After Starbucks and Nordstrom Incidents, What Should Racial Bias Training Look Like?
Two of the hallmarks of effective racial sensitivity training are an emphasis on specific behaviors and long-term consistency, experts said.
June 07, 2018 at 02:00 PM
4 minute read
Last week, Starbucks Corp. closed more than 8,000 stores in North America for an afternoon to train about 175,00 employees on combating racial bias.
The training was prompted by an incident in April at a Philadelphia Starbucks in which the manager reported to police two black men who were sitting in the store but had not yet bought anything. It turned out that the men were waiting for a friend and did not want to place an order until he arrived.
And last month, the police were called on three black teens shopping for prom at a suburban St. Louis Nordstrom Rack because an employee wrongly suspected they had stolen merchandise. The president of Nordstrom Rack flew to St. Louis to apologize personally to the three friends, and the company said it is considering changes to employee training.
Educating employees to prevent these incidents is a popular option—but what should racial bias training at companies look like? According to experts, two of the biggest hallmarks of effective racial sensitivity training are an emphasis on behavior and long-term consistency.
“This whole field of human interaction and how you treat others continues to be a great challenge for employers,” said Bill Martucci, a partner at Shook, Hardy & Bacon with a national business and employment litigation practice. “The good news is that in many actions where we see behavior that is not consistent with a company's culture, more and more companies are responding quickly, acknowledging a mistake and taking action to remedy the situation that's come up and to do their best to prevent those things from happening in the future.”
Simply instructing employees to “be empathic” or to “not discriminate” will not cut it, experts said.
Standards for employee and customer treatment must be specific, consistent and defined by clear behaviors, said Stephen Paskoff, president and CEO of Employment Learning Innovations, an Atlanta-based training company that helps organizations address bad behavior in the workplace.
These behaviors may include specific instructions to “make eye contact with every customer” or to “not ignore one customer and initiate a conversation with another you feel more connected to,” Paskoff noted, adding that these standards should be as understood and closely followed as the processes the company uses for making its products.
“You give people clear standards about how to brew the coffees,” he said. “You can give clear basic standards about how to treat people.”
Paskoff continued: “You could do all sorts of training that could be legally sufficient to build an affirmative defense, but the issue is not just giving the basic minimum. It's, how do you influence someone's behavior? It's not the same at all.”
According to the employment law experts, a company's standards, including a strong emphasis on racial diversity and inclusion, must be a matter of ongoing communications, not the focus of just an annual training session. In fact, it should be discussed as much as, say, the company's sales goals or operations, they explained.
“The commitment has to be continuous,” Martucci said. “You have to explain that we want these topics, this commitment, to be an inherent part of our core values, of who we are.”
Martucci said the issue must be made prominent in the day-to day workings of companies. This could mean integrating the matter into every-other managerial meeting, regularly recognizing a company champion of diversity or inclusion or evaluating an employee's respectful and inclusive behavior—or lack thereof—in his or her annual performance review.
The racial sensitivity training, Paskoff added, should also be used to build an environment where those who experience racial bias, both employees and customers, feel comfortable coming forward so that the initiator can better understand his or her behavior in the situation. Having such a culture of openness, he said, can allow the topic to become as commonplace as other daily, business-related discussions.
But the experts agreed getting to that point still requires a lot of work.
“The importance of consistency and core values is going to be a topic that requires a lot of discussion, a lot of follow-through,” Martucci said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Sides With McDonald's In Attorney-Client Privilege Dispute With Former Executives
4 minute read'Climate-Smart Beef'?: DC Lawsuit Accuses Tyson Foods of False Advertising
3 minute readVandana Dhamija on Navigating the 'Politics and Personalities' of In-House Tech Procurement
Are Companies Given Deferred-Prosecution Deals Scared Straight? Boeing Odyssey Adds to Doubts
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1First California Zantac Jury Ends in Mistrial
- 2Democrats Give Up Circuit Court Picks for Trial Judges in Reported Deal with GOP
- 3Trump Taps Former Fla. Attorney General for AG
- 4Newsom Names Two Judges to Appellate Courts in San Francisco, Orange County
- 5Biden Has Few Ways to Protect His Environmental Legacy, Say Lawyers, Advocates
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250