Starbucks turning a blind eye to homophobic employees?

[Triggles]

I'm surprised I haven't seen this posted ... apparently it's big news in the states. Links are for initial information and follow ups.

Original post: lilfamilyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/13/i-know-starbucks-is-not-an-anti-gay-homophobic-company-by-policy-but/

Update 1: lilfamilyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/starbucks-update-part-1/

Update 2: lilfamilyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/14/starbucks-update-2-a-letter-from-jeffrey/

Update 3: lilfamilyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/starbucks-update-part-3-inaction-and-broken-promises/

Wow. No comments. I am truly surprised. A Starbucks employee is fired and humiliated in public based on his sexuality, and it's not an issue for anyone on MN?

am shocked. that's utterly appalling

but mostly i am sad. sad that no matter what starbucks do to try and make this ok, no matter if they fire those other members of staff... the world is still full of people like them. they will become the "victims" who were fired cos of the gay man and they'll be even more bitter and twisted

It's probably not an issue on MN because this is a predominantly British site, and this US story isn't being carried on any of the mainstream UK media.

Sorry but the person who wrote the letter sounds like an utter knob.

"When I say, I am a loyal customer I mean you have had me for the better part of my adult life, hook, line and sinker. I will spend the extra $2.50 for a cup of your coffee. When I worked in Hoboken I would walk an extra three blocks for your coffee, walking past a Dunkin Donuts, Panera, Macdonalds and two bodegas to purchase from you. Every morning I drink my coffee out of one of your ceramic mugs and I have for years. A dozen of them line my shelves, (even the poorly conceived ?Father?s Day? argyle mugs from 2005 that have metal bottoms which means I can?t pop it in the microwave to reheat) I only buy Starbucks for my home consuption. When you roll out a new product, I flock to your nearest location like a moth to a flame. I mourned the loss of the Chantico and I even rushed out to try that banana mocha abomination (a match made in hell) blindly following your suggestions like a lemming. "

I imagine the guy was forever going on about his love life and his co-workers got sick of it and told him so. Because he was gay it suddenly becomes "homophobia". If it was a straight man talking about all his conquests in front of female colleagues it'd be a different story.

If they used homophobic slurs, discipline them, because that isn't acceptable. But gay people shouldn't expect special treatment on the grounds that they are gay.

This case seems to be all over the blogosphere, but not taken up by any US mainstream media, which seems a bit odd. One blog quotes Starbucks as saying they are investigating.

Anyone know how long it would reasonably age for such an invetigation to be carried out properly?

If something like that happened in the UK surely the Daily Fail would be all over it like a rash. I'm very surprised that the American media haven't picked up on it.

RobF I agree the first part of MIssy's letter was a bit sickly and arse licking in her love for Starbucks. But so fucking what if this guy was forever going on about his love life, he didn't deserve to be publicly humiliated and bullied in to quitting did he? The amount of women I've worked with over the years that have gone on and on and bloody on about their love lives bla bla bla. It got so boring, but I would never say owt to them because well that would be rude really wouldn't it. None of them were ever bullied and made to quit over moaning about their love lives. That's a nice bit of homophobia you've got going on yourself their RobF! You know what they say about the straight men who are so against gays don't you now. Anything you want to get off your chest there?

i think the media did pick up on it. she did a couple of interviews but because Starbucks then assured her that they were dealing iwth it she decided to leave it for a bit,.

now, as it has become clear they are doing nothing she is trying to up the ante a bit again.

the second link in hte OP has the links to news articles

30 days is the usual for most company complaint procedures. However, given the public element of this case, I'd have thought that Starbucks would be out apologising tout de suite.

It's a miserable story and experience for Jeffrey and I agree with Missy that it makes Starbucks corporately appear to condone homophobia.

They really need to explain themselves and tackle their staff policies...

I really like that the blog(ger) is encouraging people to donate their $4.00 cup of starbucks coffee money to an LGBT outreach programme - The Trevor Project.

There are only five news articles, and none are from major outlets. If you google, there are none on the first three pages (which is odd, as major news stories usually come up first).

