And We Know Why

Starbucks' infamous Rittenhouse Square store

The widespread media coverage of the arrests of Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson, the two 23-year-old African-American entrepreneurs whose April 12th arrest in a Philadelphia Starbucks while waiting for an associate for a business meeting, has begun to fade.

But like the aftertaste of coffee, the deeper issues concerning the perception of race in America have not.

An afternoon of mandatory customer service training at 8,000 Starbucks locations on May 29th is certainly a step in the right direction.

An appropriate response that's obviously not going to undo centuries of American history, but it is significant from the standpoint of a major American corporation responding to racial bias by one of it's employees - one that clearly sends an important message.

Personally I disagree with conservative African-American commentator and Harvard-trained capitalist Hughey Newsome who complained that Starbuck's decision was "overkill", lamenting in Ayn Rand-ian indignation that "If I am a shareholder, and an African-American, white, Asian, or of whatever background, I am going to be furious at Starbucks." 

As an investor myself, I'd be a lot more pissed off at the manager who called Philly PD on those two dudes than I would be at Starbucks.

And with all due respect to Mr. Newsome, the the only thing that was "overkill" about this incident was said-manager's decision to try and have two guys handcuffed and arrested for waiting for someone to join them while sitting inside a coffeehouse whose business model is partially based on advertising itself as a place for people to meet and hang out.

In this current climate in America when the erratic and unpopular POTUS intentionally cultivates divisiveness based on race, ethnicity, religion and nationality, incidents like the Starbucks situation are exponentially more problematic for companies eager to avoid having their brands associated with Trump's reprehensible personal views.

Particularly for large nationwide restaurant chains and retailers whose brands, reputations and profits can all be negatively affected because of the misguided actions, words or decisions of one employee who allows their own personal bias to overshadow professionalism, a sense of decency and basic common sense.

Army vet Ernest Walker's service photo and ex-Chili's
manager Wesley Patrick who accused him of lying 

In some ways the Starbucks incident is reminiscent of the incident that happened at a Chili's back in 2016.

Remember the blowback Chili's received over it's initially-tepid response to the social media outrage after Wesley Patrick, a white ex-manager of its Cedar Hill, Texas restaurant accused an African-American Army vet named Ernest Walker of not being a real veteran and took away his food on Veteran's Day back in November, 2016?

That incident was sparked when an old man wearing a Trump t-shirt (really) sitting a few tables away inside the Chili's saw Walker eating with his service dog Barack.

This was four days after the 2016 presidential election when some elated Trump supporters were doing all kinds of random crazy racist shit to innocent people of color.

So the old man gets up, walks up to Patrick and claimed that Walker was "not a real soldier".

Patrick didn't call the cops like the Starbucks manager in Philly did, but he was caught on video as Walker presented his military ID card and Army honorable discharge papers as proof he'd served in the Army and was therefore entitled to the complimentary meal Chili's offered to all vets on Veteran's Day.

Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson

Patrick (I'm guessing he didn't vote for Hillary) still refused to believe him - then made matters worse by grabbing the takeout container with the rest of Walker's meal and snatching it away after the vet had already tipped the waitress.

You can bet that the executives of the progressive-leaning Starbucks paid close attention to what happened with that Texas Chili's back in 2016.

So no doubt it was one Hell of an April for the Seattle-based coffee franchise, just as it was for the two young men who were publicly humiliated by a Starbucks employee for "waiting while black".

For me, the second half of April was a blur of tax preparation and work, both of which involved varying degrees of customer service.

Along with the arrival of some fairly spring-like temperatures, the busy season for the apartment leasing season has begun to heat up - and that ratchets things up for folks like me who lease apartments in order to put bread on the table and pay bills.

For example, I stayed late after work three straight nights last week, mostly to help two different apartment applicants sort out some tricky credit and income screening issues in order to get approved.

Both individuals are white, and as you likely know, I am black.

Nuns and clergymen join black protesters marching
on City Hall for fair housing in Milwaukee, WI in 1967

It's been at least three weeks since the very first moment that they both entered my office (separately) to ask about renting an apartment, until late Thursday afternoon when I was able to get them both approved for their respective apartments.

