Kip Powick Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Globe and Mail article The kid made a stupid mistake, the Company took action..give it a rest already !!! CALGARY — A boycott is brewing at Canada's iconic coffee and doughnuts chain after a sign that declared "No Drunken Indians Allowed" was taped to a drive-through window at a Tim Hortons outlet in Southern Alberta. The company, which says the poster was an ill-conceived joke placed by a teenage staff member at a Lethbridge location last week, is fielding complaints from aboriginal people, who are now calling for a ban on the popular eateries. "Please do not purchase from these stores," noted an e-mail that is circulating among members of native communities. "It might not make a big impact on their profits, but at least it will let them know that these [types] of discriminatory acts will not be tolerated." The e-mail urges people to call the company's head office to complain about the "offensive" sign, which a number of people already have, and to forward the e-mail to as many other aboriginals as possible. It has also made its way - several times over - to corporate headquarters in Oakville, Ont. "This is not something we tolerate and it is not reflective of Tim Hortons," Rachel Douglas, a company spokeswoman, said yesterday of the sign. "For any offence, I extend my sincerest apologies." Ms. Douglas first heard about the controversy on Friday after receiving a complaint. The teenage staff member has been suspended from a number of shifts and she was educated about the company's harassment policy. The teen, who is not aboriginal, apologized to two employees who are members of native bands, and the outlet's owner sent a letter of regret to the nearby Blood Tribe. "I think it was one of those youthful things where she just didn't realize and she was made very aware of her actions and the consequences and was very remorseful," Ms. Douglas said. "We decided it was in her best interests - and a learning experience - that we didn't terminate, but she has been disciplined and reprimanded." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 So does this mean that we now have to condone drunks coming into a place of business, causing a disruption, and adding to costs??? Just because of "Rights" Iceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 You have to wonder why she would put a sign like that. Maybe she was tired of being harassed by "drunken indians" at the drive through window? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Powick Posted May 30, 2007 Author Share Posted May 30, 2007 Cripes, she is just a teenager, she was probably PO'd by all the leering etc. Sure, she should have put a sign up that said " We reserve the right to refuse service to inebriated/intoxicated patrons", or something to that effect. But in retrospect, being a teenager she probably couldn't spell "inebriated or intoxicated", probably knew the word she should have used, if she wanted to pin-point on sector of society was "aboriginal" but couldn't spell that either Further, perhaps those that showed up drunk wouldn't be able to read and understand those more politically correct phrases as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deicer Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Thinking about this a bit more... If it's that much of a problem, why wouldn't she have the police standing by to apprehend drunks driving up to the drive through Secondly,,, Having been born and raised out west,,, It is a problem in certain areas. When I first heard of a 'Lysol and Seven' I almost spilt my beer Iceman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Has anyone visited Kenora Ontario. Apparently Kenora has always enjoyed the reputation of being the place with the largest Indian problem? in Canada? Some years back I was taken downtown after being promised that I'd see a sight I'd never forget. Apparently it was Welfare Cheque day. When the welfare cheques are handed out the natives head into town and form a line several hundred deep at the Liquor Store. The cops come out in force and patrol the street with their jail cell on wheels. It isn't much of a wait before the fights begin to break out in the line. The cops just rush in and heave the druken combatants in the back of their wagon and then sit back & wait for the next altercation. This goes on all morning long, month after month. When I last witnessed it, it was jokingly? referred to as a local tourist attraction? Several years back a local woman published a book on the situation that was considered to be 100% factual and included many photos. The Feds (Trudeau's gov) decided to ban the book as racist in nature regardless of truth? Trudeau came to town to see the problem himself. Just in advance of his arrival the local cops went out and removed (quite illegally?) every visible Indian from the streets. Trudeau came, toured, left and later commented; "I didn't see an Indian problem in Kenora"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 For all the people who are brushing this off as a stupid mistake and that it should be given a rest. Would the sign have been acceptable if it said: drunken ______ Take your pick: whiteys, rednecks, homos, jews, scots, pilots, union members, christians, cheapskate pilots, etc. Growing up in YWG and having spent a fair amount of time in Northern Ontario I am familiar with the unfortunate stereotypes of the native population which unfortunately seem more accurate than not. However I don't understand the easy dismissal of what is really a racist act. If the folks offended want to boycott Tims let them. It seems like some people have more of a