discrimination at starbucks

[Presh GG]

Thursday evening my husband and I stopped in for coffee and a treat at a Seattle starbucks located inside an all night Safeway grocery.[ I write this last part to show we would not be keeping her from going home.]
It was 7:20, good , 10 minutes till starbucks closeing and only one couple ahead of us and they had already ordered.
Both my husband and I noticed the furtive looks by both the young [ GG ] barista and the other couple. The baresta suddenly decided to tell the couple her life story, anything to keep them there while the clock ticked and we patiently waited our turn.
I knew what was happening but I couldn't believe it.
The barista then informed us she was closed. Tecnically yes she was, it was now 7:32, as I pointed out to her we had been standing there for over 10 minutes [ as if she didn't know ] . No, we were refused service.
I noticed security watching us, and didn't give a darn.

The rest of the night was ruined for me, all I felt was awful inside.

I called starbucks headquarters with the details Friday morning. The customer service rep. was very nice [ good training ]. Here it is Monday, where's that call back ?

I can deal with the "looks", and all the rest , but this was discrimination, and it is ugly.


Thanks for listening,
Presh GG

[BRANDYJ]

Presh, Is it safe for me to assume your husband was in fem mode and that's why you got the looks and lack of service? I'm sorry this happened to you.
Being treated this way is not fun under any circumstances. This is an example of why I will not go out in public dressed. I know many can deal with being read and having something like this happen. I can't. I'd be embarrassed, hurt, mad and for me it's not worth it. I wish I was different and couild deal with it like you did.

[Lorileah]

Most stores will wait on customers who are in the physical confines of the store prior to closing. That is what they get paid for. When I worked retail we often stayed late just for "lookers" who had walked in 1-2 minutes before the doors were closed. I certainly hope that a certain barista will be job hunting this week. (PS Starbucks I am sure has security cameras with time stamps so it should not be hard to prove you were there before closing)

[Talldrinkofwater]

I can't really say if it was truly discrimination from not being there myself (although it does), but it amazes me that the girl would go through so much trouble to avoid helping you two. I usually only takes like two minutes max to make a order. Instead, she wasted eight more minutes being a b****. The math here is all wrong. You should find a busy time when the girl is working again, set a timer for 10 minutes, and ask her a question about everything on their menu. What's in it...etc. When the timer goes off. just leave without buying anything. also spend the last two minutes explaining why you were holding the line up to other customers....or better yet, have your husband come in with a clipboard and tie and say he's quality assurance from regional or something and there were a few complaints about a barista matching her description.

[Vanessa Storrs]

The Starbucks in Safeways and other stores are franchise operations and not directly controlled by the Starbucks company. Call the Safeway store manager and complain. I am sure that the companies involved both have strong anti-discrimination policies.

[VickysBFF]

Presh: I am really sorry to hear this. I myself have been to a Starbucks inside a Safeway in two places in Washington State (Shoreline and Vancouver) in drab so I have an idea of what their service level should be.
Unfortunately, this illustrates something that I have pointed out to others on this board before..... Even though companies like Starbucks and Safeway have friendly policies towards the LGBT community and even though Seattle is a fairly friendly area it all comes down to individual employees. Sadly it is hard to get the corporate entity to make individual employees confirm to their policies.
FWIW, there was an instance at a Safeway in Washington, D.C. where a cashier used anti-gay slurs against a gay couple while checking out and the employee was fired.
Your best bet is to contact both Starbucks and Safeway to report the incident and hopefully they will take some action.

[Presh GG]

Brandy , yes, Tea was en femm. But does that mean we don't get respect ? It shouldn't.

Tall drink of water.. yes , Tea said the same thing [ about returning ], but this is a long way from home. May I ask what you mean " the math is all wrong ? We stood in line from 7:20 until 7:32. No one behind us and the couple ahead had already ordered.

I did call starbucks and reported the "incident " All I asked is they retrain their staff.

[Diane Lynn]

I just sent a e-mail to Starbucks to complain about discrimination. I included a link to this page. We are customers too.

Everyone needs to do the same.

That is wrong by any staff. They need to rethink working in public.

[Marleena]

Even though it's a franchise that does not excuse them. Corporate Headquarters enforces policies for all franchises. If you were in line you should have been served, simple as that. I hope you get some results as I find their attitude disgusting.

[*Vanessa*]

Further to what 'Vanessa Storrs' is saying. I would suggest calling the store you were in, as they would have the best control as to hold their guest/customers are treated. - best of luck... Discrimination of any sort anywhere is conducted only by ignorant people.

[Jill Devine]

While it is VERY likely the server was discriminating, you have very little evidence or proof. I doubt any action will be taken. It will be called a "misunderstanding"
Sad but true.

[Eryn]

Before we decide to start calling this "discrimination" it would be best to decide if the lack of service was due to an employee perception that the customer was a CDer or was simply a result of the employees' desire to end their workday.

While I think that the behavior of the employees was rude, I don't like to see the "discrimination card" played unless there was actual discrimination due to the minority status of the customer.

[BillieJoEllen]

Didn't happen to me in a Starbucks but I've had that happen to me at a bank drive up window. I wasn't en femme when I got there about 15 minutes before closing time on a Saturday morning but I was in line. The people in front of me both had very long transactions. When it was my turn I was rudely told "Tough, come back Monday". The woman I was working for at the time when told what happened went to that bank on Monday and told them why she was taking out over $400,000 out of her different accounts. I never saw that teller again. There was a TG element to this story but thats for perhaps another time.

[Michelle.M]

Even though it's a franchise that does not excuse them. Corporate Headquarters enforces policies for all franchises. If you were in line you should have been served, simple as that. I hope you get some results as I find their attitude disgusting.

Starbucks is not a franchise, they are corporate owned. And they got a 90 on the HRC CEI, which means they are LGBT aware, if nothing else.

I'd redirect the complaint to their EO department or whoever heads their Starbucks Pride Alliance Partner Network. They would really like to hear about this.

[JiveTurkeyOnRye]

Whether it was trans discrimination or not, that's horrible, horrible customer service and it should be grounds for at least a suspension and probation for the customer. Starbucks especially is a company that prides itself on customer service, so this is a pretty big violation. The reason you may not have received a response yet is because no one was in the corporate office over the weekend and now they are putting in an actual review of the situation.

[Jan Michell Collins]

Just another reason I won't go to Starbucks !!! Sorry they treated you like that . I just can't see spending that much for a cup of coffee and It's not that good anyway !!

[Talldrinkofwater]

PRESH, what i was saying about the math being wrong is that it doesn't make sense/save any time, to avoid helping you two for so long. Even if they had an issue. Would've been way less hassle to just do their job. Psshhff...and to think I'm having a hard time finding work where others are so bad at what they do.

[Debglam]

Presh,

I am VERY sorry that this happened to you and Tea! It IS a real bummer, but as others have said, is it discrimination? (Don't get me wrong - it could be. I wasn't there.) Starbucks is the McDonalds of coffee. The ones in the supermarket are not their flagship operations. Did you just get a crappy employee that would have treated ANY customer that way at closing time?

[sterling12]

Yes, you would have a hard time proving discrimination, BUT it's obviously A Case of Piss-Poor Customer Service, and it ought to cost her The Job. If you had noticed, I'll just bet there was a pimply boyfriend hanging around in The Parking Lot, or just outside the entrance!

Very minimum, you should get an apology from The Manager, and a week's worth of Latte's! There is no point putting up with this kind of garbage. Customer may not always be right....but he or she is always The Customer. I had a similar incident of very poor customer service at Save-A-Lot. To their credit, upper management called me back, reviewed The Security Tape, and several people got "dehired!"

Our little Miss wants to be lazy, or "cop an attitude," she can do so at home, and make life miserable for Mom and Dad. They should have to learn how to deal with their own problems....you shouldn't have to be subjected to it!

Peace and Love, Joanie

PS: I was clueless about The Word "baresta." Per Google, it's Ukranian for coffeemaker? Don't use that term when you talk to Management, that's way too clever for The Starbucks People! Further note: Oh wait! Went further and apparently "Barista" is Italian for Bartender, but can also mean someone who prepares coffee.....learning all the time!

