Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Political debate. Welcome Yahoo Message Board exiles and everybody else !!
donttreadonme
God-Like
Posts: 10228
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by donttreadonme » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:39 pm

clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
The door was open. There were customers in the store still being served. It wouldn't have taken much more effort to serve one more. If you know anything about retail, you would know that you never turn away business.
0 x
‘And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth.’

User avatar
evilconempire
Somebody please hep me I been hypmotized
Posts: 34028
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 7:25 am

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by evilconempire » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:51 pm

clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
That's one theory. Another is that they used racially insensitive remarks. Perhaps they didn't, but we know, from the owner's statement, that this was not behavior they supported being associate with their business.

Their statement makes is clear these two weren't trusted to conduct business in accordance with the owner's wishes. So they were fired.

Yeah, I worked retail when I was younger. Closing time was flexible, but it was like that with the small privately owned company. The larger chain places had an exact closing time with no exceptions.
0 x
How sad that your Mother didn't have an abortion before she brought such an abomination as the likes of you into this world. - Aluannie :prech:

User avatar
clusterchuck
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3300
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:19 pm

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by clusterchuck » Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:51 pm

donttreadonme wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:39 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
The door was open. There were customers in the store still being served. It wouldn't have taken much more effort to serve one more. If you know anything about retail, you would know that you never turn away business.
True, they could have served the professional equity activist. On the other hand, employees have lives too and are paid to operate the business within parameters such as cleaning up and punching out on time.

Agreed. They failed to lock the door while customers were still in the store. On the other hand:

"It is a violation of fire code (Life Safety Code) to lock any "required exit" against egress while anyone other than trained employees are inside (employees know the other ways out). For example, any door marked with an "EXIT" sign must actually function to open with a single motion by the occupant (i.e., you, a random customer in a mercantile occupancy) in case of emergency. That's the whole point of having a marked exit.

Violations of life safety code by commercial institutions in some places can be $10,000 per day. Local codes may vary"
2 x

donttreadonme
God-Like
Posts: 10228
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by donttreadonme » Fri Jul 20, 2018 10:21 pm

clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:51 pm
donttreadonme wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:39 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
The door was open. There were customers in the store still being served. It wouldn't have taken much more effort to serve one more. If you know anything about retail, you would know that you never turn away business.
True, they could have served the professional equity activist. On the other hand, employees have lives too and are paid to operate the business within parameters such as cleaning up and punching out on time.

Agreed. They failed to lock the door while customers were still in the store. On the other hand:

"It is a violation of fire code (Life Safety Code) to lock any "required exit" against egress while anyone other than trained employees are inside (employees know the other ways out). For example, any door marked with an "EXIT" sign must actually function to open with a single motion by the occupant (i.e., you, a random customer in a mercantile occupancy) in case of emergency. That's the whole point of having a marked exit.

Violations of life safety code by commercial institutions in some places can be $10,000 per day. Local codes may vary"
It was a bakery. There is product on the shelf with very limited shelf life. There were people already in the store being served. Either you sell the product or it gets thrown away. I would have fired people who refused to serve willing customers with customers already in the store in the process of being served.
0 x
‘And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth.’

User avatar
clusterchuck
Heir Apparent
Posts: 3300
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:19 pm

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by clusterchuck » Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:44 am

evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:51 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
That's one theory. Another is that they used racially insensitive remarks. Perhaps they didn't, but we know, from the owner's statement, that this was not behavior they supported being associate with their business.

Their statement makes is clear these two weren't trusted to conduct business in accordance with the owner's wishes. So they were fired.

Yeah, I worked retail when I was younger. Closing time was flexible, but it was like that with the small privately owned company. The larger chain places had an exact closing time with no exceptions.
Welcome to the world of social justice warfare where businesses are easily shuttered by public shaming for inequities, real, imagined or fabricated.

I can appreciate your small business experience. Mine was quite different. Mama Rosa's Pizza. Small town, MCAS close by, 4 employees. My instructions were: close at 11 PM, the crew cleans up. Anyone still around at midnight is on their own time. Late night prowling Grunts could be a real problem if the rules weren't strictly followed.
1 x

User avatar
Pete
Site Admin
Posts: 7021
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 1:15 am
Location: Atlanta GA USA

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by Pete » Sat Jul 21, 2018 6:08 am

Whats the difference between throwing away bad food and throwing away overtime dollars?
0 x
"I like my coffee like I like my women: hot, black, and with a piece of prune Danish" Gilbert Gottfried

User avatar
I am Z
Global Moderator
Posts: 14168
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2014 11:13 am

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by I am Z » Sat Jul 21, 2018 7:04 am

evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:50 am
Hmmm. How was she denied exactly? That bit of information seems to be missing.
perhaps they used the whoopi goldberg approach and said; "get the fk out of the building"

:coupe_affro:
1 x
if you don't follow the 7 principles of Kwanzaa, you're a racist!

“matunda ya kwanza”


I still like "Hakuna Matata

:flycarpet:

User avatar
chucky
Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rolla
Posts: 19991
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by chucky » Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:31 am

nolaxride wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 7:01 pm
psk836 wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:48 am
Some more news in racialist America (coining a new word for the race exploitation industry).

https://katu.com/news/local/portland-ba ... er-closing

"In one statement, "Back To Eden Bakery" says that according to its own surveillance video, a black woman named "Lillian", who is well known in the area as a "professional equity activist", entered at 9:06 p.m., after the bakery's closing time. Employees had also turned off the "Open" sign, but several customers (all white) who had already ordered were still inside. Two other white women who went to the bakery two minutes before "Lillian", and were also informed that the business was closed for the night.

