Arby's fires manager, suspends employee who refused to serve police officer

[brinny]

It is, but then I'm sure as a Christian you would agree it is part of the human condition.

LOL! Touche' my friend.

It is. Doesn't make it right or palatable though does it? And we are admonished by God to fight against injustices, to speak up for those who have suffered injustices, etc.

Would you like me to elaborate? I can if you wish

 

[Cute Tink]

Interesting. ANY form of discrimination (including reverse discrimination) is based on HATRED. And HATRED eats away at the person it is consuming as we speak. The only person it really hurts is the one consumed by it, as their vision gets narrower and narrower and darkness begins to take hold. It's kind of a sickness. Kinda' tragic, isn't it?

Can you elaborate on what you don't agree with?

I requoted the original post for reference.

I generally agree that discriminating against people because they belong to a particular demographic is probably based on some level of hatred, but I try to be careful with extreme words like hatred.

I also disagree that it only hurts the one consumed by it, because it does hurt the person being discriminated against.

I do think it's tragic that someone wants to use their position of power to discriminate against someone, whether it is based on past history with the group of people or even a belief that someone holds.

 

[brinny]

I'm not sure what law they would have actually violated by refusing service to a police officer. As I noted, being a police officer isn't a protected class under those laws. I could be wrong on that, but I don't think so.

However, as I noted, it is really bad PR for Arby's to not take immediate action, because a number of people would boycott Arby's otherwise.

Yes, bad PR fer sher. I'd be curious to see if there are options for her. I'd be steamed if i was this officer and i'd bring all kinds o' peoples to task.

 

[brinny]

I requoted the original post for reference.

I generally agree that discriminating against people because they belong to a particular demographic is probably based on some level of hatred, but I try to be careful with extreme words like hatred.

I also disagree that it only hurts the one consumed by it, because it does hurt the person being discriminated against.

I do think it's tragic that someone wants to use their position of power to discriminate against someone, whether it is based on past history with the group of people or even a belief that someone holds.

I agree. ANY kind of discrimination is dangerous.

 

[Cute Tink]

And all because I said I didn't trust the police. Sheesh...

I can't help but wonder if these people walked a few miles in my shoes if they could honestly say they would trust the police after that. Doubtful.

I have no doubt you have suffered as an NDN. People in my demographic have suffered at the hands of some groups, including the police. I, however, choose to give each person the benefit of the doubt as long as they are being respectful in the moment, which is why I have said I would tolerate a lot from people if in a position to provide service to them.

 

[brinny]

And all because I said I didn't trust the police. And I never said I hated the police, I only said that I didn't trust them. There is a difference.

I can't help but wonder if these people walked a few miles in my shoes if they could honestly say they would trust the police after that. Doubtful.

I've been in some pretty rough shoes, and sometimes without said shoes.

You stated that you would not have served her either.

Am i mistaken?

 

[Red Fox]

I have no doubt you have suffered as an NDN. People in my demographic have suffered at the hands of some groups, including the police. I, however, choose to give each person the benefit of the doubt as long as they are being respectful in the moment, which is why I have said I would tolerate a lot from people if in a position to provide service to them.

I don't know. You did make good points though. I just don't think my conscience would have allowed me to do so. I think I would be too nervous and too suspicious of the police, gun shy as some call it, to serve one if I had to. But I have never been in a situation like that before, so I was only speaking from my own personal perspective of the police, which is based on my past experiences with them and on other factors as well. Hindsight is 20/20, I guess I shouldn't have said anything about this in the first place. I didn't realize this thread would turn into a criticize Red Fox fest because I said I mistrusted the police in my first post of this thread. My personal views of the original topic is not the topic of this thread and I tried to bow out of it graciously, more than once in fact. I only came back to read some of the posts because someone responded to mine and I find that my personal views of mistrusting the police have suddenly become the favorite topic of the thread. And I didn't give my reasons, I only said I had them.

 

[brinny]

I don't know. You make good points, my friend. I just don't think my conscience would have allowed me to do so. I think I would be too nervous and suspicious of the police officer, gun shy as some call it, to serve one if I had to. But I have never been in a situation like that before, so I was only speaking from my own personal perspective of the police, which is based on my past experiences with them and on other factors as well. Hindsight is 20/20, I guess I shouldn't have said anything about this in the first place. I didn't realize it would turn into a bash Red Fox thread because she said she mistrusted the police in her first post in this thread. My personal views of the original topic is not the topic of this thread and I tried to bow out of it graciously, more than once in fact, but I came back to read some of the posts because someone responded to mine and I find that my personal views of mistrusting the police have suddenly become the favorite topic of the thread.

You may have some legitimate points. However, where does the targeting someone just because they're in a certain category stop?

Just give it some thought, ok?

Peace, sis.

(Where does it end? We're all hurting each other. We've GOT to come together. We are ALL in this together. And yes, Native lives DO matter. I agree. I'm sorry for all your pain. ) (((hug)))

 

[Belk]

LOL! Touche' my friend.

It is. Doesn't make it right or palatable though does it? And we are admonished by God to fight against injustices, to speak up for those who have suffered injustices, etc.

Would you like me to elaborate? I can if you wish

Agreed, it is not right and we should all do our best to try minimize it.

 

[brinny]

Agreed, it is not right and we should all do our best to try minimize it.

I agree.

 

[SuperCloud]

Unless there's a legitimate reason, that's discrimination, isn't it?

Sounds like a wide open suit case.

