Connect with us

Business

Red Lobster Apologizes After Long Mother’s Day Wait Times and Viral Brawl

Published

on

  • Several Red Lobster locations were overwhelmed with orders on Mother’s Day, causing crowds of people to wait up to three hours for their food. 
  • One Pennsylvania store had to shut its doors and police were called to keep angry customers calm. 
  • At another restaurant in the state, a woman demanding a refund sparked a physical fight with employees who were forcing her out of the building. 
  • Red Lobster apologized for the delays and promised to issue refunds to those who did not receive orders. It also said it expects both customers and staff to treat each other with respect. 

Long Waits at Red Lobster 

Apparently Red Lobster was the restaurant of choice on Mother’s day because images shared on social media showed massive lines of people waiting to pick up orders at several different locations. 

Many customers reported waiting between two to three hours for their orders while others walked away empty-handed and asked for refunds. 

Though there were angry diners at restaurants in New York, Illinois, and other areas, Pennsylvanians seemed to be the angriest of them all. At one location in the state, police were even called to try and keep things calm after the restaurant decided it had to shut down. 

Viral Video 

As you might have already seen online, a woman at one East York restaurant became so angry that she sparked a pretty violent incident with staff. 

“Call 911 somebody,” a person can be heard saying at the opening of the video. “Get Out!” a store employee repeatedly yells as she forces the angry customer out of the building. 

The woman continues to try and push her way in, demanding a refund. “Get my mother fucking money back,” she shouts and a worker responds “you will get it.”  

“Get this bitch off me,” the customer yells.

Employees start talking about finding the key to lock the door as she continues to demand a refund. At this point, there are several workers at the front trying to keep for entering. When they tell her that all they need is her name to process the refund, she shouts “Kathy Hill,” which, sidenote, has just made it even easier for people on the internet to start doxing her. 

The customer starts asking when exactly she’ll get her refund and the staff continues to tell her they won’t let her in. One employee says “no, you gotta go,” then seems to nudge her away from the door and try to close it. 

So then Karen, I mean Kathy, escalates things even further when she smacks that employee in the face. The employee starts fighting back and others step in to try and separate them. 

Once the fight breaks up, Kathy somehow feels confident enough to say, “I was assaulted and I have a whole crowd to see it.” 

That, of course, prompted a bunch of voices to respond with, “You hit her first! ”

“She’s been shoving up on me the whole time! Who has my glasses!?” she shouts back. She’s given her glasses back as all the employees are ordered inside and the door close. 

“A paying customer. You got people out here waiting for three hours for food!” someone off-camera shouts at the end of the video.  

Red Lobster Apologizes

Under Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf’s orders, restaurants in the state must either remain closed or operate with a take-out or delivery system to minimize social contact during the pandemic. 

Obviously, that isn’t going so well at some Red Lobster locations, so naturally, people have been demanding refunds and an explanation. 

Red Lober’s CEO issued a statement on Tuesday apologizing to disappointed customers. He noted that the chain had received significantly more orders than they’ve gotten on a single day and were unable to keep up. 

He also stressed that Red Lobster was working to make sure this never happens again. 

In another statement to local news outlets, a company spokesperson attributed the issues to operational and staffing changes as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. 

As far as the brawl at the East York restaurant, the company said: “We do not tolerate violence for any reason in our restaurants. We expect our team members treat our guests with respect, and we expect our guests to treat our team members with respect in return. We are grateful our Manager and the guest involved were not seriously injured in the incident on Sunday.”

So circumstances related to the coronavirus paired with the holiday rush lead to these insane situations, but still, many on social media are reminding people not to take their frustrations out on employees. Of course, we can’t see what exactly led up to the viral fight, but the majority of social media users seem to be taking the employees’ side.

One Red Lobster employee even took to Twitter to share what it was like to work for the chain on Mother’s day.

See what others are saying: (PennLive) (Fox Business) (Market Watch)

Business

Meta Reinstates Trump on Facebook and Instagram

Published

on

The company, which banned the former president two years ago for his role in inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection, now says the risk to public safety has “sufficiently receded.” 


Meta Ends Suspension

Meta announced Wednesday that it will reinstate the Facebook and Instagram accounts of former President Donald Trump, just two years after he was banned for using the platforms to incite a violent insurrection.

