Public Fairness AssessmentTM
Initiated by: D.H.

Should Starbucks coffee shops be equally open and accessible to non-paying customers?

(Equal access to store amenities for paying and non-paying users alike)
Public verdict: This just puts it in writing – most Starbucks stores have never had a policy of ejecting people who just want to use the restroom or sit for a while. Starbucks is a highly-profitable and valuable company. They should give back to the communities they serve by allowing access to all.
129 jurors voted to form this verdict and were awarded 1,935 RHU. Check your balance to see if you qualified. Log in
Case description
In April, 2018, Starbucks was hit with a wave of protests over its “loitering” policy. Two young black men were denied the use of a restroom and arrested in a Philadelphia Starbucks. They were waiting for a business associate, had not purchased anything, had declined to do so when informed by the manager that the store allowed restroom use to paying customers only, and did not leave the store when asked. Protesters accused Starbucks of bias towards people “Sitting While Black.”
 
Starbucks’ response was to formalize a “Third Place Policy,” stating that “any person who enters our spaces, including patios, cafes and restrooms, regardless of whether they make a purchase, is considered a customer.” Separate company procedures would cover anyone acting in a disruptive or unsafe manner.
291 total voters
How the public voted
Verdict
129 votes
"This just puts it in writing – most Starbucks stores have never had a policy of ejecting people who just want to use the restroom or sit for a while. Starbucks is a highly-profitable and valuable company. They should give back to the communities they serve by allowing access to all."
65 votes
"Starbucks seating areas, amenities, and restrooms should be for paying customers only."
59 votes
"Starbucks should address the problem through its rewards program: anyone who has previously made at least ten purchases can use seating areas and restrooms without buying anything."
38 votes
"The Third Place Policy should be scrapped. It encourages homeless people and drug users to congregate in Starbucks, crowding out paying customers."
See who voted: 5 jury categories.View more

What happens next

Disputing parties will be invited to resolve the matter based on this public verdict. If the parties have agreed beforehand to use the results to arbitrate the case the verdict will be binding. If not, the results are nonbinding but can be used as input to guide further negotiation. Depending on the case, results may be distributed to other interested parties such as regulators and media.
RHU Supreme Court
Earnings
1.B.D.RHU 1,420
2.M.D.RHU 1,285
3.G.F.D.RHU 830
4.N.N.RHU 800
5.L.Ş.RHU 770
6.B.L.RHU 745
7.I.K.RHU 740
8.N.K.RHU 740
9.L.C.RHU 731
10.S.C.RHU 710
Help promote justice and better decision — Earn RHU
Pick a case. See if you qualify for the jury. Vote.
Back