A barista tells Starbucks corporate that she refuses to use the "Skinny" lingo

A Starbucks barista sent this objection to the "skinny platform" to the corporate bosses. She tells them: "At the risk of being reprimanded for insubordination, I will not be following this new method for calling and marking." The "skinny" drinks debut this week.

My name is xxxxxxx and I currently work at store number xxxx in NY. I am a barista. At the beginning of January, I know that we are to begin using a "Skinny platform" for calling drinks, as well as marking cups. I would like to say that I think this decision is a poor one, and, at the risk of being reprimanded for insubordination, I will not be following this new method for calling and marking. I feel as though there are several flaws that will cause confusion, frustration and, potentially, a waste of product and time for partners, and far worse, alienate both partners and Starbucks customers. I've composed a detailed list of problems that can and, more than likely will, arise from the "Skinny platform.

1) We have been trained since day one to follow a specific method of drink calling/marking. Changing it up now will cause FAR too much confusion. For all stores, high volume stores in particular, this can severely impact speed-of-service, drink quality, customer satisfaction, labor, and product usage. Miscommunication between customers and partners, partners calling drinks and partners making drinks, and partners making drinks calling the drinks to the customers waiting to receive their drinks will inevitably lead to drinks having to be discarded after being made, customers becoming angry and impatient, assuming it is employee incompetence that is behind errors, and partners become frustrated and angry at one another after having customers criticize and yell at them. Customers will not want to come to stores where they have had such negative experiences, and coming into work will become something that partners dread as opposed to look forward to. Furthermore, from a financial perspective, the amount of product wasted could impact profits to the company, and time wasted making and then remaking drinks will affect labor hours at all stores.

2) Customers already find it difficult and confusing to order drinks at Starbucks. After spending the time to remember exactly how to order their favorite drink to make things easier for baristas, and maybe even impress us, to have things changed in such a drastic way can upset customers and make things even more confusing. People have spent so much time trying to figure out just how to order a drink at Starbucks, why change things so dramatically. It also allows for a HUGE margin of error. A "Skinny" drink is a drink made with sugar-free syrup, non-fat milk, and no whipped cream. Unless this is CLEARLY spelled out for customers, people will ask for a "Skinny" drink without really knowing what they're asking for. People may want sugar-free syrup but 2% milk, or non-fat milk but still have the whipped cream, or any number of other combinations that are NOT "Skinny" according to the recipe, but are still modified in a "Skinny" fashion. Moreover, partners who have been with the company for an extended period of time have grown used to the current procedure. We have gone through the process of learning how to call the drinks, and how to listen to customers struggle to ask us for everything they want in their drink, and translate the order into correct format. This change will throw partners off and, once again, lead to frustration and mistakes. Why complicate a system that, for the most part, works?

3) It is politically incorrect. Should we start calling drinks with 2% or whole milk and regular syrups "Fat" or "Obese?" Consider what customers on line waiting for their turn to order their drink will think if they hear the drink before them being called out as "Skinny." It leaves the door open for the next person on line to be offended. Additionally, the word "skinny" itself can have many different interpretations, not all of which are positive. In today's society, the term "skinny" often refers to a person who is considered TOO thin or unhealthy looking. People will not want to order a drink with a name that they associate with an unhealthy appearance.

4) The fact cannot be disputed that in society today, people are just waiting for an opportunity to sue major corporations. Without question, people will be leaping at the opportunity file a lawsuit against the Starbucks Corporation for discrimination. In this country, statistics show that more than two thirds of the population is overweight or obese. Calling a drink "Skinny" could easily be considered a form of size discrimination. This is not exclusive to people who are overweight as a result of their lifestyle or eating habits. There are a number of medical maladies that result in people becoming overweight regardless of eating habits or how they live their lives. Whether the corporation cares to recognize the fact or not, Starbucks is a target by society and there are a lot of people who would love to bring it down. This is just giving them the means to do so. Regardless of whether these people are justified in their claims, it is foolish to believe that people will not use this for their own gains.

5) Aside from customers who do not fit societies standards of "skinny," there are partners that are employed by Starbucks who are "overweight," and it is ridiculous to think otherwise. Imagine going to work for several hours at a time, and hearing the term "skinny" being called out countless times. It will undoubtedly have a negative affect on a person's self-esteem that may already be low from living in a society that is generally not accepting of people who do not fit the mold of a "beautiful" person. It creates an environment that people will not want to be in. It will exacerbate self-image issues that partners of ANY size may have. Why would ANYONE want to go into a store where they will hear potentially hurtful terms called out repeatedly with no regard as to how they may affect people?

I have no doubt that there is no malicious intent with "Skinny" platform. I'm sure that it is intended to make our jobs easier, and maybe show the public that Starbucks has options that can eliminate many of the calories and fat in the drinks we serve. Maybe it is even an attempt to use a different kind of lingo that could be considered hip or exciting. But the problems I have brought up cannot be ignored. They are real, and they will affect every single Starbucks that implements this system. As a company that is a part of the service industry, you are alienating customers and employees, and there will be repercussions. On a deeper level, this in essence goes against every one of our six guiding principles in one way or another.

I am not the only employee of this company who holds this opinion. I have yet to come across a single partner in any store who thinks that this is a good idea. There are several policies Starbucks enforces that I do not necessarily agree with, but this is one that I refuse to adhere to, and I will not let this be something that I complain about to coworkers and do nothing about. I am speaking on behalf of myself, and any partner who shares my beliefs but has decided not to voice their opinion. I love my job. It is a part of my life that brings me joy and makes me feel as though I am making people happy. It is for that reason that I believe this "Skinny" platform is a policy that, if nothing else, should be reconsidered by the company, if not completely eliminated. I will accept any consequences that I may face for not following this policy, but I would hope that it does not come to that.

The "Skinny" platform is not legendary.

I thank you for your time and hope that you will consider all that I have said.

Sincerely,
XXXXX

Comments

[Elizabeth]

I don't see why Starbucks couldn't just advertise its sugar-free syrups (and possibly the skim option) more prominently in the stores. Right now, it's just fine print on a gigantic menu board. I agree, "skinny" just creates more confusion. But then again I expect nothing better from corporate, who recently remodelled my store into a hellhole.

[chitown's best/angriest barista]

amen to that, sister! i am right there with you on everything you said and will also be refusing to call anything "skinny."

[Kearns]

Wait a second. "Skinny" means use skim milk, has for years, why would Starbucks want it to mean anything else?

[BOSTON STARBUCKS REBEL]

I think the skinny platform to is misguided step for Starbucks. However, it seems Winter Phase is a time when people seem to lose their minds. Remember, Chantico and how it came out in Winter 2005. Well, yeah, now we have the "skinny" platform.

[Anonymous]

so awesome...

did anyone hear about DCCF's having to be called out as double chocolaty chip frappuccino. thats 1 i deff won't be using

[Camille Claudel]

I was born and raised in LA. I have traveled across the globe, and for as disgusted and disappointed as I was when I saw the Sbucks logo in Paris, I knew I could go in there and order my drink without a hitch. Even in Athens, Greece, the barista knew my drink simply by calling it out in English.

I am sick of Starbucks, though, and all their bright and brilliant marketing plans. I wish they would leave well enough alone.

It's hard enough to have had to memorize my drink in order to get speedy and courteous service. But to start calling beverages "skinny" is just stupid.

[onlymystory]

I just found the double chocolaty chip thing entertaining.
But I agree on the skinny change. I recognize the reasoning to show the options and especially as people are making new years resolutions, now is the time to make sure people know to give up something other than Starbucks.
Even so, the skinny change is confusing. As a shift, I've been trying to explain the new system to my baristas and everyone is confused. As it stands, the only way a drink is skinny is if it is made with sugar free syrup, nonfat milk, no whip cream, and foam. But change just one of those details and we are back to calling out every marker on the cup. And I firmly agree that saying skinny implies that other drinks are for fat/obese people. I'm in great shape but while I prefer the taste of nonfat, I want my sugar and whip cream and I don't want to feel like I'm getting a drink for someone with no control every time I order. To xxxx employee--if you write a mission review, so will I. Maybe as partners we can bring about a change. Its worked with other things after all.

