Restaurant manager fired for accommodating a bigoted customer's demand

[Puppycow]

Posit: The only evidence of this event is a lone diner's facebook post. Restaurant management has been shown in other stories to fire first and ask questions later (BWW, Chipolte, etc). Lone diner/posters may be disgruntled, pot-stirrers, liars, or just wrong. Are the vaunted skeptics of the forum ready to drop the gavel here? Enough evidence presented for a conclusion?

Incorrect in the case of BWW. They fired employees after conducting a "thorough investigation".

In the Chipotle case, yes, they prematurely fired someone who had done no wrong. If memory serves, the "customers" were running a scam, hoping to get their food and then leave without paying, while loudly accusing the people behind the counter of being racists while recording them with their cellphone cameras.

 

[shemp]

If I owned a restaurant chain, every seat would be atop a trap door which opens into a chute leading to a shark tank. And every manager would have my support if they pulled the lever.

 

[Puppycow]

If I owned a restaurant chain, every seat would be atop a trap door which opens into a chute leading to a shark tank. And every manager would have my support if they pulled the lever.

Also helps solve the problem of negative Yelp reviews. Kill two birds with one stone!

 

[Butter!]

If I owned a restaurant chain, every seat would be atop a trap door which opens into a chute leading to a shark tank. And every manager would have my support if they pulled the lever.

I want to work for you.

 

[Giordano]

Office Trapdoors:
https://dilbert.com/strip/1993-10-12

 

[JoeMorgue]

"Joel you're being silly, why would I even want a Henckman Brothers Model 607 Trapdoor?"

https://roosterteeth.com/watch/rt-shorts-season-2-downstairs?page=2

 

[lomiller]

You're saying that you would be willing to enable overt, public racism

The managers actions put an end to the overt public racism. They also protected server from potential dishonest complaints about “bad service” and meant the server didn’t need to wait on a hostile, racist customer.

What it didn’t do is punish the racist customer. This could have subjected both the server and manager to a less obvious but more harmful racism, done nothing change the customers underlying views, and disturbed the meals of other customers.

What the manager did is more likely to get a better overall outcome to the situation.

because it's the path of least resistance?

Your opinion disgusts me.

I’m not arguing for least resistance, I’m arguing for best outcomes. Try considering your position in the context of police behavior. Is it better for police officers to aim for the best resolution to the situation or should they take a hardline and only care about enforcing an absolute standard on peoples behavior, even when this escalates the situation rather instead of defusing it?

 

[lomiller]

It doesn't matter what they say, quite honestly, because everybody saw what really happened.

The chances are pretty low that when they call in to complain they say “I’m the racist old lady that didn’t want a black waiter”, rather they will make a more generic complain saying the server was rude to them and the manager didn’t help. If the lady is dishonest, and I have no doubt she would be dishonest, it could be very difficult to prove it was even the same incident.

 

[Bob001]

.....
What the manager did is more likely to get a better overall outcome to the situation.
....

Well, apparently it didn't, because the woman continued to make vile remarks about the hostess, and then -- according to multiple reports -- she claimed she shouldn't have to pay because she didn't like the food.

And now the entire national chain is publicly embarrassed and the manager is fired. The "better overall outcome" would have been for the manager to ask/tell the woman and her party to leave.

 

[lomiller]

Well, apparently it didn't, because the woman continued to make vile remarks about the hostess,

At that point, I agree, the manager should have asked her to leave for disturbing other customers. Good luck kicking someone out and still getting them to pay though.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well, apparently it didn't, because the woman continued to make vile remarks about the hostess, and then -- according to multiple reports -- she claimed she shouldn't have to pay because she didn't like the food.

And now the entire national chain is publicly embarrassed and the manager is fired. The "better overall outcome" would have been for the manager to ask/tell the woman and her party to leave.

I think restaurant employees should be permitted to murder ten customers a year, each, without facing legal consequences. Something about getting other people to make meals turns a surprisingly large portion of the population into raving jerks.

 

[Bob001]

At that point, I agree, the manager should have asked her to leave for disturbing other customers. Good luck kicking someone out and still getting them to pay though.

But abusing your staff isn't enough? The manager should have told them that Olive Garden is an equal opportunity employer and public accommodation, and escorted them out.

 

[Dr. Keith]

At that point, I agree, the manager should have asked her to leave for disturbing other customers. Good luck kicking someone out and still getting them to pay though.