problem with the Natives being offended than they do with the sign itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 When the welfare cheques are handed out the natives head into town and form a line several hundred deep at the Liquor Store. Sounds like downtown Vancouver on Welfare Wednesday's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeker Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 It seems like some people have more of a problem with the Natives being offended than they do with the sign itself. The sign specifically said "no drunken Indians". It doesn't say "No Indians", or "all Indians are drunks". I'm sure the catalyst for putting the sign up was the cashier getting harassed repeatedly by drunken Indians. OK, zero out of ten for good judgement but there's some truth behind her action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest woxof Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 However I don't understand the easy dismissal of what is really a racist act. If the folks offended want to boycott Tims let them. It's dismissed if Tim's gets rid of the person who put up the sign. Why would I boycott them when one person alone or perhaps a small group put up a sign like this which is not representative of the company. It sounds like the attempt by some to create a wild, ridiculous overaction similar in some ways to a recent cartoon problem. If a boycott starts for no legitimate reason, I will try to buy at Tim's much more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 The sign specifically said "no drunken Indians". It doesn't say "No Indians", or "all Indians are drunks". I'm sure the catalyst for putting the sign up was the cashier getting harassed repeatedly by drunken Indians. OK, zero out of ten for good judgement but there's some truth behind her action. I am really failing to see the leap in logic with your statement. Say a fueler has a few bad experiences with pilots. He wears a shirt that says " No High MTCE pilots allowed" Can you say that no pilots would be offended? Your assertion that she was "repeatedly harassed" is lame at best. How do you know she did not like natives? maybe she was haraassed. Would a sign that said "No drunks allowed" have been better. By your logic though she does not have a problem with drunken whites, only drunken Indians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 It's dismissed if Tim's gets rid of the person who put up the sign. Why would I boycott them when one person alone or perhaps a small group put up a sign like this which is not representative of the company. Tim's is not getting rid of the person. Nobody is asking you to Boycott Tims. From what I understand from the article it is natives asking other natives to boycott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airband Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 ...meanwhile back at 'Le Stud' Montreal Woman Refused Service at Gay Bar says Rights Violated Wednesday, May 30, 2007 CBC News A Quebec woman says she plans to file a human rights complaint against a Montreal gay bar that refused to serve her because she isn't a man. Audrey Vachon said she was stunned when the staff at Le Stud, in Montreal's gay village, refused to serve at the bar because she's a woman. Vachon, 20, said she and her father, Gilles Vachon, had stopped in at Le Stud on a quiet afternoon to kill some time when a waiter came over and told him the bar doesn't serve women. Vachon said she was humiliated and indignated. If a homosexual was refused service, she said, she would be the first to stand up for his rights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 and in Australia Australian pub bars heterosexuals The hotel's ban is a first for Australia A gay pub in the city of Melbourne has won the right to ban heterosexuals - the first time such a decision has been made in Australia http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6697469.stm Is it all about being more than equal, should specific gender bars / clubs be able to ban those who don't fit their pattern ,,,,,,,, if so would this privilege extend to all persuasions. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 "However I don't understand the easy dismissal of what is really a racist act. If the folks offended want to boycott Tims let them." Clearly this is a "racist" act by definition however, "It seems like some people have more of a problem with the Natives being offended than they do with the sign itself." That's probably true as well. Although the sign wasn't a very good idea it is representative of the notion that society in general is getting a little fed up with so called "native rights". We all have but one life to live. I wasn't here 250 years ago and neither was my native cousin. We are both "aboriginals" of this land! Why can't he get a job and support himself & family like everyone else is supposed to? Phil Fontaine told us two weeks ago that the native's were tired of living in poverty? Get a job is my answer but, Fontaine considers that position to be racist as well? From his never ending bs I get the idea that he would prefer the Indian's be declared Canadian Royalty and treated as such? Why is it that "white boys" are the only people capable of discrimination? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Phil Fontaine is a moron and people like him are part of the problem. He does not want the current system to change because it is what keeps him and unfortunately a lot of others like him, employed. That being said I think that if this signed targeted another race then we would not be so quick to blow it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 "That being said I think that if this signed targeted another race then we would not be so quick to blow it off." Sad but, probably true as well! One has to acknowledge the reality of the situation too. A teen girl being confronted with numbers of native drunks acted in a manner that one might expect under the circumstances? The sign was not a proper response to her tribulation but, she likely hit the nail on the head and in doing so offended other natives. It's one thing for the natives to be offended by the sign but on the other hand, other Canadian's apparently aren't allowed to be offended by constant disgusting & anti social behaviour from members of a visible minority? I've seen this myself and the behaviour of a lot of these people goes far beyond the simple "drunk in a public place". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Phil Fontaine is a moron and people like him are part of the problem. He does not want the current system to change because it is what keeps him and unfortunately a lot of others like him, employed. That being said I think that if this signed targeted another race then we would not be so quick to blow it off. Phil Fontaine, agreed, life's pretty good for him these days me thinks? Why change things? "No drunken Scotsmen" "No drunken Germans" "No drunken Dukabohrs (sp?)" "No drunken Mexicans" "No drunken Irishmen" "No drunken Russians" Doesn't really have the same hitting power does it? The biggest problem has probably been how close to the mark the natives feel this has hit. I disagree that this would be taken more seriously if it was another race. To the contrary I'd bet almost any other race would have had a giggle, nothing more. I've spent enough time around large native populations to know that "drunken indians" are a real, common problem in many, many communities. She didn't put this sign up for no reason. Bad judgement? Obviously but there's more to this story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chockalicious Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Fair point Mav but maybe if the slur/stereotype hit a little closer to home for the different races/ethincities? "No cheap ass Scotsmen" "No nazi Germans" "No naked Dukabohrs (sp?)" "No illegal Mexicans" "No drunken Irishmen" "No drunken Russians" I think the hitting power is a little stronger now. Keep in mind that at least here in Canada, the groups you note are not typically singled out for derision. No cheap jews No terrorist muslims No evangelical christians I think people should remember that words do not live in a vaccuum. They can be hurtful as a stick and stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rattler Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Fair point Mav but maybe if the slur/stereotype hit a little closer to home for the different races/ethincities? "No cheap ass Scotsmen" "No nazi Germans" "No naked Dukabohrs (sp?)" "No illegal Mexicans" "No drunken Irishmen" "No drunken Russians" I think the hitting power is a little stronger now. I think people should remember that words do not live in a vaccuum. They can be hurtful as a stick and stone. The ones you selected have lost any "hitting" power over the years so I suspect very few would be offended. Re the specific incident, the punishment seems to fit the crime (at least for a 1st offence). The staff member, who is not an aboriginal, was suspended from a number of shifts and educated about the company's harassment policies. The teen has also apologized to two fellow employees who are members of native bands. Additionally, the outlet's owner sent a letter of regret to the nearby Blood Tribe. "I think it was one of those youthful things where she just didn't realize and she was made very aware of her actions and the consequences and was very remorseful," said Douglas. "We decided it was in her best interests -- and a learning experience -- that we didn't terminate, but she has been disciplined and reprimanded." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super 80 Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I have seen signs basically to the same effect on a number of reservations over the years, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaEH Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I've spent enough time around large native populations to know that "drunken indians" are a real, common problem in many, many communities. Didn't you have some fun with them last time you were in YKA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azure Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Since I happen to work right across the street from this Tim's, just a few points. They aren't drinking/driving natives, but hard core chemical users that stagger car to car looking for money while you wait for your coffee. Is it a bigger problem in Lethbridge than elsewhere? Actually, no. If one bothers to look at these natives rather than avert their gaze, you'll realize they are the same ones that approach you at Costco, Walmart, Home Depot etc. They do make their rounds but their numbers are quite small. Call the cops? The police know these people quite well, and picking them up is quite low on the list of priorities. Now, we haven't put up such a sign, however; we do have security patroling our parking lot chasing off these pan handlers, and our customers are very appreciative. The few that show up before security gets there? Well, I have to say, I have seen a huge increase in customers buying food and coffee for these poor souls.... proof that constant harassment creates anger, and occasional requests, thoughtfulness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.