[STEVEBMD]

EXCELLENT letter. I actually wrote a letter myself last weekend, elaborating on points #3 and 5. I didn't bring up the discrimination-lawsuit factor, but I have to agree with you that it's a rich target for someone who may use this for his/her own gains.... in fact, as a recovering bulimic, maybe there's some money in it for me??? ;)

[pcbarista]

I hear people ask for Skinny in reference to skim milk and I think the word just sounds silly.
This whole new drink calling system is a part of the reason that I am looking for a new job, and I know it sounds ridiculous but I get enough people looking at me like I'm insane on a daily basis, I don't need this to add to it lol. I work in a BUSY store, we don't need the added stress.

And using the word skinny makes me feel ridiculous. That's all I have to say.

Oh well.

[Eric]

To create a response from The Consumerist forum postings:

Hmmmm, sounds like this person might be a little obsessed with her own weight or body image. The term is referring to a drink, not a person. Is she really saying that the word 'Skinny' is not appropriate in any context because it makes her think about what she looks like?

Is she gonna complain about "WARNING: HOT" written on coffee cups because not everyone is hot?

Come on. It's just a marketing ploy, get over it. I hate it when people are so insecure.

Suck it up who ever you are.

So, what's in a Rubinesque?

[Eric]

And my favorite:

Don't like it? Get a new job.

[fuwalda]

This was a heartfelt, well thought out, and intelligent letter. But I also disagree with her.

I respect the fact that she has personal objections to the new skinny platform, but I don't like how all of those objections are actually concerned with other people.

She *thinks* customers will be confused. Well, I *think* they won't. It's not that hard to understand the new platform, and it will all be clearly spelled out for the customers.

She *thinks* speed of service will go down. Well, I *think* it might go down at first, but it always does as a new platform or set up is introduced. Just because a short period of adjustment is needed for most changes, does that mean nothing should ever change? I *think* not.

She *thinks* people who are overweight will take offense. You know what I think is offense to people who are overweight? When people presume that they, as a whole, are so thin skinned (pardon the use of the word thin) that they will all, as a whole, be offended by the use of the word skinny. That's ridiculous, not to mention insulting.

Right now we use the word nonfat to signify a certain kind of milk. Have you ever heard a customer or barista complain about having to hear the word "fat" over and over again? Of course not. Because most Starbucks customers and partners are smart enough to understand that the word has no value beyond its use as a drink modifier.

And, finally, as well intentioned and intelligent (though misguided and off-base, in my opinion) as her letter was, she completely nullified the whole thing when she presumed to speak for every Starbucks partner in her letter's conclusion. I'm sorry, but every partner in every store does not agree that it's a bad idea. I for one don't think it's a bad idea. I don't necessarily know if it's a good idea, but I have faith in the company and am keeping an open mind. I will agree that some of the partners at my store voiced concern at first, but most of them have come around because I made it my mission to train people on the new platform, spoke positively about it, and encouraged people to try it out before writing it off completely.

I wish the person who wrote that letter had done the same.

[Eric]

Fuwalda, right on!

[Eric]

Fuwalda, right on!

[Graeme Harper]

One thing I think should be Skinny (Slimed down) is the letter.

Basically the 2 Skinny points are, the new name is;

1)confusing and 2) derogatory.

A simpler option would be to call a drink that is sugar free, low fat milk w/ no whip LOW CAL

i.e. a Grande Lo Cal Cinnamon Dolce! Doh!

A drink with any other combination would be called as requested!?

A sometimes happy customer. . .

That was amazing. I don't know if anyone could have said it better......

[Eric]

"That was amazing. I don't know if anyone could have said it better......"

Thank you!

[BaristaB]

amen. this letter could have easily been written by me. I will use the new system... but I think it's stupid and won't work. I don't get it.

[Vicki Verona]

As much as I would have hoped that the company would have focused on product innovation rather than menu manipulation, I agree that the letter is full of passion, but not a very convincing argument.

To respond directly to the speed of service claim. Think about when a store is taught "SBUX deployment." Everyone is always up in arms about and comes up with a hundred reasons to pushback on it. And yes, at first, when a store is having their deployment behaviors changed, speed goes down a bit because its new and unfamiliar to the partners, which means they feel unconfident, and thus aren't operating at their best.

However, after a couple of weeks, it starts to click for your the majority of your partners, which forces the rest of the partners to assimilate.

With Cashing Handling Simplification, the same thing happened for the first 2-3 weeks. It was a new way of doing our deposits and it took a lot of us some time to adjust and learn how to troubleshoot. Now, I can do a deposit in 15 minutes from start to finish and I manage a $32,000+/wk store.

Here's an idea folks. Why don't we use this thread as a way of putting together a collective message to send to some of the head honchos, including Cos, Laurie, and Jim.
This site has always been a good way of getting the attention of the most highly influential people in the company. My previous SVP, Mark Lindstrom, even admitted at an open forum he attended that he views this website regularly.

[Eric]

God help you all should you ever enter the proffessional workforce...

[Vicki Verona]

I have contacts with many people up in Seattle, so I'd be happy to post their contact information.

[rakist]

Fuwalda:

I see where you are coming from but i'm going to have to fill you in on a couple of points...

First off, us Starbucks Baristas have our own forum online where thousands of us from all around the world gather to discuss issues, opinions and facts. Even involved Starbucks customers often join in on the discussions. I have read atleast 5 posts and many, many (hundreds) responses concerning customers and baristas who have taken offense to the "Skinny" promotion.

Even as a fairly skinny person myself, I as well would feel a mixture of embarrassment and rudeness in calling out such a beverage.

Concerning the issue regarding the additional confusion and waiting times for customers: The promotion is scheduled to launch for tomorrow and I can guarantee you that about 2 employees in my store have understood and decided to go along with this promotion. The rest are either wary of it or confused due to all of the CONFLICTING materials we have received!! I'm doing Siren
s Eye tonight and the materials in the binder say we are NOT changing our methods of calling out the drinks, but there is a Memo that came out telling us that we will change it!!

Obviously Corporate was having issues with this promotion from the get-go. I agree with Elizabeth who said that they should have stuck with advertising the sugar-free syrups. Why waste time with all of this nonsense?

[sir jorge]

i say...sadly...

shut up and do your job.

[estos]

amen to whoever wrote that.

[Eric]

This is what "entitlement in education" gets us - whinging brats who are offended by the performance of thier jobs.

it is going to be confusing, but - whatever customers are used to that...her letter was too long to make a solid point.
no one is going to read it up at HQ

[Herself]

Those of us who are clued in to how many carbs skim milk has versus cream know that a real 'skinny' latte is a sugar-free breve.

[B-Mo]

Ugh. I don't know why anyone wants to drink a sugar-free nonfat anything anyway.

[Rach]

She has a great point with the comment "why complicate a system that, for the most part, works?" I'm not totally opposed to this, but I do think it's unnecessary.

[Howard Schultz]

I think that the "partner" who wrote this must be a fat chick, it's the only reason that she would be worried about this.

[SeaTown Coffee]

This is Marketing 101 Pure and Simple.
Starbucks is the new McDonald's, and they are being attacked for the crappy fat drinks that they are putting out, while McDonald's is being lauded for the fact that they have so many 'healthy' options.

The Starbucks 'Skinny' platform is a bullshit response to the real accusation that the menu of drinks and food is far from healthy. Look at the stock price today, the 'Skinny' platform was supposed to raise the price by $2.00 or more...

[Lou Sussler]

She may be right or wrong in her assessment of the Skinny protocol. I don't know enough to say but my gut reaction is that she is right.

