International Nesties
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Who do you think is in the wrong here?
http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_18707661?source=most_viewed
Starbucks pays $75K in suit filed by woman with dwarfism The Starbucks Coffee Company has paid $75,000 to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to settle a lawsuit for unlawfully denying a reasonable accommodation to a woman with dwarfism, according to a press release. The lawsuit was filed by the commission on behalf of Elsa Sallard, who claimed she was fired from her job as a barista because she is a dwarf. According to a press release from the commission, Sallard told employers during a training that she could use a stool or stepladder to do her job. "The manager at the El Paso Starbucks location disregarded Sallard's request," the release said. "On the same day that Sallard requested the accommodation, Starbucks terminated her employment, claiming that she would pose a 'danger' to customers and employees." Commission officials said that the settlement not only compensates Sallard, but is an agreement that Starbucks will provide training in compliance with Americans With Disabilities Act.
Re: Who do you think is in the wrong here?
I am probably going to get flamed for this, but here is my opinion:
I think that Starbucks should never have hired her because there are going to be other staff around that are going to be busy with hot drinks and pushed for time and could easily fall over her stool or ladder, and then even bigger lawsuits could follow. I feel like this woman got lucky with this lawsuit.
What is your opinion?
DO NOT CLICK LINK ABOVE - WE HAVE ANOTHER SPAMMER
My guess is there's more to the story, for starters. Could be there were already safety incidents. Could be she created a hostile environment with a contentious attitude and threats.
Could use a stepstool to do her job? Um, those baristas move! They don't stay in one spot, they have to move quickly, have to be able to reach a certain distance, change spots to make either a hot espresso drink or a blended drink, access different small refrigerators, and even get items out of the pasty display. So not doable from a stepstool.
I don't think she asked for reasonable accomodation for the barista station. I could see how they would let her do the cashier position on a step stool with altered duties. Not getting items from the pastry display, not getting the brewed coffee because that would require another stepstool for her to safely reach the cups and hot coffee which would create a tripping hazard to the rest of the employees. But how would they have been able to accomodate her safely for other jobs without completely redoing the inside of the store? And wouldn't that have made it inaccessible to the rest of the average-height employees?
EEO protections also apply to applicants. So, theoretically, had SB denied her employment (not hired her), she still could have prevailed.
As for my personal opinion, of course I support the underlying logic of Equal Opportunity-- of course everyone should have a right to earn a living regardless of Race/Color, Age, Sex, National Origin, Religion, Disability and be free from Reprisal. However, the execution/implementation of EEO/ADA/etc legislation can often lead to bizarre outcomes-- like narcoleptic schoolbus drivers, etc.
I also think there is way more to this than that. Why did they hire her? Was she the only candidate to apply? Seriously doubt it.
A stool is a health and safety violation. Besides the trip hazard aspect, there is the hand washing aspect. She would have to wash her hands every time she moved it (as her feet would be on it, so it would require hand cleaning).
My guess is she was hired to do X job, such as cashier, but since she couldn't do Y job they limited her hours to only when a solitary X-position was required. Furthermore, some starbucks only distribute tips to baristas who actually make the coffees... so the cashier or the prep peeps are excluded. So she would feel she was being excluded from additional income by not being allowed to make coffee.
As for the narcoleptic schoolbus drivers... how is that even possible? I thought narcolepsy was one of those things that kept you from getting a license in the first place? I know there are a zillion "how the hell does that happen" things out there, so that is why I am asking. How the hell does that happen?!?! Insane!I agree, anyone could claim discrimination of some type. This would mean that I could sue a modeling agency for not giving me the job because I'm not tall enough or not pretty enough (discrimination against ugly people!! that's not fair either, right?). Certain jobs require certain physical abilities in order to accomplish properly just as other jobs require certain level of education or knowledge.