Starbucks is brainwashing employees!

Franchises are based on the idea of cloning one successful model. Employees are clones and they are expected to conform to the idealized model. If they don't, it's down the road and another set of fools will take their place, eager to slave away for peanuts. If you don't like it, devise your own model and implement it at your own risk.

Originally posted by IsThereLifeOnMars
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.

Im all about customer service but I agree, many of these huge chains and franchises make their employees accept it as religion. I'm glad I no longer work in retail or the likes.

I quit working those jobs on moral grounds, why should I be forced to manipulate people to buy things they don't need with a supervisor or manager watching my every move to make sure I'm doing everything in my power to use every manipulation skill I can muster. At one big chain female clothing store in two months time I became the 2nd top salesperson, I was pulling in 10,000$ in sales a week in clothing in our small shop, and guess how much commission I was working for? 1%.

Originally posted by IsThereLifeOnMars
I suggest you just walk away as if you never noticed anything--it's safer that way.

No way!

I would rather die a million horrific deaths than walk away from these cowards in a face off...

We need to expose them no matter the cost.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
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!

Yes,
"We" should all pool together and get the guy a room for the week. Oh, he's not one of us? My bad.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
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.

And if you rearrange the letters in Starbucks you come up with the word: Crab Tusks

reply to post by loveguy


I pay for the guy to "have a room" every night. I pay taxes that go to shelters.

Shelters that need to have plastized beds. Security to protect the workers trying to help people. That separate people to minimize rampant sexual assaults.

I ALREADY DO GET HIM A PLACE TO STAY. One that needs to be hose out every day do to the horrendous things people do when they are there.

I believe, strongly, in "your brother's keeper."

I also believe one should be REALISTIC.

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.

Here is why.

Because citizens are losers and corporations are winners.

See, loser citizens have an obligation to help winner corporations make massive profits no matter what.

And since they are selfless and care so much about the wonderful corporation, they will accept minimum wage while making the corporation thousands in profit.

This is why corporations are winners and citizen workers are losers.

I am just judging them by these two criteria: their bank account, and their ability to generate profits for themselves.

That is why the worker said "WE". Because HE serves the almighty CEO, and sacrifices the fruits of his labor in return for minimum wage because his beloved CEO needs that new Ferrari or Yacht.

Sorry to sound like a jerk, but its true. Citizens are losers and Corporations are winners.

Citizens are so desperate for 5$ that they will beg for a job at Starbucks.

But does Starbucks beg citizens for anything? Well, only if they want you to get the hell off their property!

Originally posted by keepureye2thesky

Originally posted by muzzleflash
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.

And if you rearrange the letters in Starbucks you come up with the word: Crab Tusks

Let's see here, I post truth. You post BS as a reply?

I hope you were just joking around. Seriously.

At the risk of looking like a dis-compassionate christian hater, I have to ask if the local Church opens their doors to the homeless in inclement weather? Do they provide warmth, food, a steady stream of people with change in their pocket, comfortable couches, and no proselytizing?
Nope. Didn't think so.

Amazing that some people expect the corporate world to have more compassion. I'm surprised that every desk in every office building doesn't have a little couch for passing vagrants. Every mall should have an area for them congregate....

Churches, with no taxes, spend huge amounts of money on advertising campaigns to tell people to be Christlike and compassionate, yet often fall short in practice. I can't believe how many Houses of God have opening hours. I know there are hostels, but they have limits too. What do you think should be the acceptable vagrant limit per Starbucks?

Do you bring in homeless drunks during bad weather? Really?

Corporate begging is called Advertizing.

Starbucks is a big corporate scam causing mass homelessness around the world:

www.familyfarmdefenders.org...

When Starbucks first came to Madison in 1998 to open its flagship outlet on State Street near UW, the manager dismissed fair trade and implied that local coffee drinkers (and protesters) were ignorant of trends in the wider gourmet coffee world. Of course, years later Starbucks has now become the largest fair trade coffee seller in the world, even though fair trade still accounts for less than 2% of its multi-billion dollar business. Like Walmart (which will soon claim the mantle of largest organic grocer in the U.S.), Starbuck’s token effort appears larger than life when it’s the biggest gorilla on the block.

