Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that Lowes fired this manager out of ethics or altruism. Lowes did this because it is more profitable to have non-whites shop at their stores. It's Lowes' right not to associate with a woman whose values they do not share, just as it is the woman's right who to allow in her house. Regardless, I agree with the person that stated that this lady needs to move out of Virginia if she doesn't want to encounter black people in the course of conducting her business.
What is fascinating about this story is that a private company decided not to serve a customer based on its ethical/moral values. However, we have read other news stories lately about how private companies are forced by the courts to discard their ethical/moral values and serve customers with values that are in opposition to their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough
Actually, all three of the examples you cite are both discrimination and bigotry. In fact, assuming that all people of a certain race will act the same way as one person did is pretty much the definition of bigotry.
I'm always amused when people that live in all-white states like Vermont try to educate about things like bigotry and diversity.
What are the Damages to the employee...emotional harm? Hard to prove if that happened one time and didn't affect his job.
This is not a situation where the employee is likely to collect money in a civil suit, unless he gives the employer a hard time and is fired as a result. If anything, the employer could be fined by the government for violation of federal/state civil rights laws.
It's a business decision and a moral decision. I've had Client's tell me not to send blacks to their house. If it's a key client, do you tell them to take a hike? I know the morally self-righteous will always say don't do business with that person but that's not always easy to do when you are trying to get business. By the way, that's not the only thing I've been requested to do that I didn't agree with. Would you work for a racist white, black or Asian if they gave you the best opportunity?
You raise an interesting point. Still, and this goes more so for a high profile, large company like Lowes, they risk losing out more (if story goes public, etc.) than in refunding the money of a racist. Also, Lowe's isn't some startup desperate for business; they could've easily refunded this person her money.
Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that Lowes fired this manager out of ethics or altruism. Lowes did this because it is more profitable to have non-whites shop at their stores. It's Lowes' right not to associate with a woman whose values they do not share, just as it is the woman's right who to allow in her house. . . . What is fascinating about this story is that a private company decided not to serve a customer based on its ethical/moral values. However, we have read other news stories lately about how private companies are forced by the courts to discard their ethical/moral values and serve customers with values that are in opposition to their own. . . .
Your post is somewhat contradictory -- not clear if you are saying that Lowe's was exercising moral values.
Lowe's made a sound business decision, in order to avoid legal problems as well as loss of customers, black or white.
It's a business decision and a moral decision. I've had Client's tell me not to send blacks to their house. If it's a key client, do you tell them to take a hike? I know the morally self-righteous will always say don't do business with that person but that's not always easy to do when you are trying to get business. By the way, that's not the only thing I've been requested to do that I didn't agree with. Would you work for a racist white, black or Asian if they gave you the best opportunity?
I don't know, from reading this article it sounded like the black delivery guys were on the way to the woman's house with her order, their boss telling them not to deliver it, and the reason for not doing so is a direct slap in their faces and I would for sure be pi$$ed if I were them. Especially as they were good long term employees-treating them that way is inexcusible, IMO.
If I had been the manager and chose to let this woman dictate who would deliver her stuff, I don't think I would have admitted to the drivers why I was canceling their delivery, just have given them another reason for doing so. On the other hand telling them puts the onus of the woman's racism directly on her, although it does nothing for the delivery guys to treat them that way.
I think had I been that manager and gotten this instruction from the customer, I would have informed her that her stuff was in the truck on the way, but if she insists on a "white" driver (s), the items will have to be returned to the store, and she will have to wait for it till there is someone suitable to her to deliver it, and this may delay her getting the items for who knows how long?
If the manager had canceled her order, refunding her money, that might have worked too, but especially with the economy these days no one wants to lose sales, and the manager might have been called on the carpet by the company administration, you never know. Sounds like he was anyway, so either way he was SOL. At least with the publicity they got Lowes will have to look at it and come up with an appropriate policy to address any future such incidents.
Please, explain to us all how refusing a delivery from a black person isn't bigotry.
It is bigotry; I wasn't disputing that. I just find it humorous how often I see people on the internet writing about racism and diversity who choose to live in places where there is virtually no diversity whatsoever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnTrips
Your post is somewhat contradictory -- not clear if you are saying that Lowe's was exercising moral values.
Lowe's made a sound business decision, in order to avoid legal problems as well as loss of customers, black or white.
Yes, I see how what I wrote was contradictory. Lowe's made a sound business and legal decision that may or may not be based on actual values. Either way, it appeared to be based on a moral judgment, which is good for their brand. It's possible that the board for Lowe's does legitimately believe in these values too; it's just hard to tell since, in this case, the values happen to align with good business practices.
In other recent cases, businesses have been forced to do things that are against their moral values but would have been good business practices. It's an interesting dichotomy since some of these businesses took moral stands that either cost them money or put them out of business.
Replace the black employee with a Christian employee and replace the white customer who didn't want a delivery from a black person with a Muslim who didn't want a delivery from an infidel and the posters running interference for the idiot Lowe's manager would be singing a different tune.
My stance, on the other hand, would be the same - but that's because I actually have principles.
I just moved from that area of Virginia. I actually only lived there a little over a year, having relocated from a very racially diverse South Florida. I have NEVER been to such a racist place as southern Virginia. Shortly after moving to Virginia I heard people toss around the N word like it was just a normal common word. Someone actually asked me if I was now living in that house that used to be full of Ns. They (ppl in general) also were very rude toward Mexicans too. I had no idea that ppl spoke like that in America today. It was quite bizarre.
I had an opportunity to be in a small group discussion session in a racial sensitivity training session that was required for all school officials in our school system. The speaker had been a fairly high-up figure in the U.S. Department Of Justice...well enough known that at the time (during the Clinton administration) that a fair number of people would have known his name. Before and after that he was a prominent lawyer in a large Washington firm. And he was Black.
He told us about a few months earlier going down to his parent's home in the same general part of Virginia that you're talking about. They were elderly and needed some help with home repairs. He was around 40 at the time. So he went to the local lumberyard for some supplies, and he was told to wait for the boss for something. A few minutes later he heard the guy who told him to wait say to the boss, "They's a 'buoy' waitin' for you inside." 40-something, well educated, prominent professional, but to a southern Virginian, still a "boy". Old habits die hard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