She lost me with the "I won't be doing it"

Bringing your opinion to the attention of management is laudable. Making the decision to not follow specific instructions unilaterally would get her fired from my company. Immediately.

It has happened here before.

Me: Judy (name changed), please move that rolling file out of the passageway and to the other side of your desk.

Judy: No, I like it there.

Me: It's blocking the passageway, please move it.

Judy: No.

Me: Okay, you're fired, please clean up your desk and leave.

Judy: Really?

Me: Yes.

I agreed the first time I read her letter, and I agree still. It's a ridiculous platform. Insofar as I know, most people in my store seem to dislike it as well. We all concur that the platform is silly, but have different reasons for doing so.

Seatown, that's interesting. If that's the reason for the change, then it's a lame reason. "Nonfat" is just as healthy-sounding a term as "skinny", so I wonder why they felt the need to change it.

[Eric]

@ Lou Sussler:

That's the way is works in business.

[Dangerous Dan]

I'm a fat guy and founder of the largest size-positive group in the Northwest. I think this is political correctness gone berserk. The NY barista may have a point that the new terminology might initially be confusing, but after awhile it will be second nature. As for her claim that fat people will be offended by use of the term, there will always be people with a victim's chip on their shoulder looking for any excuse to place blame. As for the 13,000 people in our Seattle-based group, we KNOW we're fat! One coffee drink isn't going to make a difference in us being "skinny" and I think anyone who takes offense at these drinks' terminology has bigger issues.

[Vicki Verona]

I agree with the poster who said it's fine if you question the platform, it's a whole different thing when you say you won't follow it.

Essentially, when you say that you are not going to follow it "At the risk of insubordination", ESPECIALLY now that you've put your store # and name on it, you might as well have written your opening statement as "I feel so strongly about this issue that I am willing to loose my job over it." Because that is what is going to happen.

Personally, I would have urged you to write this letter without your store # on it. You've put your SM/ASM into a political situation now. You've had your letter published on a very visible website to SBUX executives and your OWN field leadership team. I have no doubts that there will be an e-mail chain initiated which will light a fire under your DM to get involved.

[Someone]

I'm more offended by these coffee monkeys being called "baristas" than the whole skinny thing...

Eric,
You lose all credibility with your silly typos and grammatical errors.

As the great Professor Henry Higgins said:
"Why can't the English learn how to Speak?"
Or in this case, type.

[SS]

I think the platform is ridiculous because (aside from the introduction of sugarfree mocha) all it's doing is giving old items new names. I get bunches of customers every day asking me about sugarfree or nonfat or low calorie options, and they have very little difficulty figuring out our options and remembering them the next time they come in.

Also, why take a term that has been used solely to denote nonfat milk and recycle it for something much more complicated? How many times am I going to have to ask customers who say skinny whether they meant "Sbux Skinny" or just "nonfat milk skinny"? Not all my customers are regulars. I'm going to have to re-explain this platform a thousand times to new customers throughout the promotion. This isn't simplification, it's complication, and that's frustrating for everyone involved.

[Stacy]

I don't agree with everything said in the letter but overall, co-sign.

In fact, myself and several other partners were discussing how we should send in a mission review.

[Eric]

"Eric,

You lose all credibility with your silly typos and grammatical errors."

That's precious, my little grammar nazi! Good for you for finding a way to entitle yourself! Good boy! [pat pat].

[WateryTart]

I just pasted that letter into MS Word. It took more than 3 pages, single spaced and lacking addresses and proper page breaks, etc.

First, it should not take nearly 4 pages to say what you need to say. You look like an raving idiot when you go on that long.

And second: You sell *coffee in paper cups*. Nothing about the job is worth nearly 4 pages of babbling verbiage if you are on the "serving coffee to customers" end of the equation and not on the "pulling down big bucks as the CEO" side of things.

Seriously. It's coffee.
Not brain surgery.
Not rocket science.
Coffee.

[Eric]

More from The Consumerist:

5) Aside from customers who do not fit societies standards of "smart," there are partners that are employed by Starbucks who are "stupid," and it is ridiculous to think otherwise. Imagine going to work for several hours at a time, and hearing the term "smart" being called out countless times. It will undoubtedly have a negative affect on a person's self-esteem that may already be low from living in a society that is generally not accepting of people who do not fit the mold of an "intelligent" person. It creates an environment that people will not want to be in. It will exacerbate self-image issues that partners of ANY size may have. Why would ANYONE want to go into a store where they will hear potentially hurtful terms called out repeatedly with no regard as to how they may affect people?

[hellscaper]

Inhale another dozen krispy kreme donuts and top it off with a Crisco milkshake, fatty. It'll make you feel better.

[djo10]

Once again, the lowest level of employee is trying to steer the ship.

Just drag yourself to work like the rest of us, and conform! It's not your business!!!! If you don't agree with the way it is run....QUIT.

Yes, because the little people have never effected change in the world.

"Conform." Blah. Life is more than just dragging yourself to work. Kudos to her for feeling so passionately about the subject that she's willing to risk her job. Heaven forbid she be an individual. Maybe it was rash to include her name and store #, but at the same time, she wasn't hiding behind the name of "anonymous barista." When one takes a stand, it should not be in anonymity. It should be open and forthright.

[Vicki Verona]

I keep mission review cards available in my store, but only because its a requirement. I never educate partners about it because nothing has ever been changed because of the mission review process. Its just a way to manipulate partners into thinking they have a voice, when really the company does what they see best. If they listen to anyone, its just the field leadership teams.

For example, an SM in my district hated how the roasting plant would send out a huge box just to send out 1 roll of coffee stamps. So she kept sending in mission reviews and finally she got a call from someone at the roasting plant saying that they would stop doing it.....

And we know how that story ends.......(and if you don't, they still send out oversized boxes for small items)

[Eric]

"When one takes a stand, it should not be in anonymity. It should be open and forthright."

-Anonymous

\Brilliant!

[nancy]

We are lucky to live in a country where we have full freedom of expression. The word "Skinny" is not a derogatory term, so get over it! There are much more important things out there to fight for, like free medical care for the needy.

To: Eric
From: Anon.

I am quite sure you understood what I meant by that, therefor I don't feel the need to explain my reasons for remaining anonymous on this specific public web board. Rest assured that if I ever feel the need to write a letter to Starbucks corporate, I will do so with full name and employee number. If you believe in something enough, you should be brave enough to back it with your name.

[Eric]

"If you believe in something enough, you should be brave enough to back it with your name."

-Anonymous

\Elevated from "Brilliant" to "Priceless"!

[Justin]

If she refuses to do her job she should go open her own shop or work at Dunkin Donuts where they dont say skinny :P

[GlenFelizMochaGuy]

Good for her...but....hope she liked her job.

I guess like my coffee 'morbidly obese' - with heavy whipping cream. Cool.

I never understood why Sbux had to make up silly names for the drinks, anyway. It only reinforces the "fast-food" feel of walking into a Sbux.

[poppy]

Why did certain sentences in the letter suddenly become boldfaced? Creative editing by the webmaster, perhaps?

[Bearista]

You guys who are so gung-ho Sbux that you are criticizing this wonderful letter need a different life.. stop sucking espresso from a straw... you're turning brown. This skinny platform is a typical Sbux folly.

[Anon]

You minimum wage drones are hilarious. All you do is pour coffee on a cup. Get over yourselves and instead of worrying about stupid words worry about making your drink somewhat consistent. Better yet, worry about getting an education so you can have a real job. Unless of course, you just love to be called a Barista.

[smalrus]

Go into a diner and ask for something low-fat or low-cal and listen to how they call it to the chef. I'm sure they'll call it a skinny.

Hey, maybe the makers of Skinny Cow brand ice creams should be sued for suggesting their target market are "cows." Weight watchers eating Skinny Cow ice cream should be offended.

