Starbucks has recently been under fire for rampant abuses of power. The corporation has specifically been targeting a historically heavily marginalized group: the lactose-intolerant. Three Californians are suing the company for $5 million due to surcharging their non-dairy milk substitutes. They claim the practice of surcharging plant milk violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
It is about time Starbucks faces some well-deserved backlash for these practices. This is by far the worst thing the company has done. Union-busting and cheating workers are nothing compared to this. The company has faced many complaints regarding unfair practices to their workers as employees plead for higher wages, consistent scheduling and accessibility to the benefits Starbucks always flaunts. Starbucks is a trustworthy company, so their statements of denial should be accepted without question.
After all, when people choose to work for a company that undervalues them, it cannot be the company’s fault. The workers made their decision to work there and must deal with the consequences. Nothing is forcing them to work there besides the need for money to survive.
Their utilization of surcharges is what is truly unethical. Lactose-intolerant people face immense challenges finding eateries that cater to their needs. They have so few options besides regular milk. They are limited to soy milk, almond milk, rice milk, coconut milk, hemp milk, cashew milk, oat milk, potato milk, pea milk, hazelnut milk, flax milk, tiger nut milk, walnut milk, quinoa milk or macadamia milk. This creates worries about whether or not an establishment will have menu options for them.
At a local Starbucks, one customer explained, “Having to pay 80 cents for oat milk in my latte means I can’t make rent some months. It’s definitely the milk that’s the problem, for sure.” Another customer mentioned that their lactose intolerance makes them feel more outcast than any other aspect of their identity, including their nut allergy!
These extreme violations of ADA requirements are a targeted move against lactose-sensitive Americans. The lactose-intolerant is an already heavily marginalized group, and Starbucks makes their realities even more dangerous with these acts of financial aggression.
*This is a satirical piece and is not intended to communicate any true or factual information about the writer’s opinion except through humor and/or exaggeration. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental or is intended purely as satire, parody or spoof of such persons and is not intended to communicate any true or factual information about that person.