I'm going to take an educated guess that Arby's is an an At-Will employer. Something I'm sure, Republicans love, over unionization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment

At-will employment is a term used in U.S. labor law for contractual relationships in which an employee can be dismissed by an employer for any reason (that is, without having to establish "just cause" for termination), and without warning.[1] When an employee is acknowledged as being hired "at will", courts deny the employee any claim for loss resulting from the dismissal. The rule is justified by its proponents on the basis that an employee may be similarly entitled to leave his or her job without reason or warning.[2] In contrast, the practice is seen as unjust by those who view the employment relationship as characterized by inequality of bargaining power.[3]

I'm also betting if these Arby's employees refused to provide services to an IRS agent that Republicans by and large would be celebrating the employees decision.

Why?

Because the IRS is viewed by Republicans as going against Republicans trying to enrich themselves. And going against upper-income whites including those in the well-off suburbs.

Whereas "police" are viewed as the modern former on plantation enforcers keeping blacks and Latinos "in line" while also protecting whites and those in the well-off suburbs from them.

The IRS doesn't go around beating up and gunning to death rich Republicans anywhere near like how cops beat up and gun down working class and impoverished minorities. Yet, if you'd listen to the Republicans version of the IRS the rich whites are the most abused people on planet earth by a tyrannical IRS and "Government."

 

[Poor Beggar]

I'm going to take an educated guess that Arby's is an an At-Will employer. Something I'm sure, Republicans love, over unionization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment



I'm also betting if these Arby's employees refused to provide services to an IRS agent that Republicans by and large would be celebrating the employees decision.

Why?

Because the IRS is viewed by Republicans as going against Republicans trying to enrich themselves. And going against upper-income whites including those in the well-off suburbs.

Whereas "police" are viewed as the modern former on plantation enforcers keeping blacks and Latinos "in line" while also protecting whites and those in the well-off suburbs from them.

The IRS doesn't go around beating up and gunning to death rich Republicans anywhere near like how cops beat up and gun down working class and impoverished minorities. Yet, if you'd listen to the Republicans version of the IRS the rich whites are the most abused people on planet earth by a tyrannical IRS and "Government."

That's a lot of conjecture.

 

[pdudgeon]

Respectfully, it may not have been justified in the eyes of the employer, but if it had been me, as an employee, it would be a much different story.

If I had been in a situation like that, I would have tried to make up an excuse beforehand if I saw the police officer headed to my register.

I have my reasons and I will not discuss them. I know other people will not agree with me on this, but nonetheless, it is how I feel about the police.

the easiest way is to take a bathroom break.

 

[Red Fox]

the easiest way is to take a bathroom break.

Yes, that may have been a good solution if I had ever been in that kind of situation. And thank you for being respectful. It is much appreciated.

And now, I am going to bow out of this thread, for good this time, so I will no longer be responding to anymore posts from this thread.

 

[Belk]

Except we've been waiting for the silliness of this response so you'll find most of us have a well-thought out answer.

So...do I get to read this well thought out answer?

 

[Martinius]

Distorted propaganda about the police? I don't think so. I don't trust the police any further than I can throw a great big boulder.

I may not have served the police officer either, but I would have made an excuse of being sick or something and had someone else step into my place.

As a college student, I worked nights in a small restaurant on the edge of downtown, on a corner with bus stops all around. So lots of traffic. 2nd shift police officers walked beats in the downtown area (this was in the prior century when that actually occurred). We knew the two cops who walked beats closest to us, and we were happy to have them stop in anytime. It was like our own personal security service.

When I worked in banking, many of our customers were police officers. We loved to have them come in to the lobby or pull through the drive-up anytime. There were times when a bank robbery occurred in the area and they would have a patrol car come around at opening and closing times to watch for anything suspicious. Our employees greatly appreciated it.

To deny service to anyone, except for valid reasons (drunk, disorderly) is wrong. Based on your thinking, Someone could choose to deny service to a person who appeared to be Arab, a biker in leather, or a black person, a Latino, or a Native American. Discrimination against a group based on behavior by individuals of that group is something we should have outgrown by now. But perhaps some never learn those historical lessons.

Also, every business that I have been associated with has a clear, written policy regarding not discriminating in dealing with customers. These employees should have been aware of it, especially the manager. If I were that manager (which I have been) the employee would have been gone immediately, and I would have been in contact ASAP with the offended party, cop or otherwise.

 

[keith99]

I'm not sure what law they would have actually violated by refusing service to a police officer. As I noted, being a police officer isn't a protected class under those laws. I could be wrong on that, but I don't think so.

However, as I noted, it is really bad PR for Arby's to not take immediate action, because a number of people would boycott Arby's otherwise.

I'm not sure which laws would be violated but I'd wager there are a few in most states. Restaurants , Hotels, Taxi service and the like are the original 'public accommodations that put pretty much nullified any right to refuse service. Any posted signs are a bluff akin to the 'contract' on back of the receipt for parking.

But there is a huge barrier to suing, you sue for damages, since the manager did eventually serve toe officer and even comped the meal damages are rather hard to show. One would have to show the officer as emotionally vulnerable, a dangerous sell.

 

[bhsmte]

Wow, it's apparently true. Obviously nobody should be refused service just because they're a cop.

If you worked in a similar role, is there anyone you would refuse service to?

 

[seashale76]

And all because I said I didn't trust the police. And I never said I hated the police, I only said that I didn't trust them. There is a difference.

I can't help but wonder if these people walked a few miles in my shoes if they could honestly say they would trust the police after that. Doubtful.

I know you and I don't agree on a lot, but I do get what you're saying about trust. I don't have those particular issues myself, but I get that you actually do. I've looked at some of your older posts and I think that sometimes people on both sides are talking past each other a little bit. I think people around here probably actually agree on things more than we give each other credit for.

 

[daydreamergurl15]

One side said the reason they fired the two was because they "refused to serve police officers", the employee said he joking said "it's because you're a police officer" when trying to ring up the officer's card and the officer gets mad.

Okay, not sure where the truth lies in this one.