Or, maybe a "short" coffee is offensive to the "vertically challenged."

Business is business, regardless of if it's a mom and pop or a corporation - if its ultimately a folly it won't work period. Suck it up, don't try to personalize it, and deal.

[A Customer]

Sorry guys, I gotta agree with the letter writer. I do feel the word skinny can be construed as derogatory, just like the term fat is derogatory. As a customer, I find using skinny offensive, and I can't use that to order my nonfat vanilla latte. I have a young niece who is overweight, and while the term "skinny" may aid her in placing an order someplace, I also think it would be quite demoralizing for her to do so.

[bigyaz]

I don't know (or really care) if it will confuse things, but her letter is over the top. The arguments about offending overweight people, offending underweight people and inviting lawsuits are exceptionally lame and only serve to weaken her main point.

If it affects speed and efficiency that's legit. The rest is puffery.

[Dima K]

And let's not forget about the roll out of a "Why botheR" drink platform!

Instead of calling out a Tall Decaf SFV N Latte one must call out a /Tall Why Bother Latte/

[Dima K]

oops i tried to be so funny so hard i messed up my bit. Of course I meant /Tall Why botheR (TM) Vanilla Latte/

[zach guatemala]

the letter is way too long and tries to make too many points. and it basically calls our partners stupid by suggesting they will not be able to learn the new system...

[refusnik]

I think the letter is a little overblown. However it so far matches the reactions of all the partners I've worked with since this is actually announced. Except for the one partner that doesn't give a rat's ass about any standard.

I can't say why I find it annoying. Maybe it's because up until now people using the term skinny have always seemed to use it in an effort to appear cool or hip and in the process end up looking like a tool.

For my store there is one practical advantage. We're right next to a giant university and grande sugar free vanilla nonfat lattes are really popular with the students that come through our drive-thru. This change means that it's one button on the expeditor screen rather than three buttons and two screens.

Sure, if you call a "skinny vanilla latte" back at the customer, you're going to have to explain to them. If they hear you call a skinny drink, I'm sure they'll ask why. And you'll have to educate them. Just like when someone asks for whip on a drink that comes with it or no whip on a drink that doesn't. Or the whole asking if they'd like their iced tea or iced coffee sweetened. After you ask them a few times, they catch on and order it that way.

Most likely the only person that I'll call skinny lattes to is my SM. But only because when I do he'll say, "I don't hear you."

I am interested to see how the powers that be react to the backlash from partners. My guess is they'll ignore and plow ahead.

I do wonder how much the people that came up with this gem got paid. I'd love to have been a fly on the wall at those meetings. My experience with committees like that has been that the level of pleasure they derive from their decisions is in direct proportion to the retardation factor of the final result. They must have been so pleased with themselves. This group probably also made the double "chocolatey" chip change. . .Maybe Patt can tell us about group meetings at the SSC.

On the other hand, I am glad that my store is participating in the no-whip cream as default pilot.

I have had customers ordering drinks "skinny" for a long time already. It means nonfat milk, nothing else. That's why this is not going to go over well.

I appreciate that Starbucks is coming up with more sugar-free options, but there's no need to change the way we call and mark drinks.

[Vicki Verona]

No whip cream as default pilot? Can you elaborate more on that test?

I bet that one has more to do with dairy cost management and less about public health concerns.

[Lesley]

Hi. I'm actually the person who wrote that letter. I'm surprised to see this here, seeing as [to be honest] I've never been to this website before.

This is actually not the final version that I sent out. I went back and edited a few things, and made a new point about how this could potentially affect Starbucks from a financial perspective [gave it it's own point].

I just want to clarify though, I'm not trying to bring the corporation down by disobeying them, and I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT think that Starbucks barista's are "stupid." I work in a VERY busy store that gets VERY loud. We dont use labelers or anything, we just have to listen to people calling drinks, and then call them back. All I was trying to say is that changing a system that we've been trained to follow to a T can only lead to mistakes and people getting angry. It has nothing to do with intelligence, just misunderstanding. And I'm sure that after a while we'd become used to the new system, but my point is that we shouldn't have to.

Anyway, I really appreciate all of the positive comments that people are leaving about my letter. I know some of you think it was too long and unnecessary, but it's something that I have major problems with, and I chose not to just whine and complain about how much it sucks, but to actually try and do something about it.

:)

-Lesley

[refusnik]

Vicki,

For full and accurate details, look on the portal under documents. But here's a nutshell, or at least as I understand it.

Starting tomorrow in the pilot stores, the default will be no whip cream for *all* drinks. Hot mochas and promotional lattes will get topped with a 1/4" of foam instead of whip. If the drink would normally get a topping, ie, the drizzle on the CRF, it still gets the topping.

At first, the person taking the order is supposed to ask if the customer wants whip. If they do, then they need to call the beverage with whip, ie, "grande with whip mocha" and press the "add whip" button on the POS screen. The reason for pressing the add whip button is so that it can be tracked.

At some point, I believe we stop asking if they want whip.

While the main reason given is the new attention to the number of calories in the drinks, I also see that it will lower dairy costs and will also lower the amount of labor on drinks. Of course it will probably mean a cut in available labor hours at some point.

Should be interesting.

[EE]

Kudos to Lesley!

I'm not following it. I will NOT spend the next month explaining to people that "skinny" doesn't refer to just nonfat milk (the logical thing), but sugar-free and foam on top. A majority of my store's customers hate foam anyway. Bring on the whip!

[ASM]

I agree, its positively going to complicate things. Whats wrong with the old way of drink calling the way we mastered it, now change it and I foresee much wasted product.

Apparently the marketing dept does not have any good fresh ideas...this is as lame as the nasty taste of the new SFM.

Can we not go to Small Medium and Large, just to simplify things. How many time drinks are wasted due to THAT consfusion........sadly, MANY!

If you dont work on the front lines, you wouldnt understand. If it aint broke, dont fix it....

[HopkinsBella]

Thanks for posting the info about the transition from whip to foam, Refusnik. That IS interesting. :)

[Vicki Verona]

REFUSNIK:

Thank you for the information! So does that mean that fraps don't get whip cream either in this test?

how did lesleys letter end up on here if she didn't post it (curious) i respect what she did - but how did her unedited letter end up on here?

[BOSTON STARBUCKS REBEL]

It doesn't appear that the drinks at Starbucks are getting skinnier. Just look at the stock price. As for me, I prefer living a decadent, epicurean, hedonistic lifestyle just fine. I live on the wild side and get breve and whip cream!

[Vicki Verona]

HOPKINSBELLA:

Just want to clarify on REFUSNIKs behalf that the no whip cream as standard platform is just a test in certain markets. It isn't something that is official....YET.

Im excited if it becomes official. I see very limited pushback from customers and MASSIVE appreciation from partners.

Think about it....it eliminates one less step in a made to standard beverage. It also will reduce those horrible moments in the summer when you go through whip cream like crazy during frappuccino peak season and run out.

I read in an article from an analyst that SBUX is planning a price reduction this summer. So maybe SBUX is trying to think out of the box in reducing dairy usage as much as possible and passing on the savings to the customers to increase traffic during these harsh macroeconomic times. Its brilliant really. They are focusing on what they can control so they dont have any influence on milk prices.

[Lesley]

Vicki Verona

I had posted an original copy of my letter in a livejournal community that starbucks [and other coffee shop] baristas read/post to. I posted it with an explaination of why i was writing the letter and what not, and I was asking people to critique it, and tell me if there was anything I should add/take out or if there were grammar issues and what not. I didn't post the copy that I sent to Mission Review on the community though, so that's where this copy would have been taken from. But I dont know who would have copied it from there, whether it was someone from that community, or from this website.

