This is exactly why all the racism continues! People talk/talk/talk. Ignore it and it will not be anywhere. Another example of our society......
Kids yesterday are protesting guns... Kids protested since Vietnam and what changes? Nothing! When are people, Black/White going to protest the
Kids yesterday are protesting guns... Kids protested since Vietnam and what changes? Nothing! When are people, Black/White going to protest the
Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth
she is 50 yr. old married retired retired U.S. Army
lieutenant colonel,
Back to topic...... Racism is like the DJT soap opera the more BS. White/Blacks could work together the problem is Politics...... Their the racists, they are against MAGA
Thank You
but here is a "Bill" voted on that was not even a week old? What about Gambling???Back to topic...... Racism is like the DJT soap opera the more BS. White/Blacks could work together the problem is Politics...... Their the racists, they are against MAGA
BTW........ Why isn't this headlines?
Are you seeing the picture they want you to see or are you a racist.... Slapping-silly90))
On September 17, 2008, Duckworth attended a campaign event for Dan Seals, the Democratic candidate for Illinois's 10th congressional district. Duckworth used vacation time, but violated Illinois law by going to the event in a state-owned van which was equipped for a person with physical disabilities. She acknowledged the mistake and repaid the state for the use of the van
This was...... Duckworth served in that position until February 8, 2009. While she was Director, she was credited with starting a program to help veterans with
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and veterans with brain injury
Are you seeing the picture they want you to see or are you a racist.... Slapping-silly90))
Now all the people who like free shit can go hang out at STarbucks, take a shit, shoot up some drugs and use the Wifi, no purchase necessary.
Won't be long for those places to go to shit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbu...table-as-it-clarifies-guest-policy-1526918854
<header class="article_header module" style="margin: 0px 10px 6px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 10px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; position: relative; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">[h=1]Starbucks Says Drug Use, Sleeping Unacceptable as It Clarifies Guest Policy[/h][h=2]Company’s statement is second attempt to explain its new policy following complaints that it would turn cafes into homeless shelters and drug havens[/h]
</header>
At issue is whether Starbucks views itself as a business catering to customers or a quasi-public place. PHOTO: ROBERT ALEXANDER/GETTY IMAGES
By Julie Jargon
<time class="timestamp" style="margin: 0px 0px 4px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; font-family: Retina; display: block; line-height: 2.2rem; color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Updated May 21, 2018 6:55 p.m. ET</time>780 COMMENTS
Starbucks Corp. SBUX -0.03% tried to dig itself out of controversy Monday by attempting to clarify a policy toward nonpaying guests that generated an onslaught of weekend criticism.
The Seattle-based retailer on Saturday had said it would allow all guests in its U.S. company-owned stores to use its cafes, including its restrooms, whether or not they make a purchase. That announcement, which attracted some support, also drew complaints that cafes wouldn’t have enough seats for paying customers and would turn into homeless shelters and drug havens.
On Monday, Starbucks revealed more about the policy, telling The Wall Street Journal that employees now have detailed instructions on what to do if someone is behaving in a disruptive manner, such as smoking, using drugs or alcohol, using restrooms improperly or sleeping.
At issue, in essence, is whether Starbucks views itself as a business that caters to customers, or a quasi-public place generally welcome to all. The uproar, which follows the arrest last month of two black men who wanted to use a Starbucks bathroom in Philadelphia, demonstrates the unusual spot that the nation’s biggest coffee chain holds in American culture.
While many other restaurants and retailers also must manage the issue of lingering customers and nonpaying guests who come in to use restrooms, Starbucks has promoted itself as providing a “third place” between home and work where people can freely exchange ideas. It essentially pioneered the idea that is now generating controversy.
Other restaurants and cafes have followed suit in recent years. McDonald’s Corp. and Panera Bread now offer free Wi-Fi and encourage customers to linger. Panera didn’t respond to a request for comment, and McDonald’s—which is almost entirely franchised—said it lets its franchisees determine how to best serve their customers.
