It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Starbucks is brainwashing employees!

page: 1
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:50 PM
link   
My friend who works at Starbucks told me that he had to call the police to escort a homeless man from the store. This was on a day that it was pouring rain and i'm sure that he was just trying to catch a break from the bad weather. Anyway, he told me that some customers complained (about his smell) so he had no choice but to call the police. I was astounded by the lack of empathy by these expensive coffee drinkers. I asked him how could he kick a poor man out into the cold rain???

Now, down to the brainwashing...

He responded, "It's bad for buisiness. We like to keep customers in the store so we can sell more coffee."

I immediately asked who is "we"? Of course I knew he meant himself and Starbucks. But why use the word "we"? Is he in buisiness with Starbucks? It implies that profits for starbucks means profits for him. Starbucks has taught him to not think for himself, but to think about his old pal Starbucks and himself. Like they are a team. I told him next time leave the poor man alone. Who cares is if some customers stick around to read a newspaper and maybe buy an additional cookie or coffee refill. (He became so angry with me!!!)

As an additional point, he calls her co-workers "partners." Wow, Starbucks really did a number on their employees.

***Please don't respond with, "If Starbucks goes out of buisiness because of customer complaints he is out of work." 1. This is not his career and he can find another aweful job for extra cash while he is in school. 2. I doubt the store will go out of buisness if he tells some customers to take a hike.***

[edit on 31-3-2010 by Longtimegone]



+15 more 
posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Let him in your house to dry off then.

There are appropriate social facilities in any place that is big enough for a Starbucks.

Starbucks is not that facility.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
I would have thrown him out as well. Just like any other business, they have not only the right to throw out anyone they want, but they don't even need a reason. Good for her for looking out for her customers concerns. As far as the poor homeless guy, sure I feel bad for him, but he should have found a public place and not a private business to use as shelter.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Longtimegone
***Please don't respond with, "If Starbucks goes out of buisiness because of customer complaints she is out of work." 1. This is not her career and she can find another aweful job for extra cash while she is in school. 2. I doubt the store will go out of buisness if she tells some customers to take a hike.***

Are you trying to brainwash me as well to not think for myself?
What if the above is how I feel?

Personally, I would have not been in such a rush to get rid of the homeless
man. However, depending on well her business succeeds depends on how
far she will inch up the ladder and be eligible for bonuses etc. Her only concern
is the stability of her job. Double edged there. I would show empathy first.


+3 more 
posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
I used to work at a non-franchise coffee shop in a city. It was a constant struggle to keep the vagrants out. We were always busy as hell too and there'd be a whole couch taken up by three passed out drunk mental patients at 7AM.

They'd sleep there all day which wasnt a big deal as long as they didnt stink or we didnt need the seat but then sooner or later theyd get up and start panhandling in the shop or groping the female customers.

The first couple of months I worked there I would sympathize and make excuses but seeing the same crap day in and day out for a years wore me out. Then there was the constant panhandling going to and from work every single day. Vomiting drunk and passed out on the curb still reaching up for a handout.

Of course they'd never take any of the food I offered. They couldnt get high off of food.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Having worked at starbucks for a very short time, but going through the training process i can tell you that working at starbucks is ALL about team work and YOU being a part of the company. If I remember correctly, after you've been there for a certain length in time you do get a sort of profit share incentive or something of the like. They really want you to feel that you are a part of the company and what you do matters for not only them but for yourself.

Personally, for the short time I worked there, I liked it, but yes they really do push a sort of elitism attitude. Other than that though, I've worked at other coffee shops in my life and if a homeless man or anyone for that matter is bothering other customers and we get numerous complaints management has no choice but to ask the person to leave, because it is after all a business. It is also difficult to enjoy your food if you're choking on a bad smell nearby. If you were running something of the same, and were losing customers because of this sort of problem, I wonder might you not do the same?

I understand that homeless people don't have access to a sufficient roof over their head etc, and personally I would feel bad about turning someone away as well, and would love to offer an alternative, such as a hot shower in my establishment but I can see both sides of the coin.

