🐱 Trans Employee Sues Starbucks for Discrimination

CatParty
https://www.advocate.com/business/2018/8/01/trans-employee-sues-starbucks-discrimination

A former Fresno, Calif., Starbucks employee has filed suit against the coffee chain for harassment and discrimination she claims she received during her gender transition, reports The Fresno Bee.

Maddie Wade alleges that manager Dustin Guthrie reduced her hours and discriminated against her after she disclosed she was transitioning, forcing her to resign this year due to "intolerable conditions," according to the suit, filed in Fresno Superior Court. At the time she was planning to start hormone therapy and have facial feminization surgery.

“It was humiliating to come to work every day and be treated with no dignity or respect," Wade said in a statement to the Bee. "I never would have expected this kind of behavior from a fellow employee who failed to represent the culture and ethics that have come to embody Starbucks as a global brand.”

Now she's seeking damages from Starbucks, alleging the loss of her job and health insurance effectively stopped her transition, causing more gender dysphoria.

“I loved my friends and colleagues at Starbucks and expected to have a long-term career with the company,” said Wade, who joined Starbucks nine years ago and worked her way up to supervisor.

Her lawsuit says that in 2016 she was transferred to a northwest Fresno location that had a reputation as "the worst Starbucks in town." While she worked under multiple managers, the store's performance and reputation improved, she says. When Gunthrie became manager last year, they worked well together at first, taking the store from the bottom three in the area to one of the top three, according to her suit. He even offered to take her “under his wing” and promote her to assistant manager.

When Wade revealed she identified as a woman and wanted to be referred to as such, she asked Guthrie if she could work the same amount of hours and a similar schedule so she could keep her medical appointments regarding her transition.

The next day, Guthrie, who had previously told Wade he was Christian and wanted a career in politics, told her he was struggling to understand her transition. Her hours were cut, and Guthrie continued to refer to her by her previous name and male pronouns, according to her suit.

Guthrie also posted transphobic messages on Facebook, included in the suit, such as one with a picture of actor John Wayne and the text “Cutting off your pecker does not make you a woman. It just makes you a guy that cut off his damn pccker." He also claimed Caitlin Jenner was someone who just wanted to “cross-dress without being judged.”

When Wade told him she felt punished for being transgender, he denied that he was punishing her, according to the suit. When she also told Guthrie that customers were demeaning her by intentionally misgendering her, he “dismissively laughed about it,” the suit contends.

On the advice of her therapist, Wade resigned in June. She's been unable to seek further prescribed therapy because she lost her insurance with her job. The complaint says she would have never begun transitioning without a secure job, income, and health care.

Starbucks did not respond to requests for comment.

The coffee franchize closed all of its U.S. stores for diversity training this May 29. “The objective of closing our stores and utilizing that day for training is to affirm that Starbucks is a welcoming place for everyone," Starbucks CEO Kevin Johnson said in a statement.

Employees took to the online forums to criticize the day of training as "4 hours of filler with no substance, a bread sandwich if you will..." and "pretty shallow."


here's the law suit
https://www.scribd.com/document/385147859/Maddie-Wade
 
Cue large out of court settlement to make the screaming troon go away, and another nationwide closure for trans awareness training. There's no way Starbucks is gonna back up the manager here. They're too invested in social justice.

Not that the manager wasn't an asshole by the sounds of it.
 
Cue large out of court settlement to make the screaming troon go away, and another nationwide closure for trans awareness training. There's no way Starbucks is gonna back up the manager here. They're too invested in social justice.

Not that the manager wasn't an asshole by the sounds of it.

i have no doubt this is a cash grab for transition funds
 
Sweet baby jebuss, what did he expect? This is FRESNO.....the 'No. They treat their homeless with more respect and dignity then their residents. Also Fresno is mostly populated by religious people, majority Catholic. Of course you will get Misgendering. It's Fresno. Like the place you would shove the nozzle if you gave California an enema. Geeze. Also, themanager was working with his as a male, so of fucking course he is gonna have issues with Misgendering a newly trans employee, especially if he is religious, which again he had to know because he had access to the guys Facebook. It couldn't have been new to him that his manager was anti trans. Ugh. People think that THEIR transition is going to magically change everyone around them too, and that just don't happen.
 