In a blog post, the company said the suspensions would be lifted “in the coming weeks” but with “new guardrails in place to deter repeat offenses.”

Specifically, Meta stated that due to Trump’s violations of its Community Standards, he will face “heightened penalties for repeat offenses” under new protocols for “public figures whose accounts are reinstated from suspensions related to civil unrest.”

“In the event that Mr. Trump posts further violating content, the content will be removed and he will be suspended for between one month and two years, depending on the severity of the violation,” the blog post continued.

The company also noted its updated protocols address content that doesn’t violate its Community Standards but “contributes to the sort of risk that materialized on January 6, such as content that delegitimizes an upcoming election or is related to QAnon.”

However, unlike direct violations, that content would have its distribution limited, but it would not be taken down. As a penalty for repeat offenses, Meta says it “may temporarily restrict access to […] advertising tools.”

As far as why the company is doing this, it explained that it assessed whether or not to extend the “unprecedented” two-year suspension it placed on Trump back in January of 2021 and determined that the risk to public safety had “sufficiently receded.”

Meta also argued that social media is “rooted in the belief that open debate and the free flow of ideas are important values” and it does not want to “get in the way of open, public and democratic debate.”

“The public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying — the good, the bad and the ugly — so that they can make informed choices at the ballot box,” the tech giant added.

Response

Meta’s decision prompted widespread backlash from many people who argue the former president has clearly not learned from the past because he continues to share lies about the election, conspiracy theories, and other incendiary language on Truth Social.

“Trump incited an insurrection. And tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Ca.) tweeted. “He’s shown no remorse. No contrition. Giving him back access to a social media platform to spread his lies and demagoguery is dangerous. @facebook caved, giving him a platform to do more harm.”

According to estimates last month by the advocacy groups Accountable Tech and Media Matters for America, over 350 of Trump’s posts on the platform would have explicitly violated Facebook’s policies against QAnon content, election claims, and harassment of marginalized groups.

“Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to reinstate Trump’s accounts is a prime example of putting profits above people’s safety,”  NAACP President Derrick Johnson told NPR

“It’s quite astonishing that one can spew hatred, fuel conspiracies, and incite a violent insurrection at our nation’s Capitol building, and Mark Zuckerberg still believes that is not enough to remove someone from his platforms.”

However, on the other side, many conservatives and Trump supporters have cheered the move as a win for free speech.

Others, like Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.) also asserted that Trump “shouldn’t have been banned in the first place. Can’t happen again.”

Trump himself echoed that point on in a post on Truth Social, where he claimed Facebook has lost billions of dollars both removing and reinstating him.

Such a thing should never again happen to a sitting President, or anybody else who is not deserving of retribution! THANK YOU TO TRUTH SOCIAL FOR DOING SUCH AN INCREDIBLE JOB. YOUR GROWTH IS OUTSTANDING, AND FUTURE UNLIMITED!!!” he continued. 

The question that remains, however, is whether Trump will actually go back to Facebook or Instagram. As many have noted, the two were never his main platforms. Twitter was always been his preferred outlet, and while Elon Musk reinstated his account some time ago, he has not been posting on the site.

There is also the question of how Truth Social — which Trump created and put millions of dollars into — would survive if he went back to Meta’s platforms. The company is already struggling financially, and as Axios notes, if Trump moves back, it signals to investors that he is not confident in the company.

On the other hand, Trump’s lawyers formally petitioned Meta to reinstate him, which could indicate that this goes beyond just a symbolic win and is something he actually wants. Additionally, if he were to start engaging on Facebook and Instagram again, it would immediately give him access to his over 57 million followers across the two platforms while he continues his 2024 presidential campaign.

See what others are saying: (NPR) (Axios) (The New York Times)

Continue Reading

Business

Meta Encouraged to Change Nudity Policy in Potential Win For Free The Nipple Movement

Published

on

The company’s oversight board said Meta’s current rules are too confusing to follow, and new guidelines should be developed to “respect international human rights standards.”


Rules Based in “A Binary View of Gender”

In a move many have described as a big step for Free The Nipple advocates, Meta’s oversight board released a decision Tuesday encouraging the company to modify its nudity and sexual activity policies so that social media users are treated “without discrimination on the basis of sex or gender.”