[Nicole Erin]

It probably had nothing to do with Tea being TG.
What it did have to do with was she wanted to get out of there. Last-minute shoppers are annoying. Thing she might have worried about was a line forming at 7:20 and have to deal with a bunch more customers, have to re-clean a bunch of stuff etc...
So the delay was just for that reason. Cashiers could care less what the customer looks like. she probably sees TG often.

[RenneB]

I'd say turn around is fair play.

Go back to the store with at least an hour or two before closing and make sure that the same attendent is there at the order taking location. "Hi, I'd like a ....oh I just can't make up my mind, could you help me? Ya' know, I'm not sure, what exactly does that one taste like? Could you describe in detail the other offerings that you have...." after about 10 minutes of hemming and hawing... "oh just forget it, I'm not thirsty anyway" and walk out. Do that every day for a few days and maybe they'll get the point.....

Renne.....

[Barbara Ella]

It is a shame that this happened to you two. It must be reported to Starbucks, because regardless of whether this was discrimination, or just poor service, this employee deserves scrutiny from upper management, not the management at the store, as that also may be part of the problem. Corporate will have records if this store has been reported on prior to your incident. This is totally unacceptable from all viewpoints.

Babes

[Acastina]

I'm a California lawyer, and this is definitely a civil rights violation here. I've done some online digging, and it appears that under Washington law that barista violated Tea's civil rights. Restaurants, coffeeshops, grocery stores and the like are all public accommodations, and it's illegal to discriminate in public accommodations by refusing service or 86-ing you from the place for any of the enumerated conditions in the statute. Washington statutes include that state's civil rights law in RCW 49.60. Specifically, RCW 49.60.030 declares that discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal, and RCW 49.60.040 (26) broadly defines sexual orientation to include virtually every variant on gender identity and expression.

In other words, if Tea was expressing gender by being crossdressed at the time, she is a protected actor under the statute. If she was perceived as being male but presenting as female, or anything in between, that's "perceived gender".

The upshot is that Starbucks would, under such a statute, be civilly liable in a claim under the statute. The barista would be as well, of course, but she's just an agent of her employer, and, unless the employer could show that she was violating clear company policy on what the law sometimes terms a "frolic", the company is on the hook too.

At the very least, keep the pressure up on this particular outlet and with corporate. Assert that you consider it to be a rights violation under the law. Consult an attorney if you feel strongly about it. The only way these practices are ended is if aggrieved parties speak up and don't take being ignored or patted on the head for an answer. This is a human rights issue, and the little twit behind the counter should join the ranks of the unemployed for something like this. If she's not mature enough to know and obey the law, she's not mature enough to work in customer service.:naughty


While it is VERY likely the server was discriminating, you have very little evidence or proof. I doubt any action will be taken. It will be called a "misunderstanding"
Sad but true.

With respect, wrong. Their testimony is all the evidence they need. The facts as described could not be reasonably construed as a misunderstanding. The standard of proof is a preponderance: slightly more likely than not. Ten minutes of stalling and then refusing service is discrimination, plain and simple.

This is what African Americans endured in the South and elsewhere for decades, and making excuses for discrimination doesn't go very far toward ending it.

[morgan51]

I wnder if they can spell City Brew?

[Marleena]

Customer service is about taking care of people. The girl behind the counter should take orders in a timely fashion. She used a stalling tactic which is not ever acceptable behavior. It was done on purpose to avoid serving Presh and Tea. She knew she was taking it past closing time. It was evil in my mind.

You take care of the customers orders first and then talk when you have time to.

[NathalieX66]

Presh, what happened to both of you was reprihensible. I can't even imagine the staff being that discriminate. In fact, Satrbucks is one of the places that feature gender-neutral rest rooms, at least the ones where I live. I always saw Starbucks as a progressive, liberal, open-minded establishment.
In your case, was the staff on a "family values/morality" campaign?

I've been to over a dozen Starbucks in my girl self, and never ever had a problem. EVER. Some of these, I've been to more than twice. There's a senior aged TG woman in my town that is always at the Starbucks near me.

[2B Natasha]

Starbucks is not a franchise, they are corporate owned. And they got a 90 on the HRC CEI, which means they are LGBT aware, if nothing else.

I'd redirect the complaint to their EO department or whoever heads their Starbucks Pride Alliance Partner Network. They would really like to hear about this.

WRONG. All Starbuck stores in Safeway's are franchises. They are owned and operated by Safeway. The staff are employed by Safeway and paid by Safeway. That is why you cannot leave a tip for them. They are Union grocery clerks. Speak to Safeway or the union that represents them.


I'm a California lawyer, and this is definitely a civil rights violation here. I've done some online digging, and it appears that under Washington law that barista violated Tea's civil rights. Restaurants, coffeeshops, grocery stores and the like are all public accommodations, and it's illegal to discriminate in public accommodations by refusing service or 86-ing you from the place for any of the enumerated conditions in the statute. Washington statutes include that state's civil rights law in RCW 49.60. Specifically, RCW 49.60.030 declares that discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal, and RCW 49.60.040 (26) broadly defines sexual orientation to include virtually every variant on gender identity and expression.

In other words, if Tea was expressing gender by being crossdressed at the time, she is a protected actor under the statute. If she was perceived as being male but presenting as female, or anything in between, that's "perceived gender".

The upshot is that Starbucks would, under such a statute, be civilly liable in a claim under the statute. The barista would be as well, of course, but she's just an agent of her employer, and, unless the employer could show that she was violating clear company policy on what the law sometimes terms a "frolic", the company is on the hook too.

At the very least, keep the pressure up on this particular outlet and with corporate. Assert that you consider it to be a rights violation under the law. Consult an attorney if you feel strongly about it. The only way these practices are ended is if aggrieved parties speak up and don't take being ignored or patted on the head for an answer. This is a human rights issue, and the little twit behind the counter should join the ranks of the unemployed for something like this. If she's not mature enough to know and obey the law, she's not mature enough to work in customer service.:naughty

And you can get a hold of the owner of the franchise and the union that they work for and complain. That may help also. Since it is a franchise that is operated by Safeway and is run by safeway perhaps you should start there. Just a thought. Or you could sue the union that she is part of. Or you could file a frivolous law suit against Starbucks and waste your money there. Your call.

[UNDERDRESSER]

If the description of the event was accurate ( I don't doubt it ) then it does sound like discrimination. But even if it weren't, if that happened at my local Safeway Starbucks, the Barris ta would be looking for a new job the next morning.

I know if i tried that where i worked, I'd at the very least get a difficult meeting with my team leader the next morning.

[Eryn]

In other words, if Tea was expressing gender by being crossdressed at the time, she is a protected actor under the statute.

What if she wasn't recognized to be a crossdresser by the employee? If she wasn't, then the employee was merely being rude to a person thought to be a GG. It would be rather interesting to try and prove that the employee knew that one's client was a CDer when that client had gone to considerable effort to portray a GG!

This whole thing is rather silly. Yes, the employee was rude, yes that was wrong, but there is no reason to start talking lawsuit simply because one employee did something stupid. All that would do is give the TG community considerable negative publicity and harm a corporation that has been a good supporter of the LGBT community. Better to address the problem in a reasonable fashion through corporate channels or local management.

Abraham Maslow said "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Apparently the same concept applies to a law degree.

[docrobbysherry]

That's the LAST STRAW for me, Presh! I'm DONE buying coffee from Starbucks, PERIOD! Whatever her reason(s) were, they were ALL WRONG!

[NathalieX66]

That's the LAST STRAW for me, Presh! I'm DONE buying coffee from Starbucks, PERIOD! Whatever her reason(s) were, they were ALL WRONG!

No! No! No!

The answer is to stand up for your rights. Fight back!

Don't boycott. Don' move to Canada......FIGHT! Come on Americans, be Americans! :usa:

[Presh GG]

Thank you all

Starbucks has my name and phone number. The very nice customer service rep. said she would pass this report to that particular Safeway. We'll wait to see.
In the meantime there is always Tullys , Lighthouse and dozens of independants who would like the 15$ daily average [ not counting tips ] we spend.

