Starbucks fires employee they call racist.

[resident_evil]

Starbucks has put entry keypads to the bathrooms in their establishments. ha ha It implies they have usage rules. STARBUCKS HAS KEYPADS INSTALLED ON THEIR BATHROOM DOORS! That means they expect their employees to deny someone usage of bathrooms conforming to some sort of rule set.

IF I WAS THE EMPLOYEE FIRED FOR BEING RACIST I'D FIND A LAWYER AND SUE STARBUCKS FOR $10M IN DEFAMATION AND UNLAWFUL TERMINATION. I WOULD RUIN STARBUCKS PROGRESSIVE REPUTATION IN A HEARTBEAT.

 

[Jen]

Or maybe you get the code on your receipt?

 

[EatTheRich]

It does seem very clear that this employee is being made a scapegoat because Starbucks got bad publicity.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Starbucks has put entry keypads to the bathrooms in their establishments. ha ha It implies they have usage rules. STARBUCKS HAS KEYPADS INSTALLED ON THEIR BATHROOM DOORS! That means they expect their employees to deny someone usage of bathrooms conforming to some sort of rule set.

IF I WAS THE EMPLOYEE FIRED FOR BEING RACIST I'D FIND A LAWYER AND SUE STARBUCKS FOR $10M IN DEFAMATION AND UNLAWFUL TERMINATION. I WOULD RUIN STARBUCKS PROGRESSIVE REPUTATION IN A HEARTBEAT.

Not all Starbucks have keypad entry restrooms. unless it's a recent addition.

 

[ObamacareForever]

Starbucks has put entry keypads to the bathrooms in their establishments. ha ha It implies they have usage rules. STARBUCKS HAS KEYPADS INSTALLED ON THEIR BATHROOM DOORS! That means they expect their employees to deny someone usage of bathrooms conforming to some sort of rule set.

IF I WAS THE EMPLOYEE FIRED FOR BEING RACIST I'D FIND A LAWYER AND SUE STARBUCKS FOR $10M IN DEFAMATION AND UNLAWFUL TERMINATION. I WOULD RUIN STARBUCKS PROGRESSIVE REPUTATION IN A HEARTBEAT.

So he wasn't fired for race, gender, age, disability, or veteran status discrimination?
If not they can be fired any reason and being a racist is definitely an acceptable reason to be fired.

 

[guvnah]

If not they can be fired any reason and being a racist is definitely an acceptable reason to be fired.

The suit wouldn't (or shouldn't) be for wrongful termination, but rather defamation. IMO such a suit would have merit.

 

[ObamacareForever]

The suit wouldn't be for wrongful termination, but rather defamation. IMO such a suit would have merit.

Starbucks hasn't defamed anyone.

 

[guvnah]

Starbucks hasn't defamed anyone.

Agree to disagree.

 

[ObamacareForever]

Agree to disagree.

Starbucks has made no mention by name(as far I know) of the manager that fired. Nor have they stated publicly why he was fired. Where is the defamation coming from?

 

[guvnah]

Starbucks has made no mention by name(as far I know) of the manager that fired. Nor have they stated publicly why he was fired. Where is the defamation coming from?

I find it funny af that you ask this just a few posts after saying the employee was fired for being racist.

 

[Dawg]

So he wasn't fired for race, gender, age, disability, or veteran status discrimination?
If not they can be fired any reason and being a racist is definitely an acceptable reason to be fired.

Manager followed Starbuck policy and was fired
with your great liberal education you should understand it's wrongfully fired

Negative

 

[Dawg]

Starbucks has made no mention by name(as far I know) of the manager that fired. Nor have they stated publicly why he was fired. Where is the defamation coming from?

manager didn't fire anyone

How do you know manager was a "he"?

You said manager was a racist=defamation
Manager followed SB training and policy

Maybe when you move away from home you will better understand the world and how it works instead of being told how it works.........

 

[ObamacareForever]

I find it funny af that you ask this just a few posts after saying the employee was fired for being racist.

It's clear that Starbucks fired them for being a racist. But they haven't said that publicly. And without a public statement I see no defamation.

 

[Dawg]

It's clear that Starbucks fired them for being a racist. But they haven't said that publicly. And without a public statement I see no defamation.

No it's not clear, you even stupidly admit that, fired for obeying company policy is only thing clear.

Normal humans when ask to leave by management/cops would have simply left and waiting outside for 3rd party to arrive and re-entered.

It's all good now, I hope Every homeless down and out black, white or brown fill all Starbucks and paying customers have nowhere to set!

 

[Dawg]

The Latest Update:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/men-arrested-at-starbucks-say-they-feared-for-their-lives/ar-AAw3zaL?ocid=spartandhp

 

[resident_evil]

So he wasn't fired for race, gender, age, disability, or veteran status discrimination?
If not they can be fired any reason and being a racist is definitely an acceptable reason to be fired.

But Starbucks put the locks in. That makes Starbucks racist not the scape goated employee. Does logic ever work for you?

 

[ObamacareForever]

But Starbucks put the locks in. That makes Starbucks racist not the scape goated employee. Does logic ever work for you?

I had no idea locks could call the police.

 

[resident_evil]

I had no idea locks could call the police.

Playing stupid doesn't further the conversation. Oh, wait, are you playing!?! ;0)

 

[ObamacareForever]

Playing stupid doesn't further the conversation. Oh, wait, are you playing!?! ;0)

Locks don't discriminate. Managers who call the police are discriminatory.

 

[PhilFish]

Locks don't discriminate. Managers who call the police are discriminatory.

If these 2 guys were white or asian...still discriminatory?