Connect with us

Business

Starbucks Walks Back Ban on Black Lives Matter Apparel After Boycott Threats

Published

on

  • Many called for a boycott of Starbucks on Thursday after learning that employees were prohibited from wearing clothing that supports the Black Lives Matter movement.
  • The company’s dress code policy banned attire that advocates for a political, religious, or personal matter, which many found hypocritical given Starbucks’ recent statement in support of the movement.
  • Some also found the rule to be inconsistent, as the company encourages employees to wear apparel in support of the LGBTQ community.
  • Starbucks then reversed the policy on Friday saying, “We see you. We hear you. Black Lives Matter.They will also be designing their own BLM shirts for employees to wear.

Starbucks Reverses Decision

Starbucks will now allow its employees to wear apparel in support of the Black Lives Matter movement after facing fierce backlash for previously banning it under its dress code.

“We see you. We hear you. Black Lives Matter. That is a fact and will never change,” they wrote in a Friday morning message addressed to their employees, whom they call partners. The letter was written by the Chief Operating Officer, Roz Brewer; Executive Vice President Rossann Williams; and the Vice President of Diversity and Inclusion, Zing Shaw.

The company also announced that it is currently designing its own Black Lives Matter t-shirts. Until those arrive, Starbucks is encouraging its staff to wear their own clothing in support of the movement. 

“We’ve heard you want to show your support, so just be you. Wear your BLM pin or t-shirt,” the coffee chain added. “We are so proud of your passionate support of our common humanity.”

Customers Threaten to #BoycottStarbucks

This statement came one day after many pledged to boycott the Seattle-based coffee giant for telling its employees that wearing anything in support of Black Lives Matter was not allowed under the chain’s dress code.

In an internal memo obtained by BuzzFeed News, Starbucks said staff could not wear any pin that “interferes with safety or threatens harm to customer relations or otherwise unreasonably interferes with Starbucks public image.”

Banned pins include anything that advocates for a political, religious, or personal matter. Because of this, Black Lives Matter clothing did not “currently adhere to policy.” Starbucks instead suggested that employees wear a “Keep It Brewing” t-shirt that had been designed by their Black Partner’s Network. This came after employees were asking if they could wear Black Lives Matter attire as the country sees ongoing protests against police brutality following the death of George Floyd.

Many believed that it was hypocritical of the company to bar their employees from actually supporting the movement in their stores, especially after its recent public statement. On June 4, the chain pledged its support of Black Lives Matter and promised to donate $ 1 million to organizations promoting racial equality.

Others were frustrated that staff can wear pride pins in support of LGBTQ rights, but not Black Lives Matter. In some cases, employees have said the company will actually give out LGBTQ pins and attire. 

“If a partner can wear something in support of the lgbt community then y’all shouldn’t ban us from wearing something in support of #BLM,” one person wrote. 

A bulk of the frustrations came from the fact that many believed that racial equality should not even be considered a political issue. 

Response to Company’s New Position

Even after Starbucks reversed their decision, many were still outraged that it had to take the threat of a boycott for the company to allow its staff to publicly support Black Lives Matter. 

On the other hand, some were pleased that the chain listened to the public and its employees. 

“So damn proud to be a partner today!” one Twitter user said. 

In it’s Friday statement, Starbucks claimed that it wanted to be part of the calls for change across the country.

“This movement is a catalyst for change, and right now, it’s telling us a lot of things need to be addressed so we can make space to heal,” the company leaders wrote. They promised to ensure “a safe third place where you are seen, heard and valued.”

See what others are saying: (CNBC) (Forbes) (Wall Street Journal)

Business

Mental Health Startup Cerebral May Have Harmed Hundreds of Patients, Leaked Documents Reveal

Published

on

The company is being investigated by multiple federal agencies for its questionable practices, which have come under increasing scrutiny in recent weeks.


Over 2,000 Incident Reports Shed Light on Recklessness

A Silicon Valley mental health startup called Cerebral may have harmed hundreds of patients by flagrantly disregarding medical standards, according to a cache of documents reviewed by Insider, as well as over 30 interviews with current or former employees by the outlet.

Founded in 2020, Cerebral provides mental health treatment to customers through talk therapy and medication for conditions such as depression, anxiety, insomnia, and ADHD.

With people quarantined during the pandemic, it became one of the largest virtual therapy firms in the United States, attracting some $462 million from investors.

Cerebral employees filed at least 2,060 incident reports during seven months in 2021, according to Insider. They show that the company enrolled patients with complex conditions like bipolar disorder, then assigned them to clinicians and other staff members with insufficient training, oversight, and support to treat such cases.

It also put dozens of patients on questionable treatment plans and misdiagnosed many others, the reports say, with company medical providers prescribing potentially lethal combinations of drugs or addictive drugs to patients with histories of addiction.

Additionally, many patients were left stranded without care for extended periods due to technology issues or the company’s failure to retain clinicians.

As a result, Cerebral shuffled patients from one provider to the next and even bungled their prescriptions, sometimes leading them to suffer drug withdrawal or take the wrong medication.

Patients Tell Their Stories

One patient reportedly spent two weeks waiting for a referral to a clinician, later saying she spent eight days in a psychiatric ward.

Another patient told CBS News she was prescribed a drug for her anxiety but afterward could not reach her prescriber for instructions on how to switch to the new medication safely.

“Any time I needed help, she was never available,” she said.

After she did not get a response for six days, she began taking the drug anyway, which caused her to break out in a rash.