You are using hindsight while everyone who has ever worked in a restaurant saw this as the end game from the start. Better to ask them to leave when they initially showed their intentions than to wait until they have already eaten your food.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I think restaurant employees should be permitted to murder ten customers a year, each, without facing legal consequences. Something about getting other people to make meals turns a surprisingly large portion of the population into raving jerks.

And then another large group assume that every waiter is also an expert sommelier. I can't tell you how many awkward wine conversations I've had to listen to where the waiter has just memorized the "most popular" in each category. Now when these conversations start I ask the waiter whether they prefer vodka or whiskey. In no time you can figure out that they are just a beer drinker, or a scotch drinker, or really just love fruity drinks. But in no cases have I found a waiter who is a oenophile. And yet my wine drinking friends demand that they provide their expert comparisons of the three merlots they are considering before they finally just order the blend with a fun name.

I may be in the wrong thread for this rant . . .

 

[blutoski]

I think restaurant employees should be permitted to murder ten customers a year, each, without facing legal consequences. Something about getting other people to make meals turns a surprisingly large portion of the population into raving jerks.

Honestly, I think it's just a universal feature of customer facing roles. If you're dealing with the public, there's going to be an element that thinks they own you. There's another element that has substance abuse problems. There's an element that has mental illness.

And it's true at every pricepoint.

When the product is cheap, i'm surprised it actually matters enough to make it the hill they're going to die on.

When the product is expensive, I'm surprised that somebody with an MD/PHD/MBA would screech like a toddler.

 

[Checkmite]

The chances are pretty low that when they call in to complain they say “I’m the racist old lady that didn’t want a black waiter”, rather they will make a more generic complain saying the server was rude to them and the manager didn’t help.

And it wouldn't make a difference because when the corporate office follows up by calling the manager, the manager will explain what actually happened.

 

[Checkmite]

Deleted

 

[wollery]

The managers actions put an end to the overt public racism.

No they didn't, the abuse continued.

And the manager sent a clear message to the staff - "I'm more concerned about keeping things quiet than standing up for you."

Good luck getting your serving staff to work hard for you after you allow them to be abused in public and then appease the abusers.

They also protected server from potential dishonest complaints about “bad service” and meant the server didn’t need to wait on a hostile, racist customer.

If the customer is kicked out before any service and the manager logs the time and date of the incident then that problem doesn't occur, and no server has to wait on the hostile racist customer.

What it didn’t do is punish the racist customer.

What it did was give the customer the impression that their odious views were acceptable, and encouraged them to keep going.

This could have subjected both the server and manager to a less obvious but more harmful racism, done nothing change the customers underlying views, and disturbed the meals of other customers.

It may not change their underlying views, but it would damn sure send a message that they can't voice them in public if they want to get a meal.

What the manager did is more likely to get a better overall outcome to the situation.

The server was in tears, other customers complained and the manager got fired.

You'll have to explain how that is a better outcome.

I’m not arguing for least resistance, I’m arguing for best outcomes.

Best outcome is that the racist realises that their views are unacceptable and adjusts their behaviour in future.

Try considering your position in the context of police behavior.

Why? This isn't a police behaviour situation.

Of course, racial abuse is actually a criminal offence, so it could easily have become a police situation.

Politely asking them to leave is the "better outcome" response to that situation.

Appeasing a customer who abuses a member of your staff is short-sighted and cowardly.

 

[Babbylonian]

IMO accommodating people with this type of reprehensible "opinion" would be a dangerous precedent. It is well beyond stating some sort of political view. It is a form of insult and verbal abuse with no legitimacy in a healthy society. The manager and staff should feel obligated to protect their legitimate clients from this type of idiot. Ejection seems fully appropriate.

Sure, but what if it's the manager's first day? What if s/he's never heard of racism? What if s/he has a very specific type of dyslexia that distorts racial slurs into unicorns and rainbows?

Listen to the racist apologists in this thread: They know what's up, and what's up is racism! At Olive Garden you're family and every family has racists you sometimes have to tolerate at dinner...and also you can't prove they're racists.

 

[Checkmite]

The server was in tears, other customers complained and the manager got fired.

You'll have to explain how that is a better outcome.

Exactly. The customers were already "disturbed" so that ship had sailed. The server wouldn't have had to wait on a customer who was made to leave either, so that "protection" was a non-issue. The only thing Iomiller proposes that was actually at (speculative) risk was a "fake complaint of poor service" from the racist customer which as we've explained wasn't a real threat to anyone.