“The whole Starbucks situation has opened up a can of worms. In most cases restaurants leave it up to the discretion of the individual restaurant and most are too busy to enforce a policy,” said Joe Pawlak, managing principal at restaurant consulting firm Technomic Inc.
Starbucks’s piecemeal messaging on the issue and the outpouring of commentary that ensued shows the challenges firms can face in an era when every corporate move can be immediately telegraphed and then dissected by the public at large.
“Often the people with the strongest views on either end of the spectrum will be the loudest online,” said Jeremy Robinson-Leon, president of Group Gordon, a corporate and crisis communications firm.
Views over the last few days ran the gamut. “It sounds like Starbucks is turning their stores into homeless shelters. Their coffee is strong but their management is weak,” said Ron Raduechel, a 64-year-old retired supply chain executive from Waukesha, Wis., who said he would no longer go to Starbucks.
“I believe Starbucks is doing what’s right in their hearts whether its outcome sparks negativity or not,” said Johnny Varela, a 31-year-old carpenter in Orlando, Fla. “I think Starbucks is very humanitarian.”
The dust-up is far from Starbucks’s first. It has driven attention to itself before by using its size to try to enact social change. The company in 2015 tried to foster conversations about race relations by urging baristas to write “Race Together” on customers’ cups, a move from which it backed away following social-media backlash.
Before the Affordable Care Act was proposed, Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz decried the lack of affordable health-care for millions of Americans. He caused an uproar among gun-rights proponents when he told U.S. customers that firearms were no longer welcomedin its stores.
Conveying a message of inclusiveness without alienating paying customers is critical for Starbucks at a time when its cafe business is more important than ever.
The company this month agreed to sell the rights to market and distribute its packaged coffee in grocery stores to Nestlé SA so it could focus on its coffee shops. Sales at its U.S. cafes have been slowing.
“Starbucks is making a strategic bet that by defining its own moral code they will continue to attract a core consumer group that will remain loyal, but you max out on that demographic at some point,” said Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants.
Starbucks, he said, had no choice but to take action rather than just apologizing and then letting the news die down. “The whole goal of managing a crisis is regaining credibility and that comes from aligning words with actions,” he said.
Under the procedures for handling disruptive guests, Starbucks said Monday, managers and baristas should first ask a fellow employee to verify that a certain behavior is disruptive and if it is, respectfully request that the customer stop.
Other examples of disruptive behavior include talking too loudly, playing loud music and viewing inappropriate content. The company provided employees with examples of when they should call 911, which includes when a customer is using or selling drugs.
The arrests last month in Philadelphia came after a manager’s decision to call the police after the two men asked to use the bathroom without purchasing anything and allegedly refused to leave when asked.
Starbucks quickly apologized for the actions of the store manager, who ultimately left the company. When a video of the men’s arrests went viral, people immediately took to social media calling for a boycott of Starbucks.
A couple of days after the news spread, the boycott threats died down.
The company announced a few days later that it would close its more-than 8,000 U.S. company-owned stores on May 29 to conduct antibias training for employees. Later, Starbucks said it settled with the two men for an undisclosed amount.
Write to Julie Jargon at julie.jargon@wsj.com
Won't be long for those places to go to shit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbu...table-as-it-clarifies-guest-policy-1526918854
<header class="article_header module" style="margin: 0px 10px 6px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 10px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; position: relative; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">[h=1]Starbucks Says Drug Use, Sleeping Unacceptable as It Clarifies Guest Policy[/h][h=2]Company’s statement is second attempt to explain its new policy following complaints that it would turn cafes into homeless shelters and drug havens[/h]
</header>
At issue is whether Starbucks views itself as a business catering to customers or a quasi-public place. PHOTO: ROBERT ALEXANDER/GETTY IMAGES
By Julie Jargon
<time class="timestamp" style="margin: 0px 0px 4px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; font-family: Retina; display: block; line-height: 2.2rem; color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Updated May 21, 2018 6:55 p.m. ET</time>780 COMMENTS
Starbucks Corp. SBUX -0.03% tried to dig itself out of controversy Monday by attempting to clarify a policy toward nonpaying guests that generated an onslaught of weekend criticism.