Presh GG

Erin, as I stated all I asked is that particular barista be retrained. However It wouldn't hurt my feelings if she were let go.
That's as far as we want to take it .. At This Time.

[Chickhe]

I've had crap like that happen to me when I was younger and it has nothing to do with gender. It has a lot to do with the employee providing bad service and not caring much. In the US you usually have good service because people believe hard work leads to prosperity, but as the economy suffers people feel helpless and stop caring about their jobs...self fulfilling trip to unemployment probably. The best thing you can do is contact the manager at the store and tell them politely about your bad experience... the employee will get the message.

[kimdl93]

I hope that your experience reflects the juvenile behavior of an employee. I've been to a number of Houston Starbucks and never encountered anything but positive reactions.

This sounds like an excellent opportunity for the Store manager to provide some customer service training.

[grace52]

Had a nearly the samething at a Dairy Queen 10 years or so when wife's softball game was running late, we wanted peanut buster parfas. I drove fast across town knowing they close at 10, we pulled in at 9.45 started walking to the door,open sign still on, radio had just given time, when young girl went running to door and locked it my face. I pointed to clock on wall she just said we are closed and walked away laughing to other co worker, then would not acknowledge us at all. As a buisness owner I wil stay well after hrs. to take care of customers. I have probably only graced their doors only afew times since. Oh well Grace has saved a few pounds.

[Michelle.M]

I'm a California lawyer, and this is definitely a civil rights violation here. . . . This is a human rights issue, and the little twit behind the counter should join the ranks of the unemployed for something like this. If she's not mature enough to know and obey the law, she's not mature enough to work in customer service.:naughty

Yes, a legal opinion, and a good one at that! I agree. This is the sort of thing that deserves action. Unless, of course, the cost of Tea outing herself is too high a burden for her to bear, and I totally understand that.

But Starbucks does take this sort of thing seriously -

http://www.starbucks.com/blog/our-dedication-to-embrace-diversity



WRONG. All Starbuck stores in Safeway's are franchises. They are owned and operated by Safeway. The staff are employed by Safeway and paid by Safeway. That is why you cannot leave a tip for them. They are Union grocery clerks. Speak to Safeway or the union that represents them.

I stand corrected, thanks! But still, it seems to me they might be licensed and wholly operated (as in Barnes & Noble). A small distinction, and that still puts the responsibility on Safeway rather than on Starbucks, but they must still adhere to Starbucks standards to maintain the right to own the franchise or license. Thanks for setting me straight!

[sometimes_miss]

I'm also of the opinion that she was probably just a lousy employee, period. There's no way to know whether her actions were TG discriminatory or not, but I've been through the same situation, and I never go out en fem. Seeing as we now know that the Starbucks is question is run by the main store, simply write to the manager of the store and explain to him why you're upset, and ask if there is any reason why you should ever purchase ANYTHING from the main store again, making sure he/she knows exactly the day and time when the problem occurred. The responsible employee will definitely get reprimanded, because managers know that for every complaint about a problem, there are nine more people who WON'T complain, but will simply never come back to purchase anything at the store again. And if you don't get a response? Then write to the head of the company itself, just find out who is in charge of customer service, and include a copy of the letter you wrote to the store manager. The more people that ignore you, the bigger the problem will become when it finally gets addressed. Oh, and you can always create a video about it, and send it to Yahoo or a news media company. They love to put stuff like that out there. Or maybe go back to the store with a phone that records video and see if you can get a short segment of the same employee wasting time again. Title might go something like, 'This is why starbucks is now a failing business!'.

[larry]

Thanks Rose. Nicely taken care of....

[Acastina]

I guess I need to elaborate on why this is a discrimination incident. I was never advocating a "frivolous lawsuit", a throwaway term of denigration that means next to nothing in the real world; like "tort reform". This incident is a civil rights violation, however trivial the circumstances may appear to be. It goes to the core of the societal habits of treating people differently due to prejudice, and it's unacceptable whenever, wherever, and by whomever.

Unless Tea passes perfectly, she was most likely read. There is no other plausible explanation for deliberately stalling and then refusing service. It's the refusal of service that is the discriminatory act under these statutes. No difference whatsoever in principle from "whites only" under Jim Crow. The crucial fact is that there was something different about Tea's presentation, a difference that many find offensive and by reason of which they mistreat others displaying that difference. Just look at how many members here live in fear of being discovered and shunned or worse. The Washington legislature and governor have chosen to declare that prejudice to be illegal in their state. That is the law.

It goes like this:

•A person was refused service in a public accommodation.
•That person manifested (or would appear to a reasonable person to manifest) a characteristic of a protected class of persons under the law.
•An inference arises that the refusal was due to prejudice arising from the characteristic.

That's called a prima facie case, and the claimant has at that stage satisfied the burden of proof. The burden then shifts to the defendants (in this case twit, Starbucks, and Safeway) to rebut the inference by presenting evidence that some non-discriminatory reason caused the refusal of service. Such might include a power failure or equipment being turned off prior to the claimant's arrival, anything neutral that couldn't be helped. I see absolutely nothing in the facts set forth in the OP to suggest any such plausible justification. They were there during business hours, waited their turn, were ignored, and then refused service while one was crossdressed. In fact, it's bizarre behavior to act as the barista did in an everyday customer-service setting.

Without sufficient evidence to persuade a trier of fact (judge or jury) that the refusal was justifiable and innocent of prejudice, a finding of illegal discrimination follows. That's all there is to a discrimination claim, although proof can get extremely complicated and difficult in such cases as age discrimination in employment due to conflicting inferences and a multitude of other considerations. In a case like this, there's not much I could think of to offer if I were representing the defendants, other than a prompt, quiet settlement.

Of course, few such incidents lead to formal proceedings; the foregoing is simply the theory of civil rights claims. In my work, I've read at least parts of more than 10,000 civil rights appellate opinions, so it's routine analysis for me. The important thing is that some common prejudices are being systematically rooted out by law, and that process takes vigilance, patience, and courage. The law does not give discriminators the benefit of the doubt or blithely dismiss their discrimination as harmless. That prejudice is what distinguishes ordinary violent crimes from hate crimes, and it is important in every instance if we care about addressing the very hatreds that have most of the good people on this board cowering in fear much of the time when they are simply trying to be themselves.

As Nathalie said, you fight back, even if it's just getting an apology from the manager and a reprimand for the barista. Contrary to fears that fighting back makes the TG community look bad, any resulting publicity serves to raise public awareness that such prejudices are no longer acceptable in civilized society, and that's progress.

Court is in recess...

[Presh GG]

Thank You,
We will write whatever response we get.

You are RIGHT, the first thing they offered is $ on " my coffee card" How insensitive. I told them I no longer have one.
Funny/ sad thing ... it used to be a favorite gift when I wanted to thank someone.

Only those who have suffered this discrimination, know how it feels.

For those who are wondering , Tea wore a mid calf wool coat and 2" heals, obviously not looking for attention... and we are both old enough to be that girl's parents.
We are not threatening looking people.

Presh GG

[Acastina]

Thank You,
We will write whatever response we get.

You are RIGHT, the first thing they offered is $ on " my coffee card" How insensitive.

Exactly. It trivializes and monetizes insult and humiliation. Not enough. It's about dignity, not money.


Only those who have suffered this discrimination, know how it feels.

Exactly, again. It's that sudden realization that you're being mistreated because of a prejudice, not anything you've done to offend (such as being rude, impatient, drunk, and so forth). It's that shock, the hurt, the humiliation, the anger. The whole purpose of civil rights laws is to rid society of those negative emotions by punishing those who provoke them and, hopefully by that means, making others aware of the new rules.


For those who are wondering , Tea wore a mid calf wool coat and 2" heals, obviously not looking for attention... and we are both old enough to be that girl's parents.
We are not threatening looking people.

Presh GG

OK, traditional women's clothing, not a compromised unisex look or otherwise. Again, that characteristic is what makes it more likely that this was discrimination and not just bad customer service. In terms of clothing these days, many young women seem almost obsessively androgynous, and therefore likely to notice and react to more traditionally feminine attire.

