Restaurant Review for Chick’s On The Square

Restaurant Review for Chick’s On The Square

Comments 0 Comment

We received a written complaint that Chicks On The Square, in Macom, Illinois, allegedly might be practicing racial discrimination in treating customers that walk into its establishment.

Here is part of the complaint:

“When we entered Chick’s at about 1:00 p.m., no one was ahead of us, and the establishment was not busy. Two employees … saw us enter, but both loitered behind the register just chatting and ignored us. We waited at the front door. Their behavior continued while at the same time looking at us. They made no attempt to approach or signal us to wait or sit. Meanwhile, another couple came in behind us. The … man grabbed two menus and on the sly, signaled the couple to approach and follow him to a booth. We were stunned by the action and exited in anger. It is useful to note that the couple who enter after us was Caucasian. Your employees are Caucasian. Everyone in the establishment appeared to be Caucasian. There were no visible minorities. We are not Caucasian, African American, or Hispanic. What can a reasonable person conclude about your employees and your establishment? It would appear that you employ racist employees in a racist establishment. It would be reasonable to also conclude that your employees engaged in blatant racism (i.e., discrimination based on race). This is reprehensible, despicable, and utterly unacceptable, and these two individuals must be disciplined.”

Here is part of the company response:

“I had a conversation with … our GM at Chicks in Macomb.
He mentioned that he spoke with you regarding this unfortunate incident.  I hope this has been resolved If not, or if I may be of further service please contact me.

There is no excuse for this behavior, we do not condone racism!
Our goal is to create WOW Experiences for everyone who walks through our doors.

I sincerely hope this incident can serve as a learning experience for our young staff and bring us together toward a long lasting beneficial relationship.”

Partial response by the offended party:

“At this juncture, based on the incident, my wife and I will not be able to patronize Chick’s On The Square in Macomb, Il.  The initial experience has left an indelible mark on us and may dissipate over time.  Being from Los Angeles, CA where both people and good food are appreciated, coming to Macomb and attempting to find good cuisine is certainly a chore.  Finding out that something good is out there was exciting, but the experience just entering the door was disappointing.  Maybe in the future when things improve at the restaurant, we will be able to patronize and enjoy your establishment, but for now, best wishes.”

Score Card’s analysis:
The incident should have NEVER have taken place.
Being on the receiving end of discrimination vs apologizing that such action took  place does not equal out in this case.  What a person “says” by their behavior often times speaks louder than written or spoken words of excuses.  The owner never stated that any disciplinary action took place and thus the “remedy” appears inadequate.   Chicks On The Square  explanation was not, on the face of it, boiler plated but appeared to came close.

Trial Problem #2

Trial Problem #2

Comments 0 Comment

Quite a few years back I found myself being a juror in a case (Riverside, California) where some alleged juvenile gang members shot up a neighborhood (Lake Elsinore).    No one was injured.  The gang members were after a young man who did not fit into their group.  From my point of view, the trial was all but smooth and honest.  The defense attorney, throughout the trial, gave hand signals to the teenagers who had to testify as to what to say in clear view of the jury.  The judge was busy grading papers and failed to catch this flagrant, egregious, unethical behavior.

The second incident, I am not perfectly sure was a problem, just a very strong suspicion.  The jury was shown a video taped interview at a police station of one of the juveniles.  the audio was not that good so each juror was given a book full of pages giving us what was being said so we could follow along.  All of a sudden I picked up some words that heavily implied that this youth might have coerced a witness.  I looked down at my note book and there it was, words that told me there was a good chance that the person we were seeing in the video might have lied and coerced a witness.   It could have been a mistake of the person who tried to write down the text from listening the tape.  But I had spotted the problem from the audio I was listening too from the video presentation.  This could not be a problem because the lawyers must have perused the video and corresponding text given to the jury.  I did not know what to do.  The rest of the day, I looked back at that part of the book to see if I had made a mistake.  There it was, words that, to me, implicated this young man in a more serious crime.  An elderly couple, that allegedly were the target of the alleged coercion by the remarks in the book, took the stand and I looked carefully for any hint that they were not telling the truth but detected none.  After lunch, I went home and drafted a letter to the judge.  When we went back into the courtroom, I handed the letter to one of the police officers at the door.  The judge was handed the letter and called the attorneys over for a private consultation.  The attorneys allowed us to take one book into the jury room and the video playing device when we broke to decide the case.  I asked for the book but could not find the passage.  I had my book bookmarked where the problem was by bending back the top edge of the offending text page.  I could not find the same page in this new book.  The jury wanted to speed up the decision process and my issue, I decided, was not going to be pursued.  Every person in the jury was offended by the defense attorney’s actions.  The prosecution did not have a very strong case.  We all were very disappointed in the parents of the alleged gang members.  All the families seemed middle class, white, anglo, affluent, and seemed spoiled.