“I messaged back,” she said, “letting them know it was spreading and getting worse, and they said that they were still trying to get a hold of that prescriber… They make it seem like they want to help, and then they get you, and then they’re gone.”

A Cerebral spokesperson told Insider that the reports did not highlight enough patients to accurately reflect the company.

“Any incident reports you obtained show Cerebral’s dedication to quality,” the spokesperson said. “You can’t take a relatively small group of incident reports and draw conclusions about our care.”

Two former senior employees told the outlet those reports were monitored by just a couple of people who had other responsibilities at the company, adding that leadership frequently pushed off solving the systemic issues flagged.

Cerebral’s practices are currently being investigated by the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission.

See what others are saying: (Business Insider) (CBS News) (Fierce Healthcare)

Continue Reading

Business

Instagram Testing New Tools To Verify Users Are Over 18

Published

on

The new tools include AI software that analyzes video footage of a person’s face to verify their age.


Instagram Cracks Down on Underage Users

Instagram is testing new features in the United States to verify the age of users who claim to be over 18 years old. 

According to a statement from Instagram’s parent company, Meta, the tools will only apply to users who seek to change their age from under 18 to over 18. The platform previously asked for users to upload their ID for verification in this process, but on Thursday, it announced there will be two new methods for confirming age. 

One of the strategies was referred to as “social vouching.” Using this option, people can request that three mutual Instagram followers over the age of 18 confirm their age on the platform.

The other method allows users to upload a video selfie of themselves to be analyzed by Yoti, third-party age verification software. Yoti then estimates a person’s age based on their facial features, sends that estimate to Meta, and both companies delete the recording. 

According to Meta, Yoti cannot recognize or identify a face based on the recording and only looks at the pixels to determine an age. Meta said that Yoti “is the leading age verification provider for several industries around the world,” as it has been used and promoted by social media companies and governmental organizations. 

Still, some question how effective it will be for this specific use. According to The Verge, while the software does have a high accuracy rate among certain age groups and demographics, data also shows it is less precise for female faces and faces with darker skin tones. 

Issues With Kids on Instagram

Meta argues that it is important for Instagram to be able to discern who is and is not 18, as it impacts what version of the app users have access to.

“We’re testing this so we can make sure teens and adults are in the right experience for their age group,” the company’s statement said. 

“When we know if someone is a teen (13-17), we provide them with age-appropriate experiences like defaulting them into private accounts, preventing unwanted contact from adults they don’t know and limiting the options advertisers have to reach them with ads,” it continued. 

These changes come as Instagram has been facing increased pressure to address the way its app impacts younger users. 

Only children 13 and older are allowed to have Instagram accounts, but the service has faced criticism for not doing enough to enforce this. A 2021 survey of high school students found that nearly half of the respondents had created a social media account of some kind before they were 13.

The company also recently came under fire after The Wall Street Journal published internal Meta documents revealing that the company knew that it harmed teens, including by worsening body image issues for young girls and women.

See what others are saying: (The Verge) (The Wall Street Journal) (Axios)

Continue Reading

Business

Elon Musk Threatens to Fire Employees Unless They Work in Person Full-Time

Published

on

The world’s richest man in the world previously suggested that the popularity of remote work has “tricked people into thinking that you don’t actually need to work hard.”


“If You Don’t Show up, We Will Assume You Have Resigned”

On Wednesday, Electrek published two leaked emails apparently sent from Elon Musk to Tesla’s executive staff threatening to fire them if they don’t return to work in person.

“Anyone who wishes to do remote work must be in the office for a minimum (and I mean *minimum*) of 40 hours per week or depart Tesla,” he wrote. “This is less than we ask of factory workers.”

“If there are particularly exceptional contributors for whom this is impossible, I will review and approve those exceptions directly,” he continued.

Musk then clarified that the “office” must be a main office, not a “remote branch office unrelated to the job duties.”

“There are of course companies that don’t require this, but when was the last time they shipped a great new product? It’s been a while,” he wrote in the second email.

Later on Wednesday, a Twitter user asked Musk to comment on the idea that coming into work is an antiquated concept.

He replied, “They should pretend to work somewhere else.”

The Billionaire Pushes People to Work Harder

Musk has a history of pressuring his employees and criticizing them for not working hard enough.

“All the Covid stay-at-home stuff has tricked people into thinking that you don’t actually need to work hard. Rude awakening inbound,” he tweeted last month.

Three economists told Insider that remote work during the pandemic did not damage productivity.

“Most of the evidence shows that productivity has increased while people stayed at home,” Natacha Postel-Vinay, an economic and financial historian at the London School of Economics, told the outlet.

Musk is notorious for criticizing lockdown mandates and went so far as to call them “fascist” during a Tesla earnings call in April 2020.

Not long before that, Tesla announced that it would keep its Fremont, California plant open in defiance of shelter-in-place orders across the state.

In an interview with The Financial Times last month, Musk blasted American workers for trying to stay home, comparing them to their Chinese counterparts whom he said work harder.

“They won’t just be burning the midnight oil. They will be burning the 3 a.m. oil,” he said. “They won’t even leave the factory type of thing, whereas in America people are trying to avoid going to work at all.”

That same day, Fortune published an article detailing how Tesla workers in Shanghai work 12-hour shifts, six days out of the week, sometimes sleeping on the factory floor.

See what others are saying: (CNBC) (Electrek) (Business Insider)

Continue Reading