ETL confrontation!!

[commiecorvus]

Today, one of my peers sent me a text accidentally saying that she felt that she was being followed up on because she's black. She said that she thinks that the ETLs (we are ETLs) micromanage her in a way that we don't do to each other.

I confronted her about it and told her that I thought she was making the racism up in her head and she just has a guilty conscience.

@Barcode
She didn't bring it up with him.
He confronted her because of a text that was sent accidentally.
When she tried to defend herself he laughed at her.
Bad all the way round.

I'd agree with you otherwise.

 

[jameskohners]

The problem is, in order for her to prove racism she has to show what is called *disparate treatment*. In other words, if she came in with a white TM and they both did not say hello but only the black TM was coached... that goes in the "paper trail of racism" file. But it is not enough.... you have to show a pattern of disparate treatment of people who are similarly situated. So, it can't be "white TM was not written up for being late" but "black TM has written up for pushing 40 carts at a time". It has to be the same (or very similar) situations and people of one race were treated differently than the others in the same situation.

On the hair comment... honestly, that is (at best) hostile work environment sexual harassment. It would honestly be easier to prove that than racism.... unless the TM who said it was stupid enough to say something like "I don't like your hair texture that you black people have"

Now, does this mean they are not racist? No, not at all... the problem is, though, in order to actually have someone with power (read: corporate or the courts) do anything about it, she needs way more than this to meet the burden of proof required.

The one, and only exception to having to get enough solid evidence, would be if the ETL in question was stupid enough to literally admit it. In other words, he says something like "Hey, I don't like black employees and I make my management decisions with that in mind and always make sure to treat white employee better". Then it is slam dunk on his ass regardless of how much evidence you have.

The team member was talking to a black TM and said "your kids are going to suffer in life if they get that kinky hair you have, your hair is worse than (insert black ETL here), and her hair is really bad... hopefully my kids get pretty straight hair like mine" black ETL heard the comment as well as other TMs, who were offended. Either way, I felt that she needed to suck it up and deal with it and I called her out on it.

 

[redandkhaki]

if i was truly offended by something and i was having a conversation about it with someone and they said to me "you know what? Too bad, just suck it up and deal with it!" i would be upset too. Whether what she is feeling is what is true it IS what she is feeling. It's rude to just disregard her feelings and since it is a sensitive subject I feel like it should have been handled better.

 

[redeye58]

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

 

[stateoftarget11]

commiecorvus, out of curiosity, where did you learn about the concept of white privilege at?

 

[Barcode]

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

GSA1 could have stellar performance in all other areas, and was a top contributor.

GSA2 could be on CCA or have other performance problems in other areas.


@commiecorvus Touché. He does have the right to stand up for what he doesn't think is right though. As long as he hasn't done anything racist, I think he should be okay.

 

[commiecorvus]

The team member was talking to a black TM and said "your kids are going to suffer in life if they get that kinky hair you have, your hair is worse than (insert black ETL here), and her hair is really bad... hopefully my kids get pretty straight hair like mine" black ETL heard the comment as well as other TMs, who were offended. Either way, I felt that she needed to suck it up and deal with it and I called her out on it.

Please listen, ff there is one thing I can get across to you in this whole conversation my friend, it's that YOU CAN"T DO THAT!
I understand it's a small thing to you.
I know it seems silly and it seems like something she should get over but man, please take me at my word...
If you can apologize to her for saying it, do so.
Don't ask me why you should, just frelling do it.

It's, how can I put this, like saying a woman is being hard to get along with so it must be her time of the month.
Doesn't seem like a big deal, if you're male but if you have a mom or a SO you know not to make that joke.
I know you didn't mean to hurt her feelings or tread on dangerous ground but you did.
Maybe it would be a good idea to do some reading, take some classes.

edit: There's a very long past where of the value of a person was based on how 'good' their hair was. It has spawned a huge industry and caused a lot of problems.
I'm not going to go any deeper but let me tell you it's a serious issue.

But if you can, go say you're sorry.
And never say it again.

 

[redeye58]

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

GSA1 could have stellar performance in all other areas, and was a top contributor.

GSA2 could be on CCA or have other performance problems in other areas.

Perhaps, but the only qualifier he mentioned was that GSA1 "had been in role longer". If they are making mistakes in the SAME workcenter, they should've been handled equally. Just because someone has been "in role" longer doesn't excuse them & should, in fact, require them to be held to a higher standard.

 

[commiecorvus]

commiecorvus, out of curiosity, where did you learn about the concept of white privilege at?

Why @stateoftarget11 some of my best friends are ...
Actually that's true but not the story.
I grew up in a family of radicals, my grandfather was a member of the NAACP in the 50's.
He helped integrate a couple of unions in the sixties.
My mom marched in voting rights and peace marches.
So this stuff has been my bread and butter from an early age.
I've also gone to the trouble of educating myself over the years.