[Vicki Verona]

Sorry my post accidently got posted before I could finish so Ill just wrap up.
SBUX already made one of their smartest decisions in the company history by converting to 2% as a standard for milk usage. The more milk fat, the higher you pay. By converting to 2%, they save on average 25 cents per gallon. That means that at 25 cents x 400,000,000 gallons of milk used on average per year company wide = savings of $100,000,000

>>>how did her unedited letter end up on here?

How did Howard Schultz's memo end up on here? (Try: it's a gossip website.)

[poppy]

Vicky Verona wrote "It also will reduce those horrible moments in the summer when you go through whip cream like crazy during frappuccino peak season and run out.

In other words, customers want whipped cream during the summertime, and Starbucks is taking it away, and that's a good thing?

[neevan]

Just for my knowledge, what are those test markets?

[refusnik]

Just to clarify- we'll still have whip available to put on any beverage at no charge. It's just that default, at least in the pilot stores, all drinks will now default to no whip.

Yes Vicki, even the frappuccinos will be no whip.

I agree, it's a good way to save some money- heavy cream is expensive. And it will save the step. But, as always, we'll just say yes if someone wants whip.

As for the where the test markets are, I don't know. I just know that my store has been chosen to test it.

[Vicki Verona]

Poppy:
You misunderstood. It's not that they are taking it away, its just that that they are testing how customers will react when it becomes an option rather than a standard. Currently, I already have my partners ask all customers if they want whipped cream. I bet you anything that if you compare my dairy COGS to a store that goes "whip as standard," youll see that my store is probably spending less.

I just thought of another reason its going to help efficiency and make partners really happy. Its going to eliminate all of those moments when a customer orders their tall CRF, you make it, and hand it off, only to have it sent back because they didnt want whipped cream even though they never said no whip cream.

[Lisa]

To all the sensitive Fatties out there, all you gotta do is eat less (eliminate the obvious fatty food) and exercise more. Some overweight is excused for those who just happen to be thick, but those who are obese, you guys have no excuse, and Skinny is not the only synonym out there for thin.

[Stan]

2) Customers already find it difficult and confusing to order drinks at Starbucks... This is an insult to the general public. New products come out ALL the time, new names, new conbinations, everywhere! Either this person works in an area where the general population's intelligence is sub-standard, or she just doesn't want to do her job. In that case, good thing she post this annonymos, otherwise her superior may find out about her laziness.

[anasm]

Haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know if anybody has any positive stories about the "skinny" platform yet. I do. I've been alerting people that order their drinks in a way that fits the skinny platform, that we've made their order easier. One exchange was like this

Me: We've made it a little easier to order your drink! You can just order a skinny vanilla latte now.

Customer: Really? I don't have to say all that other crap?

Me: Nope, just skinny vanilla latte

Customer: That's AWESOME.

[god forbid]

God forbid overweight or obese people are given another reason to lose weight.

It's not "okay" to be overweight or obese, it's bad for your health, it's bad for society, it's bad for health care costs.

God forbid more attention is brought to the health crisis in this country from people eating terribly and not exercising.

Props to Starbucks for creating a new drink with a good name.

[raspberrywmocha]

The picture for this topic is so funny, lol.

I like the idea of Starbucks trying to promote healthier options for people trying to lose weight... but I agree that calling the drinks "skinny" sounds silly and is definitely a risky term to use.

Hopefully the "skinny" will be phased out at the end of this promotional period.

Eric must be very lonely.... and fat.

[jabanga]

"Once again, the lowest level of employee is trying to steer the ship.

Just drag yourself to work like the rest of us, and conform! It's not your business!!!! If you don't agree with the way it is run....QUIT."

Posted by: djo10

why does starbucks call them partners?

[Joe]

Vicki: By converting to 2%, they save on average 25 cents per gallon. That means that at 25 cents x 400,000,000 gallons of milk used on average per year company wide = savings of $100,000,000

Im not sure were you got your information however according to a Forbes article from May 2007, Starbucks goes through about 93 million gallons of milk per year. Which is a savings of about $23 million per year. Still a decent savings but not $100 mil.

I do agree with you about how the baristas will learn to assimilate this new move just like they do all the other changes. Lesley's letter is indicative of the mentality of some of the baristas which is to say they are spoiled little brats. I can hardly wait for the followup in which she whines that "no one in management listens to us" just because they dont immediately halt all movement forward based on her say-so.

[Andy]

I agree with the letter-writers' sentiments - this is a very silly marketing ploy by Starbucks, and I think it will go down as a mistake.

Again - and I hate to come back to this, but I must - Starbucks needs to start focusing on the core business and product - serving high quality coffee and beverages - and that includes the quality, the experience, and the consistency. Customers don't want more lingo to learn. Customers don't need a marketing package for every single month/holiday/season! Get back to the basics, because this is the area where things are really slipping! Hello management - check the stock price lately?

This marketing "plan" is unnecessary and potentially damaging. If you want people to know about healthier options, advertise your new sugar-free syrups and remind them about lowfat milk! That's the point in all of this, isn't it? It's January so everyone is health conscious after over-doing it during the holidays. They come to Starbucks, but they want to go easy on the calories and fat in support of their new New Year's resolution. TELL THEM ABOUT THEIR OPTIONS, don't go pilfer a long-established coffee term and bastardize it for your own needs to push a new promo. It's a bad, bad idea.

Customers don't like confusion....nor do your employees.

[deusx]

Once again, the lowest level of employee is trying to steer the ship.

Just drag yourself to work like the rest of us, and conform! It's not your business!!!! If you don't agree with the way it is run....QUIT.

Posted by: djo10 | Jan 2, 2008 1:19:05 PM

I and many other people who work in this company are not JUST employees, a very large percentage are shareholders hence the term "Partners". Legally, no matter what percentage owned all shareholders have the right to voice their concerns and wishes in regards to the direction the company is headed.

I may not necessarily agree with refusing to follow the new standard but expecting to be hear as a shareholder is not an entitlment attitude as many claim it is a fair expectation.

[Burrrista]

Ugh...I've disliked this term from the first time I heard it. In the short 2 years I've been with the company, every single customer who has used the term "skinny" has a)always had their nose in the air and b)only ever used it to mean non-fat. Now, I don't know if their snobby tones have only been due to their own satisfaction at making themselves sound healthier, or because I'm a little overweight myself, but I've always walked away from those transactions feeling more than a little put-off. Now, I'm working on my weight, but it's been an up-hill battle my whole life, and I don't need any reminders that I'm still 40 lbs away from my goal. I do agree that for some customers, and for register partners, this will be easier to order and ring in, but it will also be an endless source of confusion for those who have ordered skinny drinks and meant non-fat only. Just my two cents, but I really think that Starbucks could've come up with something else to call these drinks.

[leeannaindiana]

my manager had us read through the promo binder and here's 2 things i couldn't find answers to. perhaps you fine folks can help...

1. i get the whole what makes a latte NOT skinny thing (2% milk, or regular vanilla, etc). is a nonfat latte without any syrup still called skinny? or just a "grande nonfat latte"?

2. is it now "wrong" to call a "grande SFV nonfat latte"? do i have to coach someone if they call it that way? or are both correct?

[Diana the BN Barista]

Personally, I don't really care whether we use the term skinny or not. Oh and I'm fat. And not offended.

What does bother me is this.... There was absolutely NO communication (at least as far as I am aware) about this between Starbucks and B&N Cafe. Yeah, yeah, I know we are not a Starbucks, so who cares about us, right? Well, not A LOT of our customers realize this. So if they receive crap service from us, they just go off and bad mouth Starbucks. If there is going to be a change as substantial as this, they really should have told us. If I didn't read this site, I would still assume skinny meant non-fat and nothing else. At least now, I can be on the alert for it.

Now whether me and my employees use this term, who knows. I guess it will all depend on if there is any official word from Starbucks to us on this. It will be interesting to see how many customers start using it on their own though.