At no point did I for even one second consider treating either of them differently because their skin color was different than mine.

Granted, I am strictly bound by federal and state fair housing laws that govern the treatment of anyone who seeks to lease an apartment.

Regardless of their race, country of origin, gender, religion, sexual orientation, familial status or physical or emotional disability.

As I learned during a National Apartment Association professional certification training that I took back in December, the U.S. government created laws that prohibit discriminatory housing rental and sales practices based on those protected classes listed above under the Fair Housing Act - which was part of the sweeping Civil Rights Act of 1968.

Discrimination based on familial status (i.e. refusing to rent to someone because they're single, or have kids) or based on an individual's physical or emotional disability were added later under the Fair Housing Amendment passed in 1988.

Violation of those laws is a very serious issue for leasing professionals or property management companies found guilty of violating them - it can lead to termination, and or tens, even hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines levied against an individual or organization by state or federal agencies.

Nelson and Robinson settled with the city of Philly
for $2 for this arrest back on April 12th

So I'm very familiar with those laws, and because it's the right thing to do, I make adhering to them part of the basis of my sales techniques and customer services practices no matter who walks in the door of my office or calls me on the phone.

So aside from the blatant racial discrimination, I was genuinely floored when I first read about Nelson and Robinson being handcuffed and arrested for sitting in a Starbucks.

From the perspective of a property management professional who deals with a multitude of customer service issues on a daily basis, and as a former bartender who worked in the service industry for five years in New York City, the dustup over the Starbucks situation in Philly should never have happened.

As Kate Allison the CEO of PR outfit Karma Agency observed in an interview with WHYY:

"Starbucks has been from the very beginning a place where people go to gather - you go there to read, to work on your laptop, to have conversations with people. That is a huge part of the brand; it's a dimension that we've all sort of universally accepted. And that makes this particular situation feel all that much worse."

If you manage or work in an establishment where the business model is predicated upon making customers feel welcome and encouraging them to spend long periods of time inside said establishment, it's perfectly normal for some customers to prefer to wait until the person or party they're there to meet arrives before actually ordering something to eat or drink.

And yes, pointing a newly-arrived customer towards the restroom is a common courtesy, particularly when someone first walks in off the street - making people feel welcome is part of the job.

When I was bartending on the Upper West Side of New York in the late 90's and early 2000's, if a customer sat down at the bar and told me they were waiting for someone before ordering a drink or food, my stock response was to offer them a glass of water, maybe give them a menu and tell them to just let me know when they were ready to order.

How many times have you seen folks hanging out
at Starbucks without ordering?

Granted, those kinds of situations are very different than say a disheveled-looking homeless individual or panhandler coming into the establishment and wandering table to table shaking down customers for cash.

But even in those situations managers should know how to handle that in a respectful manner that reflects positively upon the business or establishment.

You don't need to be an asshole to enforce rules and treat folks with respect.

And you certainly shouldn't need to call the police to do it either - unless someone is getting violent or physically threatening someone.

According to an account of the Starbucks incident that Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson gave to the Associate Press, after the men were told they couldn't use the restroom because they hadn't ordered anything - they took it in stride.

A few minutes later when a server came by where they were sitting and asked if they needed help, one of them told the server they were waiting for someone to arrive and with that, the white female manager proceeded to dial 911 and call the police.

Which is pretty mind-boggling considering that Robinson claims he's been a semi-regular customer of that Starbucks location for eight years  - and he and Nelson were there for a business meeting regarding a real estate transaction.

Now I'm not suggesting the white female Starbucks manager is a "racist" because she called the police on two black men waiting for a business associate to arrive for a meeting.

Starbucks COO Rosalind Brewer and CEO Kevin Johnson

But her decision to do so suggests that her perception of what was actually happening was warped to some degree by her own personal bias based on their race.

There've been plenty of times I've been to a Starbucks and seen people camped out there working on a laptop, reading or talking with a group of people and it's not apparent that they're actually drinking or eating something they've ordered.


Four days after the incident, I listened to a segment on Morning Edition on WNYC on the continuing fallout from the Starbucks arrest, host Rachel Martin spoke with Starbucks Chief Operating Officer Rosalind Brewer, who is herself African-American, about the growing controversy.

