Exploring the Controversy: DEI Initiatives and Their Local Impact
Andrew Bailey’s lawsuit claims Starbucks enforces race-and-sex-based hiring practices without providing specific examples. USA Today Network file photos Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey believes Starbucks’ commitment to increase diversity among its workforce is an affront to white men. Don’t believe me? Read the 59-page complaint Bailey filed in federal court alleging the corporate coffee giant’s hiring practices excludes white male employees. In a lawsuit filed this week in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Bailey alleges Starbucks is violating state and federal laws by engaging in sex- and race-based discrimination. In legal documents, Bailey writes: “In other words, since 2020, Starbucks’ workface has become more female and less white.” (Yes, the document uses the term “workface.”)
It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what Bailey is implying. Are white men really being denied opportunities to serve lattes and Frappuccinos at Starbucks in Missouri? Highly doubtful. But if you fit this demographic and you have been turned away from being a barista or being promoted to upper management at Starbucks, feel free to email me at tporter@kcstar.com — I want to help share your story. Bailey is a Republican. As such, he is lockstep with the GOP’s latest target: diversity, equity and inclusion.
I truly believe having a diverse workforce is an intentional act. Hiring or promoting qualified people of color, women or other marginalized individuals into leadership positions or giving them job opportunities is essential to a company’s growth and bottom line. To me, inclusion isn’t morally wrong or illegal. But not to Bailey, who in this case is running the GOP’s playbook with great precision. Too bad he didn’t offer in the lawsuit one example of a white man in Missouri being discriminated against at Starbucks.
Because of that glaring omission, the court should dismiss this case in its entirety. Bailey’s lawsuit “asserts that Starbucks enforces race-and-sex-based hiring practices, unlawfully segregates employees, and provides exclusive training and employment benefits to select groups in violation of anti-discrimination laws,” a statement on the attorney general’s website reads. In legal documents, Bailey claims — without proof — because Starbucks isn’t recruiting the most qualified workers, customers are faced with slower service time and higher prices. Pardon me while I wiped up the coffee I just spat out from laughter. But there is nothing humorous about these egregious claims. In a statement to CBS News, Starbucks denied its DEI initiatives and hiring practices are discriminatory. “
We disagree with the attorney general, and these allegations are inaccurate,” the statement read. If Starbucks truly believes in its mission and has not engaged in unfair hiring decisions, then the company should fight this lawsuit. It should not be lost on any of us that these claims of reverse racism against white men have become more prevalent in recent years. And some may even have merit. But we should never forget why discrimination based on sex or race was outlawed in the first place: Black people and other minorities, women and other non-white subgroups have been routinely and systematically denied access to good-paying jobs, quality housing, equitable education, much-needed public transportation and life-changing business and personal loans for many decades.
President Donald Trump has all but declared war on DEI. As a result, major retailers such as Ford, Google, McDonald’s, Meta (Facebook), Target and Walmart have cowered and scaled back or eliminated their DEI initiatives altogether. And Republican attorneys general like Bailey have taken Trump’s lead. Bailey should show us just one example of a white man being discriminated against at Starbucks in Missouri — we’re called the Show-Me State for a reason. I’ll wait.
#StarbucksDEI #MissouriNews #DiversityConcerns
