A Starbucks location in Chicago has found itself at the center of controversy following an incident that upset a customer and her family. Jacqueline Garretson shared her mother-in-law’s experience on X, revealing that staff drew the word “LOSER” on the cup after she ordered a Mint Majesty tea with honey, known to be Charlie Kirk’s favorite drink. This incident sparked outrage as Garretson noted, “No customer should ever be mocked or insulted because of what they order or what they believe. This is blatant bias, unprofessional, and unacceptable.”
After the incident, Garretson and her husband demanded accountability. They confronted the district manager, pressing for swift action against the staff member responsible. The conversation revealed a disconnect between management’s claims of investigating the situation and the family’s demands for immediate resolution. Garretson’s husband argued, “We’re looking for immediate accountability and action, not just corporate callbacks and investigations.”
The couple’s determination to hold Starbucks accountable was clear. They were unsatisfied with vague responses and promised follow-ups from the district manager, who said, “We’re still looking into the situation.” Frustration mounted as they pointed out that it had already been over 24 hours since the incident without any meaningful communication. The district manager’s attempts to placate the couple only fueled their anger, with Garretson expressing that the writing on the cup was “disgusting.”
As public sentiment grew, Starbucks made the decision to temporarily close the Chicago store. Garretson announced, “We asked Starbucks for accountability by 5 pm. When we arrived, the store was temporarily closed.” This action came in response to the mounting criticism and an influx of calls and visits from concerned citizens.
Starbucks issued a statement claiming that customers were free to order drinks using Charlie Kirk’s name. However, this only added fuel to the fire. Many viewed the company’s response as inadequate, and Garretson highlighted ongoing frustrations, revealing that more than 48 hours later, neither the district manager nor corporate had contacted them despite promised communication. “Corporate hasn’t reached out either despite multiple attempts,” she stated.
This situation exemplifies a growing divide in how service industry employees interact with customers based on perceived political affiliations. Garretson’s mother-in-law did not identify herself with any political movement; rather, she simply ordered a tea that had gained popularity online. Yet, the incident raises broader questions about tolerance and respect in customer service.
As conversations surrounding accountability and respect in businesses continue, the Starbucks incident serves as a case study for what happens when personal bias seeps into workplace environments. Customers want assurance that their patronage is valued, regardless of their personal beliefs or political stances. As the story develops, it remains to be seen how Starbucks will respond to the outrage and what long-term impacts this incident will have on their brand.
"*" indicates required fields
