Elsa Sallard requested a stool or a small step ladder to help her do her job such as working the cash register and preparing beverages, and Starbucks allegedly refused. She was fired after Starbucks allegedly claimed she would be a danger to customers and employees. (Starbucks Gossip)
Why couldnt she just be happy cleaning underneath the tables.
Posted by: AngrySockMonkey | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:27 PM
You can't "supersize" employees.
Posted by: Me (the original) | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:38 PM
Would she be offended every time someone ordered a Tall Latte?
Posted by: arthurtwoshedsjackson | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:42 PM
Companies are supposed to work with disabled employees conditions as long as the employee's request isn't unreasonable.
You'd think a step stool would be a reasonable request. However, one thing to take into consideration is whether a step stool would be a tripping hazard to other employees.....or whether a dwarf would be a tripping hazard to other employees.
Posted by: twerp | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:42 PM
Starbucks - Seattle
Seattle - Emerald City
Emerald City - Wizard of Oz
Wizard of Oz - Munchkin
...must...resist....Don't say it.......
This hurts, guys...
Posted by: RockyMtnMac | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:54 PM
In Starbucks lingo, she's a "short." (That's the super-small size they don't advertise.)
(Venti, Grande, Tall, Short.)
Posted by: Jim Romenesko | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 01:59 PM
A stool is a hazard in a work area especially when dealing with hot liquids if you trip and spill the liquid.
LOL @ angry Sock Monkey
Posted by: TequilaJoe | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 03:16 PM
well i don't think the little lady is going to get very much from this. i bet she gets the short end of things.
Posted by: lester | Tuesday, May 17, 2011 at 07:41 PM
Companies are supposed to work with disabled employees conditions as long as the employee's request isn't unreasonable.
--------------
Being short is not a disability.
The next thing you know, hospitals will be sued for not hiring "doctors" because they don't have a medical degree. Some of these EEOC things are ridiculous.
Posted by: Farmer Bob and the City | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 12:03 AM
Was she a dwarf or a midget? Because there is a difference. I know some people want to call them all "little people," but let's get our terminology straight.
Posted by: wank | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 05:07 AM
I am going to sue the Celtics for not letting me on the team. Do you know how much money those guys make?!
Posted by: sometimesilie | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 05:20 AM
Being short is not a disability, but being a genetic dwarf most certainly is.
That said, the company is required to provide "reasonable" accommodations for her to do the work she was hired for....in this case, a stool. The hazards to the other baristas of having a stool at a busy coffee counter trumps her request, however. I would rule in Starbucks' favor. There are other positions in Starbucks she could fill where height wouldn't be a factor. She needs to be moved into one of those.
Posted by: ReginaFilangee | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 05:38 AM
Speaking as a 5'1" 52 yr. old male; There are just SOME jobs that are NOT applicable.
The way the barristas move and interchange positions behind the counter, a stool WOULD be a hazard.
Posted by: Krash | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 05:40 AM
Get a job as a short order cook.
Posted by: American Veteran | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 07:58 AM
Let's go straight to the horse's mouth. The US government has an entire web site (www.ada.gov) devoted to the Americans with Disabilities Act. There's even a handy FAQ that summarizes rights and responsibilities for employers and individuals with disabilities under the act (http://www.ada.gov/q%26aeng02.htm). According to this FAQ, employers can be exempted from making accommodations for disabled employees if the accommodation involves an undue business hardship or if it presents a health and safety risk to other employees. The employer must provide reliable safety and medical evaluation to prove that this risk exists; it cannot simply assume that a disabled person presents a risk to others without documenting it.
My sense is that this case turns on whether Starbucks was able to make reasonable accommodations for the woman with dwarfism without causing a safety risk for the other baristas. Starbucks could have easily provided an inexpensive step-stool to allow her to reach the counter, so there's no business hardship. However, it's an open question whether the step-stool would have presented a tripping hazard to other baristas. It would depend on the layout of the store, how many other employees there were, how busy the store was, etc.
Starbucks would have to formally prove that her step-stool presented a safety hazard. It would also have to prove that existing job roles and procedures couldn't be modified to reduce this risk. Since she was fired after only three days on the job, it's doubtful that formal evaluations were done on any of these points. This may be why the EEOC thinks she has a good case and is taking up the suit.
Posted by: Phranqlin | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 08:24 AM
Midget stool should never be allowed behind the counter at an establishment where food and beverages are being served.
Posted by: ambeckham | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 08:49 AM
LOL!
Posted by: sometimesilie | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 09:04 AM
ambeckham wins this thread.
Move along.
Posted by: Pile of Pooh | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 11:57 AM
The EOC is a joke. Not all humans are equal, no matter how many libs say it is. Starbucks should be able to fire this midget for _any_ reason, including if the manager or customers find midgets creepy. I know I find midgets creepy. Midgets, like left-handers and other freaks also tend to be dishonest. My last dorm-mate was left-handed and a big, fat, liberal liar.
When I am running my own medical practice in a few years, I will NOT be hiring left-handers or midgets as nurses or staff. It's MY right as a business person. I don't need the ham-handed government to interfere with my affairs!
Good for Starbucks firing this midget. Other staff would have tripped over it anyways, and it would have creeped out customers, costing SBs $$$!
Posted by: Toby Philpott | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 09:13 PM
@Toby Phillpott
I'd think you're a troll but you've posted before and you're no troll.
What kind of a person are you?
First of all, the term is 'little people' although using dwarf isn't the end of the world. What is your problem? Are you some kind of a nazi? I think you are, referring to dwarfs as 'it'. Wait - you're fat and squat like South Park's Cartman right? What's with the bull shit about left handers? F**k you arsehole!
It's people like you that give us freedom-loving conservatives a bad name!
FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarfism
Posted by: sciencegirl | Wednesday, May 18, 2011 at 10:40 PM
Toby Philpott, you're yet only a young Luke Skywalker to Dick Tater's Obi Wan. But keep trying, you show promise!
Posted by: sometimesilie | Thursday, May 19, 2011 at 06:54 AM