The board—which consists of lawyers, journalists, and academics—said the parent company of Facebook and Instagram should change its guidelines “so that it is governed by clear criteria that respect international human rights standards.”

Its decision came after a transgender and nonbinary couple had two different posts removed for alleged violations of Meta’s Sexual Solicitation Community Standard. Both posts included images of the couple bare-chested with their nipples covered along with captions discussing transgender healthcare, as they were fundraising for one of them to undergo top surgery.

Both posts, one from 2021 and another from 2022, were taken down after users reported it and Meta’s own automated system flagged it. The posts were restored after an appeal, but the oversight board stated that their initial removal highlights faults in the company’s policies. 

“Removing these posts is not in line with Meta’s Community Standards, values or human rights responsibilities,” the board said in its decision, 

According to the board, Meta’s sexual solicitation policy is too broad and creates confusion for social media users. The board also said the policy is “based on a binary view of gender and a distinction between male and female bodies.

“Such an approach makes it unclear how the rules apply to intersex, non-binary and transgender people, and requires reviewers to make rapid and subjective assessments of sex and gender, which is not practical when moderating content at scale,” the decision continued. 

Free the Nipple Movement

The board stated that the rules get especially confusing regarding female nipples, “particularly as they apply to transgender and non-binary people.”

While there are exceptions to Meta’s rules, including posts in medical or health contexts, the board said that these exceptions are “often convoluted and poorly defined.” 

“The lack of clarity inherent in this policy creates uncertainty for users and reviewers, and makes it unworkable in practice,” the decision said. 

The board’s recommended that Meta change how it manages nudity on its platforms. The group also requested that Meta provide more details regarding what content specifically violates its Sexual Solicitation Community Standard. 

For over a decade, Meta’s nudity policies have been condemned by many activists and users for strictly censoring female bodies. The Free the Nipple movement was created to combat rules that prevent users from sharing images of a bare female chest, but still allow men to freely post topless photos of themselves. 

Big names including Rihanna, Miley Cyrus, and Florence Pugh have advocated for Free the Nipple.
Meta now has 60 days to respond to the board’s recommendations. In a statement to the New York Post, a spokesperson for the company said Meta is “constantly evaluating our policies to help make our platforms safer for everyone.”

See What Others Are Saying: (Mashable) (The New York Post) (Oversight Committee Decision)

Continue Reading

Business

Amazon Labor Union Receives Official Union Certification

Published

on

The company already plans to appeal the decision.


Amazon Labor Union’s Victory 

The National Labor Relations Board on Wednesday certified the Amazon Labor Union (ALU) Staten Island election from April, despite Amazon’s objections. 

After Staten Island staffers won the vote to unionize by 500 votes in the spring of 2022, Amazon quickly filed a slew of objections, claiming that the ALU had improperly influenced the election. Amazon pushed for the results to be overturned. 

Now, the National Labor Relations Board has dismissed Amazon’s allegations and certified the election. This certification gives legitimacy to the ALU and puts Amazon in a position to be penalized should they decide not to bargain with the union in good faith. 

“We’re demanding that Amazon now, after certification, meet and bargain with us,” ALU attorney Seth Goldstein said to Motherboard regarding the certification. “We’re demanding bargaining, and if we need to, we’re going to move to get a court order enforcing our bargaining rights. It’s outrageous that they’ve been violating federal labor while they continue to do so.”

Negotiate or Appeal 

Amazon has until Jan. 25 to begin bargaining with the ALU, or the online retailer can appeal the decision by the same deadline. The company has already announced its plan to appeal. 

“As we’ve said since the beginning, we don’t believe this election process was fair, legitimate, or representative of the majority of what our team wants,” Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel, said in a statement.

This win comes after two recent defeats in ALU’s unionization efforts. The union lost an election at a facility in Albany and another in Staten Island. 

ALU’s director Chris Smalls told Yahoo! Finance that he is unconcerned about these losses.

“For us, whatever campaign is ready to go, the Amazon Labor Union is going to throw their support behind it, no matter what…We know that it’s going to take collective action for Amazon to come to the table,” he told the outlet. “So, for us, it’s never unsuccessful. These are growing pains, and we’re going to fight and continue to grow.”

See what others are saying: (Vice) (NPR) (Bloomberg)

Continue Reading