It’s amazing to me that a year later, people still remember the Steak ‘n Shake incident where my son and I were denied service at the drive-thru window of the Bolingbrook Steak ‘n Shake. I still receive comments from time to time, and with the exception of two that were literally nasty comments, I’ve published every one of them.
Carol, a lady who bills herself as the friend of the still-employed trainer, left the following comment recently:
As a friend of the SnS manager who didn’t serve you, I just wanted to throw this out there-
Obviously what he did was wrong, since this is America and he works for a corporation and you can’t just not serve people. It would be great if SnS had a better drive thru board to better help assist all types of customers that need extra assistance for whatever reason. I’m sure that’s not in their budget at this time, however.
From his point of view,I believe, the reason he didn’t serve you is because he through you were being very rude in the drive thru. When you work in a drive thru, you get many, many, many rude customers. Sometimes it can really push you close to wanting to snap on someone, as he did you. I believe he told you as you pulled up to the window that “he wasn’t going to not serve you because you were deaf, he was going to not serve you because you were being rude.”
I guess what I’m really getting at is that there is another side of the story out there that doesn’t really get much mention, and this seems like a classic case of a manager dealing with a lot of stress on his shift and snapping on the wrong person. Not the right thing to do by any means, but maybe it really has less to do with deafness than meets the eye.
Dear Carol:
Let’s go over this one more time, shall we? I pulled up to the drive-through window and when the window opened, I explained that I could not use the speaker because I couldn’t hear and ordered two milkshakes. I was told to go around again. The trainer probably figured I just couldn’t hear clearly. I calmly explained again why I needed to give my order through the window and why going around again wasn’t the solution. The trainer kept insisting that it was company policy and that I needed to place my order at the speaker.
Yes, Carol, at that point, I’m sure on the company’s videotape, it must have looked like a rude customer was ripe and ready for an argument. After all, like every other customer, all I wanted was for the guy to do his job, which was to take my order, fill it, and send me on my merry way. Instead, I had to explain why an accommodation was needed at the drive-thru window and defend my reasons for not being able to use the speaker. The trainer had chance after chance to change his method of delivering customer service and fill the order. Instead, HE chose to threaten the cops, shut the window (not once, but twice) and leave me empty-handed.
Let me remind you that he failed to follow the Steak ‘n Shake corporation’s customer service delivery model. He had several chances to redeem himself as an employee and satisfy the customer, but he failed to do so. If the company had a policy in place for customers with disabilities as well as a drive-thru modification, chances are good that my son and I would have drove off that day happily enjoying our milkshakes.
Yes, Carol, there are two sides to every story, but when it comes to discrimination in the drive-thru, this story is pretty straightforward: My son and I were denied equal right to the same service that customers without disabilities experience in the drive-thru.
Comments
11 responses to “Steak ‘n Shake, The “Other” Side of the Story”
What a calm response Karen, good for you for explaining it so clearly and addressing the issue head on.
Joanna Youngs last blog post..Inclusive Language: I, We, and You
Good response, and you still remain calm, cool and collected.
Kyms last blog post..Yes I Am.
There may be two sides, but when you consider that one wanted two milkshakes and the other wanted to keep his job, it becomes a matter of credibility.
One has nothing to lose, the other has plenty to lose. One is a customer like those on which the business depends for its existence, the other is an employee who can be easily replaced. The only excuse he can offer to defend himself is to call you “rude”. Pretty weak at that, especially when a customer can rightly claim she was refused service and has cause to feel offended.
You are right to assert the rights of the deaf customer and this is a winnable situation. Your remining calm and focused is an asset as well. There are so many other situations where the circumstances are less clear and the Deaf customer is typically dismissed or swept under the carpet with no improvement in their equal rights situation.
Dianrezs last blog post..Paula’s Pearls: Still Opinion
Wow, a whole year has gone by? I remember this like it was last week! I’m taking an ASL course and the other night one of my fellow classmates asked the teacher to explain how deaf people use the drive-thru windows of fast food chains. I grinned to myself and thought about your story….about how that employee chose the wrong person to mess with!
Heathers last blog post..Using his words
I can’t believe it’s been a whole year either!
I still haven’t been to SnS since this happened to you- nor has my mother (who is losing what is left of her hearing at an alarming rate).
I don’t know that we’ve harmed SnS by not going- but it has made me feel better knowing that I won’t support a company that could have easily rectified this situation.
BTW- my mother routinely pulls up at drive thrus and tells the people she can’t hear the speaker- we have yet to have a negative experience. Most are happy to take the order at the window and apologize for the bad speaker or say they understand. I hope her/our ‘luck’ holds in this regard.
Karen et al,
I have left several posts on you site but am still struggling to understand the issue.
As you stated in this article, “he failed to follow the Steak ‘n Shake corporation’s customer service delivery model”. As we all know, the company does have a policy in place that allows customers that want or need face to face service to get that service at the window. The same policy as any other other drive thru in the country. In this unfortunate case, the employee acted against policy, and not in line with the training he had recieved. Due to that, he and his supervisors were disciplined, and all associates in the company were reminded of how to respond to this situation in the future.
My question is how is this unfortunate situation any different than any other case where a rogue employee does something stupid or even illegal?
What is it that you are asking SNS corporate to do? Why is the reasonable accomodation of ordering at the window not acceptable?
Sincerly Searching….
In this case, what the employee did was indeed illegal. He refused to serve me two milkshakes at the window– an accommodation that is quite reasonable under state and federal law. That’s called discrimination.
This isn’t the first time it has happened at this very same restaurant. Another deaf Bolingbrook customer encountered similar discrimination from this very restaurant.
I’m asking the restaurant and the corporation to make physical changes to the way that customers with disabilities are accommodated at the drive-through to prevent this from ever happening again with another customer with a disability.
Wow, the trainer empoylee and his friend are clueless. That line “he wasn’t going to not serve you because you were deaf, he was going to not serve you because you were being rude.” is full of ignorance and a pathetic attempt at self-preservation.
Sorry you had to encounter such an ass, Karen.
Karen…thank you so much for taking the time to answer my post. I am not trying to be difficult or dense; however, I am struggling to understand the leap from reasonable accommodation (ordering at the window) to the requested physical changes in the drive-through.
We all know it is illegal to deny you service. Any company or person that acts like this should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as well as in the media. But your argument is “he didn’t serve me at the window, therefore, I demand physical changes to the drive thru to prevent this in the future”. I’m missing the connection…Shouldn’t your argument be “he didn’t serve me at the window, I demand service at the window”?
No rational person here is saying you shouldn’t be accommodated and served. I’m simply trying to understand the balance between reasonable accommodation and preferential treatment.
Patiently awaiting your reply…
Why would a deaf person try to use a drive thru? Just go inside.
As an Sns employee at the time of this incident I just wanted to let you know that your problem did have an impact. I work in a store hours away but the incident was discussed with all of the employees. Also, concerning the acusation of rudeness it is a job hazard. People are going to be rude it is not acceptable to turn people away for this reason. Even saying that is ludicris