We are bombing the shit out Libya and killing civillians, South Sudan is on the brink of civil war, Gaddafi is threatening terrorist retallation, a young child was stabbed to death in SE London, Lawyers and human rights activists are being disappeared in China, Millions are starving in N Korea, 'Corrective rapes' are increasing in S Africa the baby rape capital of the world, Iran is testing nuclear capable missiles whilst refining uranium and giving guided tours of underground missile silos on state TV, 15 jobs lost from Lloyds TSB

Sense of perspective much?

Ok somethingwitty... so if it's not war and killing and nuclear stuff, then we're not allowed to discuss things? Get a grip. If it's not of interest to you, find something else to do.

Perhaps the donations could go to the Pride Alliance Partner Network?

Or perhaps indicating that Starbucks has an active and campaigning LGBT organisation doesn't fit the agenda?

This story isn't "apparently big news in the States". It's not being carried by the media, and it has yet to be demonstrated that the incident ever took place.

I was trying to give it the benefit of the doubt. But the request for money, noted by a poster above, has made me even more suspicious.

is this a more of major news story than Chinas bullying in the south seas, are people aware of our obligations and the fact that we may have to declare war on China if it attacks our allies?

"If you google, there are none on the first three pages (which is odd, as major news stories usually come up first)."

It is intolerable behaviour but should it be in the top 3 pages?

had no idea, somethingwitty, that there was a hierarchy of news, so that if something is seen in the media, we must first verify if you consider it pressing enough to discuss before it's posted on the board....

Not sure if you are deliberately misconstruing my point....

This would suggest there is fact a hierarchy of news:
"There are only five news articles, and none are from major outlets. If you google, there are none on the first three pages (which is odd, as major news stories usually come up first)."

I would suggest major news stories would come up first, meaning this would not be in the first 3 pages.

There was also surprise there was not a bigger response onMN, It wasnt in the UK

There was a similar dearth of fundraising comment on the indonesian domestic worker who was beheaded for being sexually assaulted in Saudi Arabia. Because it was a non UK issue.

Fundraising? Um, I wasn't fundraising. And lots of news that occurs in the US, even obscure, gets posted on here.

I was simply surprised, as Starbucks is a big name here, and usually that type of thing brings up a response. You seemed to be saying that it wasn't important compared to other things going on in the world right now, to which I simply was saying "so what? we can still bring it up for discussion."

I see, fairly new to MN.

I was saying it would unlikely to show up on google as the algorithm picks up sites that have lots of views and links in and out

I will be continuing my boycott Starbucks on account of this. Not that I would think of spending £3+ on a poxy cup of coffee anyway.

LOL it is expensive. We go to Costa coffee now for numerous reasons.

Starbucks tends to be one of 'those' companies referred to when the thorny topic of commercial globalisation comes up. Why Starbucks rather than other international coffee chains I'm never quite sure, but the reaction can be quite visceral. An American employer being homophobic is certainly interesting or even concerning. Unlike more liberal Europe, America generally doesn't seem to have decided exactly how it feels about gay people, does it? But, given Starbucks' tendency to attract criticism simply for being Starbucks, I wonder if the story isn't being put around for political reasons

Hence the reason I posted it. If it's real, then I suppose people should be aware. If it's not, then fine, that should be brought up too.

America is a big contradiction on homosexuality anyway. They have some characters on television that ARE, but it's always shown as a huge part of their character - meaning it's made a big deal out of it. Almost like they're saying "oh we're fine with gay - after all, we have these characters on television about it." But nowhere do you see a character that their being gay is simply a small part (albeit normal part) of who they are. It's always a thing that "defines" their character, which strikes me as odd. (not that we don't have that here as well, but still... ) I think people are much more accepting of it here than in some areas of the US that I've lived, although I can't be certain. But then the US is a huge contradiction in a number of ways - some of these nighttime soaps that are sooooo horribly steamy (practically soft porn like Spartacus Blood and Sand) but yet they freaked out over Janet Jackson's nipple at the superbowl a few years ago.

I'm not a horribly huge fan of Starbucks anyway, as they are wildly overpriced (and I don't like their food LOL).