DO NOT LICK THE BRAIN! and other obvious stuff

July 31st, 2018 by Fiona W. Ong at Shawe Rosenthal


This blog was written by Fiona Ong at Shawe Rosenthal, author of our Maryland Human Resources Manual. You can find the original blog post here and their Labor & Employment Report newsletter (which is excellent) here.

Starbucks – Training Employees on the Obvious?

Picture of brain

I have a friend who is a high school biology teacher. A few years ago, her class dissected a sheep’s brain. After class, one of her students confessed to her that he had licked the brain!!! (I’ll pause here for a moment so you can wrap your own brain around that….) Unsurprisingly, this caused an immediate uproar. The school nurse was appropriately concerned about possible health issues (prions that can cause horrific diseases, poisonous chemicals, etc.). On the other hand, an administrator questioned whether my friend had failed to preemptively instruct her students NOT TO LICK THE BRAIN. Um, what? I think we can agree that is one of those things that is so glaringly obvious you should not have to spell it out as a general matter.

What else is obvious? Well, I’d say the direction that Starbucks gave to its employees to call 911 if they observe a customer using or selling drugs. Or there’s a fire or robbery. This is associated with Starbucks’ new policy on non-paying guests in its stores. The issuance of the policy follows the well-publicized arrest of two Black men in a Philadelphia store and the company’s subsequent announcement that it would close all stores on May 29 for anti-bias training.

The new policy welcomes all to Starbucks spaces regardless of whether they make a purchase. However, it does contain the following provisions:

In situations where a customer is behaving in a disruptive manner that does not maintain the third place environment and interferes with the Starbucks Experience for others, Starbucks partners should follow the “Addressing Disruptive Behaviors” procedure.

If a situation presents an immediate danger or threat to partner or customer safety, Starbucks partners should call 911.

The Washington Post reports that the “Addressing Disruptive Behaviors” procedure identifies eight instances of when 911 should be called, including: a gas leak or fire, robbery, a threat of violence, the use or selling of illegal drugs, the destruction of store property, a medical emergency, or a physical assault (Yes, I know that’s only seven. I can’t figure out from the article what the eighth one is). I frankly find the specific identification of these examples to be unnecessary (and a little paternalistic) because, well, they’re really pretty obvious. I would hope that a Starbucks employee (and anyone else) would understand that they can call 911 if a guest is having a heart attack, or the store has been robbed or is on fire – without a written procedure to instruct them to do so.

I also raise an eyebrow at another reported part of the procedure – that before taking action against disruptive behavior, the employee should ask another employee to “observe and verify” the behavior. As a general rule, that seems pretty ridiculous. In most cases, the disruptive behavior is going to be obvious and an employee would likely be able to determine that all on his/her own. Requiring “verification” would often be unnecessary, and may, in fact, delay a response to the disruption. Of course there will likely be situations in which case an employee might be unsure of whether the behavior is actually a problem, and it would be completely appropriate to involve another employee to assess and help deal with the issue. But to require it every time? (Although I wonder if that requirement is intended as a check on rogue employees…)

Now, I want to make clear that I really appreciate the fact that Starbucks is trying to be proactive in training its employees on bias and guest relations, as well as how to deal with potentially problematic guests. But from a practical standpoint, I don’t think all of the pieces have been very well thought-out. Starbucks, in an excess of caution, seems to be taking an overly regulated approach. And I suspect that employees will comply with some degree of eye-rolling.

Just as my friend does, when she now warns her students each year before the sheep brain dissection lab, “DO NOT LICK THE BRAIN!”