This is the second time that I have seen lawyers make decisions that impact the outcome of a trial in such a way that justice was not pursued in an honest and just manner.

I have looked for hours into the Internet to find a list of juror’s rights to speak up if a juror has an important issue to bring up and have found nothing.  I find it absolutely appalling that the very people that need to decide the outcome of a trial must remain mute.  This is a fragrant deficiency of the system.

Gatekeeping Young Women

Gatekeeping Young Women

Comments 0 Comment
A previous post (490) was sent to an Assistant Professor of Sociology.  I asked his opinion for the accuracy of the post.  This is his response:

I will be somewhat broad and brief since this is a rather complex issue.

At the heart of the problem is the notion of patriarchy and power.  In other words, it is a man’s world, hence men rule.  This idea is inculcated through socialization, i.e. brainwashing of both girls and boys who are told in many ways that there are certain realms that they should “roam around in” in order to be good citizens.  This is reinforced, not only in the mass media, but also at home, school, the workplace, and society in general.

In regard to historical male-female disparities, women have lagged significantly in terms of wages.  In 1960, the percent of men’s income that women earned was 61%.  In 1965, it declined to 58%, increased to 65% in 1985 and 71% in 1990.  Around 2000, it declined to 65% and as it stands now, it is at 78% (U.S. Census Bureau).  Those numbers are significant over the course of a lifetime.  As one goes up the salary hierarchy, across the board, the actual earnings are even more dismal for women.

Statistics for this article.
Statistics for this article.

Another factor that could bolster the argument is the fact of tracking at the early points in a child’s life.  Basically, educators and the educational system begin to sort students into different educational programs (or tracks) on the basis of real or perceived abilities and characteristics.  This practice is common based on the race and gender of the child.  There are two tracks or ability groups—the academic track and vocational track.  Those in the former go on to community colleges and universities, and the latter, end up learning skills and trades that allow them some mobility, but significantly less than those who move on to higher education.  The gatekeeping dynamic continues on at the university level—students are tracked into majors sorted by gender.  [Remember the brainwashing stared early, continued at the parochial levels, and is set by higher education.]

When we examine the field of study and gender, we observe the following for women versus men: 73% vs. 27% in Psychology, 36% vs. 64% in Mathematics, 31% vs. 69% in the Physical Sciences, 28% vs. 72%, and 21% vs. 79% in Engineering (Statistical Abstracts, 2005).  Additionally, when we look at the starting salaries in some professions, a clear picture emerges: in Computer Science, the average is $52k, Chemical Engineering: $51k, Mathematics: $44k, and the Social Sciences: $32k (Statistical Abstracts, 2003).  Remember, women are tracked into the “helping” professions, which tend to pay less (teaching, for example) and men are tracked into the more lucrative majors and professions.

The “glass ceiling” (i.e., the invisible barriers that deny women the opportunity to move up) is built into the system.  Note this is not natural, but an artificially created condition (by men).  In the professional world, women are put on the “mommy track” and men are put on the “glass escalator” that puts them on the fast track to the top where the rewards are to be had: higher-level positions, more desirable work-assignments, and higher salaries.  This is still quite poignant as I write this.  People point to the exceptions—women who have made it—and generalize.  However, when one examines the hard facts, things are a bit different.

How does this all relate to marriage and divorce?  Simply put, men enter with more resources than women, even at the professional level.  When a divorce occurs, men leave in a better position than women because they have already accumulated a key capital that allows them more life chances—education.  In addition, the legal system gives preference to women’s desires in regards to children.  This is another manifestation of the patriarchal system—women are viewed as more competent caretakers (again, this is not true for either sex).  The result is that women are burdened down by childcare responsibilities and costs, and businesses are less tolerant of single parents or females with children.  [Remember the “mommy track?”]

