Charles Edison

"Economics, politics, and personalities are often inseparable." - Charles Edison

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Starbucks Discrimination

In a time where jobs are a hot item and people are in high competition for them, it is hard to overlook a job refusal due to discrimination. Starbucks is being sued for not hiring a one armed man in San Diego due to his disability. Starbucks refuses that the claim is legitimate and responded that he did not receive the job due to other reasons, not his disability. Starbucks is known for hiring people with disabilities and that the man's recollection of the interview was false. Pierre, the man who was not hired, is a former bartender that claims the Starbucks manager told him in the interview that the flavoring syrups were too high for him to reach and therefore he was not fully suited for the job. Whether or not Pierre's accusations are true or not we do not know for sure, but what we do know is that people are desperate for jobs and the denial of one over a physical handicap is expected to receive large recognition and bad news for Starbucks if the story is in fact true and he was not hired due to his physical situation. It is important not to discriminate in job hiring. Our unemployment is improving and if people are going out and trying to find jobs, they should not be turned away due to a handicap that would not actually effect their work. This is bad for our economy and unfair to our citizens.

2 comments:

michael.parleto said...

I don't think it hurts the economy as a whole. For the one armed guy, it does, since he doesn't have a job and isn't making any money (from Starbucks at least). But that position will just be filled by someone else. If I were the manager at Starbucks, I probably wouldn't hire him either. He has one arm, he won't be able to do as good of a job as someone with both arms. I would want the absolute best employees I could hire. It's a business, not a charity for the disabled.

Amber said...

It is sad how easily people can discriminate in different situations without even thinking twice about it. I have mixed emotions about this blog post because Starbucks has a right to the best of the best applicants when hiring because the economy is so rough. There is a fine line between discrimination and plain competition. However, if in fact the interviewer did say Pierre couldn't work there because he was unable to reach the syrups, I believe that does have discrimatory underlyings in it. Pierre has a right to fight Starbucks on the claim but unless he has legitimate proof of what the interviewer said, his words will be empty in a court of law.