 





HR Webinars
Answers to contractor's frequently asked questions on filing VETS-4212 reports
August 23rd, 2018 at 1:00pm CDT by Ogletree Deakins


HR Articles
Employment agreements – what to do before you do
Background checks of the future are continuous
Treating service animal requests (always treat the animal)
Prepare for saying "No" – you need to decide how to refuse service
List 10 up: What's the deal with employee handbook rules?
I cannot tell a lie . . . you're fired for cutting down the cherry tree
Milk Stork delivers for working mom's and their baby
Job tasks and essential functions under the ADA
Who are you? Why are you here? Personality testing?
No, you can't sleep on the job
Technology driving the hiring process
Should you give your employees a little Slack – or do they have enough already?
"We need to talk" isn't any easier to say than to hear
Bet employers must make: call and raise your minimum wage
Zero tolerance for "zero tolerance" policies
Ralph Waldo Emerson as a productivity consultant
PS: PTSD IRL*
Is the employee "disabled" under the ADA?
The six step DOL audit polka
PTO on the house!
New rules for work rules
Dr. Strangelabor or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Millennial
Did Bartleby the scrivener write his own job description?
"Treating" disgruntled or bad behaving employees
Hiring under the age of 18
DO NOT LICK THE BRAIN! and other obvious stuff
Helping your employees save for emergencies
Right to bare arms in the workplace
#MeToo quiz
Under standing desks
How to approach an employee showing signs of cognitive decline
Dress codes should not be encoded
Foul language *
Rorschach, Horshack and Abednego
Don't ask a woman the gender of her child, especially. . .
Guidelines for a valid no-solicitation/no-distribution policy
All aboard the Love Train for long-term onboarding!
Gender and workplace bathrooms
No FMLA for pet's death
Personal hygiene in the workplace
Yes Virginia, there is a St. Patrick's Day in Ireland
Master the modern method for managing March Madness
Drug testing in The Office
Background checks
"Thank you" and "I'm sorry" – meaningful, simple and impactful
Michael Corleone HR tip for the day
S'not flu or it is, doesn't matter
Be prepared for ICE raids
Looking for employees: an untapped source of talent
Calling Dr. Love(less)
Non-exempt employees – what counts as wages?
HR is not a happy accident
Do new hires have to be a culture club fit?
Remote workers and telecommuting
When former employees ask for references
Model written lock out/tag out program
Wrong table cat
They might be giants . . . transforming healthcare?
Conducting internal I-9 audits
The Nebraska Chamber has issued a W-2 challenge to state taxpayers
The impact of super bowl(ing)
12 steps to handling violence in the workplace
Workplace retaliation: don't give in to the Dark Side
Would you really want to work with a bunch of yous?
What is the ADA?
Monty Python should not write your job descriptions
FMLA definitions
Unemployed or wear a bra – are those the only choices?
What "government shutdown" means for employers
An intern by any other name
FMLA - "leave" as in "leave the employee alone"
 “M,” “F,” Or “X”? Nonbinary Gender Designations in the Workplace
Sexual harassment – can't find it – what now?
Probationary periods
Employee contracts
Introverts
How to treat fringe benefits for employees
Attendance policies
Different repeal
Temporary and leased employees
Birthdays in the workplace
Needy employees
Holiday parties - acknowledge, avoid, assume (nothing)
Dress codes: who, what, wear
Punch clock
Nepotism: favoring relatives and friends in the workplace
Year-end performance reviews
Hiring interviews
The Form I-9 has changed… Again!
Service dogs at work
Bring your own gun
Social media
Year-end or holiday incentives
Arizona sick day policy
Paternity leave
HRsimple spotlight - Fiona Ong
Permissible post-accident drug testing
Paid family leave: a growing trend
Politics in the workplace: how to remain legally compliant during election season
Termination Series: Communicating the reason for discharge
It’s only a matter of overtime
Interview with attorneys at Kastner Westman & Wilkins
Valentine's Day heartaches around the office
Safety and health tips
Wearable technology
Favorite HR sites
Back to school time is here!
Vacation policies and time off
Interview with author J. Hagood Tighe
Non-compete agreements
Workplace romance
Holidays
Bullying in the workplace
Employment references
Telecommuting or remote (control) workers
Social media and employment
Performance evaluations
Breaktimes
Interview with attorneys at Wilson Worley PC
Interview with attorneys at Knudsen Law Firm
Interview with Kathy Speaker MacNett
Firing, a job to do right the first time
Job advertisement do’s and don’ts
Employee handbooks – getting a handle on your policies
Technology in the workplace
Interview questions: do's and don'ts
Employee personnel files