[Tall Guy]

Sending a letter is not bad. In fact, I wish more partners and customers would do so about whatever they see as needing improvement. What the problem is here is the deliberate insubordination. You are a barista. You need to look up your job description with your store manager and follow it. If you want to be in product development or field implementation, apply at starbucks.com. Until then, follow the best practices as outlined or seek other employment.

Personally, this letter makes me cringe. Without attacking the author, each and every point reads as a lazy excuse as to not embrace a potentially positive change for the health of our customers and our company in general. (It’s too hard, people might be offended, etc...)

Instead of worrying about the potential negative, why not embrace the potential positive and prevent the negatives from occurring. Positive thinking is very productive.

What every store needs to do is be pro-active in their sampling efforts. This will allow customers to be introduced to the new platform in a non-threatening manner. If they like it they can order it. If they want to stick with their usual, no problem.

Additionally, we should all be very open and encouraging that if the customer orders it and doesn't like it, tell us and we will make them something else. It's a just say yes situation and THAT creates legendary service. It also gives the customer the knowledge that trying new drinks is good and there are NO negative repercussions for doing so. Again, legendary service.

Make it your personal responsibility to educated customers and create a positive experience.

[Zipy]

DCCF isn't a corperate thing, its a law. We aren't legally allowed to call it chocolate if it doesn't meet certain standards. It's just some dumb law, but its not their fault.

[chishift]

i'm all about insubordination, and my mangement knows about it (always has, always will) and i still have my job for as long as i need it (counting down the days until i graduate) and i will be as insubordinate as possible for this promotion because it is quite possibly the dumbest f-ing thing this company has ever come out with in the nearly two years i've been with them.
and about us being the lowest level of employees, shut the F up! without us nothing would happen, there would be no starbucks and you would not get your daily fix. we try to steer the ship since we're the ones on the "front lines" dealing with this crap firsthand, and everybody's life is easier if things work well for us.
and yes, it will confuse our customers. i've had seemingly very smart(educated) people ask me "how many shots are in a double tall cappuccino?" and "is this my ice water" (as they point to some espresso beverage in a hot paper cup). the idiocy is amazing.
i really don't want to have to explain this to so many of our customers. since we started an unofficial trial of it less than a week ago it's been disaster. and we've had a surprisingly high number of returned drinks because people just don't like the taste of it (SFM in particular). i really don't want to have to remake any more drinks than we already do during the morning rush, and i really don't want to have to explain it twice (once at the register, and once handing off the beverage) because one time is too many.
{end rant}

[Kat]

As a customer, I would prefer Starbucks focus on selling better and consistent products than coming up with new names for things.

[Michael C.]

Apparently your skin is too thin to leave the house. Oh, wait, I said "too thin" so I guess now I'm discriminating against very thin people. Imagine their hurt feelings!!!!! Seriously, call the Whaaa-mbulance to take you to the nearest mental hospital where you can grow up and learn to deal with the "harsh" realities of real life away from mummy and daddy. In the meantime, leave Starbucks, they don't need you there.

i'm all about insubordination, and my mangement knows about it (always has, always will) and i still have my job for as long as i need it (counting down the days until i graduate) and i will be as insubordinate as possible for this promotion

Wow, this post just amazes me. In my opinion in a nutshell, this is probably the biggest reason our stock prices are in the shitter. Partners with this kind of attitude. You are actually proud of that fact that you are insubordinate (always have been, always will be)is that something to be proud of? Believe me, I'm also counting down the days until YOU graduate. You and your management team should be terminated from this company. Since you have such a terrible attitude my wish for you is that you get every customer with as bad an attitude as you have. I hope your last weeks are filled with every imaginable customer complaint. You are a waste to the company.

[Educated customer]

This discussion is fascinating more because of the vitriol thrown at the writer than anything else. We live in a society where a person should be able to express an opinion and not be vilified for doing so. This barista obviously cares about Starbucks. If she/he didn't, she/he would get a new job; by making this carefully considered statement, she/he is merely expressing concern that the new label will be harmful and she/he is explaining why. I applaud this person for putting her/him self on the line. The nasty, negative comments posted here are, frankly, unAmerican because they are trying to stifle her/him. The writer isn't trying to foist an opinion on anyone here, her/his letter was for Starbucks corporate, not you. I agree with the writer. I would never ask for a skinny drink because it sounds stupid. I will order the same way I always do and ask for a non-fat latte with sugar free syrup and no whipped cream. If we live in a society in which employers can't hear constructive criticism from their employees, especially then the employees want to help the company, then we're in a very sad place.

[*********]

i totally agree with this article, because i strongly believe that starbucks day a day is creating confusion among its costumers. i can not believe what starbucks is doing with the baristas and "their starubucks basrista dream" it is not fun anymore to work in this company/
Starbucks made such a simple menu of drinks in fufu stuff that nobody can order or even make.

The reason for the DCCF change is that for a product to legally call itself "chocolate," it must contain both cocoa powder and cocoa butter. Which leaves me wondering, why haven't we changed the name of "Hot Chocolate" to "Hot Chocolatety?"

[Cheryl]

You may have totally valid concerns regarding the possible production confusions resulting from the whole "skinny" business.. but the touchy-feely Poor Little Fat Feelings? Give it a rest.

If people have self esteem problems because they're not happy with their weight, the solution is for them to stop shoveling in so much garbage and get the body moving. Banning words like Thin, Skinny, Svelte, size 2 and so forth isn't going to help those with elastic waistbands.

What's the difference between yelling, "skinny" and yelling "no fat, low fat?"

I say.... if you cringe when you hear words like, "obese" and "Fat" etc... why..it's time to get off the couch!

It will undoubtedly have a negative affect on a person's self-esteem (gag gag, whine whine) that may already be low from living in a society that is generally not accepting of people who do not fit the mold of a "beautiful" (or healthy, like, they don't eat CRAP)person. It creates an environment that people will not want to be in. It will exacerbate self-image issues that partners of ANY size may have. Why would ANYONE want to go into a store where they will hear potentially hurtful terms (oooohhh, if we banish the words, then maybe now one will notice that we think it's okaaaaaay to be among the millions of ever expanding potato chip shoveling masses...)called out repeatedly with no regard as to how they may affect people?

[j]

as the husband of a longtime sbux employee / asm,i think supports most promos that sbux comes up with. This time she supports them, but is having trouble as two of her overweight SS's are upset and offended by the new vernacular. My personal opinion (is summed up by many of these readers) is that its mis guided. I am a long time sbux customer. I much prefer the convention of ordering something sugar free and not skinny. It's just silly, and can devalue certain people, and disparage others,

[SBAddict]

1) "Skinny" is not hip new lingo. It sounds like somebody found a 1978 menu and decided to use one of the diet products from it. The employee has a very good point on this score.

2) The employee goes past a line with the whole "I refuse to do it." Because a certain percentage of customers will adopt the lingo, having been conditioned to do so at other stores.

3) All of you telling her to shut up and do her job are way off base. The moment Starbucks or any service-oriented company stops listening to the employees on the front end, they're going to begin to disintegrate. A company wants employees that care, that have an emotional stake in the company. Because employees like that will bend over backwards to give good service, and that only increases the value of the brand.

[JustAnInsideLook]

The larger problem is that the fad of Starbucks is ending. It's no longer cool to drink because it's everywhere. They painted themselves into a corner trying to squeeze out every penny they could. The stores that are doing well will continue to do well, the new struggling stores will struggle. They need to scale back to the store numbers circa 2005 and then sell off the new stores to franchisees if they want to return to high stock prices.

[CalgaryBarista]

1. i get the whole what makes a latte NOT skinny thing (2% milk, or regular vanilla, etc). is a nonfat latte without any syrup still called skinny? or just a "grande nonfat latte"?

By Starbucks definition, a skinny drink must contain one of the sugar-free syrups. If it doesn't contain sugar-free syrup AND non-fat milk AND foam, it's not a skinny beverage. You would be correct in calling your example a grande non-fat latte.