Labor Rights and Living Wages: The primary objective of fair trade is to bring economic justice and workplace dignity to farmers and workers. It would seem odd, then, that the fair trade price for the sector’s flagship product - coffee - has been “stuck’ at $1.26 per pound ($1.41 per pound for organic) for over a dozen years now. A real fair trade system would have the producer in the driver seat, determining a parity price that covered their cost of production and gave them a decent household income (adjusted for inflation). Realizing how wrong it is when a few powerful buyers wield undue influence to suppress market prices, Just Coffee is now paying between $1.56 and $2.00 per pound to its suppliers.

www.politicalfriendster.com...

Several of the largest grocery story and restaurant chains have also announced that they are going rBGH-free. Safeway reported that all of its stores in the Northwest have stopped accepting rBGH, this coming shortly after Starbucks reported all of its shops in Oregon and Washington were no longer serving rBGH products, as well as in other selected markets. Our task is now to get Starbucks to go completely rBGH-free nationwide at all of its 8,500 outlets.

www.organicconsumers.org...

The OCA launched its Starbucks campaign nearly seven years ago. One of the main demands of this campaign has been to force the world's #1 coffee purveyor to stop using rBGH-laced milk in its products. Due to health concerns, rBGH, a genetically engineered cow hormone, is banned in most of the world, but is legal in the U.S. After hundreds of OCA organized rallies at Starbucks around the world, and years of grassroots pressure, Starbucks announced, as of January 1, 2008, all of Starbucks products are rBGH-free. The OCA will continue to pressure Starbucks to increase its sales of organic and Fair Trade coffee and start selling Fair Trade chocolate.

Starbucks, one of the largest buyers of Fair Trade Certified coffee, will double its purchases to 40 million pounds in 2009, making the company the largest purchaser of Fair Trade Certified coffee in the world. Marking a new phase in their nine-year relationship with Starbucks, TransFair USA and FLO will join Conservation International as key partners in the Starbucks Shared Planet commitment to ethical sourcing.

www.waynemadsenreport.com...

January 6, 2009 -- Our boycott of Starbuck's began today. WMR and its group of daily "coffee meeting" sources began our boycott of Starbuck's today in support of a Palestinian and Lebanese boycott of the coffee giant. Starbuck's CEO, Howard Schultz, is reportedly an active supporter of Israel and Zionist causes.

windowintopalestine.blogspot.com...

money.cnn.com...

Ethiopia doesn't deny that its choice is unorthodox, countering that its industry, in which 95 percent of the coffee is produced by two million subsistence-level farmers, is too unwieldy and impoverished to take on the administrative burden required to guarantee geographic origin. "If you set up certification, you have to bear the cost," says Ron Layton, head of Light Years IP, a nonprofit intellectual-property consultancy that has been advising Ethiopia.

A recent visit to Fero found most coffee farmers working without shoes. Their clothes were ripped. Most live in mud huts with thatched roofs and subsist on the fruits and vegetables they grow. "We are angry," says Teshome Debigo, a 28-year-old farmer. "But to whom can we cry?" This year the cooperative that manages the Fero farmers' production and sales produced 300,000 pounds of coffee. If the coffee sells as it did last year, each of the cooperative's 2,432 farmers will net about $120 - the total yearly cash earnings for themselves and, on average, four other family members. Another $20 per farmer is captured by the cooperatives and unions, which goes toward infrastructure and administration. Starbucks awards $15,000 to the producers of its premium lines. In Fero that amounts to about $6.20 per farmer.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by loveguy

 

I pay for the guy to "have a room" every night. I pay taxes that go to shelters.

Hello,
So realistically, they have a room, they just don't use it?

Shelters that need to have plasticized beds. Security to protect the workers trying to help people. That separate people to minimize rampant sexual assaults.

So, realistically, all homeless people have to first commit a crime in order for your tax dollars to help them? Institutionalized? Shelters are "not-for-profit" according to my understanding.

I ALREADY DO GET HIM A PLACE TO STAY. One that needs to be hose out every day do to the horrendous things people do when they are there.

Yes, you boot him out for stinking, Hmmm?

I believe, strongly, in "your brother's keeper."