There was no question that she was both personally and professionally disturbed about the incident, as Brewer observed during the interview:

"Just watching that video was quite painful. You know as an African-American executive myself with a 23-YO African-American son it was very difficult to watch. The police should not have been called in this situation."

Brewer also talked about the need for individuals, not just Starbucks employees or members of the Philadelphia Police Department, to take responsibility for the kind of racial bias that sparked this unfortunate incident.

Again, Starbucks' internal remedies aren't going to fundamentally alter the underlying issues that prompted the incident, but they could nudge the needle - and I think their executives deserve credit for a substantive response that wasn't pandering or just lip service.

CEO Kevin Johnson flew to Philadelphia to personally apologize to both men and called the incident "reprehensible" - Starbucks also quickly came to an undisclosed settlement with Nelson and Robinson.

Philadelphia PD Commissioner Richard Ross
addresses the Starbucks arrest

And the fact that the company will be closing over 8,000 different Starbucks on the afternoon of May 29th the day after Memorial Day for sensitivity training is pretty substantive.

Especially considering that they employ over 238,000 people worldwide.

It's been awhile since I've taken time to write here on my blog.

Partly because I've been busy.


But also because a lot of my sensitivity to these kinds of situations stems from an experience that took place when I was 12-years old and living in Bethesda, Maryland.

I was tall for my age, approaching six feet tall when I was 12, and as an African-American living in the mostly white suburbs of Bethesda, Maryland, that occasionally created problems for me.

"The Empire Strikes Back" was released in May of 1980, and while my mother took me and my brother to see it during a trip to Philadelphia, once school was out for the summer back in Bethesda, some friends and I made a long bike trip into downtown Bethesda to see the film again on a hot summer day at a theater on Wisconsin Avenue.

It was early afternoon and we were hot from the long bike ride so we were all eager to get inside the air-conditioned theater.

My friends rushed inside to get tickets and save seats and I lingered outside because I was having trouble with my bike lock, so I was alone when I got to the ticket booth outside.

The theater had one of those old ticket booths that stood alone outside the front entrance of the theater, but under an awning, and there was a white lady in her 50's with a beehive-type hairdo sitting behind the glass.

I slid my money under the glass partition and said, "One child please." after all I was 12-years-old and still qualified for a the child-price ticket.

She gave me this sort of piercing, hostile look, like she was angry, and said:

"No you can't. And you know why."

For a moment I just stood there dumbfounded and confused, at first I thought she was kidding, and then when her expression didn't change I feared she wasn't going to give me a ticket.

So I asked her what she meant, and she pointed her finger at this little black felt sign with white letters arranged on it with the prices and showtimes and replied:

"You have to be 12 or under for a child's ticket."

I protested and explained to her that I was 12, but she accused me of lying to get a cheaper ticket.


Like some white adults I encountered as a tall-for-his-age black boy in suburban Bethesda, they often mistook me for someone much older than I actually was.

And they sometimes treated me that way too - like the woman looking at me strangely from behind the glass and seeing something that I was not.

I recall standing there alone in front of that ticket booth on that hot summer afternoon hearing the sound of traffic on Wisconsin Avenue driving by just beyond the sidewalk, longing to be inside the cool darkness of the theater with my friends, but also realizing my parents were both at work and there was no way I could prove to the woman that I was 12.

What 12-year-old carries ID around with his or her birthdate on it? I certainly didn't.

I remember feeling helpless, angry, humiliated and offended because she didn't believe me and had accused me of lying - but the movie was about to start so with tears of anger moistening my eyes I pulled out another bill and paid the adult fare snatched my ticket and change and went inside.

I never told my white friends in the theater what happened to me and I never told my parents about it either - I knew what happened was wrong, but I didn't fully understand it and I was too young to be able to fully grasp or confront the complexities of racial bias that revolve around being a boy or man of color in America.

Even now, years later, I can still feel the sting of anger and humiliation - and the self-satisfied contempt in her voice still rings in my head.