Please do persist and let us know how it turns out. You might also want to contact the Washington Human Rights Commission: http://www.hum.wa.gov/. This is their area of expertise, and they can fully inform you of rights and remedies. Anonymity is often available in these cases. PM me if you'd like.

Good luck, and thanks for reporting the incident here.:cheer:

[~Joanne~]

I am one of the closeted dressers Acastina mentions above. the exact reason I stay closeted is because of this persons behavior. It's funny because I can see this from both sides. Maybe she did clock Tea and decided to take them back to the stone ages or maybe she was just a plain out lazy shit who wanted to leave which is probably what it was.

I wasn't there so I can't say which it was but like Acastina pointed out, I don't see it hurting our community as much as it helping it to make sure that if companies want our money, they should treat us the SAME as everyone else. if this is how this persons treats everyone, then she has no business in a customer driven profession even a low end one.

Money talks, and bulls**t walks....My money never walked into starbucks and never will. the only message these people truly understand is the almighty dollar or the lack there of. JMO

Joanne

[MissMarcie]

Let's break this down. It was 10 minutes out of your life. 10 minutes. It wasn't brain surgery. You're going to have an extremely hard time proving "discrimination". 9 times out of 10 it was just a dumbass employee. You don't know any of the circumstances leading up to this. And you want to maybe get this employee fired? Is it really worth it?
Really? My advice is relax. S--t happens.

[Acastina]

Let's break this down. It was 10 minutes out of your life. 10 minutes. It wasn't brain surgery. You're going to have an extremely hard time proving "discrimination". 9 times out of 10 it was just a dumbass employee. You don't know any of the circumstances leading up to this. And you want to maybe get this employee fired? Is it really worth it?
Really? My advice is relax. S--t happens.

No, it's discrimination. It's illegal and wrong. They don't need to know or document anything beyond what they experienced. I've read the facts of thousands of discrimination cases, and the ten minutes of stalling just screams prejudice because there's no rational business reason for treating a customer like that. Not nearly-closing-time, not had-a-bad-day, not I-hate-my-job. Nothing. It's illegal and wrong. The management of Starbucks and Safeway need to know that it happened, and they need to take corrective action; because it's the right thing to do, and for their own legal protection. Especially Starbucks, which has a well-deserved reputation for being enlightened and progressive in their business model, policies, and practices.

Letting a discriminator get away with it, in the context of the public-exposure paranoia that is rampant here, is just cowardly and does nothing to advance the admirable purposes of an enlightened statute intended by the legislature to protect people like us from this petty hatred as we go about our lives minding our own business. Fear of being treated like this keeps a lot of our sisters here behind closed doors and isolated.

It's one thing that it happens. It's another to join others in advocating for protections against discrimination and finally achieve that goal. It's something quite different to disregard that progress, when the proscribed discrimination persists, by trivializing or rationalizing an illegal act that causes needless pain.

Yes, s**t happens, but this s**t is against the law.

[MissMarcie]

No, it's discrimination. It's illegal and wrong. They don't need to know or document anything beyond what they experienced. I've read the facts of thousands of discrimination cases, and the ten minutes of stalling just screams prejudice because there's no rational business reason for treating a customer like that. Not nearly-closing-time, not had-a-bad-day, not I-hate-my-job. Nothing. It's illegal and wrong.
You don't know that this is a case of "discrimination", and anyone will have a hell of time proving it. nothing "illegal" has happened here. Someone didn't get a cup of coffee. Big deal. Who said there had to be a "rational" reason? Dumbass employees do dumbass things. We live in a "litigation happy" society. Someone dares to do something you think they shouldn't and suddenly there's a lawsuit. That's ridiculous. Is this REALLY worth having someone lose their job? REALLY?

[Acastina]

First, it is illegal, whether you agree with the law's intent or not. It's discrimination in public accommodations, and the law doesn't care whether it's a cup of coffee or something you would deem sufficiently substantial to care about.

Second, please read the order of proof I described above. A legal inference arises from the circumstances which, if not rebutted, decides the case.

Third, such claims typically have to be first made to a state agency charged with administrative adjudication of discrimination claims, and no lawsuit can be filed unless and until the agency gives permission by closing the administrative case. In other words, there are systems set up to nip these things in the bud, reserving litigation as a last resort at the claimant's option.

Fourth, the "big deal" is employer liability, and it's very real. Let a culture of discrimination take root in your customer-service business, and you'd better have a good defense firm on retainer. Findings can support fines, court orders to cease and desist, and damages to individual claimants, all of which hurt the bottom line and the company's reputation.

Fifth, the "rational reason" is something that would excuse what is otherwise prima facie discrimination; it's a defense to the claim. So the law says there has to be one if you're going to rebut the inference.

Sixth, this is something the legislature and the governor think shouldn't happen, and I happen to agree. I prosecuted an employment discrimination claim on my own 25 years ago with nothing but a constitutional principle to work with. It's taken the quarter-century since then to codify similar protections so they apply to private actors. These laws are modeled on the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the difference is the additional protected classes, which have expanded beyond the hard core of race, religion, ethnicity, etc., to matters like handicap and gay rights.

Finally, yes, I really do think that an employee who willfully breaks the law and puts her employer at risk, for nothing more than personal prejudice, ought to lose her job. The purpose of this law is to change behavior, and overlooking violations doesn't accomplish that.

Ask any African American of a certain age whether incidents like this are no big deal....

[MissMarcie]

The atty. business must be really slow in CA right now.

[Eryn]

I guess I need to elaborate on why this is a discrimination incident. I was never advocating a "frivolous lawsuit", a throwaway term of denigration that means next to nothing in the real world;

Only to those who make their living off of such lawsuits and who would like to stir up more of them! The rest of us, who end up paying for the litigation in everything we buy and every service we receive, don't consider it a "throwaway term" at all.


OK, traditional women's clothing, not a compromised unisex look or otherwise. Again, that characteristic is what makes it more likely that this was discrimination and not just bad customer service. In terms of clothing these days, many young women seem almost obsessively androgynous, and therefore likely to notice and react to more traditionally feminine attire.

What, you're saying that an older women dressing traditionally, *not* androgynously, is *more* likely to be read and therefore discriminated against? That's a remarkable bit of lawyerthink. If she had been dressed androgenously, you'd be pointing to that as the cause of the discrimination! :)


Unless Tea passes perfectly, she was most likely read. There is no other plausible explanation for deliberately stalling and then refusing service.

Few people pass perfectly, including a lot of GGs! Barring some major gaffe it's unlikely that Tea was read for certain. It's much more likely that the employees had simply finished cleaning some piece of equipment that they would have had to dirty with Presh and Tea's order. They didn't want to have to clean it again before they quit for the evening so they decided to stall and hope that the new arrivals would get disgusted and leave. In most cases this is what would have happened, but in this case Presh and Tea showed remarkable patience to stand there for 10 minutes being ignored. This certainly isn't right, but an $8/hour employee isn't likely to have a very strong work ethic or a lot of smarts. Laziness isn't discriminatory.

I think that every CDer wants to be treated as an ordinary person, and sometimes that treatment might include an encounter with a lazy employee. Our response should be the same as a GG who was treated as rudely. We certainly shouldn't be pulling out the "discrimination card" unless we are certain that we've been discriminated against. Save the big guns for a worthwhile fight.

Presh did exactly the right thing. She made the issue known to the proper people at Starbucks and asked that the not-terribly-bright employee be retrained. I'm not surprised that she was offered a freebie, this is SOP for this sort of business. I hope to hear of a reasonable and civilized resolution to this situation soon.

[Michelle.M]

The atty. business must be really slow in CA right now.

Are you a troll, or have you just lost your marbles?

We get so very few legitimate responses from actual attorneys, and now that we have something good you behave like this?

Hey, I don't know anything about you or how you identify (CD, TS, etc) and whether this is your hobby or whether you present in public or not. But for those of us who do experience this sort of nonsense it's no laughing matter. It's NOT nothing. It's not a little matter of "sh!t happens". It's not a joke nor is it something big that we make out of nothing.