The Seattle-based retailer on Saturday had said it would allow all guests in its U.S. company-owned stores to use its cafes, including its restrooms, whether or not they make a purchase. That announcement, which attracted some support, also drew complaints that cafes wouldn’t have enough seats for paying customers and would turn into homeless shelters and drug havens.
On Monday, Starbucks revealed more about the policy, telling The Wall Street Journal that employees now have detailed instructions on what to do if someone is behaving in a disruptive manner, such as smoking, using drugs or alcohol, using restrooms improperly or sleeping.
At issue, in essence, is whether Starbucks views itself as a business that caters to customers, or a quasi-public place generally welcome to all. The uproar, which follows the arrest last month of two black men who wanted to use a Starbucks bathroom in Philadelphia, demonstrates the unusual spot that the nation’s biggest coffee chain holds in American culture.
While many other restaurants and retailers also must manage the issue of lingering customers and nonpaying guests who come in to use restrooms, Starbucks has promoted itself as providing a “third place” between home and work where people can freely exchange ideas. It essentially pioneered the idea that is now generating controversy.
Other restaurants and cafes have followed suit in recent years. McDonald’s Corp. and Panera Bread now offer free Wi-Fi and encourage customers to linger. Panera didn’t respond to a request for comment, and McDonald’s—which is almost entirely franchised—said it lets its franchisees determine how to best serve their customers.
“The whole Starbucks situation has opened up a can of worms. In most cases restaurants leave it up to the discretion of the individual restaurant and most are too busy to enforce a policy,” said Joe Pawlak, managing principal at restaurant consulting firm Technomic Inc.
Starbucks’s piecemeal messaging on the issue and the outpouring of commentary that ensued shows the challenges firms can face in an era when every corporate move can be immediately telegraphed and then dissected by the public at large.
“Often the people with the strongest views on either end of the spectrum will be the loudest online,” said Jeremy Robinson-Leon, president of Group Gordon, a corporate and crisis communications firm.
Views over the last few days ran the gamut. “It sounds like Starbucks is turning their stores into homeless shelters. Their coffee is strong but their management is weak,” said Ron Raduechel, a 64-year-old retired supply chain executive from Waukesha, Wis., who said he would no longer go to Starbucks.
“I believe Starbucks is doing what’s right in their hearts whether its outcome sparks negativity or not,” said Johnny Varela, a 31-year-old carpenter in Orlando, Fla. “I think Starbucks is very humanitarian.”
The dust-up is far from Starbucks’s first. It has driven attention to itself before by using its size to try to enact social change. The company in 2015 tried to foster conversations about race relations by urging baristas to write “Race Together” on customers’ cups, a move from which it backed away following social-media backlash.
Before the Affordable Care Act was proposed, Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz decried the lack of affordable health-care for millions of Americans. He caused an uproar among gun-rights proponents when he told U.S. customers that firearms were no longer welcomedin its stores.
Conveying a message of inclusiveness without alienating paying customers is critical for Starbucks at a time when its cafe business is more important than ever.
The company this month agreed to sell the rights to market and distribute its packaged coffee in grocery stores to Nestlé SA so it could focus on its coffee shops. Sales at its U.S. cafes have been slowing.
“Starbucks is making a strategic bet that by defining its own moral code they will continue to attract a core consumer group that will remain loyal, but you max out on that demographic at some point,” said Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants.
Starbucks, he said, had no choice but to take action rather than just apologizing and then letting the news die down. “The whole goal of managing a crisis is regaining credibility and that comes from aligning words with actions,” he said.
Under the procedures for handling disruptive guests, Starbucks said Monday, managers and baristas should first ask a fellow employee to verify that a certain behavior is disruptive and if it is, respectfully request that the customer stop.
Other examples of disruptive behavior include talking too loudly, playing loud music and viewing inappropriate content. The company provided employees with examples of when they should call 911, which includes when a customer is using or selling drugs.
The arrests last month in Philadelphia came after a manager’s decision to call the police after the two men asked to use the bathroom without purchasing anything and allegedly refused to leave when asked.
