This will last a month or two tops. Total number of businesses in the history of the world so far that have been successful providing unlimited free shelter to homeless: 0
In winter in some locations the store will be 100% filled 10 seconds after the door opens and not one person will be a paying customer.
That's one of the reasons they installed locks on the restrooms.
It’ll be hard to go back on it at this point though.
I don’t live in a big city, there isn’t much of a homeless problem here (it exists but nothing like some places I’ve been), and I don’t go to Starbucks, but I almost never encounter places that have codes on the bathrooms.
The reason businesses in some locations put locks on the restrooms is so that they won't find dead junkies in the stalls or hookers using them for intimate services.
Looks like Starbucks screwed up on both ends.Jury awards $25.6 million to white Starbucks manager fired after the arrests of 2 Black men
Jurors in federal court in New Jersey have awarded $25.6 million to a former regional Starbucks manager who alleged that she and other white employees were unfairly punished by the coffee chain after the high-profile arrests of two Black men in 2018 at a Philadelphia location.apnews.com
Update
Why do I have the Car Wash theme song playing in my mind.In addition to homeless people taking baths.
Now Starbucks is clarifying its original statement after reactions by employees and customers.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/starbu...lcohol-drug-abuse-being-disruptive-to-others/
Or, as Starbucks Executive Chairman Howard Schultz recently told the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C.: "We don't want to become a public bathroom."
Still, the coffee chain is going to run that risk, in light of its new policy of opening its space to all, whether paying customers or not.
"We're going to make the right decision 100 percent of the time and give people the (bathroom) key," said Schultz, discussing rules that took effect during the weekend.
A company spokesperson further clarified to CBS News on Monday: "The key piece here is that we are asking customers that when using a Starbucks space, we respectfully request they behave in a manner that maintains a warm and welcoming environment by using spaces as intended, being considerate of others, communicating with respect [and] acting responsibly."'
Separately, a Starbucks procedure manual for employees offered detailed instructions on what to do if someone is behaving in a disruptive manner. It said disruptive behaviors include smoking, drug or alcohol use, improper use of restrooms and sleeping.
Oh so that's what the were whooping it up about when I flipped by Fox.Dammit, I hate it when those “go woke, go broke!” people are right—but this was absolutely boneheaded race-based discrimination. Starbucks corporate wanted to do something for the sake of doing something, didn’t listen to their team members, and tried to railroad a white manager because she wouldn’t go along with their chosen narrative.
I think the awarded damages here is a ludicrous number though, and I expect Starbucks to appeal. They should’ve settled. Fire the lawyers.
Edit: Reread the thread. Both sad and hilarious that the two black men at the center of this incident settled for a token sum of $1 each + $200K to a foundation, while this white regional manager (who was nowhere near the incident) got $25M. Sometimes thems just the breaks. Whatever happened to Holly Hylton though? She was labeled a racist but I remember hearing some Trumper customer calling her an SJW who was absolutely not a racist—Holly always maintained she was just following company policy.
Of course. They will run with their unicorn 24x7 like they did with the Bud Light stuff. I have bad new for the #bothsides people, it will take at least a 50K cases to get things close to even.Oh so that's what the were whoopy it up about when I flipped by Fox.