2. is it now "wrong" to call a "grande SFV nonfat latte"? do i have to coach someone if they call it that way? or are both correct?

With the new marking/calling system, a SFV nonfat latte is now a skinny vanilla latte, marked SKVL on the cup. Technically, you should have a coaching conversation with your partners if they continue to mark/call 'skinny' drinks incorrectly. Keep in mind, though, that once one of the modifiers changes (your first question), it's no longer a skinny beverage, and marking/calling reverts to normal.

[jess]

Call me an elitist, but every time someone used to order their latte "skinny," i would get annoyed and go the extra step to call out every single modifier...

I won't be using the term. And I'll be writing in a mission review the next time I work. I feel like the new platform is useless and is simply going to frustrate partners and customers alike.

Plus...the customer wanting to be skinny has nothing to do with the width of the drink? As far as I can tell, the cups only come in one width, and if they get skinnier, they'll fall out of cupholders. then everybody will just be complaining again. (joke)

And the everlasting question...do i put the cinnamon sugar sprinkles on your grande nonfat no whip sugar free cinnamon dolce latte?

Tell you what Starbucks...if I can call out fatty lattes right alongside those skinny lattes, then I'll do it. Otherwise, forget it.

[Clint]

Why not just call it "bland."

I need a Venti Java Chip Frap and make it Bland!

That would settle the entire problem!

[sbuxlifer]

I've always hated the word skinny. There's just something about the word itself that makes me cringe. And I know it's wrong, but I especially can't bear to hear grown men say it. That said, I don't see what's so hard about saying sugar-free, nonfat. It's clear and it's always worked until now.
I decided a while ago that I would not be saying "skinny" either. If you want to add stupid lingo to our repetoire, sugar free and nonfat is "no fun" and sugar free, nonfat, and decaf is "what's the point". That's how we're rolling at my store.
I'm filling out a mission review card when I get to work.

[Grebby]

In the places where I lived, "skinny" always used to mean "with skim milk" in the pre-Starbucks days. Of course the "large" then was 12 oz. and nobody ordered these 20 oz., 800 calorie monsters that made them fat in the first place.

[Grebby]

PS I have a certain affection for the word skinny ever since Lauren Bacall said it in "To Have and Have Not."

Slim: Hello.
Steve: Let's have it.
Slim: What do you want?
Steve: Johnson's wallet.
Slim: What?
Steve: Come on.
Slim: What are you talking about? Hey mister, what's got into you? What do you think you're gonna do?
Steve: I'm gonna get that wallet, Slim.
Slim: I'd rather you wouldn't call me Slim. I'm a little too skinny to take it kindly.
Steve: Quit the baby talk. Which is it?
Slim: You know, Steve, I wouldn't put it past you. I didn't know you were a hotel detective.
Steve: Johnson's my client.
Slim: He doesn't speak so well of you.
Steve: He's still my client. You oughta pick on somebody to steal from that doesn't owe me money.
Slim: He dropped it and I picked it up.
Steve: And you were gonna give it back to him, of course.
Slim: No, no I wasn't. I don't like him.
Steve: That's a pretty good reason.

I agree that the whole "skinny latte" platform is ridiculous. The terminology is offensive and gimmicky. My drink recommendation for the day "a short whole milk latte". We need to get back to what's real and cups of skinny lattes/cups of nothing are anything but. Frankly, if I'm paying $3.+ for a latte it better have something of substance in it. C'mon Starbucks!

I will not be using the new marking/calling system either.

[Daydotter]

So which IS it on the cup?

SKVL in the drink box? or

SFV
N
L
like in the old days?

Because

The promo book says "we will continue MARKING and CALLING the drinks like before"

The sheet that came with it says to ignore everything in the promo book about this? Which one nullifies which? I am confused as are most of the shifts

[Oafcore]

Are you kidding me with this?! I got linked here after analyzing SBUX shares on the exchange...I didn't know people were so concerned with how their overpriced coffee drink is marked. Don't get me wrong here I love the company, brilliant business model. I've always thought of the average starbucks worker as a person with a unique personality working to support their alternative lifestyle. You know, Artists, musicians, writers, etc...Definitly in a higher class than your average McDonalds employee. But after reading this essay I don't know what to think. As a STARBUCKS patron I can honestly say that I could care less what you call my drink, or how you mark it...STOP FREAKING OUT ABOUT UNIMPORTANT ISSUES, YOU ARE THE REASON PEOPLE HATE STARBUCKS. Starbucks IS not a career, get your ass in school and get a REAL JOB. Start putting your efforts into real issues, like Iraq or Afghanistan, or hell, Why Starbucks' stock is in the toilet....

[Daydotter]

How about

Grande

5 SR

SKVL

For those who don't know -- SR is the OFFICIAL way of marking Sugar in the Raw (tm)

Is THIS drink still skinny?

How about

Grande

4 H

SKHL

(they want 4 pumps of regular Hazelnut added). Is THIS still Skinny

or should I return to

Grande

4 H + 4 SFH

N

L

Is this semi-skinny?

[auntnancis]

As a diabetic, I will still order my coffee the longer, old-fashioned way. I need to ensure my coffee is sugar-free, non-fat, and non-whipped. I think the only way to do that is to spell out exactly what I want.

[Daydotter]

Hey, Lib!

Maybe you are the reason why the country is going down the drain with your "alternative" culture?

Did you ever think about that? Go to your sites like mediamatters for America or democratic underground and leave us, poor baristas and their shifts, alone with your war nonsense.

[Daydotter]

Oh, I am sorry for calling you a lib. Maybe you are a Ron Paul supporter or a losertarian.

[Daydotter]

See, this is what happens when someone brings in politics into this. Can we stick with Starbucks?

[Daydotter]

I am sure both libs, right-wingers, and hybrids can get along fine here -- just keep your politics to yourselves.

End Rant

[Kevin Sonak]

I think you should not discriminate against the people who are healthy and within their median weight by putting a politically correct term on skinny or fat. People choose to be winners or losers, drunks or designated drivers, and yes, fat or skinny. Life doesn't give you a trophy just for participating. Please don't take this the wrong way -- I am not trying to be cruel, but don't punish those who are not overweight by imposing Orwellian absolutes. Just leave your personal problems at home, or convince the remaining 1/3 of the population they are wrong and they should to gain weight.

[Daydotter]

On a bighter note -- can we say a big HELLO-O-O-O to the regular white cups. I was so freaking tired of the red cups, I could scream.

[Daydotter]

Kevin, a fellow Michigander! Hey, do you know if there's a new Bux in Woodhaven now?

[It's coffee madness!!]

Oh man- as a non- Starbucks employee, reading these postings is freaking hilarious... so many things about these postings are just unbelievable... the fighting between strangers, the feelings hurt from being politically incorrect in a named drink, the little guys trying to take down the corporation- we need this to be a reality show PRONTO!!...

The first episode can feature this barista getting fired- that would be quite a hook for the show... then we can watch the corporate marketers trying to come up with a drink name that won't offend anyone, all the while creating drinks that make us all fatter- BRILLIANT!!...

Have we all seen the hidden camera Burger King commercials where people flip out because they temporarily took the Bic Mac off the menu?... that is GOLD, my friends... you think they'd just relax and find another way to get empty calories, like... like... a Frappachino!!... hmm, I smell a spin-off series...

Thanks to starbucksgossip, I now have the answer to my question as to what Starbucks baristas do when they're off their shift- they go home and blog about Starbucks... this is GREAT!!! keep the madness coming, we love reading it!!

You know what I get at Starbucks?... water... and they still screw up my drink every time... "I said 2 pumps of hydrogens, not 1!!"...

[Shann]

Well. I was laughing to myself today because I was thinking over the New Skinny platform and now we put foam on a skinny mocha... It isnt in the recipe for a mocha, but if it is Skinny... ah
Do we remember a couple of threads back so many people were making a fuss over foam going on a "Mocha with no whip..."