Starbucks quickly apologized for the actions of the store manager, who ultimately left the company. When a video of the men’s arrests went viral, people immediately took to social media calling for a boycott of Starbucks.
A couple of days after the news spread, the boycott threats died down.
The company announced a few days later that it would close its more-than 8,000 U.S. company-owned stores on May 29 to conduct antibias training for employees. Later, Starbucks said it settled with the two men for an undisclosed amount.
Write to Julie Jargon at julie.jargon@wsj.com
Now all the people who like free shit can go hang out at STarbucks, take a shit, shoot up some drugs and use the Wifi, no purchase necessary.
Won't be long for those places to go to shit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/starbu...table-as-it-clarifies-guest-policy-1526918854
<header class="article_header module" style="margin: 0px 10px 6px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 10px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; position: relative; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Starbucks Says Drug Use, Sleeping Unacceptable as It Clarifies Guest Policy
Company’s statement is second attempt to explain its new policy following complaints that it would turn cafes into homeless shelters and drug havens
</header>
At issue is whether Starbucks views itself as a business catering to customers or a quasi-public place. PHOTO: ROBERT ALEXANDER/GETTY IMAGES
By Julie Jargon
<time class="timestamp" style="margin: 0px 0px 4px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 14px; vertical-align: baseline; background: transparent; font-family: Retina; display: block; line-height: 2.2rem; color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Updated May 21, 2018 6:55 p.m. ET</time>780 COMMENTS
Starbucks Corp. SBUX -0.03% tried to dig itself out of controversy Monday by attempting to clarify a policy toward nonpaying guests that generated an onslaught of weekend criticism.
The Seattle-based retailer on Saturday had said it would allow all guests in its U.S. company-owned stores to use its cafes, including its restrooms, whether or not they make a purchase. That announcement, which attracted some support, also drew complaints that cafes wouldn’t have enough seats for paying customers and would turn into homeless shelters and drug havens.
On Monday, Starbucks revealed more about the policy, telling The Wall Street Journal that employees now have detailed instructions on what to do if someone is behaving in a disruptive manner, such as smoking, using drugs or alcohol, using restrooms improperly or sleeping.
At issue, in essence, is whether Starbucks views itself as a business that caters to customers, or a quasi-public place generally welcome to all. The uproar, which follows the arrest last month of two black men who wanted to use a Starbucks bathroom in Philadelphia, demonstrates the unusual spot that the nation’s biggest coffee chain holds in American culture.
While many other restaurants and retailers also must manage the issue of lingering customers and nonpaying guests who come in to use restrooms, Starbucks has promoted itself as providing a “third place” between home and work where people can freely exchange ideas. It essentially pioneered the idea that is now generating controversy.
Other restaurants and cafes have followed suit in recent years. McDonald’s Corp. and Panera Bread now offer free Wi-Fi and encourage customers to linger. Panera didn’t respond to a request for comment, and McDonald’s—which is almost entirely franchised—said it lets its franchisees determine how to best serve their customers.
“The whole Starbucks situation has opened up a can of worms. In most cases restaurants leave it up to the discretion of the individual restaurant and most are too busy to enforce a policy,” said Joe Pawlak, managing principal at restaurant consulting firm Technomic Inc.
Starbucks’s piecemeal messaging on the issue and the outpouring of commentary that ensued shows the challenges firms can face in an era when every corporate move can be immediately telegraphed and then dissected by the public at large.
“Often the people with the strongest views on either end of the spectrum will be the loudest online,” said Jeremy Robinson-Leon, president of Group Gordon, a corporate and crisis communications firm.
Views over the last few days ran the gamut. “It sounds like Starbucks is turning their stores into homeless shelters. Their coffee is strong but their management is weak,” said Ron Raduechel, a 64-year-old retired supply chain executive from Waukesha, Wis., who said he would no longer go to Starbucks.
“I believe Starbucks is doing what’s right in their hearts whether its outcome sparks negativity or not,” said Johnny Varela, a 31-year-old carpenter in Orlando, Fla. “I think Starbucks is very humanitarian.”