Just my two hundred cents...



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Wow. Society brainwashed all of you who have posted so far.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Bet he would of loved a large hot americano and perhaps one of those marshmallow dipper things. Wouldn't of cost jack-all to us but would of meant a great deal to him. Whats the big deal in showing a bit of human kindness?



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
ALSO!!!!!!!!!!

The point of this post is not to argue whether it is right or not to kick out a smelly homeless man.

The point of this post is to discuss why an emplyee would include herself with the company (using the word "we") when it is NOT her career job.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by doorhand
Bet he would of loved a large hot americano and perhaps one of those marshmallow dipper things. Wouldn't of cost jack-all to us but would of meant a great deal to him. Whats the big deal in showing a bit of human kindness?


Actually, at another coffee shop I worked at, I cannot tell you how many times I took money from my own tips (which were if i was lucky 2 dollars in a day) to cover a homeless person's coffee or someone who didn't have enough change.

So I was barely making minimum wage, barely surviving myself, living with my parents because I couldn't possibly afford to put a roof over my own head all the while giving away my meager tips to homeless people, I even befriended one and would buy him a bagel and coffee when he would come in because he would play his guitar and sing for me.

So, once again, there is more than meets the eye to every situation.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Longtimegone
ALSO!!!!!!!!!!

The point of this post is not to argue whether it is right or not to kick out a smelly homeless man.

The point of this post is to discuss why an emplyee would include herself with the company (using the word "we") when it is NOT her career job.


It was stated above that most big corporations use "team" to refer to the
work force. I work at a crap ass deli and when I reference back to how my
day was, I often say, " Wow, we we're busy" or "Geeez, we we're so slow
today"...

Unless you are in business for your self, I don't see what is so incredibly wrong with using the word "we".

I think your anger lies more in her kicking the guy out and not her choice of words. And that's ok.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Longtimegone
ALSO!!!!!!!!!!

The point of this post is not to argue whether it is right or not to kick out a smelly homeless man.

The point of this post is to discuss why an emplyee would include herself with the company (using the word "we") when it is NOT her career job.


Because the company wants you to feel that YOU are part of the company. Maybe you didnt read my previous post well enough. There are tons of incentives to accomplish this feeling of WE. I don't know about you, but every company I've worked at has made sure we know that they are paying us to represent the company and us being an employee makes us a 'WE' being part of that company.

Also most companys drill into you TEAM WORK TEAM WORK TEAM WORK we are WE not YOU. Just the way it goes. It's how most large companies are able to function best.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by seeker11]



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by doorhand
Whats the big deal in showing a bit of human kindness?


Because you can't make a profit off of human kindness.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
LOLOLOLOL! Brainwashed?

I would have escorted him out myself! That is too much fun to leave to the police! A stinky, dirty, either mentally ill, or drastically lazy person was loitering (against the law) in a place of business, and they removed him (only after several complaints)? And that is a problem?

As far as "we." I have had tons and tons of jobs, and everyone of them I was part of "we." We is your coworkers, and your company, and your customers that are entrusting you with their care and comfort. WE is very important, and it doesn't have to be indoctrinated or brainwashed, for most caring and responsible individuals, it comes naturally and honestly!

Good Riddance, and Kudos to your friend for taking care of his job, his company, and his customers!



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Longtimegone
ALSO!!!!!!!!!!

The point of this post is not to argue whether it is right or not to kick out a smelly homeless man.

The point of this post is to discuss why an emplyee would include herself with the company (using the word "we") when it is NOT her career job.


Because she works there. Your environment is a community, in which you participate.

In our societies, this usually constituets a choice as well. You willingly engage in a community.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I used to hang out at a cafe where you might say that all walks of life hung out on occassion.

Human kindness is one thing.

Having to remove someone who is chanting for 45 minutes in the only bathroom is another.

Is the homeless guy with the yo-yo kung fu interesting? Sure.

But I don't need to clean his pee up from the floor when he just decides to whip it out and pee in the corner of the cafe.

