Leftist Starbucks finds itself in the sites of liberal ire

[_Res Ipsa]

they fired the manager(?) and said that the situation was handled completely incorrectly, even doubling down with the sensitivity training.

I think the manager will have a good case to sue the elites at Starbucks for defamation for calling her racist for simply doing what she was more than likely instructed to do by the company. Hit them where it hurts the worst, right in the wallet.

I think you’ll find, if you venture beyond the pages of Breitbart and The Daily Caller, that the company had no such policy.

[_Brackite]

Why didn't the guys just buy a ____ ing cup of coffee?

- Doc

Maybe it was against their religion? The religion that I grew up in, I wasn't allow to drink coffee. It wasn't until I was in my mid-20s when I first drank a cup of coffee.

[_Res Ipsa]

they fired the manager(?) and said that the situation was handled completely incorrectly, even doubling down with the sensitivity training.

I think the manager will have a good case to sue the elites at Starbucks for defamation for calling her racist and incompetent for simply doing what she was more than likely instructed to do by the company. Hit them where it hurts the worst, right in the wallet.

Since they're disparaging her competence as a professional the burden of proof will be upon them to prove that there were white people loitering who were permitted to use the bathroom and hang out and wait for other people without purchasing anything. On top of that you'd have to prove that the police asked white people to leave and that they refused and were subsequently arrested, which we know did not happen. Of course we know the golden rule in civil court. Whoever has the gold makes the rules. I'd be interested to know how much the starbucks elites will lose in attorney fees.

Dude, seriously, stick to optometry.

[_ajax18]

Why couldn't they just leave when they were asked to leave. This is why black people have problems with the police. There's no doubt in my mind that if I refused to leave for whatever reason, i' be arrested as well.

[_schreech]

[_EAllusion]

I'm a left-leaning type, and I think the black guys were wrong, belligerent, and trying to agitate because the climate in today's society allows for partisans to act like children and get kudos from virtue-signalling backpatting morons. I'm sure they're going to file some sort of civil rights lawsuit in the hopes of getting a lot of free coffee.

- Doc

Alternatively, Starbucks, including this one, lets people loiter around waiting for friends because that's the kind of atmosphere it seeks to cultivate, but it didn't do so in this case, almost certainly because the customers were black.

The weird thing about your take is the fact that they were super-polite and somehow still managed to get arrested. I'm sure it makes many people who have also loitered around Starbucks waiting for friends to show up wonder what the hell happened. I've done that.

What's a shame is it probably comes down to the terrible judgment of a single manager that is leading to a whole organization getting besmirched. Starbucks is promising to fix this with training, because giant corporations tend to blurt "training!" as a fix to any HR problem, but sometimes you just can't fix bad judgment.

[_EAllusion]

Why couldn't they just leave when they were asked to leave. This is why black people have problems with the police. There's no doubt in my mind that if I refused to leave for whatever reason, i' be arrested as well.

They didn't want to leave because they felt, probably correctly, that they were being racially discriminated against which is both wrong and illegal. The idea of getting kicked out of a Starbucks for hanging out a short while waiting for a friend to arrive is ludicrous if you are at all familiar with the type of business Starbucks is. You're basically asking why black people have to get all uppity and expect fair treatment.

[_Hawkeye]

Why couldn't they just leave when they were asked to leave. This is why black people have problems with the police. There's no doubt in my mind that if I refused to leave for whatever reason, i' be arrested as well.

That's easy for you to say because you'd never be asked to leave because you're white. That's white privilege. You ask why they didn't just get up and leave, it is because they knew their civil rights were being violated. Had they just left this never would have been a national story.

Anyone who has ever spent any amount of time at Starbucks knows what kind of environment it is. The business thrives by being a magnet for business meetings. People of all colors have been doing precisely the same thing for more than a decade without incident. But this time Starbucks happened to hire a racist manager who didn't like the idea that two black guys were sitting in his store for 10-15 minutes. He was so afraid of black people he called the cops instead of approaching them on his own. I mean, who do they think they are anyway, a couple of white guys?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'm a left-leaning type, and I think the black guys were wrong, belligerent, and trying to agitate because the climate in today's society allows for partisans to act like children and get kudos from virtue-signalling backpatting morons. I'm sure they're going to file some sort of civil rights lawsuit in the hopes of getting a lot of free coffee.

- Doc

Alternatively, Starbucks, including this one, lets people loiter around waiting for friends because that's the kind of atmosphere it seeks to cultivate, but it didn't do so in this case, almost certainly because the customers were black.

The weird thing about your take is the fact that they were super-polite and somehow still managed to get arrested. I'm sure it makes many people who have also loitered around Starbucks waiting for friends to show up wonder what the hell happened. I've done that.

What's a shame is it probably comes down to the terrible judgment of a single manager that is leading to a whole organization getting besmirched. Starbucks is promising to fix this with training, because giant corporations tend to blurt "training!" as a fix to any HR problem, but sometimes you just can't fix bad judgment.

"On three different occasions the officers asked the males to leave, politely," Ross said, "because they were being asked to leave by employees, because they were trespassing. Instead, the males continued to refuse.... They told the officers they were not leaving."

In EA's bizarro world this is polite behavior...

I would've bought a cup of coffee.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

"On three different occasions the officers asked the males to leave, politely," Ross said, "because they were being asked to leave by employees, because they were trespassing. Instead, the males continued to refuse.... They told the officers they were not leaving."

In EAllusion's bizarro world this is polite behavior...

I would've bought a cup of coffee.

- Doc

People have a right not to be racially discriminated against in a business subject to public accommodations law. Kindly asserting that right without being verbally or physically aggressive is quite polite. It's the very picture of polite resistance. You called this "belligerent" and supposed they were trying to set up a civil suit to make money.

I guess if you want to declare this definitively not polite, then what you are saying is that there is no polite way to refuse being treated unfairly. Rosa Parks was simply belligerent for refusing to give up her seat like the police told her to.