Sitting here looking back on the incident, I'm reminded of the title of writer James Baldwin's voluminous collection of essays "The Price of the Ticket", which sits on my bookshelf not far from where I sit as I write these words.

So like many African-American men, I can understand and identify with the humiliation and anger that Rashon Nelson and Donte Robinson felt as they were handcuffed and led out of that Starbucks by Philadelphia PD officers back on April 12th.

I understand how Ernest Walker felt when a manager at Chili's took his meal away from him and accused him of lying about being an Army veteran to get a free meal at Chili's.

I paid the price of the ticket that day in front of the theater because I had no other choice - and we know why.

NYU's Watermelon-Flavored Controversy

The Weinstein Dining Hall at NYU

Examples of incidents involving racial insensitivity on American college campuses have been the subject of more than a few of my blog posts over the years.

It's not like I plan that, they happen - now and then and I write about them.

What's fascinates me is how often those types of incidents tend to occur around the federal holiday recognizing Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday, or during Black History Month.

As if there's a weird intentional spike in racial resentment that surfaces during those times of the year when contributions to American society and history by prominent African-Americans are recognized by a federal holiday, events and various types of media programming or entertainment.

Remember the Arizona State chapter of TKE's "Martin Luther King Black Party" back in January of 2014? (And yeah, that was a real thing.)

A recent controversy that erupted over soul food, Kool-Aid and watermelon-flavored water served at a dining hall on the campus of New York University offers perspective on enduring racial stereotypes, how students of color perceive a climate of racial insensitivity on major American college campuses - and the backlash from those who feel such claims are invalid.

As Tony Marco reported for CNN on Thursday, this latest controversy started when NYU student Kayla Eubanks walked into the Weinstein Passport Dining Hall and noticed a menu posted advertising a special meal in recognition of Black History Month.

NYU students in front of the "Black
History Meal" menu

The food choices included barbecued ribs, collared greens, mac and cheese, mashed yams and corn bread, which is fine - those are all delicious foods (depending on one's taste) commonly recognized as belonging to the broader spectrum of distinctly African-American southern cuisine.

Personally speaking, I don't find those specific food choices listed on the NYU dining hall menu "offensive" in a racial sense - and frankly just writing those down made me hungry. Really.

But it was the beverage choices paired with that menu that really stood out for Eubanks, large containers of red Kool-Aid and watermelon-flavored water.

Click the link to the CNN article above to see the cell phone video she recorded of the dining hall offerings; the video of the drink display helps put it in perspective.

Eubanks quickly told others about it.


As Maggie Astor's New York Times article notes, 19-year-old NYU sophomore Nia Harris heard about the menu from Eubanks and went over to the dining hall to check it out for herself.

Troubled by what she saw, she spoke with dining hall staff and asked the head chef of the dining hall about the selection of the choices on the special Black History Month menu - including the drinks.

In her now widely-read email, Harris says he told her that the menu choices were not in any way intended to be offensive, and he claimed they'd been created by two African-American cooks on the staff.

Harris wrote an email to NYU officials expressing her concerns, and then posted the email on her Facebook page and the story blew up - NYU President Andrew Hamilton released a statement calling the menu choices "inexcusably insensitive".

Aramark, the huge food service provider that actually handles meal service for the NYU dining hall, quickly released a statement apologizing for the incident and promptly fired the two cooks who supposedly came up with the menu and drink selection.

Was it right to fire two employees who came up with what they felt was an appropriate menu with a Black History Month theme?

Personally speaking I think firing them was a bit extreme.

According to the NYU and Aramark statements, the two fired employees violated policy by not consulting with NYU before creating the menu choices.

For a moment, let's forget whether the two cooks were white, black or Hispanic.

If they sat down and took the time to come up with a menu that would in some way recognize or honor African-American culture, it doesn't seem like they did that out of any kind of malice.

As I said above, I thought the foods on the menu seemed pretty good choices if they were going for soul food.

But I can see where the selection of watermelon-flavored water placed alongside those foods could be perceived as being racially insensitive.

Particularly when viewed in the larger historical context in which degrading imagery portraying African-Americans as having some kind of fetish for watermelon that sends them into some kind of trance.