Is it human to let someone come on in and dry off? Sure. It is also apparently human to leave your heroine needle in the couch for someone else to sit on.

Can I get into a nice conversation with the crazy guy? Sure.

But I don't like him throwing a bench at me later when I don't respond the way he wants to something. Nor is it an invitation to try corner me or follow me home.

Not one of these examples made up by me.

The "vagrant" homeless are that for a REASON. They aren't the homeless family trying to get it together. They aren't the working homeless.

Those reasons why they are that way, in places where there are faciliities to shower, to do laundry, etc. And those reasons aren't fixed because I say good morning every day when I see you.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Starbucks is a very non-elite group if you think about it. Before starbucks, you could really only find coffee shops in places like Greenich (sp?) Village and other 'trendy' (ie used to be a minority but white people moved in and cleaned it up) neighborhood. It would be a bit grimy with aspiring writers and poets working there. Not the most friendly of people.

Starbucks brought coffee to the masses and coffee shops into the mainstream. They made it fast, efficient, but most of all friendly. You won't find a holier than tho barista behind a starbucks register.

Did they water it down? Maybe. But it is the old circular arguemnt of 'independce'. You need to think for yourself, but you can only prove that by choosing option b. Punk rock is freedom of expression, but if you choose to not express punk culture (ie Avril Lavine) you aren't 'punk'. I don't like my coffee tasting like ass, but if i choose sweet I have no 'taste'. Starbucks gave people a choice, and they reflect what the people want.

Aside from that, the benefits are pretty good there. 20 hours qualifies you for health care, there are stock options, and you get a free pound of coffee a week. Not a bad deal really.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Awory
Starbucks is a very non-elite group if you think about it. Before starbucks, you could really only find coffee shops in places like Greenich (sp?) Village and other 'trendy' (ie used to be a minority but white people moved in and cleaned it up) neighborhood. It would be a bit grimy with aspiring writers and poets working there. Not the most friendly of people.

Starbucks brought coffee to the masses and coffee shops into the mainstream. They made it fast, efficient, but most of all friendly. You won't find a holier than tho barista behind a starbucks register.

Did they water it down? Maybe. But it is the old circular arguemnt of 'independce'. You need to think for yourself, but you can only prove that by choosing option b. Punk rock is freedom of expression, but if you choose to not express punk culture (ie Avril Lavine) you aren't 'punk'. I don't like my coffee tasting like ass, but if i choose sweet I have no 'taste'. Starbucks gave people a choice, and they reflect what the people want.

Aside from that, the benefits are pretty good there. 20 hours qualifies you for health care, there are stock options, and you get a free pound of coffee a week. Not a bad deal really.


The customer will never feel a holier than thou attitude from a barrista, but amongst employees and management it's a bit different. But it's all apart of wanting to be the best coffee shop out there, which really, is that a crime? Not in my opinion.

The MOST important thing when working at starbucks is FRIENDLY and EXCELLENT customer service.

They take pretty good care of their employees, especially compared to some other coffee shops I have worked at.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Starbucks is actually Illuminati owned.

In every single Starbucks, it is said there is a "All Seeing Eye" with a pyramid, somewhere in the store in plain sight to see.

Due to this fact, it comes as no surprise to see that the Starbucks method of operations consists heavily upon brainwashing.

The Illuminati are very good at brainwashing.

Research Project MKUltra.
Also maybe look up Project Monarch.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 05:34 PM
link   
You're onto something man. But I'm afraid you don't know the half of it.

In college I worked at Starbucks. I worked at a Borders. I worked at Banana Republic. Let me tell you--the brainwashing is everywhere, not just at Starbucks. "The customer comes first. Make the customer happy. A happy customer is a paying customer. A customer who is being grossed out by the foul reeking of a vagrant is likely to leave before they spend money oh no!@"

Lemme tell you, you have no idea just how deep this "customer service" conspiracy goes, or who you're bumping up against if you dig too deeply. I suggest you just walk away as if you never noticed anything--it's safer that way.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join