The dust-up is far from Starbucks’s first. It has driven attention to itself before by using its size to try to enact social change. The company in 2015 tried to foster conversations about race relations by urging baristas to write “Race Together” on customers’ cups, a move from which it backed away following social-media backlash.
Before the Affordable Care Act was proposed, Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz decried the lack of affordable health-care for millions of Americans. He caused an uproar among gun-rights proponents when he told U.S. customers that firearms were no longer welcomedin its stores.
Conveying a message of inclusiveness without alienating paying customers is critical for Starbucks at a time when its cafe business is more important than ever.
The company this month agreed to sell the rights to market and distribute its packaged coffee in grocery stores to Nestlé SA so it could focus on its coffee shops. Sales at its U.S. cafes have been slowing.
“Starbucks is making a strategic bet that by defining its own moral code they will continue to attract a core consumer group that will remain loyal, but you max out on that demographic at some point,” said Eric Schiffer, chairman of Reputation Management Consultants.
Starbucks, he said, had no choice but to take action rather than just apologizing and then letting the news die down. “The whole goal of managing a crisis is regaining credibility and that comes from aligning words with actions,” he said.
Under the procedures for handling disruptive guests, Starbucks said Monday, managers and baristas should first ask a fellow employee to verify that a certain behavior is disruptive and if it is, respectfully request that the customer stop.
Other examples of disruptive behavior include talking too loudly, playing loud music and viewing inappropriate content. The company provided employees with examples of when they should call 911, which includes when a customer is using or selling drugs.
The arrests last month in Philadelphia came after a manager’s decision to call the police after the two men asked to use the bathroom without purchasing anything and allegedly refused to leave when asked.
Starbucks quickly apologized for the actions of the store manager, who ultimately left the company. When a video of the men’s arrests went viral, people immediately took to social media calling for a boycott of Starbucks.
A couple of days after the news spread, the boycott threats died down.
The company announced a few days later that it would close its more-than 8,000 U.S. company-owned stores on May 29 to conduct antibias training for employees. Later, Starbucks said it settled with the two men for an undisclosed amount.
Write to Julie Jargon at julie.jargon@wsj.com
Honestly, Starbucks used to be a place one could go to to escape ridiculous behavior. The only recent problem was homeless squatters.... who brought smells and, well, many of them were insane with drug problems.
Not a fan of Starbucks, but I was paying for civilization... a nice, quiet place to go to.
They all are quiet places to sit down and study and use wI-fi. You conveniently forgot Panera Bread. Which is probably the most comparable to StarBucks as far as paying and sitting. There is no grocery store or public library.
Wegmans has an upstairs area where you can sit down and eat, study, use a computer etc.... these stores are ALL set up for this type of activity. Business professional type stores. Star bucks provides free Wi-Fi and usually located in city areas, street corners, probably relatively close to a school or college.
I think they are setting rules because druggies are coming in and shooting up in their bathrooms. They probably thought the two black people were up to no good. And asked them to leave. Even though there were white people admitting they hadn't bought anything either.
hno:I burn up my monthly phone data plan every month from constantly checking lines..making bets..reading the rx..updating business related issues out in the field...and thus ive used mcdonalds wifi many many times without purchasing anything..also go there to plug in my laptop to charge it..coffee shops have more outlets available and i dont purchase anything there either...i dont like mcdonalds food nor do i drink coffee..but they have free wifi that i sometimes even use while parked in my car....just being resourceful
I think places that offer free wifi are doing that in hopes of drawing potential customers in..theres nothing that says i have to buy anything...in other countries ive been to, the wifi password is displayed for everyone to see and use in public places including restaraunts. I dont take sugar packets and toilet paper rolls out of these places..just using the free unlocked wifi that is essentially in the air....ooops i forgot i use the free wifi at the gym that i pay a membership to...but anyone can use that wifi..and free wifi at all tropical smoothies but you have to ask for the password and i buy a better product there than what is available at the more popular and available places around town..i guess im only too cheap half the time huh? But maybe you are judgemental more than half the time?