 

[jameskohners]

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

GSA1 could have stellar performance in all other areas, and was a top contributor.

GSA2 could be on CCA or have other performance problems in other areas.


@commiecorvus Touché. He does have the right to stand up for what he doesn't think is right though. As long as he hasn't done anything racist, I think he should be okay.

To be honest, GSA 1 is a favorite of leadership and her TLs. GSA 2 was just too aggressive, didn't like her personality as much. Would do anything to help GSA 1. She lost her keys, ETL HR wanted her to go on CCA, we fought about that. I didn't want GSA 1 to have a record. According to ETL-HR, GSA 2 was new so mistakes were expected and training was needed, according to HR seasoned GSA 1 should've definitely been treated the same since her knowledge level should've been higher than GSA 2 (according to HR). I disagree.

 

[Barcode]

@Barcode I'm just insulted that she implied there's racial tension in the store. When I asked her for example, that's how the other situation came up. She also brought up a situation where she thought 2 GSAs were treated differently. GSA 1 (white) didn't understand the cash office and kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached), GSA 2 (black) got coached for all her mistakes and eventually told she had to demote. GSA 1 was in role longer but she saw it as her being treated better than GSA 2. I don't think white people get preferential treatment. It could be unfair and coincidental, but doesn't mean it's racial.

These ARE the same situation but you DID put them in different contexts:
GSA1 "didn't understand cash office & kept messing up so we trained someone else so she didn't have to do it anymore (she didn't get coached).
GSA2 "got coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote".
Why was GSA1 who 'kept messing up' without getting coached allowed to be replaced without demotion while GSA2 was 'coached for all her mistakes & eventually told she had to demote?

GSA1 could have stellar performance in all other areas, and was a top contributor.

GSA2 could be on CCA or have other performance problems in other areas.

Perhaps, but the only qualifier he mentioned was that GSA1 "had been in role longer". If they are making mistakes in the SAME workcenter, they should've been handled equally. Just because someone has been "in role" longer doesn't excuse them & should, in fact, require them to be held to a higher standard.

Yes that is true, but it also doesn't reflect upon their overall job performance. They are both deficient in Cash Office, but we don't know about any other deficiencies they may each have.

@jameskohners Interesting. Does GSA #2's personality have anything to do with their performance or job execution? I'm guessing they don't rub off too well on people.

 

[redeye58]

The team member was talking to a black TM and said "your kids are going to suffer in life if they get that kinky hair you have, your hair is worse than (insert black ETL here), and her hair is really bad... hopefully my kids get pretty straight hair like mine" black ETL heard the comment as well as other TMs, who were offended. Either way, I felt that she needed to suck it up and deal with it and I called her out on it.

Really? And you told her you were also going to the STL about your convo with her because YOU felt insulted about her perceptions?
Wow.
Freakin' clueless.....

 

[Barcode]

@redeye58
The Hair thing doesn't really come off as racist as much as it does rude and offensive.

 

[redeye58]

To be honest, GSA 1 is a favorite of leadership and her TLs. GSA 2 was just too aggressive, didn't like her personality as much. Would do anything to help GSA 1. She lost her keys, ETL HR wanted her to go on CCA, we fought about that. I didn't want GSA 1 to have a record. According to ETL-HR, GSA 2 was new so mistakes were expected and training was needed, according to HR seasoned GSA 1 should've definitely been treated the same since her knowledge level should've been higher than GSA 2 (according to HR). I disagree.

Def favoritism.
If I was starting out in a new position, coached for mistakes despite the fact I was new, then told to demote while watching someone who was a leadership pet do the same WITHOUT getting coaching (even after losing keys!), I'd be pissed too.

 

[Barcode]

To be honest, GSA 1 is a favorite of leadership and her TLs. GSA 2 was just too aggressive, didn't like her personality as much. Would do anything to help GSA 1. She lost her keys, ETL HR wanted her to go on CCA, we fought about that. I didn't want GSA 1 to have a record. According to ETL-HR, GSA 2 was new so mistakes were expected and training was needed, according to HR seasoned GSA 1 should've definitely been treated the same since her knowledge level should've been higher than GSA 2 (according to HR). I disagree.

Def favoritism.
If I was starting out in a new position, coached for mistakes despite the fact I was new, then told to demote while watching someone who was a leadership pet do the same WITHOUT getting coaching (even after losing keys!), I'd be pissed too.

Yes it is indeed favoritism.

Playing devils advocate here though. What if GSA1 has a very friendly and outgoing aura and they click well with their team and the guests. GSA 2 is aggressive and clashes constantly with their team, and rubs off the wrong way on guests. Is it so wrong to play favorites sometimes? Guest Service is a very interpersonal workcenter which requires the right personality for the job.

 

[redeye58]

No problem playing favs until one TM is getting coached while the other is getting passes.
GSA1 may be FFF & a dream TM but CO mistakes AND losing a set of keys w/o a coaching?
It's a problem.