Images like the one seen above were quite common in the late 19th and early 20th century in America - images with clear racist connotations - and that one is fairly tame.

If you're interested, just go to Google and type in the words "watermelon, racist" to see some of the more degrading visual representations of African-Americans and watermelon.

But to get back to those two fired cooks, let me play devil's advocate for a minute.

What if they just thought that the taste of watermelon would go well with the menu they came up with? (Admittedly, pairing that with the red Kool Aid did make me think, Hmmmm...)

Jamaican bobsled team's watermelon helmets
at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi 

Now obviously there's no "rule" about when you can eat barbecued ribs with corn bread and collard greens.

But those are foods I generally associate with summer when watermelon is in season and people grill outside in warm weather.

As Nia Harris observed in her email to NYU officials, watermelon is not in season, so maybe the choice struck some as odd - but would slices of actual watermelon have made the meal seem racially offensive?

My blog post about the Jamaican two-man bobsled team's watermelon-themed helmets at the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi came to mind when I first read the story about the NYU dining hall menu.

Something that some viewers wouldn't have considered as having anything to do with race - but others like me, saw as having a distinctly racial aspect to it in light of the degrading imagery I mentioned above.

Regardless of where one stands on it, the NYU menu dust-up is a pretty interesting look at how race is perceived in America.

NYU student Nia Harris' Facebook photo

Admittedly, I was quite taken aback at some of the many heated replies Nia Harris received on her Facebook page in reply to her posting the email she sent to the NYU officials - a number of people were downright hostile to her.

Some guy called her a "snowflake" for being overly sensitive, another girl fat-shamed her and criticized her for being overweight.

It's not like Nia Harris took over the NYU campus or blew something up.

She just wrote an email expressing how something she saw made her feel as a woman of color on a college campus.



The reaction to the story is an example of how deeply racism circulates within the depths of the collective American psyche.

I honestly don't know if there's a "who's right or who's wrong" to this story.

But it offers insight into how quickly deeply-ingrained prejudices can bubble up to the surface, triggered by seemingly innocent or harmless things (like a menu or a fruit) that can be perceived as being linked to darker, more sinister aspects of this nation's history.

The reactions to her email posted on her Facebook page serve as a reminder that even though we're in the 21st century, it's easy to underestimate the degree to which racism, or prejudiced thinking has permeated American society.

And it shouldn't come as a surprise when we see it on the campuses of institutions of higher learning; after all, what are college campuses but microcosms of our larger society?

Again, I don't think it's fair that Aramark fired the two cooks, but the speed with which they did demonstrates that as a corporation, Aramark clearly learned from the debacle with Chili's back in 2016 when an insensitive manager named Wesley Patrick took away the food of a black U.S. Army veteran in Cedar Hill, Texas simply because an old dude in a Trump t-shirt made a loose accusation.

Perhaps, if this NYU dining hall-incident inspired such spirited debate on social media, maybe that watermelon-flavored water those two cooks made was actually a positive thing overall?

Funny there was no mention of how it actually tasted.

The Resistance Will Not Be Televised

The #GrabMyWallet boycott against Ivanka Trump's
fashion product line is gaining traction in the U.S. 

Donald Trump's efforts to populate his top cabinet positions with men who mirror his own narrow-minded views on bigotry, xenophobia and extreme religious intolerance are genuinely frightening.

But social media is offering a variety of innovative ways for the millions of Americans who might not be able to join marches or protests against the Trump to express their opposition for what he stands for.




The backlash to Chili's Grill & Bar in the wake of manager Wesley Patrick's treatment of African-American veteran Ernest Walker last Friday is an example of the growing grassroots movement to show solidarity against Trump's horrifying vision for America by financially boycotting the Trump brand, and speaking in the one language he does seem to grasp - money.

It's been interesting to see how technology, social media and grassroots activism can directly (and quickly) influence the behavior, choices and profitability of large and small companies - and impact the larger American landscape.

For example the stock price of Chili's parent company Brinker International is down 1.04% over the past five days, so I think it's interesting to observe investor's response to the negative global publicity generated by Wesley Patrick's personal bias and poor management skills.  