This is our life, and for some of us it's every day, in public, trying to life an authentic life with nothing more than the normal access to society that everyone else has.

We just want to go to the store and buy groceries. Ride a bus and go somewhere. Have lunch in a restaurant. And in this case, just get a lousy cup of coffee without taking a load of cr@p from a spoiled teenager who thinks she can get away with it. And if it were up to you, she would.

You think this is funny? It's not. It's discrimination. It's some bigot treating a person like they are less than anyone else just because of the way they look. It's wrong, and you should be ashamed for trying to trivialize this.

[Presh GG]

Acastina,

In every way I want to Thank You for your support.
The facts of last Thursday were EXACTLY as I stated.

To Missmarcie, you weren't there, I was. This is no joke and no laughing matter. Who are you and Shame on you to call out another member !
Yes, it may not have been " the end of the world" but it was WRONG and it felt ugly.

And ERIN as far as "our response should be the same as a GG who was treated with disrespect" .. I really expected more respect from you ! I am a GG !
Can you not put yourself and Mimi in our place ?
Would you please read the op again and tell me when she cleaned anything since there was a couple ahead of us who got their coffee?

One more point, we're flexible with an SA , I was one once.. and we would have gladly worked with her if she had only been kind.

Can we please just be civil within our community ?

All I / we asked is this particular barista be retrained, but there are alot of GREAT young people out there who would be happy to have a job, and would do it better than this young women.

Presh GG

[MissMarcie]

We get so very few legitimate responses from actual attorneys, and now that we have something good you behave like this?
How do you know this person is an actual atty? You don't.


You think this is funny? It's not. It's discrimination. It's some bigot treating a person like they are less than anyone else just because of the way they look. It's wrong, and you should be ashamed for trying to trivialize this.
Yes, actually I do think it's funny, and it's ridiculous too. You don't even know ANY of the real facts of this situation yet you've already organized a firing squad. How can you say w/o question that it was discrimination? You don't know. Where's your concrete proof? You don't have any. You'll be needing the facts before you go to court and try to collect a settlement check. Sure, you can rave on w/o knowing all the facts. But I don't really think you're impressing anyone much.

[MissMarcie]

All I / we asked is this particular barista be retrained, but there are alot of GREAT young people out there who would be happy to have a job, and would do it better than this young women.

10 minutes out of your life and you now know this person doesn't deserve to be employed. Wow, that's really amazing.

[Robertacd]

Starbucks is the McDonalds of coffee.

Seattle and any other city is full of privately owned and operated coffee shops that probably serve better coffee and deserve your support more than a giant corporation.

I did not read this entire thread and see it has gotten way out of hand...

Leave Starbucks to the coffee novice.

[Michelle.M]

Yes, actually I do think it's funny, and it's ridiculous too.

Shame on you. Bad behavior is never OK. Bigotry is worse, and you're endorsing it.

[Aprilrain]

Let's break this down. It was 10 minutes out of your life. 10 minutes. It wasn't brain surgery. You're going to have an extremely hard time proving "discrimination". 9 times out of 10 it was just a dumbass employee. You don't know any of the circumstances leading up to this. And you want to maybe get this employee fired? Is it really worth it?
Really? My advice is relax. S--t happens.

If I were Presh it would break my heart to see the little B$%&h on the unemployment line

[MissMarcie]

Shame on you. Bad behavior is never OK. Bigotry is worse, and you're endorsing it.
Sorry, but No. The shame is on you for becoming part of a lynch mob w/o knowing all the facts.
I only endorse the truth and I haven't seen it all yet. There are 2 sides to every story.

[Michelle.M]

Sorry, but No. The shame is on you for becoming part of a lynch mob w/o knowing all the facts.
I only endorse the truth and I haven't seen it all yet. There are 2 sides to every story.

Look, there are two kinds of people in this matter - those who regard discrimination as unacceptable and wrong and those who tolerate it. You've chosen the wrong side of this argument.

And worse, you keep beating this drum trying to make yourself look like a voice of reason. It's not working.

Do yourself a favor. Leave this problem to those who have the stomach for the fight and just run along and get back to your transmisogynistic little life, OK?

[Presh GG]

I think we need a moderator to jump in here.

I REPEAT CAN WE PLEASE BE CIVIL WITHIN OUR OWN COMMUNITY ?

Thank you,
Presh GG

I THINK MARCIE WORKS FOR STARBUCKS

[Eryn]

And ERIN as far as "our response should be the same as a GG who was treated with disrespect" .. I really expected more respect from you ! I am a GG !
Can you not put yourself and Mimi in our place ?

I've been in a very similar situation. One evening a few weeks ago I received some looks that I interpreted as disapproving from a fast food employee. It may be that he made me, or it may be that he just didn't like my rather homely looks. I have no way to know because I wasn't inside his mind. Mimi and I continued on and had a good evening.

Since your complaint was that your mistreatment was brought on by the presence of Tea, I was approaching the situation from the point of view of a CDer. I was not disrespecting you. GGs and CDers are equally deserving of respect. If a pair of GGs had experienced that same treatment as you and Tea they would likely do the same thing you did, report the incident to the appropriate management. They likely wouldn't be considering lawsuit strategy as some other posters in this thread were suggesting.

[Presh GG]

Erin,
Acastina was NOT advocating I take this to court. Go back and read her posts carefully.
You can never have too much education, and I thank her.

I'm very sorry this happened to you , Were you served ?

P & T

[Jacqueline Winona]

Wow, how did this thread get so out of control? Ok, there are two sides to every story, but it doesn't mean the two sides are always equal. Here, Presh got treated in a manner nobody could ever find tolerable, and however far she takes it, she has a right to be seriously angry. Running the clock out on a potential customer is terrible business and frankly the employee who did it, especially if her motiviation was due to the fact she did not want to serve a CD, deserves whatever punsihment Starbucks gives her. I wouldn't go back there for any reason and I doubt anyone here would either. Whether Presh decides to take it further is her and her SO's decision but I can certainly understand why she would. And Presh, I wish the best to both of you regardless of what you decide. Beyond saying that and assuring you that Acastina isn't making an argument out of thin air, I'm staying out of the legal argument on this.

[AllieSF]

Eryn,

I am not an advocate of frivolous unneeded lawsuits, and I have heard a lot of the attorney jokes. But, in this case, I think that Acastina's comments were a great addition to this thread, because as someone said earlier, we actually have a real attorney's input versus a lot of personal opinions based on our own experiences. I agree that it first sounded like she was saying that Presh should sue. However, she later clarified her statements stating that a non-legal approach, with the legal discrimination option being held in the background, was the best and most logical way to address the situation. That is what to me it looks like Presh has done by contacting the store manager and looking for additional training for the employee.

Acastina, made some wonderful points when it comes to the reasons why we have anti-discriminations laws supporting our free rights. I personally liked her thorough analysis and comments. I didn't hear her saying that Presh should sue the hell out of them to make money. I interpreted it to be more recommending that they discuss their rights with the store manager.

The laws and penalties that protect our rights do need to be enforced to make them worth anything. If nobody enforces the laws, especially these new ones protecting the civil rights of a minority group, there will be no incentive for a lot of companies and people to respect those laws and to put into effect adequate employee training programs to prevent exactly what appears to have happened to Presh and Tea. Whether it was a serious disrespect of their civil rights or not, only Presh, Tea and maybe a court of law can decide. They were the only ones there. However, I believe Presh and I think that this discussion is a good one as it helps clarify our rights and what the laws are to protect those rights, thanks to Acastina.