 

[Barcode]

No problem playing favs until one TM is getting coached while the other is getting passes.
GSA1 may be FFF & a dream TM but CO mistakes AND losing a set of keys w/o a coaching?
It's a problem.

Hm yeah that is a problem depending on the exact circumstances.

Granted it depends which set of keys were lost, I don't think it is of the same severity as a ETL/SRTL losing building keys which is Auto-Final.

CO Mistakes depends on which kind of mistakes also. I forgot to put a money tray in the vault once (was still locked in the room though), only had a small amount of money and I got a Counselling (Written CCA) for it (granted the ETL that discovered it was known for being a hardass). So it is possible.

In all honesty I think this whole thing reeks, and the OP should stay out of it.

 

[Guest]

I think everyone is racist and has prejudice on some level. Before you go on the offensive with that comment, let me explain. Most people judge you by what you look like. Since the majority of people can see with their eyes, they judge anyone and everyone on their appearance. I'm not saying it's right or should be accepted but it's a flaw of humanity. People make judgments based on appearances. Some people are hardcore when it comes to their prejudices while others not so much. I believe most people stereotype while the hardcore ones act on their hatred and prejudices.
I have judged people on their appearances and most of the time I'm wrong. You can't judge people off a first impression or what they look like. You have to give people a chance. However, it's conflicting because anyone can do anything. If I saw someone in a hoodie and if they looked suspicious, I would be on my guard.
At the end of the day, I try to think of it like Flight of the Conchords in which everyone should be treated like a person.

 

[stateoftarget11]

commiecorvus, out of curiosity, where did you learn about the concept of white privilege at?

Why @stateoftarget11 some of my best friends are ...
Actually that's true but not the story.
I grew up in a family of radicals, my grandfather was a member of the NAACP in the 50's.
He helped integrate a couple of unions in the sixties.
My mom marched in voting rights and peace marches.
So this stuff has been my bread and butter from an early age.
I've also gone to the trouble of educating myself over the years.

I only ask because it is more of an advanced concept that - outside of college or civil rights groups - most laypeople are not familiar with.

 

[Guest]

Aren't terms like colored people, people of color, and African-American inaccurate and possibly offensive? Black and white aren't technically colors. With that being said, how can someone that is not a color be a person of color? And what about the term African-American? I am a Caucasian and most of my ancestry is from Europe mainly England, Ireland, and Germany. Should I be called a European-American? Not being cute or trying to start anything. Just posing questions for people to think about.

I think white privilege is more myth than fact. For me personally, I would say that white privilege might help in cases when it comes to the law but that's pretty much it. It did not help me in college. I believe I only got 1 scholarship and that was some silly 500 dollar one for being in some goofy Christian organization. Since I'm a straight male WASP, I wasn't able to get a scholarship based on what I looked like or where I came from. If you are a black person or a Native American or even Jewish, you can get scholarships. But not me. Poor baby. Then again, I'm white so my opinion on race means nothing because I have never suffered from anything even though I've been poor my whole life. Aren't there more poor white people than poor minorities in America? Just sayin'. And in the 1700s and 1800s, weren't slaves owned by rich white males in America?

And when I drive, I never expect to have a cop to take it easy on me because I'm white. You know why? Because cops have to make quotas to get bonuses and to keep their jobs. They will do whatever it takes to write you a ticket and/or haul your butt to jail.

And lastly, when it comes to crime and race, aren't most homicides caused by white guys? Serial killers? Domestic terrorists? Anyone can do anything in my opinion.

 

[RedDog]

The very fact you felt the need to tell her she is wrong and everything is fine, tells me something may be brewing in your store. That you felt compelled to go to through each example and toss cold water on it is odd. Why would you not just tell her to speak to her HR? Clearly you are not her, and all you have to go on is a few examples she gave you so why would you try and tell her she is wrong? You have to know that will just make matters worse.

 

[willthisbeonthetest]

Is the OP for real?! I can't imagine any ETL -- at least in my store -- acting, thinking, speaking the way all of the people in this scenario are purported to have acted.

No ETL would let a TM stand outside for 30 minutes, no one would ever get coached for not saying 'hello' to an ETL (maybe for insubordination if they passively aggressively refused a task), no ETL would EVER DARE call a team member a 'monkey' regardless of the circumstances. And there would certainly be no discussion among TM, TL and ETL about coaching team members unless it was need to know.

And IF any of this had happened, the integrity hotline would be lit up like a Christmas tree.

I doubt the veracity of any of this story. It just wouldn't fly in my store or my district.

 

[snoboy8999]

I am absolutely shocked that there are people who are denying white privilege exists. And I'm a white guy.

 

[Barcode]

I hate the term white privilege. Nothing but reverse discrimination.

 

[snoboy8999]

Discriminated on because you are white, and therefore in the majority, and therefore privileged?