4 ms·

Quoted from this article [1] : “I inform (the employee) that I am well aware of the policy at The 5 Point Cafe but asked to see where it was policy for Glass t

by jfim 13y ago

Quoted from this article [1] : “I inform (the employee) that I am well aware of the policy at The 5 Point Cafe but asked to see where it was policy for Glass to be disallowed at Lost Lake. She said she couldn’t provide any and when asked to speak with management she stated she was the night manager. I again inform her that the two venues are different and have different policies. She refuses and I leave,” he wrote. “As we are leaving, Brian (his partner) points out that on the menu they state “Post photos on our website via Instagram by using #LostLake.” So how is an establishment which is REQUESTING photos be taken, not allow me to bring a device which takes photos and can post to Instagram? I would love an explanation, apology, clarification, and if the staff member was in the wrong and lost the owner money last night and also future income as well, that this income be deducted from her pay or her termination.” It seems rather legitimate to request to see an official policy. [1] http://blogs.seattletimes.com/allyoucaneat/2013/11/26/diner-using-google-glass-asked-to-leave-restaurant/ http://blogs.seattletimes.com/allyoucaneat/2013/11/26/diner-...

mturmon 13y ago
It's always OK to ask. The story says that the employees had had a briefing on exactly this policy not long before the incident, so it's not surprising that the restaurant asked him to stop, and didn't capitulate because it wasn't written down. You have to admit that publicly calling for termination of an employee over a minor incident like this is, (a) asshole behavior (i.e., completely out of proportion), and (b) not the proper role of a patron (i.e., they are NOT the restaurant manager). I used to work at a restaurant, and this whole incident seemed familiar. A patron is having a bad day, or is a little touchy, and something minor escalates beyond comprehension. It's quite common to have irate patrons asking to speak to the general manager, or even the owner (who in my case lived out-of-state, leading to snickers), over petty misunderstandings. I had one of these get out of control once, and the GM mentioned to me that probably the guy had a bad day and chose to take it out on someone who had to take it. A young adult at the time, with no real life pressures, I didn't get it, but I do now.
- jfim 13y ago
  > You have to admit that publicly calling for termination of an employee over a minor incident like this is, (a) asshole behavior (i.e., completely out of proportion), and (b) not the proper role of a patron (i.e., they are NOT the restaurant manager). I definitely agree with that. > A patron is having a bad day, or is a little touchy, and something minor escalates beyond comprehension. Indeed, such is life with customers.
techsupporter 13y ago
> It seems rather legitimate to request to see an official policy. Why? If a patron is in a private establishment and the person controlling that establishment asks a patron to leave, why not simply leave? Complain on Facebook, post a negative Yelp review, go to the media, refuse to return, and tell your friends. I don't understand the logic in trying to negotiate staying in a place that no longer wants to serve you, especially since the ill will is now likely on both sides. In a private business, "because I said so" is a valid, if curt and dismissive and not conducive to continued business, reply.
DigitalSea 13y ago
Definitely legitimate to request an official policy, but it's not like he was being ejected on religious or race though. Maybe the policy is so new they've yet to print it out for patrons to read, especially more difficult if it requires printing out new menus on particular stock material. It's like going over a friends house and they ask you to leave without an explanation. It's private property at the end of the day and as long as you're not literally picking someone up and throwing them out, there are no civil rights being violated here. The owner and management staff at the time reserve the right to eject patrons for whatever reason they seem fitting, obviously ejecting a patron means lost revenue, so they wouldn't just go ejecting people for no good reason. I get it sucks for the patron kicked out, but lets be honest here, the situation is being blown way out of proportion. You're kicked out of a restaurant because you refuse to comply with the requests of the restaurant to remove your device from your head? How hard is it to remove your glasses? Would the person in question have responded the same if he was wearing a hat and was asked to remove it as well? Calling for the employee who felt as though they were doing the right thing to be fired is just horrible and waters down the argument of the patron in question if you ask me. It reminds me of the time I was at a restaurant and someone started an argument with 3 of the restaurant staff because they were charged for two bottles of sparkling water at $10 a pop. They claimed they weren't told of the cost even though the menu had the cost, they were yelling to the point the manager just said they would remove the water from the bill and leave it at that. Restaurant staff have to put up with a lot of crap for a minimum wage. The patron involved needs to have some compassion, especially if the employee was only just briefed on the new policy themselves. I swear some people deliberately try and test the boundaries in these situations. The patron in question acted very decently, but should have just removed the glasses and there wouldn't have been a problem.
- jfim 13y ago
  True, if there was an unambiguous sign on the window "No Google Glass," I doubt any of this would've happened. However, with regards to the religion or race part, it's very likely that someone ejecting on this basis will pick some other arbitrary reason rather than saying "we don't serve x people here." I agree with you that it's likely that neither party was completely clean, especially considering the guy knew the policy at a different but related establishment.
sanskritabelt 13y ago
Lots of places have a "WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE" sign.
tehwebguy 13y ago
This is a riot. The manager on duty tells him that he can't wear Glass in the restaurant so he storms out. Why would he not take the manager at their word that the policy had changed? Why does it have to be written down somewhere that you can't wear Glass while dining? > I would love an explanation, apology, clarification, and if the staff member was in the wrong and lost the owner money last night and also future income as well, that this income be deducted from her pay or her termination. He actually called for the business to dock the employee's pay or fire them, how embarrassing!

