Posts Tagged ‘ EEOC ’

Should Dwarfism Preclude Working at Starbucks?

August 23rd, 2011. By AbiK

“Dwarfism is not a disease and opinions vary within the dwarf community about whether dwarfism is a disability. Dwarfism is a recognized condition under the Americans with Disabilities Act . Short stature can make some activities of daily living harder, such as using an ATM or gas pump. But most people with dwarfism have active, healthy lives and normal life spans.”

That’s a quote from WomensHealth.gov. The bold is from me as it caught my eye…is dwarfism a disability that’s rightly covered by the ADA? WomensHealth.gov is one of the sites I clicked through in order to try to gain more insight on the recent discrimination settlement where Starbucks agreed to pay $75,000 to a woman, Elsa Sallard, who has dwarfism and was let go after only three days of training as a Starbucks barista (“barista” being the adopted from Italy and seemingly inflated on US soil moniker for someone who makes, pours and hands over coffee, espresso or that quad venti skinny with whip iced caramel macchiato).

So Sallard, whose actual height has not been reported, must be 4 feet, 10 inches tall or less—as that’s the height one needs to be in order to be considered a dwarf (according to MedlinePlus, though the Mayo Clinic defines a typical range of “2 feet 8 inches (81 centimeters) to 4 feet 8 inches (142 centimeters)”). Four feet ten inches in and of itself would not seem to be a disability so I’m going on the assumption that whatever height Sallard is, she’s shorter than one needs to be to perform barista duties.

Regardless, she requested a stool or step ladder in order to facilitate her work behind the Starbucks counter. According to Reuters, the Starbucks manager at the location (El Paso, TX) where Sallard was being trained “ignored” her request and subsequently fired her, claiming she’d pose a danger to employees and customers.

While this may not be popular with all readers, I can see the manager’s point of view. I may not totally agree with it, and it certainly doesn’t align with how the ADA is worded**, but I can see where he might have been coming from. Particularly if the El Paso Starbucks was anything like a Manhattan Starbucks.

(**btw, the ADA considers a qualified individual with a disability to be “a person who meets legitimate skill, experience, education, or other requirements of an employment position that s/he holds or seeks, and who can perform the eessential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation. Requiring the ability to perform “essential” functions assures that an individual with a disability will not be
considered unqualified simply because of inability to perform marginal or incidental job functions. If the individual is qualified to perform essential job functions except for limitations caused by a disability, the employer must consider whether the individual could perform these functions with a reasonable accommodation. If a written job description has been prepared in advance of advertising or interviewing applicants for a job, this will be considered as evidence, although not conclusive evidence, of the essential functions of the job.” As such, dwarfism would be considered a disability.)

I recently had the pleasure of hitting a few Starbucks locations throughout NC, SC, GA and VA. It’s a pull up a chair and relax with some coffee kind of vibe. Not so in NYC. In New York, coffee’s gotta be served up PDQ or fuhgedaboutit. Doesn’t matter what time of day. So I can see where a manager at a busy Starbucks might first be thinking of mitigating the risk of injury prior to accommodating someone who can’t effectively reach all the necessary equipment to wait on customers.

It’s not hard to imagine the hustle and bustle behind the counter with waves of piping hot coffee (where’ve I heard that before?) cresting at the rim of every cup that’s being shuttled around. Throw in a step stool to maneuver about and it’s a burn injury waiting to happen at the very least; a slip and fall injury (or worse) at the worst.

The manager’s concerns—if that’s what they were—really aren’t part of the equation when it’s an ADA case. So for Sallard, Starbucks should’ve just run out to Lowe’s and gotten a blessed step stool. Instead, they’re coughing up $75,000 and providing diversity training on how to manage associates with disabilities.

Tags: ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, Dwarfism, EEOC, El Paso TX, Elsa Sallard, Starbucks Discrimination, Starbucks Dwarf
Posted in Discrimination, Emerging Issues | 3 Comments »

You Don’t Look Hollister: You’re Fired

February 26th, 2010. By AbiK

What? The uber-hip, ultra-prep and ubiquitous Abercrombie & Fitch is at the center of an EEOC Complaint re: banning a Muslim employee from wearing her hijab (aka head scarf, for those of you less “hip” to all things diverse). Perish the thought!

Say it isn’t so, but oh, it’s true! Seems the Brand is the Look, and the Look is All-American-prep and so—you know, by that theory of transitivity you learned in prep school—well, the Brand is All-American-prep. Like complete mirror image. And we know brand integrity is Everything. Cap E intended.

Abercrombie & Fitch lost me a number of years ago—they used to be this quiet, reserved, quality outfitter with a store nestled in the upper recesses of Trump Tower on 5th in NYC. But then things changed. With folks like J. Crew eating up market share, well, A & F apparently found themselves in need of a re-image. Repositioning. ReBranding.

Rebrand—and expand with companies like Hollister—they did. Go into a store now and you’ll be greeted by a sea of 20-something oneness and assimiliation set to the backdrop of glaring music. Their black & white ads suggest a more “knowing” (yes, sexually) and somewhat monied and genteel crowd that I imagine the sales side of the biz only wishes it could duplicate on the sales floor. But there’s the rub. It can’t.

See, you can homogenize your ad campaign. Not so your sales staff.

So what happens when brand image isn’t playing out at the stores, or in this particular case on the stockroom floor of A&F subsidiary brand Hollister? If you’re a district manager who clearly didn’t read Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: Abercrombie & Fitch, EEOC, Hajib, Hollister, Muslim, Umme-Hani Kahn
Posted in Emerging Issues, Employment | 4 Comments »