[rocketscientist]

Is it my turn to flame someone?LOL. Ok,my $.02 FWIW. Fact #1: Presh and Tea were there 10 min. til' close Fact #2: The "barista" intentionally didn't serve them(regardless of the reason) knowing full well they had been waiting patiently for their turn. This alone is grounds for a complaint to management. As others have pointed out, this is NO way to behave in a customer service position. Eryn, all the pronouns you used were shortsighted. You should have used "everybody" and "anybody" instead of GG and CD because "anybody" and "everybody" is deserving of respect. But, I digress. My opinion is that the "barista" should, in the very least, be reprimanded and reminded of her duties to ALL customers. Presh, good luck in getting it all sorted out. Wish you and Tea the best. Hugs, Tonya

[suchacutie]

Wow...what a thread! What is clear is that the barista did not act in a professional manner, no matter how one looks at it. She was a child who did not have the maturity to be in charge of the place. Since it wouldn't have taken but a few minutes to server her last two customers, my guess is that she had already shut down and cleaned up various pieces of machinery because there was probably no one in the store for a while, and she wanted out. She didn't know how to do that except to be...well...an idiot! And that's only if she didn't perceive one of her last two customers as transgendered!

If she did see a transgendered person in line and freaked, she is still without the maturity to run this store. If the store closes at 7:30, then she needs to run it until then or needs to seek other employment.

I have a friend who reminds me of a quote, "Do not ascribe to malfeasance that which sheer incompetance can provide". Unfortunately, I find this quote to be applicable more times than not!

tina

[Eryn]

I'm very sorry this happened to you , Were you served ?

Mimi was doing the ordering while the person was looking at me was at the adjacent register and luckily had no part in our transaction. I really haven't thought much about it since. Life is too short to dwell on momentary encounters.

If you would, please indulge my curiosity. What was it that kept the two of you in that line for that long without saying anything? I consider myself to be rather patient and I'd be good for two or three minutes, tops, in a situation like that. Regardless of TG issues, ignoring customers for that long is just flat rude and should have even made the other employees and customers uncomfortable.

I have a feeling that management might want to review the security camera recording for that period. That might be more telling than a customer complaint.

[Heelsnlegs]

I think you should ID the location. There are enough of us in the community that we could comment to the manager of Safeway at that location. (I spend a fair bit of time in the area myself) just to get the message across that when you insult one of our community the word gets out. Numbers (and money) talk. BTW almost every Starbucks I have had a complaint with (nothing to do with my TG lifestyle) was located in a Safeway. My understanding is that in Safeway Starbucks, the Starbucks baristas are Safeway employees Maybe Starbucks isn't the problem.

[Aprilrain]

Erin has a point, you guys must be Buddhist monks to stand there for 10 minutes! If it were me and my SO he would have lasted about 3 minutes, me maybe 5 and if my
ex-wife were there........... well lets just say i'd feel sorry for the poor girl behind the counter!

[Sarasometimes]

Isn't safeway the same chain that arrested the couple for forgetting to pay for a sub sandwich even though they paid for over $50 worth of grocaries? The daughter was put in protective custody?? as for whether it is a franchise or not, my approach with Starbucks would be they display your brand, make good on this or don't count me as a customer anymore. keep us posted, maybe more of us will pick a different brand of coffee. Good news is they didn't get to take your money!!

[karanne]

Personally, I've never seen the attraction of Starbucks - I think there are a total of three in this county - the closest one is a half-hour's drive north. I don't see why people would pay $10 for a 4oz. cup of coffee when you can get coffee by the liter at any 7-11!

That being said, I've worked those horrible customer service jobs and in retail sales. I've worked photo labs, camera stores, and lingerie/dress shops when I was in high school and college. Yes, I've stood there and waited while looky-loos dawdled and looked at racks, tried on dresses that were thrown on the ground, and during the Christmas season, I've had them limbo under the security gates to get in and waste time 'looking'.

"Why isn't your gate open?"

"Because we're not open yet, sir/ma'am. I'll have to ask you to please leave until we do."

"Why, how rude! I want your manager's name, young lady! I'll have you fired for this!"

"That's fine, sir/ma'am. Here's his/her card. They get in at 8:30 when we open, in another hour and a half. Now if you don't mind?"

So, I can totally understand their wanting to leave as quickly as possible, especially if they have to re-clean equipment. We all know the saying 'The customer is always right.' but a substantial fraction of the time, They Ain't Right.

[inori]

Think a lot of people are off topic here.
The thing is, that person works in the customer service industry.
No matter where you go, that kind of customer service is just unacceptable.
It doesn't even matter if the customer is a CD or a normal person, simply unacceptable.
That kind of attitude should certainly be reported and have the management deal with it.

[Kate Simmons]

Evidently that particular person was not interested in creating a possible rapport with potential repeat customers. You cannot motivate some folks with a stick in any case my friend.:)

[Nigella]

There have been enough comments on this thread that could have got it closed, however, it appears to be back on track.

Presh has asked for some moderation and here it is, keep your comments civil and in relation to the topic. Anyone who takes this thread off topic or disrepects another member is likely to have their membership moderated.

If you can't keep it civil, stay out.

Nigella
Super Moderator

[Presh GG]

Good Morning and Thank you Nigella !

I wish some people would go back and read a particular post before they hit reply.

As I stated , we were a long way from home and wanted coffee[ to go ] Shouldn't matter... there was nothing keeping that girl there after we were gone, and the store was open all night.

Please tell me again WHEN she had time to clean anything sinse there was a couple who were served ahead of us.

Wow there seems to be alot of people who don't stand in lines [ must be where you live ] We are used to it when we're in Seattle .
Ok so Erin or Aprilrain 3 minutes , 5 tops THEN what do you do , start yelling ?, Stamp your feet ?
Not my / our style ... We're not Buddist, close though, We follow Tao.

Presh GG

[Jessica86]

You're lucky. Down in Texas, every restaraunt has the RIGHT to refuse service to anyone....for any reason. I know it is disgusting, and I would do exactly what you are doing. It really is horrible there are people like that, but I have had something similar happen just a few weeks ago...while I was in male mode. I went to a taco bell drive through, and they said "hold on please." It was 1155...I know...closing time is 1200 midnight. So, after about eight minutes, I see this girl walking, smoking a cigarette. The lights go out on the sign, and she walks up "Oh, we are closed now." Needless to say I was quite angry since nothing else was open that late in the small town I was working in. I drove thirty minutes just to go to a whataburger, and drove back to keep working.

[~Joanne~]

10 minutes out of your life and you now know this person doesn't deserve to be employed. Wow, that's really amazing.

Anyone in customer service, not serving the customer, doesn't deserve to be employed. That is a correct statement. I don't know you but apparently you don't read around to see how bad it is right now out there. If your fortunate to have a job, you better hold on to it for dear life. There may not be another one for a long time and there are plenty of people looking right now.

The first rule of business in a customer service related job is "the customer is ALWAYS right". period. that's the beginning, middle, and end.

I have always been a manager, in a lot of different "service" jobs and the very first thing WE are told, regardless of the service, is to make the customer happy. Happy customers are return customers. this is basic business sense. What are the chances of presh and Tea returning? nill. If this person was under MY employ, they would have been terminated on the spot or the next day after a review of the security cameras.

It's as simple as that and I don't care WHAT the customer looks like. They get treated equally. I am not pointing fingers here either, just throwing out a manager's point of view on the subject ;)

[MissMarcie]

Bottom Line..."discrimination" still cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in this story.

[~Joanne~]

Bottom Line..."discrimination" still cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in this story.

That is true. Piss poor customer service though can be with just the look of the tape and this employee should be terminated. Like I stated in my reply, there is no need to turn away ANY customer (or kill the timer), regardless of any reason, 10 minutes before you close.

You wanted the job, you got the job, your expected to perform the job to the best of your ability. If you can't, someone else can and frankly in this economy, that's how companies are looking at it. for every 1 lazy employee, there are 10 hard workers looking to try and just make ends meet.

You take the CD aspect out of this and it's still wrong.

[ReineD]

Bottom Line..."discrimination" still cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in this story.

MissMarcie, are you a lawyer? Do you understand the explanation that Acastina (who is a lawyer) offered? :p

The case is not at trial and proving anything at this point, "beyond a shadow of a doubt", does not come into question. lol.

Acastina assessed the situation based on Presh's account (see her post #25) and determined there is enough cause, IF Presh and Tea are of a mind to do this, for a complaint based on a civil rights violation. THEN the ball would be placed in Starbuck's & Safeway's court, and it would be up to THEM to prove there were non-discriminatory reasons that caused the refusal of service (see Acastina's post #42). AND ONY IF it ever went that far, then the Judge would have to consider both sides and make a judgment, unless the matter was settled quietly between the parties beforehand. If not, the Judge would be the one to determine "beyond a shadow of doubt", not you.