What does it mean for girls at a young age?

1)  My recommendation would be for parents to recognize their complicity in inculcating and reproducing the system of domination they take for granted.  Change the practice of buying certain things for boys and certain things for girls.  Be aware of the double standard that they practice everyday when they interact with their children.

2)  Most importantly, strongly encourage females to get into professions that will allow them to pursue higher incomes that will allow them to be independent of men in their adult life.

The more controversial recommendations for females, in particular, would be:

1)  Do something that will provide a financial basis for the future by doing something that will get you there—not necessarily doing something that you love to do.  As a whole, people have been taught to follow their hearts and dreams—do what makes them happy.  This is part of the brainwashing in the system.  Think about it this way, encourage your daughters to become lawyers, doctors, businesswomen, etc. even if they do not want to do.  After accumulating what is desired (say after 10 or 15 years), do something that will make them happier.  They will have the finances to pursue what they love instead of struggling.  In the long run, they will be able to create a basis that can be transferred across generations.   Delayed gratification goes a long way.  [How do you think the rich remain rich as well as their descendants?  They do what is necessary to maintain a lifestyle, and yes, they are happier and healthier as well as their future generations.  Don’t fall into the trap that rich people are miserable.  That is what they want you to think, which means there is more for them and less for you.]

2)  Delay marriage until after getting graduate degrees and starting a career.  Again, the better base one has, especially women, the better off life may be in the event of divorce.

3)  In regard to finances, a) Save money.  Do not impulse buy.  b) Maintain a separate saving account that only you have access to even when married.  Think logically, not with emotions, on this account.  In the workforce, people are exposed to a variety of individuals from the world over, especially, in large corporations that require travel.  Unintended and intended things do happen when people begin to move up the socio-economic ladder.

4)  The Cinderella story is a myth.  A prince is not going to come along and sweep you off your feet.  You are not a princess.  Marriage should be a rational decision, not based on some romantic ideal.  Evaluate the person objectively and then make a sound decision.  What does he have to offer?  What do you have to offer?  This may sound harsh, but why do marriages fail?  One of the primary reasons is money.  Love is a fleeting emotion.  Finances are objective and measurable.

5)  In cases of abuse, females must divorce their husbands.  “He will change” is wishful thinking.  Do not stay in a marriage because of children.  They will be worse off.  Again, awareness and logic will go along way in making a better life.

There are so many theoretical and practical aspects of this, but this will have to suffice for now.

Best,
Davison Bideshi, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Western Illinois University

Graphics done by M. Rane
Scientific Illustrator

Why Some Young Women Make A Life Choice Mistake.

Why Some Young Women Make A Life Choice Mistake.

Comments 0 Comment

See also the article Gatekeeping Young Women

I have come across a number of middle aged women who might have made a mistake in one of life choices that can significantly impact their lives and the lives of their children.  This article will spend time exploring one of these possible life choices because we see a pattern repeat over and over again and wish to alert young women about this possible problem.

The life choice pattern we are concerned about works like this.  A married women is separated, divorced or the husband dies.  The problem arises when the women, has been left alone through divorce, separation or death, does not have a profession and/or an employment record that helps her to find a good job.  Statistics fails to support a husband and wife staying together.  When a divorce takes place this places both in a lower economic rung of the ladder.   The women most often suffers more.  She is the one who typically takes care of the children. She is the one who has less employment history.  She is the one who is removed from the job market due to child birth and rearing of children.   She is the one who takes the children to school and club activities.  We put the burden of children upon her but fail to balance out her rewards for doing so.

A good portion of women  might lack good retirement benefits. With a good solid marriage, where both husband and wife have good jobs there is a better statistical probability that one or both will have a good retirement.  When the marriage is splits the family the total retirement asset value might be cut in half.   Social Security requires a number of quarters to qualify you for drawing Social Security benefits.  Women are often times taken out of the job market for raising children and just might not make the necessary minimum quarters for receiving Social Security.   Any women who is still married and not working in a job that offers retirement benefits is putting herself into a position where she may be forced to work the rest of her life if her spouse dies and he did not have a good retirement.  These factors, not finding a job, finding a lower paying job, finding a job that is not a pleasure, obtaining a job that does not have good benefits all work to potentially placing this women in a lower  pay and retirement scale.  Counter to that is when a women has a mate and they both have good jobs, better chance they both enjoy a good retirement, a good life to death.