Guthrie also posted transphobic messages on Facebook, included in the suit, such as one with a picture of actor John Wayne and the text “Cutting off your pecker does not make you a woman. It just makes you a guy that cut off his damn pccker." He also claimed Caitlin Jenner was someone who just wanted to “cross-dress without being judged.”
Realistically speaking, how legitimate is it to include this guy's social media postings in a suit? I understand the plaintiff needs to build a background and supply context for the case, and also I'm sure Starbucks is no different from most businesses in that they warn employees about using social media in ways that make their employer look bad.

But this isn't the guy posting pics of himself drinking on the job or calling people nigger while wearing his Starbucks uniform. He's just expressing wrongthink. We all know that Starbucks believes it is a social justice business that sells some coffee on the side so no need to go into how they view the guy's beliefs, but if he gets in trouble over it could be potentially have cause to fire back over this? Because I can't really see how there is a legitimate legal connection between his treatment of a trans subordinate that affected her performance and career (which is bad and he is wrong) and what he posts on his own social media that is separate from their employer (which should be his own business).

Because if the plaintiff's case is basically "Starbucks give me money because I don't approve of one of your employee's beliefs" then why can't he submit any other arbitrary character samples? Why can't he say "well I volunteer at the soup hotel once a week and I rescued a litter of puppies from a burning house on my last birthday, please throw out the plaintiff's case". Or better yet, comb through the plaintiff's social media and find something that was okay when she posted it a month ago but today is arbitrarily bigotry according to the James Gunns of the internet. If she deserves money because his beliefs offend her why is turnabout not fair game?

Yes, yes, we all know why, but I'm specifically asking for the "justice is blind" answer that a court should be held to.
 
Realistically speaking, how legitimate is it to include this guy's social media postings in a suit? I understand the plaintiff needs to build a background and supply context for the case, and also I'm sure Starbucks is no different from most businesses in that they warn employees about using social media in ways that make their employer look bad.

But this isn't the guy posting pics of himself drinking on the job or calling people nigger while wearing his Starbucks uniform. He's just expressing wrongthink. We all know that Starbucks believes it is a social justice business that sells some coffee on the side so no need to go into how they view the guy's beliefs, but if he gets in trouble over it could be potentially have cause to fire back over this? Because I can't really see how there is a legitimate legal connection between his treatment of a trans subordinate that affected her performance and career (which is bad and he is wrong) and what he posts on his own social media that is separate from their employer (which should be his own business).

Because if the plaintiff's case is basically "Starbucks give me money because I don't approve of one of your employee's beliefs" then why can't he submit any other arbitrary character samples? Why can't he say "well I volunteer at the soup hotel once a week and I rescued a litter of puppies from a burning house on my last birthday, please throw out the plaintiff's case". Or better yet, comb through the plaintiff's social media and find something that was okay when she posted it a month ago but today is arbitrarily bigotry according to the James Gunns of the internet. If she deserves money because his beliefs offend her why is turnabout not fair game?

Yes, yes, we all know why, but I'm specifically asking for the "justice is blind" answer that a court should be held to.


I lost it at “soup hotel”
 
Cue large out of court settlement to make the screaming troon go away, and another nationwide closure for trans awareness training. There's no way Starbucks is gonna back up the manager here. They're too invested in social justice.

Not that the manager wasn't an asshole by the sounds of it.
With 2.5 gorillion trannies either killing themselves or being murdered every day, there's really no incentive to settle quickly. Just file motions and wait tranny entropy out.
 
When she also told Guthrie that customers were demeaning her by intentionally misgendering her, he “dismissively laughed about it,” the suit contends.

On the advice of her therapist, Wade resigned in June. She's been unable to seek further prescribed therapy because she lost her insurance with her job.

This is how it goes every time a mentally vulnerable person troons out. Decline in emotional functioning, unrealistic expectations of social acceptance (and passing), dumbass therapist giving terrible advice, unemployment. After that, its usually housing instability, then they try sex work or get a creepy boyfriend, and start using drugs. Trans people really need to start trying to be resilient instead of rage quitting society over something as minor as misgendering.
 
Customers probably misgendered her because seeing a dude in a man bun is not an uncommon sight at Starbucks. I agree the manager treated her badly, but those customers likely made an honest mistake and there's nothing he could have done to stop it.
 
This sounds like following the money. The people "liable" for this troon kneecapping xyrself are the manager and the therapist, but neither of them have pockets as deep as Starcucks'. This is why I'm dubious of the account about the manager as well: the case against the employer already seems paper-thin, so the incentive is to ratchet up the everything to Saturday morning cartoon villain levels (beyond normal troon histrionics, I mean.)
 
Atrás
Top Abajo