national level. This wasn't at all what I was looking for, though it obviously operates from the premise that 911 is for emergencies like anyone older than a toddler normally would understand. I didn't find what state laws or local ordinances are for misuse of 911 systems. Happily, the Philadelphia police web page makes it quite clear that 911 is only for emergencies and 311 is for non-emergencies:

https://www.phillypolice.com/about/contact/

Someone with more time will have to determine what the various penalties are locally for not abiding this.

The 911 call from the Starbucks manager, which is publicly available, doesn't mention calling because men are swearing at her, though being sworn at isn't what anyone normally would consider an emergency situation. She states that she has two gentlemen in her store who are refusing to make a purchase or leave. She gives her address. That's it. That's her stated emergency. This is not, in fact, an emergency. If the situation were volatile, it might be, but we know it wasn't. Police could have easily been misled to an incorrect impression that it was going to be volatile given that 911 was called.

I'd love to see your citations showing that 911 there, here, or anywhere isn't a line for emergencies involving personal safety.

Regardless, the woman demonstrated self-control, ethics, and morality by upholding and enforcing company policy. Those are the pillars upon which civilization is formed and maintained,not that I would expect you to understand that. She was transparent in her behavior, but has been crucified by men. Pathetic.

Right. You never did answer why you believe the witnesses who say whites were not receiving the same treatment in the same store at the same time are liars. Why do you think that?

[_Res Ipsa]

So, I became curious about what the written policy for the store actually said. Haven't found it yet, but did find a couple of other things to throw in the hopper. The first is an "interview" that was posted to a site called 'Tech Book." https://apple.news/AYlFb6RSpTIiXQFxA6xn6GA I found it interesting because it gives some insight into how the manager understood the policy:

According to Holly – who grew visibly flustered during my unrelenting questioning – a corporate policy germane exclusively to Center City Philadelphia locations prohibits excessive loitering. And if that policy is violated, then management has the discretion to ensure it’s enforced, even if it means calling the police.

Holly told me that she doesn’t inform the customers that she’ll be calling the police. I retorted: “Everyone deserves a warning.”

Two things: she said the policy applied to "excessive loitering." The two men were arrested after sitting for around two minutes. She also said she had the "discretion" to call the police. Discretion means that she wasn't required to call them. So, she chose to call the police to remove two guys who'd been just sitting at a table for two minutes, while she didn't choose to call the police on other white customers sitting at tables who also hadn't purchased anything.

The second thing I found, for what it's worth: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... laims.html A former Starbucks employee, who worked under the former manager, says she exhibited bias against folks who weren't white.

The third thing was that Starbucks originally defended the manager, placing blame for the incident on it's own unclear policies and training. Only after Howard Schultz sat down with the former manager and talked to her did they come to what the local Philadelphia paper described as a mutual agreement that she would not longer be an employee. As we haven't heard from her since, I guess it's possible that that there was some severance paid and maybe an NDA signed.

I also tracked down the original source of reports that a white customer had been given the bathroom code without buying anything a few minutes before the two black men entered and that a white person had been sitting in the restaurant for a couple of hours without buying anything and had not been asked to leave. http://6abc.com/what-a-witness-says-hap ... 86989648=1

ETA: Doesn't look like the actual policy has been made public. The Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations is conducting an investigation. https://beta.phila.gov/2018-04-19-mayor ... -incident/ It's possible they will release a report that refers to the actual policies.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

And this why Hillary Clinton would never have been elected int this country. People like EA crap all over women every chance they get. This woman was a dedicated employee, educated, driven, and bilingual. And EA gleefully rubs his hands as he and other men destroy her.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

And this why Hillary Clinton would never have been elected int this country. People like EAllusion ____ all over women every chance they get. This woman was a dedicated employee, educated, driven, and bilingual. And EAllusion gleefully rubs his hands as he and other men destroy her.

- Doc

Doc, really, you've worn out this schtick. There is evidence that the former manager treated white customers differently than she treated non-white customers. Where is your evidence that anyone is treating the former manager differently than they would a man?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Well. You people are treating the two trespassers, who victimized this woman with coarse language and churlishness, like Jesus Himself, all the while this good woman, this hard working woman, was thrown out onto the street. Treated like crap by two men. Treated like crap by her male superiors. Treated like crap by the men on this board.

You all make me sick with your misogyny.

- Doc

[_Res Ipsa]

Well. You people are treating the two trespassers, who victimized this woman with coarse language and churlishness, like Jesus Himself, all the while this good woman, this hard working woman, was thrown out onto the street. Treated like crap by two men. Treated like crap by her male superiors. Treated like crap by the men on this board.

You all make me sick with your misogyny.

- Doc

"You people..." Reminds me of another poster here, but I just can't put my finger on it...

[_Hawkeye]

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

[_Res Ipsa]

No, pretty sure he’s not a poster here...