Logic would suggest that if customers do begin boycotting Chili's as a direct consequence of the incident in Cedar Hills, Texas, the impact on the company's profit margin will be very real - which in turn could effect the decision of some investors to sell the stock to cut their losses.

Or, some investors motivated by displeasure over Ernest Walker's treatment may simply decide to sell the stock on principle.

Remember when news emerged last year that Exxon-Mobil's own internal research showed that the burning of fossil fuels was a major contributor to global warming, and that the company had known this for decades even as it contributed to bogus "research" that backed climate change denial?

I was one of many people and large institutional investors (like the Rockefeller Family Fund) around the globe who decided to sell my Exxon-Mobil stock.  


In many ways the movement to divest from fossil fuel production is an extension of the global anti-apartheid movement to encourage nations to divest from the nation of South Africa over it's government-mandated policy of racial segregation in the 70's and 80's.

That same kind of widespread grassroots energy is not only coalescing around the growing anti-Trump movement taking shape in this country, the accessibility of technology combined with the power of social media platforms are now targeting the companies that either do business with Trump, support him, or are associated with his family.

As an article by Sam Reed in the style section of The Hollywood Reporter noted back on October 24th, influential digital brand strategist Shannon Coulter's #GrabYourWallet social media movement to encourage consumers to contact large retailers and demand they stop carrying Trump products is gaining steam - her list below makes it easy for consumers to take action:

Fed up? Call these retailers and tell them to stop peddling Trump products!

Lists like this one created by Coulter translate a message that retailers and investors understand; one that people from all walks of life are speaking with their purchasing decisions, computers and cell phones.

One that can have a concrete impact as the critical holiday spending season nears.

Other online grassroots movements like The Donald J. Trump Resistance have cropped up to give people information on the CEO's or owners of large retailers who have supported Trump, so that consumers who don't want their hard-earned dollars lining the pockets of people who are giving tacit endorsement to the kinds of anti-American policies Trump envisions.

Republican State Senator Doug Ericksen

You heard about Republican Washington State Senator Doug Ericksen proposing a bill that will alter existing law to categorize what he calls "illegal protests" as "economic terrorism" and make it a felony?

A felony, like assault or murder.

Can you imagine an America where the right to freedom of expression protected by the First Amendment becomes a felony?



Trump supporters can, is that what they meant by "Making America Great Again?"

As I write these words, the newly-created Facebook page of the Resistance to Donald J Trump already has 27,808 likes and growing and Twitter is rapidly becoming a hub for information and news on the huge number of organizations and individuals who are actively opposing Trump and his policies.

With the evidence now indicating that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by a margin that exceeds the number of votes John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon won by, it's clear that the American people did not give Trump an open mandate roll back gains in civil rights, strip away women's right to make their own reproductive and healthcare choices, end Medicare, or put the names of law-abiding Muslim citizens into some kind of database registry.

This isn't Nazi-era Germany, and the grassroots campaign to make Trump and the politicians and corporate interests that are associated with him understand that is only getting started.

The mainstream television news outlets that gave Trump so much free press and live coverage of his rallies and speeches during the election might not devote as much coverage to the growing opposition to the president-elect, but it's happening.

The resistance is real.

Who'd have imagined that we'd need one in 21st century America?

Chili's Cold Reception To a Black Vet

U.S. Army veteran Ernest Walker

The latest example of overt bigotry based on an individual's race or ethnicity linked to Donald Trump is a Texas-sized doozy.

African-American Army vet Ernest Walker goes to a local Chili's in Cedar Hill, Texas with his registered service dog last Friday for the free meal the restaurant chain offers to military vets on Veterans Day.

He orders his meal, eats, then asks the waitress to pack up the rest to go as he has to leave and pick up his wife; he tips her.

Then according to Walker's Facebook page, an older white man wearing a Trump t-shirt walks up, sees Walker sitting there with his service dog, proceeds to question him about his service and then tells the young white manager of the restaurant, Wesley Patrick, that he doesn't think Walker is a real vet.

Patrick comes over to Walker's table and verbally confronts Walker, basically accuses him of lying about his service to get a free meal; Walker politely shows the suspicious manager his government-issued military ID and military discharge papers - but the manager still doesn't believe him.

