Starbucks ordered to pay extra $2.7M to employee who was fired for being white

abcnews.go.com...

A New Jersey federal judge has ordered Starbucks to pay a former employee who was awarded $25.6 million in a wrongful termination suit an extra $2.7 million in damages.

Shannon Phillips, a former regional director for the chain, sued the coffee giant in 2019, claiming that she was fired for being white.

The ruling comes after a Camden jury ordered the coffee giant to pay Phillips $25.6 million in settlement money, including punitive and compensatory damages, following a trial in June.

The story of one of the regional Starbucks manager who was fired after two African Americans, Donte Robinson and Rashon Nelson, were arrested on trespassing laws while waiting for a business meeting. It is understood one of the employees at a Starbucks in Philadelphia called the Police after asking them to make a purchase or leave.

Another important issue is how abcnews has covered this story which can be seen in their headlines:

Starbucks ordered to pay extra $2.7M to employee who said she was fired for being white

Far from being great in terms of reporting. I changed the title a little to:

Starbucks ordered to pay extra $2.7M to employee who was fired for being white

Shannon Phillips who is white didn't make a random claim she was fired for being white but she was actually fired for being white. Race was the determining factor that resulted in her getting $25.6M in compensation back in June and an additional $2.7M in August.

Judge and Jury have decided her race was the determining factor in her getting fired. Is not a personal opinion or an unsubstantiated claim but what the court have said.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Great news! As long as Starbucks are made to pay and not again the taxpayer. That would be just ridiculous, Starbucks is responsible and they can afford this.

originally posted by: ancientlight
a reply to: AlienBorg

Great news! As long as Starbucks are made to pay and not again the taxpayer. That would be just ridiculous, Starbucks is responsible and they can afford this.

The court has ordered Starbucks to pay and not the taxpayer.

a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

Its a message to them as a corporation, play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. It has to hurt to mean something. a reply to: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Joneselius
Its a message to them as a corporation, play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. It has to hurt to mean something. a reply to: Bluntone22

As it should..
But we have a president that said "white people need not apply" to positions in his administration.

I guess who you are matters...😏

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

That persons life has been forever altered. Even though their name is cleared in the media, they will forever
and incorrectly be seen as a racist.

To me that settlement isn't enough.

originally posted by: Joneselius
Its a message to them as a corporation, play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. It has to hurt to mean something. a reply to: Bluntone22

Correct!

Still don't understand how they could justify firing the manager.

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Joneselius
Its a message to them as a corporation, play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. It has to hurt to mean something. a reply to: Bluntone22

As it should..
But we have a president that said "white people need not apply" to positions in his administration.

I guess who you are matters...😏

Indeed. He also publicly admitted to selling state secrets and blackmailing a foreign leader, so yes, who you are definitely matters.

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

That persons life has been forever altered. Even though their name is cleared in the media, they will forever
and incorrectly be seen as a racist.

To me that settlement isn't enough.

Agreed. I would have given her twice that or more.

In the present climate, white Americans are lucky to find a decent job.
It's 'What other languages do you know?'
If you only speak English (God forbid), they give you a funny look.
I feel as if I am living in a third world country, where we have to struggle to make ourselves understood, and are unwanted.
Then again, I am living in NJ.

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

That persons life has been forever altered. Even though their name is cleared in the media, they will forever
and incorrectly be seen as a racist.

To me that settlement isn't enough.

Agreed. I would have given her twice that or more.

She has already been paid $28.3M in damages altogether. So I think she is financially secure for the rest of her life.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

That persons life has been forever altered. Even though their name is cleared in the media, they will forever
and incorrectly be seen as a racist.

To me that settlement isn't enough.

Agreed. I would have given her twice that or more.

She has already been paid $28.3M in damages altogether. So I think she is financially secure for the rest of her life.

Agreed, but the point is, Starbucks needs to feel the pain and be made an example of.

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: AlienBorg

$25 million seems a bit high.
That's several lifetimes of earnings to 99% of the population.

Pain and suffering I suppose.

That persons life has been forever altered. Even though their name is cleared in the media, they will forever
and incorrectly be seen as a racist.