The bakery says "Lillian" left the store briefly and began recording video."

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work."

In the statement "Back To Eden" says the employees were fired because the woman and the "clamoring public" demanded they be fired.

In one statement, the bakery admitted that the employees did not necessarily do anything wrong, "this is more about how a black woman was made to feel" at the business."
After having given this some thought, and reflecting on the Chic-fil-a story, I agree with the store owner. The employees should be fired. Not for refusing service, but for not providing excellent customer service. They should have served everyone. If you don't want folks walking in the front door, lock it.
Can’t lock the door with customers inside , it is a safety hazard and against the law there.
0 x
"I’d rather die standing up than live on my knees."
Stephane Charbonnier

User avatar
chucky
Ayatollah of Rock-n-Rolla
Posts: 19991
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by chucky » Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:38 am

evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:51 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:28 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 9:09 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:47 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:18 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:59 pm
evilconempire wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:52 pm
clusterchuck wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 2:06 pm
Pathetically, identity politics has a strong enough hold on the public conscience to provide those with hypersensitive ethnicity a portable wedge capable of instant deployment, even when no "issue" exists. All that REALLY matters is how the poor poor oppressed feel about the way they are treated by random humans.

Society is insane for fostering this victim mentality.
Unfortunately racism is thriving in the US. Some people just refuse to acknowledge it. Also unfortunate there are those that use it to their benefit. Identity politics plays a strong role in the assumptions one is willing to make about incidences such as this one where we don’t have all the information.
In a society where it has become important to identify the skin color of people in a bakery after closing, and, what passes for "journalism" these days, it is difficult, NEH, impossible not to make at least a few assumptions with a story like this.
Based on the available information, the bakery owner appears to have fired employees in effort to manage perceptions of the event. After all, there is much to fear when one gets on the bad side of a "professional equity activist".
Of course, if what was said to her was offensive and racial it is relevant to the situation and should be included in the story. There's no doubt assumptions will be made about this to fill in the gaps of missing details. Those assumptions are going to be based on biases.

If the owner doesn't feel the employees did anything wrong and doesn't want to lose them then he or she should keep them. What the owner said though doesn't say he or she feels they didn't do anything wrong so there is something else to this story that we aren't being told.
Again, based on the information provided in the article what happened is clear. The owner eve said it outright. The employees were sacrificed to appease blood lust of a "professional equity activist" and the "clamoring public" - because they demanded it.
Like I said, they made numerous statements. One of which you've cited and the others I've cited. They are not consistent with each other, which is why I said we're not being told the whole story.

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work." The way they went about it? I'd like to know how they went about it.
The way they went about it was not considering the damage a professional equity activist and a clamoring public reacting to a video of white people being served could do to the business. In other words, serve the activist regardless of circumstance.

If the owners aim to provide an excellent customer experience at all times, they should have trained the employees entrusted with conducting business in the owners absence to do so.

Having worked in retail in a younger day, I was trained that closing is closing. If you stay open to serve a late straggler or two, you run the risk of more appearing and running the payroll into overtime, so close up punctually. Period.

Of course, that was long before social justice warriors could stand outside videoing the injustice of white people who showed up before closing being served by racist employees working in a racist bakery.
That's one theory. Another is that they used racially insensitive remarks. Perhaps they didn't, but we know, from the owner's statement, that this was not behavior they supported being associate with their business.

Their statement makes is clear these two weren't trusted to conduct business in accordance with the owner's wishes. So they were fired.

Yeah, I worked retail when I was younger. Closing time was flexible, but it was like that with the small privately owned company. The larger chain places had an exact closing time with no exceptions.
SJW racists should not be rewarded and given privilege because they threaten businesses with boycotts over manufactured incidents.
0 x
"I’d rather die standing up than live on my knees."
Stephane Charbonnier

User avatar
nolaxride
Global Moderator
Posts: 17025
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:09 pm

Re: Portland Bakery Fires Two Employees For Failing To Serve Black Woman AFTER CLOSING

Post by nolaxride » Sat Jul 21, 2018 11:04 am

chucky wrote:
Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:31 am
nolaxride wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 7:01 pm
psk836 wrote:
Fri Jul 20, 2018 11:48 am
Some more news in racialist America (coining a new word for the race exploitation industry).

https://katu.com/news/local/portland-ba ... er-closing

"In one statement, "Back To Eden Bakery" says that according to its own surveillance video, a black woman named "Lillian", who is well known in the area as a "professional equity activist", entered at 9:06 p.m., after the bakery's closing time. Employees had also turned off the "Open" sign, but several customers (all white) who had already ordered were still inside. Two other white women who went to the bakery two minutes before "Lillian", and were also informed that the business was closed for the night.

The bakery says "Lillian" left the store briefly and began recording video."

"The bakery also says in the statement that the way the employees went about denying the woman service, "lacked sensitivity and understanding of the racial implications at work."

In the statement "Back To Eden" says the employees were fired because the woman and the "clamoring public" demanded they be fired.

In one statement, the bakery admitted that the employees did not necessarily do anything wrong, "this is more about how a black woman was made to feel" at the business."
After having given this some thought, and reflecting on the Chic-fil-a story, I agree with the store owner. The employees should be fired. Not for refusing service, but for not providing excellent customer service. They should have served everyone. If you don't want folks walking in the front door, lock it.
Can’t lock the door with customers inside , it is a safety hazard and against the law there.
I disagree. Most commercial doors are safety doors. They always open out whether they're locked or not.
0 x
-- Ignotum per inotius

Post Reply