A verbal exchange ensues until Patrick reaches down and grabs the container with Walker's to-go food in it and takes it away from him; video of the exchange was caught on Walker's cell phone and posted on Youtube where it's now been seen hundreds of thousands of times.

Blowback for this deplorable treatment of a military veteran on Veteran's Day was swift, local protesters were picketing with signs in front of the restaurant by the next day, by Sunday the reaction on social media and news of the incident prompted a response from Chili's which issued a statement with a rather tepid apology for the incident and the behavior of manager Wesley Patrick.

Chili's manager Wesley Patrick

Video of this incident would've sparked outrage even if it had taken place before the election of Trump.

But in light of the sharp increase of overt incidents of hate against members of the Muslim, African-American, LGBTQ and Hispanic communities since last Tuesday, Patrick's treatment of Walker bears more scrutiny.

As do the training practices and management policies of the restaurant chain he works for.


A veteran who served his country honorably was dehumanized and embarrassed (his words) in one of their restaurants because an embittered old man wearing a Trump t-shirt questioned the service record of a total stranger minding his own business.

How have people have reacted?

Take a look at some of the thousands of comments that have been posted on the Facebook page of Chili's Grill & Bar by folks of different racial, ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds.

According to the Dallas Morning News, Wesley Patrick has been removed from his position as manager of the Cedar Hill Chili's, but my sense is that's not going to be enough for Chili's or its parent company Brinker International.

Chili's Pres./CEO Kelli Valade

The Catholic Church scandals have taught us that simply moving the pedophile priest to another parish doesn't solve the deeper institutional problems that allowed him to molest children in the first place; it just gives the priest a chance to molest more children in another parish.

In no way am I equating the molestation of a child with the actions of an incompetent manager in a restaurant, but many people are not going to be satisfied until Patrick is fired and Chili's takes concrete steps to apologize to Walker in a meaningful way.

Late Monday afternoon Kelli Valade, the president and CEO of Chili's did release a public statement, and the company deserves a measure of credit for accepting responsibility for the debacle.

But as someone whose worked as a copywriter and in a corporate communications capacity, the statement struck me as a bit canned and generic.


Like some PR hack in a cubicle in their corporate communications department opened up a "crisis apology" template in Word, polished the text and emailed it to Valade's assistant to run by "legal" for a quick review before sending it out.

Obviously it was meant to demonstrate that the company was aware of the situation and the public reaction to it; but to a degree I think Chili's got schooled in the power of social media in the same way that some police departments have in the face of evidence captured by an individual with a cell phone camera that conflicts with  the account of an officer who knows he or she screwed up but is trying to cover their ass.

Chili's TV commercials are slick, the menus are colorful, and the food is pretty decent as far as franchises go - but the brand was still soiled by what's on that segment of cell phone video.

Someone sets fire to their New Balances

No $500,000 television ad buy during the half-time of the Super Bowl is going to just wash away the impression of how Wesley Patrick treated Ernest Walker on Veterans Day.

And I guarantee you that in the current climate of growing consumer activism against companies that appear to be aligned with the hate and bigotry peddled by Trump, there are a sizable number of people who will consciously choose not to go to Chili's in the coming weeks of the Thanksgiving and holiday season specifically because of this incident.

Just ask Matthew LeBretton, the VP of Public Affairs of New Balance whose klutzy ill-timed pro-Trump comments after the election has sparked people to post video of themselves burning their New Balance shoes on Youtube.

So Kelli Valade is going to have to roll up her sleeves and do some work to assure the public that Chili's customers will not be treated differently because of the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, or their ethnicity or religion based on the word of a racist Trump supporter who happens to be in the restaurant - or by some bush league manager with a sketchy political agenda, no customer service skills and a cheesy goatee.

The Website of Chili's parent company Brinker International boasts that it owns over 1,600 restaurants in the U.S. and around the world and that "Our guests know that every time they step into our restaurants, we'll give them a warm welcome...while making people feel special."

Those words ring pretty hollow in the wake of Ernest Walker being interrogated about his military record with his service dog at his feet on Veterans Day.