
Just days after starting
a thread about obnoxious customers, I read about a homeless guy who threw hot water in the face of a Starbucks employee in San Diego. He asked for the free water, then walked over to the condiment area. When the employee told him those items were for paying customers, he flung the water in her face. She was treated for second-degree burns. ||
Read "Man throws hot water at Starbucks employee"
This is tragic and I hope that young lady recovers quickly.
However... I dunno. I think if you give somebody hot water you set up the expectation that it's ok to use the condiment bar. If a homeless person comes in and asks for water, it's ok to say no.
Posted by: waltie | June 16, 2011 at 11:12 PM
I don't think giving hot water sets the expectations that they can use the condiment bar. I gave hot water out plenty of times. Often people had a packet of cocoa or tea they wanted. Hot water is no different than cold water to the employee.
Posted by: hipsterdufus | June 16, 2011 at 11:26 PM
I'm glad the man was arrested. Burns are horrible.
Posted by: hipsterdufus | June 16, 2011 at 11:28 PM
I hope Worker's Compensation in California is not a corrupt agency the way it is in my state. Injured partners have had their worker's comp claim denied BEFORE their medical paperwork was even filed. Starbucks will almost certainly do everything in its power to deny any medical claim this barista has and will deny that she was injured on the job.
Posted by: drive | June 17, 2011 at 12:02 AM
I doubt any of that will happen.
Posted by: waltie | June 17, 2011 at 12:19 AM
I... don't see how they could do any of what you said Drive. It's just...so wrong on so many different points.
Workers comp is pretty employee friendly in this state (like everything). Uh, Starbucks tends to also be pretty worker friendly. I doubt they would deny the claim that she was injured on the job since its in the news that she was injured on the job.
If her district, in CA, is anything like my (nearby) district - they will bend over backwards trying to make sure shes okay.
Posted by: Barista Ben | June 17, 2011 at 02:10 AM
Starbucks workman's comp is not bad, I had to implement it as a manager, and if you follow the proper channel to initiate it, it's easy. If not, it's a nightmare, as I had to deal with from the prior incompetent manager.
Posted by: promotedtocustomer | June 17, 2011 at 07:54 AM
the overall issue here (as well with the ghetto latte) is that the partner should not have bothered trying to tell the homeless guy not to use the condiment stand.
understand that it's just the cost of doing business.
if you're gonna give them the cup (10c) and the sleeve (6c) and the hot water (0.2c) - why not just give them the shakes of chco-powder (0.3c) and the splash of milk (3c)??
do you give a discount to people who drink their coffee black?
so don't worry about the extra stuff people want to use.. that's the cost of doing business.
you say those things because you want to have power over these people; at least subconsciously - you want to ensure they 'know their place' in society -- don't bother.
if you're gonna give them the water, and you know they are not a customer - then just leave them be.
or don't give them anything.
Posted by: just saying | June 17, 2011 at 04:10 PM
@just saying
The person getting black coffee has paid me money.
The person using condiments has not.
It's that simple. And yes, it is because as an employee of Starbucks, I do have power over who gets to use the condiments, the bathroom and the lobby. The nature of customer service is such that I actually have power over very little, but that's just how things work.
In fact, it's also a part of my job to ensure that these things or places are clean, well stocked, non-service-animal-free and available to customers. Who are people that pay me money. I'm not running a charity, honey.
Someone who has not paid, be he or she the Pope, Barbara Streisand or a homeless person, gets the same "Sir/Miss, I'd like to let you know that condiments/bathrooms/tables/whatevers are for paying customers. Thank you."
Do I risk hot H20 in the face? Probably. Though I do at the very least keep an eye on folks to whom I give it. If they've cause trouble before, they don't get any hot water at all. And call me petty, but do I enjoy having these interactions?
Absolutely.
Posted by: otterinthewater | June 17, 2011 at 07:17 PM
What happened to her is certainly terrible and unacceptable. It serves as a good reminder though, of why Starbucks safety and security policies state you should remain behind the counter if possible, or stand a good distance away when dealing with problematic customers, or non-customers.
Posted by: Aaron | June 17, 2011 at 07:41 PM
Speaking of asshats, this is the scene at a Starbucks near Buffalo NY - a barista literally hanging out the window during business hours. One that messes up drinks so frequently that it would break records if Starbucks cared to track such things.
http://yfrog.com/keb66bj
Transit and North French location. Maybe the worst Starbucks around.
Posted by: buffalo! | June 17, 2011 at 07:58 PM
I agree with just saying. It's unfortunate that a partner was assaulted, but it's a bit ridiculous to refuse someone a couple splenda packets and milk...who knows, the guy may have been prepping his cup for some VIA...
Posted by: baristamclane | June 17, 2011 at 09:07 PM
@baristamclane - Good point.
I hope this barista recovers soon!
Posted by: baroosta | June 17, 2011 at 09:28 PM
Just Saying is spot on.
Posted by: waltie | June 17, 2011 at 09:48 PM
Uh, no matter what the situation here, there is no need to throw 200 degree water in someone's face. Denying someone condiments might warrant an "f u", but that's it...
Posted by: promotedtocustomer | June 19, 2011 at 01:19 PM
Just saying is right, one of the things about SBUX's corporate culture is that whole "just say yes" thing means, in essence, accepting getting ripped off, a little bit, from time to time.
On a case-by-case basis, problem customers can be asked to leave the store, sure, and "just say yes" does not mean "free anything you want," but nonetheless, the only reason I would have interrupted this particular customer is if they were a known problem.
If this were the case, I would (or ask my supervisor to) ask the customer -- erm, non-customer -- not to return.
@otterinthewater, I've got one of those gold cards and buy coffee at SBUX quite often. But, sometimes, I will walk into a starbucks and use the restroom, without buying anything. I can always count on SBUX to have clean, accessible public restrooms.
One example is, friends and I sometimes gather at a SBUX before a run, and, I'd buy a coffee afterwards, but, not before.
If a barista decided to take it upon themselves to deny me access to my pre-run urination, I would not be a happy customer.
Of course, NOTHING justifies an actual ASSAULT like this...
Posted by: Also just saying | June 20, 2011 at 05:04 PM
Just saying is right. No one is saying she deserved this, because she didn't, but unless he was a known problem customer she should have just let him use the condiment bar and go.
@ otterinthewater - You have serious issues, and you wouldn't last long at my store if you treated our customers like that.
Posted by: Lexi | July 07, 2011 at 05:02 PM
Well I agree with just saying.It's unfortunate that a partner was assaulted, but it's a bit ridiculous to refuse someone a couple splenda packets and milk...
Posted by: crowd SPRING | July 15, 2011 at 12:59 PM
When I got hired, my manager told me that starbucks would rather give away product than create an image where we don't care about the people in our store...
Posted by: Bobby | July 21, 2011 at 03:26 AM
I certainly doubt that any of that thing will happen or not. I like the image.
Posted by: WFG Canada | July 27, 2011 at 08:35 AM
Does anyone know who Starbucks Workers Comp carrier in CA is? I can't find any info on it....
Posted by: BeansBeansBeans | July 24, 2012 at 03:39 PM