Another somewhat related issue is that some women do find good paying jobs but it is not a pleasure for them.   The pursuit of happiness is a universal goal for all of us.  If a women finds herself alone she needs to find a job quickly to pay bills.    This some times translates into accepting a job that pays less than what her education and experience tells us she should attain.

Once a divorce or separation takes place, a women can fall lower in the social economic scale.  She will be facing stressful circumstances.  Children might be affected from results of this family break up and loss of purchasing power.  She might also  become a burden to her extended family members if unemployed for any extended time.

To solve this potential problem we must back up to viewing young girls environment to see what might have promoted this intellectual mistake.  It is our opinion that an attitude comes about from and through the mass media trying to promote stories that sell well to young girls.  The stories are usually romantic where a young girl meets the right boy, they date, and marry and the wedding is given major importance.  The media stories might not include all those elements but typically one or more.  The stories are typically light, friendly, and seasoned with obligatory romance.   In middle school and high school young girls especially use special shampoos, oils, lip gloss, eye shadow, and other makeup.  This is quite normal for young girls.  They dress in clothes that are often eye catching and conversation starters.  Girls might take special pride in hair style, nails and even body piercing to make billboard statements as to who and what they think they are.  Again, this is normal behavior and it points to their sensitivity and easily being impressed by new products and fashion.  Boys and girls are followers at this young age.  Girls read girl magazines, go to movies that are targeted for their age group and view television in the same way.  These are impressionable years for these girls and big business has each girl in their cross hairs.  The girls are studied by survey groups and pandered to according.  The media outlets are selling the good life as Hollywood thinks it should be sold for best return on their dollar by putting forth a dreamy life style to sell their product(s).  A lot of girls and women eat it up like it is all real and if they do they may be more prone to make the same trek down into a troubled life that so many women before have followed and suffered for.

We all have images of what we want, who we want to be and who we want to be with.  These images are not drawn out of thin air but we get them from watching our parents, friends and the media.  The points being made here are two.  First, media organizations promote an image that is typically pumping up romance and glittering the marriage ceremony.  As a result some girls might put too much of their aspirations into their partner for “life”.  Reality counters this with a cold hard statistic that tells us that roughly half of all marriages fail.  Point two follows the first point.  We recommend a solution.  To solve this problem we recommend that young girls do well in school, seek out a passion to follow as a profession, complete their education for that profession, and find a job and keep it for a significant number of years so they can market themselves again after removing themselves for child rearing.    It is ok to date and have boy friends but think about your profession first.  This down plays the romance element quite a bit.  A sociologist friend, who teaches marriage and family class, tells his students that marriage is not about romance but should be an economic union between two people, a business partnership.  Personally, I think throwing out romance is a bit harsh.  Instead, I recommend a balance of romance and good business sense with the scales tilted in favor for the business portion.  A young women should seek out a mate that is not solely physically attractive because that wears thin shortly.  A women should consider a lot of things when choosing a mate but strong consideration for a man who has a good profession and who is heathy should be valued.

Parents, you can help by talking to your daughter about what the media is attempting to do to them and why.  We recommend you do not tell your daughter but have a discussion about this subject and get her input.  For example, as she watches TV or reads a book or magazine, discuss what is being portrayed.     What life style is she being told to lead?  If she were to follow that life style, how realistic is it?

We recommend, support and encourage your daughter to participate in activities that will make her her own person and not subservient.   She needs to be her own women and feel she is any man’s equal because the odds say she will be alone, on her own, if  marriage dissolves at some point.

For parents consideration when your daughter is in middle and high school:

  • Team sports, school and league, (only recommended if school grades are good).
  • School band (also may help self discipline and school grades).
  • Boy Scouts Venturing for girls.
  • School debate.
  • Theater and dance (only if your child is on stage as a participant).
  • Drill team.
  • Cheer leader.

Less important but might help if there is some development problem or shyness:

  • School clubs.
  • Theatre, dance, audio visual, behind the scenes, for students that might be too shy.
  • Girl Scouts.