To me that settlement isn't enough.

Agreed. I would have given her twice that or more.

She has already been paid $28.3M in damages altogether. So I think she is financially secure for the rest of her life.

Agreed, but the point is, Starbucks needs to feel the pain and be made an example of.

Yes they do!

And I think the punishment is proportional as Starbucks is very well known brand and highly successful business. If it was a smaller businesses the compensation would have been much less I believe.

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
In the present climate, white Americans are lucky to find a decent job.
It's 'What other languages do you know?'
If you only speak English (God forbid), they give you a funny look.
I feel as if I am living in a third world country, where we have to struggle to make ourselves understood, and are unwanted.
Then again, I am living in NJ.

That's pretty silly. I'd say a majority of the people employed at my company are white. Sure, knowing a second language like Spanish is a huge plus with customer/client-based jobs. But it's certainly not making its too hard to find work.

I'd say its far harder to find work if you cannot speak English well.

It just seems silly to say "woe is the white man/woman". Especially in light of centuries of racism by white people in the u.s.

I think Starbucks was just looking for a fall guy (or girl in this situation) and because it was a racial situation, they needed a white manager. So, starbucks pulled a little bit of racism for an initial racist event.

I think the moral of this story is not about race but the fact that you can just sue the sh!t out of people to make a buck. America isn't racist, it's exceedingly capatalistic.

originally posted by: Turquosie

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
In the present climate, white Americans are lucky to find a decent job.
It's 'What other languages do you know?'
If you only speak English (God forbid), they give you a funny look.
I feel as if I am living in a third world country, where we have to struggle to make ourselves understood, and are unwanted.
Then again, I am living in NJ.

That's pretty silly. I'd say a majority of the people employed at my company are white. Sure, knowing a second language like Spanish is a huge plus with customer/client-based jobs. But it's certainly not making its too hard to find work.

I'd say its far harder to find work if you cannot speak English well.

It just seems silly to say "woe is the white man/woman". Especially in light of centuries of racism by white people in the u.s.

I think Starbucks was just looking for a fall guy (or girl in this situation) and because it was a racial situation, they needed a white manager. So, starbucks pulled a little bit of racism for an initial racist event.

I think the moral of this story is not about race but the fact that you can just sue the sh!t out of people to make a buck. America isn't racist, it's exceedingly capatalistic.

The court awarded the manager around $28.3M altogether. They ve done it for a reason.

Do you think the woman who sued Starbucks did it just to make a buck (as you said above) or there was a much more serious reason for it?

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: Joneselius
Its a message to them as a corporation, play stupid games and you win stupid prizes. It has to hurt to mean something. a reply to: Bluntone22

Correct!

Still don't understand how they could justify firing the manager.

They were lefty, so they did it hoping to score some white guilt points so BLM would 'like' them on Facebook.

originally posted by: ancientlight
a reply to: AlienBorg

Great news! As long as Starbucks are made to pay and not again the taxpayer. That would be just ridiculous, Starbucks is responsible and they can afford this.

I would that they cannot afford this and that it hits them hard on their bottoman line.

I wouldn't mind seeing them go bust. Would miss it one bit.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Given this expense of this ruling, Starbuck's will quite likely appeal. Given the depth of their pocketbooks, they will find a favorable judge to hear the case.

The massive ruling in favor of this woman will likely hurt her overall award in the long run on appeal. Should have settled for $5 - 10M, gave her lawyers their 60% contingency and enjoyed the rest of her life drinking a proper coffee like Black Rifle.

Nice moral win for now though. I hope the best for her.

originally posted by: davegazi2
a reply to: AlienBorg

Given this expense of this ruling, Starbuck's will quite likely appeal. Given the depth of their pocketbooks, they will find a favorable judge to hear the case.

The massive ruling in favor of this woman will likely hurt her overall award in the long run on appeal. Should have settled for $5 - 10M, gave her lawyers their 60% contingency and enjoyed the rest of her life drinking a proper coffee like Black Rifle.

Nice moral win for now though. I hope the best for her.

They can appeal but I think it won't change that much even if they can employ an army of lawyers. If they loose which is very likely to happen the bill will be much higher.