I also believe one should be REALISTIC.

Well, when I'm confronted by a person in need, while I don't have the resources to provide them with their needs, I give them an address for a mission/shelter. And I know they tend to wear-out their welcome, but it's not on my shoulders anymore, I did everything within my power to help.
And when someone remembers me, it's not because I'm the a-hole that told them to take a hike.

I sometimes volunteer at the Salvation Army. I serve dinner to them that I can't afford to pay for on my own. That's why I'm not wealthy, a fool and his money is soon parted.

"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's."

reply to post by Longtimegone

I'm sorry, I went off topic there didn't I?
I once worked at a 7/11. A real team-player I was.
I introduced the idea of "sales forecasting" to my boss, in the deli door/frozen.
I later found-out my boss took the credit, and all the perks. I got fired after getting pissed. Yeah, go team...

reply to post by loveguy


video.google.com...#

Black Gold -- expose on the multbillion coffee corporate scam

For a 3 dollar cup of coffee a farmer earns 3 cents.

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

reply to post by loveguy


I have no idea what half of what you responded means. Its almost completely dissaciated from anything I posted, and the quote you use from the Bible is utterly non-contextual.

Maybe some lead arsenic sprayed on your coffee? Oops you don't have cancer since you didn't have to spray it without any protections....

annhyg.oxfordjournals.org...

Few mothers were exposed compared with fathers. Exposure levels varied between fathers and mothers, depending on pesticide. Women usually helped in planting, harvesting, cutting and picking, nursery jobs, packing, or milking the cows, while men were involved in all types of jobs, including spraying and other application, mixing, and field preparation with pesticides.

Cancer STINKS!!

Economics Professor debates Starbucks over the film Black Gold

video.google.com...=-4665090042723890



[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

Here's the actual Black Gold documentary -- watch in full here:

video.google.com...#

And get DEPROGRAMMED!!

reply to post by Longtimegone


People don't outright agree with you so you accuse everyone of being brainwashed??

So your friend likes the company. Big deal. I have known people who worked for Starbucks and the company takes care of its people. It is known as one of the best companies to work for.

When I go there, I usually see the employees getting along and seem quite happy.

oh the horror. So if your friend feels part of the club, and a member of a team, then she can say we.

If most people could only be so lucky to enjoy their job.

reply to post by nixie_nox


For a 3 dollar cup of coffee a farmer earns 3 cents.

2 million farmers in Ethiopia in dire poverty is not taking care of its people.

Starbucks relies on starving farmers so a few of it's customer service employees can feel smug?

Sorry but that's just wrong.

blackgoldmovie.com...

This movie was absolutely amazing.I saw it at the Hot Docs film festival in Toronto.It was such an eye-opener.The fact that the latte that I buy from Starbucks affects the farmers in Ethiopia was soo incredibly wrong to me that I literally cannot touch a cup of coffee anymore.I can't just stomach the fact that because I'm supporting the corner Starbucks, someone halfway around the world has to starve for it.Why should I benefit at the expense of someone else????

www.globalexchange.org...

According to Tadesse, "There are communities that are growing coffee that have never bought clothes for the past three years. Malnutrition is seen in coffee areas? We have a plan to establish societies to help them save, then to use the money for when they are short of cash to buy food [during the growing season] when there is no harvest."

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

[edit on 31-3-2010 by drew hempel]

I know this sounds simple, but people use the term "we" when they refer to themselves and at least one other person. When I say "we went to the park" I am telling you myself, along with at least one other person, went to the part. You can interpret person broadly to include organizations like a business.

When your friend says "we" he is saying that he as well as Starbucks and/or some of is employees hold the belief. I would not rush to draw the conclusion that Starbucks has put your friend through some sort of special brainwashing technique because your friend now shares beliefs with Starbucks. The fact of the matter is we all tend to share beliefs with people whom we share an economic interest with.

You may find your friend using the term we in a way that contradicts the best interest of Starbucks. For example he may say "We think we are not getting paid enough" to refer to himself and other Starbucks workers. He may also say "we think our manager is a jerk" to refer to himself and his coworkers. Are the coworkers brainwashing him? Or is he just sharing beliefs with people whom he shares an economic interest with?