Finally, a young women should seriously consider finishing college before having children.  A women should enter the job market in a good profession as soon as possible and stay long enough to brand her a good hire if she decided to quit to have children.  A women needs to think, in the back of her mind, what do I need to do to ensure my life style if my life partner leaves or dies.

_____

For a more deeply examined view on this subject, please read Gatekeeping Young Women.

Alleged Legal System Failure: RR Crossing

Alleged Legal System Failure: RR Crossing

Comments 0 Comment

My sister, in the early 1970’s, had to sit as a juror in a case where a family brought a lawsuit against a railroad company. This took place in the city of Riverside, California. Two young male teens died at a railroad crossing. One of the young men owned a motor scooter and let his friend ride on the scooter with him, which is against the motor vehicle laws, therefore illegal. The scooter was designed for one person only. For some reason, which will never be known, the scooter-driver drove into the ‘side’ of the train engine at the railroad crossing and both teens were killed by the impact. It was not a front-end-of-engine impact.

The family believed that the railroad crossing protection against such accidents might not have functioned properly. I remember that my sister told me that any juror that knew electronics was excused, could not serve as a juror. I thought this rather odd.

After the trial was over my sister told me that the railroad company spokes person said the system was foolproof and spent a lot of time describing how and why it was foolproof. She then went on to describe, as best as she could, how the system worked to me. Her description was cursory but having training in electronics I spotted a number of factors that could be problem points for the system to be “flawless”. It occurred to me, at that time, why the defense lawyer might want a jury pool to be sanitized from any intellectual capacity to understand the nuances of electronics. The sanitation may have worked in favor for the rail road company, if the trial was allowed to run through its planned length — but for some reason known only to the judge, attorneys, railroad and family, the trial was declared a mistrial after a month-long trial period in the courtroom. The jury was not told why a mistrial was declared. For the jury, the hardest conclusion to arrive at was a choice between: 1) did the crossing ‘alarm’ fail and/or did the engineer forget to blow the train whistle, or, 2) did the young driver try to beat the train at the crossing and misjudge the speed of the train and the ‘slowness’ of his scooter with the (illegal) passenger on the back, over-estimating his horse power and timing at that moment.

A few years later I had to pick up my sister and she asked if a young man could also be driven home. I was driving, my sister sat in the front passenger seat, and the young man took a back seat in the car. We asked him where he lived and when he told us where his home was, my sister told him about a trial she participated in that involved a railroad crossing near this young man’s home. As we drove, the young man then told us that the community had continuous problems with that railroad crossing not functioning properly.  I could see out of the corner of my eye that my sister was shaken. After we dropped off the fellow at his house, my sister told me that she still felt confused and conflicted about the trial. She told me about how convincing the expert was who testified about how flawless the railroad crossing device was. The jury was told that the railroad company sent out THEIR inspectors to detect any problems but found none. We both felt that the lawyer, for the family, only needed to walk the area around the crossing to get a feel if there was a recordable level of malfunction with the crossing. My sister did not know if that was done.  At the trial, some testimony was presented by a couple of residents in the area explaining that there were a few problems with the crossing. The ‘neighborhood’ testimony was not ‘strong’ because people had to try and recall when and how that they had seen problems at the crossing, time of day, train whistle heard, or not, etc. — which is difficult when you do not have an accident or specific incident to magnify the memory associated with observed ‘problems.’

WSJ Article – Reflections From Surviving Law Firm

WSJ Article – Reflections From Surviving Law Firm

Comments 0 Comment

Prompted by a Wall Street  Journal article Monday, January 26, 2009, front page title “Recession  Batters Law Firms, Triggering Layoffs, Closings”, I sent off an e-mail to a  law firm in San Bernardino County to elicit a response.  Here are some  bullet points:

  • “Yes, a lot of firms are suffering.  The ones doing  the worst are the LARGE firm,s, with 600 $ + per hour rates, and the mega  clients who would write checks to them without a thought and are are now  cutting costs”
  • “We all expect it will slow in 2009, and as the CEO of  the Firm, I am projecting a 10% reduction in revenues.”
  • “So far, however, we have not seen it (reductions) and  personally, I am starting this year off  busy.”