The determination of legal matters is accomplished by a series of logical steps leading to trial and it is useless to discuss any outcome of trial until such steps are entered into. That said, Presh has made it clear she will not take the matter to Court and for you to continue trying to determine the outcome of a trial while not considering the legal process such as it has been clearly explained in this thread, gives me the impression you are trolling, IMO.


EDIT Ooops, Presh I forgot to mention that I'm so sorry you and Tea had to suffer through this. I would have felt angry as well. As a SO I also have developed a sense of when people are just being ornery vs. being ornery because they object to my SO's presentation. I can also tell the difference between someone staring at us because they are genuinely curious or if they stare at us out of disdain. And I don't consider myself a paranoid person. That said, what you feel, how you are prepared to deal with it, and any possible legal outcome should you take legal action are three separate matters and it's a shame that some people in this thread are conflating the three.

:hugs:

[Presh GG]

Thank you Reine,

This has been an eye opener. My god, I requested a Mod on my own thread !

It's such a shame some people can't tell the differance or don't want to admit this is happening.
Sinse it seems starbucks isn't going to call us back, I guess it's important to drive out and speak in person to the manager. I dread this , but I would like an explaination, and closure... No pun intended. :o

Presh

[ReineD]

Presh, if I may suggest, take some time first and write out what you will say, if only for practice. I would pay particular attention to Acastina's posts, but put it in layman's terms as simply as you can. You don't want to threaten them. But you do want them to know that you know your rights. Another very helpful post (IMO) is Purple's Post #20 (http://www.crossdressers.com/forums/showthread.php?170341-discrimination-at-starbucks&p=2773783&viewfull=1#post2773783).

Good luck! :)

[Eryn]

My earlier question in post #68 has been misinterpreted by some and I wish to clarify that I am not questioning whether Presh and Tea actually spent 10 minutes waiting. What I wanted to know is if there were extenuating circumstances that prevented them from speaking to the offending employees during that time.

Also to clarify, I mentioned that the security camera recording might be more telling to management than the customer complaint. The reason is that the manager is likely to think that a complaining customer will exaggerate the time spent waiting, but the recording will verify that when Presh said 10 minutes, she meant *10* full minutes.

[Jeninus]

Bottom Line..."discrimination" still cannot be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in this story.

As an East Coast colleague of my learned friend, Acostina, I'd like to raise a small point of clarification: "Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt" applies only in criminal cases. In civil cases, the burden of proof is a "Preponderance of the Evidence."

Think the OJ trials. In the criminal case the glove that didn't fit caused the jury to acquit because it raised a shadow of a doubt.. among other shadows we lawyers generally agreed upon after the jury's verdict was handed down but kept quiet about in light of the generally expressed dismay at the acquittal by non-lawyers. In the civil case OJ lost because the families only had to prove that OJ's involvement in the deaths was more likely than not in order to win and strip him of most of his wealth. The preponderance burden can be met with merely the proverbial weight of a feather falling on the otherwise perfectly balanced scales of justice, one way or the other.

My analysis of the Case, if ever brought: the defense would proffer the barista's belief that there were two women waiting in line. She would swear by all she held holy that she had no clue that Tea was a he (the perfect pass). The issue before the finder of fact would be whether she discriminated against Tea while Tea was in her protected status as a CD/TG. If the finder decided that the barista probably, or more likely than not, did not know that there was a CD/TG waiting in line the case would be dismissed. Rude yes, but not guilty of discrimination under Washington State law, as the agent of the real defendants. Fired, likely, (usually when an employee's action forces a defendant to bring expensive defense lawyers out of the gate the employee is gone AFTER the hearing or trial) but the defendant(s) Starbucks and/or Safeway would be off the hook (an ancient and purely legal term by the way, nothing at all to do with fishing).

Whether or not the defendant(s) might offer some small settlement prior to the hearing would probably be based on their measure of the credibility of the barista, on how well or poorly Tea presented on the surveillance tape; and how much extra it would cost to go ahead with the defense, if the defendant(s) allowed that consideration.

To be quite frank, most private lawyers, those who aren't employed by the Government, the ACLU or other similar outfit, simply aren't interested in bringing such cases, unless it's for a client with whom they have more extensive and lucrative business dealings. An exception would be lawyers who want to build up a practice in discrimination law, I suppose. Between us girls, the law schools are flooding the country with far too many new lawyers.

I believe Presh's proposed solution is preferable to bringing any legal action, and I sense that this view is shared by Acostina.

[Presh GG]

In answer to Erin , Tea and I are Taoist. Patience is a virtue.
I'll clear this up moment by moment , But I don't know why it seems important to some people we didn't yell or stamp our feet or otherwise make a scene.

First we went to QFC where the starbucks was closed. We then drove to Safeway because I wanted a double shot grande latte. Tea originally didn't feel like coffee, but as I pointed out we are hours from home , she changed her mind and decided on an americano. I'm the one with the sweet tooth so I'll have any treat available.

Now for the rest of the story. The couple ahead of us had ordered. A couple of furtive looks Then the lady said excuse us and tried to move aside which was when the young barista jumped into action with a story of her life and then "oh, did you know I don't have a fiance anymore ?" The couple were clearly getting as uncomfortable as I was [ with the stories ].
As we began to move forward ,I was at the counter with Tea slightly beside/ behind me. It is my opinion she [ the other customer ] felt this was as wrong as I did.
I felt it was now our turn and the other couple moved to the seating area. I began to order when in a sarcastic voice the girl stated she was closed. I asked when she closed , "7:30" I said "it is 7:32 and we have been waiting our turn for 10 minutes while you talked about your private life "
She turned on her heel and walked away.
That's it.
Please, it is employee [singular ] No others around but the one chatty girl.

I hope I have cleared up any questions you may have had. Standing in line , we don't get loud or nasty , we simply wait our turn as most people do.

Presh & Tea

I'm also very curious why some people have a problem with lawyers. Trust me, you will love them when you need them.[ nothing to do with this incident ] I'm just curious.

Good night,
P

[donnatracey]

What a thought-provoking thread, to say the least! Sorry Presh, but after 2 mins max of listening to her drivel I would have politely interrupted and asked "can I place my order now since it is almost closing time, etc?". No way would I have waited almost 10 mins. And I would have gotten her name (surely she had a name tag) and reported her conduct the next day - probably in person. Waiting for a return phone call is a mug's game......

I hope this gets resolved to your satisfaction and I def agree with those who say the young lady should be pounding the bricks now looking for a new job......:2c:

[goofus]

Sheesh...I see it as bad customer service at best and discrimination at worst...

[Presh GG]

Donnatracy,
We did call starbucks the following day , gave them all the information, then our name and phone number. They were to look into it and call us back.

Good night,
Presh GG

[Tanya C]

There are some members of this forum who would do well to go back and read Presh's op on this incident. They would realize that what she was seeking from Starbucks was not monetary compensation, nor was she requesting that the barista lose her job. Presh was simply asking that the barista be retrained so that an incident like this one wouldn't happen to anyone else in the future. If you ask me this is a very appropriate and positive response to an onerous occurence.
But more importantly, Presh was also seeking a little support from this forum for having endured such an ugly situation. And although she received it from most, there seems to be a couple of members who are hellbent on reviling her for daring to defend her tg husband as well as the tg community as a whole against the specter of discrimination. She's been criticised for everything ranging from "making a big deal over just 10 minutes" to "waiting a whole 10 minutes in line before raising hell".

Presh,
I think you have written a wonderful thread and you've done a terrific job in fielding the negative commentary from the naysayers. I just hope they will eventually realize that what you are doing is standing up for all of us.
I'm certain that Tea is very proud of you.
I know I am.

Tanya

[Sarasometimes]

There is no legal phrase "shadow of a doubt in USA. In criminal court it is "Beyond a reasonable doubt". There will almost alway be some doubt. The burden is to take it beyond a reasonable doubt. Civil matters are as stated. Simply clarifying the issue. Good luck to all.