by jfim 13y ago

mturmon 13y ago

It's always OK to ask. The story says that the employees had had a briefing on exactly this policy not long before the incident, so it's not surprising that the restaurant asked him to stop, and didn't capitulate because it wasn't written down. You have to admit that publicly calling for termination of an employee over a minor incident like this is, (a) asshole behavior (i.e., completely out of proportion), and (b) not the proper role of a patron (i.e., they are NOT the restaurant manager). I used to work at a restaurant, and this whole incident seemed familiar. A patron is having a bad day, or is a little touchy, and something minor escalates beyond comprehension. It's quite common to have irate patrons asking to speak to the general manager, or even the owner (who in my case lived out-of-state, leading to snickers), over petty misunderstandings. I had one of these get out of control once, and the GM mentioned to me that probably the guy had a bad day and chose to take it out on someone who had to take it. A young adult at the time, with no real life pressures, I didn't get it, but I do now.

jfim 13y ago
> You have to admit that publicly calling for termination of an employee over a minor incident like this is, (a) asshole behavior (i.e., completely out of proportion), and (b) not the proper role of a patron (i.e., they are NOT the restaurant manager). I definitely agree with that. > A patron is having a bad day, or is a little touchy, and something minor escalates beyond comprehension. Indeed, such is life with customers.

techsupporter 13y ago

> It seems rather legitimate to request to see an official policy. Why? If a patron is in a private establishment and the person controlling that establishment asks a patron to leave, why not simply leave? Complain on Facebook, post a negative Yelp review, go to the media, refuse to return, and tell your friends. I don't understand the logic in trying to negotiate staying in a place that no longer wants to serve you, especially since the ill will is now likely on both sides. In a private business, "because I said so" is a valid, if curt and dismissive and not conducive to continued business, reply.

DigitalSea 13y ago

Definitely legitimate to request an official policy, but it's not like he was being ejected on religious or race though. Maybe the policy is so new they've yet to print it out for patrons to read, especially more difficult if it requires printing out new menus on particular stock material. It's like going over a friends house and they ask you to leave without an explanation. It's private property at the end of the day and as long as you're not literally picking someone up and throwing them out, there are no civil rights being violated here. The owner and management staff at the time reserve the right to eject patrons for whatever reason they seem fitting, obviously ejecting a patron means lost revenue, so they wouldn't just go ejecting people for no good reason. I get it sucks for the patron kicked out, but lets be honest here, the situation is being blown way out of proportion. You're kicked out of a restaurant because you refuse to comply with the requests of the restaurant to remove your device from your head? How hard is it to remove your glasses? Would the person in question have responded the same if he was wearing a hat and was asked to remove it as well? Calling for the employee who felt as though they were doing the right thing to be fired is just horrible and waters down the argument of the patron in question if you ask me. It reminds me of the time I was at a restaurant and someone started an argument with 3 of the restaurant staff because they were charged for two bottles of sparkling water at $10 a pop. They claimed they weren't told of the cost even though the menu had the cost, they were yelling to the point the manager just said they would remove the water from the bill and leave it at that. Restaurant staff have to put up with a lot of crap for a minimum wage. The patron involved needs to have some compassion, especially if the employee was only just briefed on the new policy themselves. I swear some people deliberately try and test the boundaries in these situations. The patron in question acted very decently, but should have just removed the glasses and there wouldn't have been a problem.

jfim 13y ago
True, if there was an unambiguous sign on the window "No Google Glass," I doubt any of this would've happened. However, with regards to the religion or race part, it's very likely that someone ejecting on this basis will pick some other arbitrary reason rather than saying "we don't serve x people here." I agree with you that it's likely that neither party was completely clean, especially considering the guy knew the policy at a different but related establishment.

sanskritabelt 13y ago

Lots of places have a "WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE" sign.

tehwebguy 13y ago

This is a riot. The manager on duty tells him that he can't wear Glass in the restaurant so he storms out. Why would he not take the manager at their word that the policy had changed? Why does it have to be written down somewhere that you can't wear Glass while dining? > I would love an explanation, apology, clarification, and if the staff member was in the wrong and lost the owner money last night and also future income as well, that this income be deducted from her pay or her termination. He actually called for the business to dock the employee's pay or fire them, how embarrassing!