I started off today explaining to many regulars that they can begin ordering their Grande sfv n l as skinny v l... They were thrilled...
Most of them stumble over so many words and things to have to remember.
At first I was opposed to this idea, but hey, it is our job to follow the rules and guidelines and recipes. They never said in the job description that we wouldnt have to learn a whole new drink calling system. Why are we complaining? >.>

[Steven]

I object to an employee of Starbucks calling herself a "barista". This is confusing for customers who already struggle to not laugh at the parody of pulling espresso that is done by Starbucks. When I worked at McDonald's in high-school I had 10 times more personal control over the quality of the final product than a Starbucks employee ever will.

[HopkinsBella]

Vicki Verona,

I know that the whip to foam will be in the test phase only. I can read, believe it or not.

[SS]

DAYDOTTER: Your "4 H + 4 SFH" N L would be wrong regardless, as technically it is "4p H + 4p SFH". ;)

To the earlier commenters asking about the no-whip test market, I don't know the whole of the story but my store and many others (if not all?) in the Atlanta region (which comprises a much larger area than just Atlanta - I'm in Alabama) are participating.

[not a barista]

I hate you starbucks! Here is the thing: i worked in the corporate stores and then now work in the independent one.
We have sizes that are called normal things like small medium and large. Our machiatto is the real machiatto with espresso and foam.
Of course people have learned the starbucks lingo and bring it into our shop. And the hilarity ensues.
"Can I have a grande latte? You mean a medium? No I mean large!"
"Can I have a tall coffee? You mean a small? NO the big one, large!" "Can I have a machiatto? You mean the regular one with espresso and some foam? yeah yeah... Wait, where is the rest of it? I ordered a caramel machiatto!!"

So now the new skinny crap. "Can I have a skinny vanilla latte? Oh now that you made it, i meant with sugar free vanilla!" "Skinny mocha please, but I do want the whip cream!"

For the love of god stop bastardizing our language!
It was cool before but now that you are moving to the mcdonalds territory, stop making things complicated.
Though i have to say, brilliant marrketing move. All the papers will be talking about it as if it's really really important. Like when you added lunch with sandwiches. People forgot that, at least in 1999, you had sandwiches and salads too. yep the $5 ones with 2 pieces of bread and a small piece of meat and cheese.

[SS]

STEVEN: If you'd like to object to the job title, I recommend you contact corporate. They hire us as baristas; why should we call ourselves anything different? Some of us actually are educated in the art of espresso beverages, by the way. Just because we happen to push a button to pull your shot for the moment doesn't mean we don't know how to pull an excellent shot from scratch, start to finish, and top it off with some latte art. Grouping all Sbux baristas into one category is an epic show of ignorance and stereotyping.

[barista lane]

Steven:

You get behind the counter and compare the taste of milk that is aerated correctly vs. incorrectly. And then taste shots that have been calibrated correctly vs. incorrectly. Then try a mocha or a white mocha without stirring. Then tell me how much control I have over the drinks I make.

Thanks.

[fuwalda]

I just wanted to come online to hear about all of the stores that burned down. What? Nothing happened? No stores shut down? No riots broke out? No customers avoided Starbucks in disgust?

Well, not at my store. Most of the customers, as it turned out, really seemed to like the new skinny thing. It makes it easier to order. And most of the partners got into the groove. It makes it easier to call and mark.

It remains to be seen if this was a success, but it certainly wasn't the failure many people predicted. And I hope the girl who wrote that letter felt pretty stupid as she watched partners and customers use the word skinny with little to no confusion or hurt feelings.

[RoBoBarista]

Made it the whole shift this a.m. w/o anyone saying that word....behind the counter.

still refusing to use the term "skinny," especially because people kept f-ing it up, both partners and customers, and it's still stupid, no matter how you try to justify it.

[fuwalda]

In your opinion it's stupid. In my opinion it's not.

[very suprised]

I was very suprised today, customers loved the skinny lattes. Not only one but many customers said they felt the old drink calling was difficult to order and remembering all the differant components in thier drinks.

[Just a Customer]

For a new customer, the SBUX menu can be overwhelming. For a regular, if you can't handle telling the barista how you want your drink made, WOW, slow your life down a bit. As for the skinny platform, there has been ice cream out for years now called Skinny Cow. I have yet to hear of riots or mass ice cream panic.

[Meag]

I really need to read on up on all this at work lol there's so much Im unsure of lol. Anyway I just think that it's interesting that this barista wrote that letter, good for him/her. This does not mean I agree nor do I disagree. Also, about the platform.. well Im on the fence about this, I'll just wait and see what happens at my store..soo at the moment, neutral like switzerland :)

[Zeke]

The letter is mostly going to be ignored; they've already considered the implications (threat of lawsuits? give me a break) - but that all said, it's a poor decision. "Skinny" is mostly going to have the effect of humiliating the Starbucks employees who are forced to say it. And making people in line cringe inwardly.

I had a customer in my store today almost die because she was allergic to the sweetener in the 'skinny' latte she ordered and thought it was just a non-fat latte.... needless to say we aren't using 'skinny' anymore in my store...

I'm not a fan of skinny. But this argument that the word is somehow politically incorrect is just insane.

[almostanasm]

I too think the "Skinny" platform is misguided. As someone with a sensativity to the SF stuff, I have to say the SFM is the WORST (it is colored with yellow #5 and red #40, two colors which are considered suspect by many countries, and indeed banned in some- google them if you want). Someone made a 'skinny' hot chocolate (chocolaty???) the other day and i nearly puked from one sip that i didnt even swallow!
Someone at head office better be reading this thread. My mission review is gonna be heading your way. This ridiculousness HAS to stop, i wont encourage my customers to drink something this toxic and harmful for them!

[Kittymoose]

I'm not doing it - and neither is anybody but my SM at my store. It's easier for us to call and mark drinks same as before - so what's the point?

I foresee a ton of remade drinks in the future. "What? Skinny means Sugar-free AND no whip? I thought it was just non-fat milk! This is gross!"

I agree with Almostanasm. The stuff they put in artificial sweeteners really freaks me out.

[Melody]

I tried the "skinny" mocha today just to say I tried it. Will never do that again. I drank just barely 2 sips, took it back to the barista and told them it was gross. They laughed and agreed and I got another drink.

*where's a smiley head pounding against a brick wall when you need him?*

By the way, someone mentioned the orange syrup as having tanked (and predicted SF syrups may do the same?). In the summer, Orange syrup was fabulous for italian sodas. Most stores will indeed make you one if you buy the carbonated water. And it's one of the cheapest drinks you can buy. It's a fabulous unknown summer bargain. Orange syrup with carbonated water, with whip cream and a little cream, and orange sauce on top.

[itsnotamermaid]

RE: Letter: I'm glad said barista feels that her voice can/will be heard.
RE: Skinny Drink Platform: I was "eh" about it at first, think it's ridiculous since skinny already means nonfat to the rest of the milk drinking, english speaking community. Having worked w/it today: yes, it will take proper education on the part of the baristas and strong communication to the customers, but so far, SKVL is easier to write and we all just keep calling out "skinny" vanilla latte, over-emphasizing the "skinny" just to entertain ourselves. This is not the worst idea sbux has come out with yet, and I'm sure it won't be the last idea we baristas complain about. I do believe the SFM is one of the worst tasting things ever, tho.

I HATE THE SKINNY LINGO!!!!!!!!!!!
My entire store is opposed. It's ridiculous, takes MORE time, and is just plain TACKY. One of my shifts and I have made it clear to our partners that we refuse to use the lingo and most other partners at our store feel the same way.

Today, one customer read the board and asked for a tall skinny mocha. When she asked what the "skinny" meant, I explained and she nearly died when I told her it was SF Mocha. She thought the syrup sounded gross and wanted real chocolate. She just wanted regular mocha with no whip a