[Nikki A.]

I tried not to get involved in this thread, but my 2cents worth. No matter how you were dressed, the service was horrible and inexcusable. It is also an indication of poor training and a lack of a work ethic that is so pervasive in todays market.

[queenie]

My earlier question in post #68 has been misinterpreted by some and I wish to clarify that I am not questioning whether Presh and Tea actually spent 10 minutes waiting. What I wanted to know is if there were extenuating circumstances that prevented them from speaking to the offending employees during that time.

Also to clarify, I mentioned that the security camera recording might be more telling to management than the customer complaint. The reason is that the manager is likely to think that a complaining customer will exaggerate the time spent waiting, but the recording will verify that when Presh said 10 minutes, she meant *10* full minutes.

Perhaps Presh and Tea are just very patient people. I have friends like that and heck, if I'm in no hurry, I'll stand idly in line listening and engaging in chit chat until it's my turn. Just because you and some others on this board would *never* wait that long to raise a stink, doesn't make their doing so improper. Nor does it lend any sort of validation to that employee's actions.

We all know that the ball was dropped here. I'm not going to get into pedantic arguments about whether or not customers are always right. Presh and Tea were well within the window of business prior to their closing time and this person chose to not do their job. For those of you defending the employee and telling Presh to just brush it off, let me ask you this. Are you going to set a line in the sand where this type of action would not be ignored? Safeway probably lost a $6 sale in this failure of a transaction. In your eyes, I guess that's ok. What if someone else came in at the same time the next day looking to buy 4 large drinks, instead? Would a loss of a $20 transaction be enough to spark your interest and ire then? What if they wanted to also buy a few pounds of coffee beans? Would a $30 or $40 loss in sales finally wake you up?

Brushing off and excusing bad behavior only serves to reinforce bad behavior and makes for very poor business practice to say the least.

[jillleanne]

Before we decide to start calling this "discrimination" it would be best to decide if the lack of service was due to an employee perception that the customer was a CDer or was simply a result of the employees' desire to end their workday.

While I think that the behavior of the employees was rude, I don't like to see the "discrimination card" played unless there was actual discrimination due to the minority status of the customer.

I agree. One must remember, places of business such as this do not hire, let's say, 'the brightest lights in the parking lot' to make coffee or whatever they do there. No surprise really to hear this happened. Doubt it was gender related.

[Presh GG]

What in the world has happened here ?

We had a REAL Lawyer here who wrote discrimination law cases [for students ] for a liveing and all that is left of her CONSIDERABLE RESEARCH IN WASHINGTON ST. LAW IS WHAT SMALL QUOTES PEOPLE SAVED.

I am shocked and devastated ...
[B]Do you REALLY think this is an isolated case ?
Do you really think this won't happen again and again or shall we just stay home ? Doesn't anyone want to learn anything from such a fine legal mind as Acostina For the next time when it isn't "just *ing coffee ? And no one could leave her alone and allow me, the op. the respect to learn something I truely wanted to know , what to do THE NEXT TIME .

WHAT??? WERE YOU ALL JUST THREATENED BY HER BRILLIANT ,EXTREMELY WELL RESEARCHED POSTS.?

I DID NOT REALISE IF I ASKED FOR A MODERATOR , I WOULD LOSE [B]THE ONLY INFORMATION IN THIS THREAD I WANTED... FOR THE NEXT TIME. I guess no one could tell the differance between the trolls and the important information.


you weren't happy till you ran her off
thanks alot guys

[Marleena]

Presh, the troll in question has a habit of stirring up crap. Any reply to her just ends up in post after post, (no win situation) so I avoided her.

Acastina said the correct things IMO. She should be commended for taking a stand here against TG discrimination, not abused about it because she was thought of as a lawyer trying to make a fast buck. She was trying to educate people about TG discrimination. Lawyers fight for minorities, which we are. Things will never change for TG issues unless people make a stand. Presh just you making Safeway/Starbucks management aware of this problem makes it easier for any other minorities.

I really feel bad about the way you and Tea were treated, it is unacceptable.

[Nigella]

What in the world has happened here ?

We had a REAL Lawyer here who wrote discrimination law cases [for students ] for a liveing and all that is left of her CONSIDERABLE RESEARCH IN WASHINGTON ST. LAW IS WHAT SMALL QUOTES PEOPLE SAVED.

I am shocked and devastated ...
[B]Do you REALLY think this is an isolated case ?
Do you really think this won't happen again and again or shall we just stay home ? Doesn't anyone want to learn anything from such a fine legal mind as Acostina For the next time when it isn't "just *ing coffee ? And no one could leave her alone and allow me, the op. the respect to learn something I truely wanted to know , what to do THE NEXT TIME .

WHAT??? WERE YOU ALL JUST THREATENED BY HER BRILLIANT ,EXTREMELY WELL RESEARCHED POSTS.?

I DID NOT REALISE IF I ASKED FOR A MODERATOR , I WOULD LOSE [B]THE ONLY INFORMATION IN THIS THREAD I WANTED... FOR THE NEXT TIME. I guess no one could tell the differance between the trolls and the important information.


you weren't happy till you ran her off
thanks alot guys

Presh

Not sure what you mean? Acastina's posts are still here, and intact, non of her posting has been deleted, so unless she has contacted you via PM, I don't understand this post

[AllieSF]

Nigella, I think that Presh means that Acastina decided to leave this thread because of some of the negative comments about her posts.

[Nigella]

If that is the case, I hope she is still reading it and realises that the comments made will not be tolerated. Her advice is as valid as anyone elses. whilst others may not agree with it, it is not their place to grind her down, although they can comment on it without trolling.

[Cindy_Act]

Frankly this type of thread annoys the heck out of me. I can't believe anyone would stand there for 10 minutes under those circumstances??? But I would like to ask how many of us have been the "victim" of poor service over the years? I know I have been and I wasn't wearing a dress at the time. My point is...Had I been wearing a dress on those occasions, would that have been discrimination? Of course not...just plain crap service. As a society, I think we all need to harden up a bit and stop being so thin skinned and easily offended.

[Tamara Croft]

Presh, the troll in question has a habit of stirring up crap. Any reply to her just ends up in post after post, (no win situation) so I avoided her.

And that troll has now been banned. After reading her posts in this thread, she reminded me of another member I'd banned, same writing style, same trolling, some other things that I won't mention here as those are the obvious things that give her away each time... yes more than a few :rolleyes:

[Presh GG]

Thank you Tam and Nigella and you too Purple !

I really don't understand Trolls. Some of them are long time members here and the others , are they even TG/CD ? I don't "get" what they get out of it being so mean ?

Presh GG

We have not gone back to Seattle, but it is definately in our plans to just talk quietly with the manager.

[Michelle.M]

And that troll has now been banned. After reading her posts in this thread, she reminded me of another member I'd banned, same writing style, same trolling, some other things that I won't mention here as those are the obvious things that give her away each time... yes more than a few :rolleyes:

Yay! You're my hero! Thanks for the job you're doing :)

[~Joanne~]

And that troll has now been banned. After reading her posts in this thread, she reminded me of another member I'd banned, same writing style, same trolling, some other things that I won't mention here as those are the obvious things that give her away each time... yes more than a few :rolleyes:

Absolutely wonderful Tamara, Thank you. we have enough battles within ourselves and the world around us that we really don't need trolls invading with the nonsense that this one brought to what I believe to be an important matter.

Presh, I hope that this matter gets settled to both, your and tea's, satisfaction. Acastina freely gave a wealth of great information for your use if you decide that the situation needs to go further than you originally intended it to. As a Manager myself, termination of the employee is not far fetched. As you stated, if she did this to you, I am sure she does it to many others as well. It may not be an isolated incident. Please keep us updated on the progress :)

[Michelia]

I have been to Starbuck all over the country and used their female bathrooms and people have alwasy been super nice to me. It sounds like a couple of poorly trained workers that may not even work for Starbucks. Unless they told you they would not serve you because of your presentation, I would not call it discrimination. Just poor and rude service. It does happen.