Letter to Starbucks

Masking Policy Change Complaint

09/16/2020

Hi Mxxxxxxxxxxxxx,

I'm looking forward to speaking with you tomorrow to clarify the masking policies for Starbucks guests.

I know we have only spoken in passing before so I'm also looking forward to having a chance to speak with you
directly! Before our meeting, I just wanted to send this message to explain my thoughts. My apologies for the
length of this message but hope it is clear and that it finds you well.

On Sunday, I was informed that our policy is to allow customers to taste and fix their beverages indoors and not
to issue masking reminders after they have placed their orders and/or received their drinks.

I am very concerned about this decision to allow guests to drink indoors.

I do not believe that there is any practical difference between tasting of beverages and indoor drinking & dining
which, regardless of whether customers are seated or standing, is against LA County Health Code.

This decision violates Covid health code which states that customers must be masked at all times they are
indoors of a business (as well as any time they are on the property outdoors and not actively eating or drinking).
We already struggle to encourage consistent indoor masking. Allowing guests any additional approved time
indoors unmasked poses a danger to partners and other customers.

I believe that to not offer guidance to keep their mask on "at all times indoors" is going to create further
confusion and unnecessary health risk.

Given that we have not been able to fully hold orders so that all items go out together, that customers
frequently place multiple orders or wait after for their friends' orders after receiving their own, and that we are
already struggling to communicate to the guests that their masks must be on while they wait for their orders
and discouraging them from consuming outside items they have brought in with them, this is not a small
percentage of the time that we are discussing.

I am further concerned about the discontent we will face from the customers who will feel that those tasting
their beverages are allowed to unmask while they are not. The degree of harassment which partners are subject
to, both from guests who are genuinely unfamiliar with LA County Health Code and/or those who are choosing
to act in protest against it, is an ongoing issue. It is exacerbated by inconsistency and confusion. The more clear
we can be with how we ask guests to keep others safe and the more consistent we can be with how we model
the expected health code compliant behavior, the easier it will be for partners to perform their jobs safely and
ensure the safety of all our guests.

Having unmasked guests tasting a beverage at the hand-off plane is a high risk activity. As this will likely occur
while a partner waits to ensure they are satisfied with their beverage and then, quite likely, is asked to top the

MASKING POLICY COMPLAINT LETTER

page 1 of 3
beverage off with more cream or other items means that partners will be in close contact with the unmasked
guest and the container from which they have just drunk while that guest continues to speak to the partner.
Hand-off plane interactions take place at less than 6ft, the plexiglass is shorter than many customers, and
encouraging the consumption and alteration of beverages at this place will increase the transmission risk
considerably.

However, my concern goes beyond the hand-off plane. Having unmasked guests walk through the lobby
drinking their beverage on their way to the door puts every other guest they pass on the way, generally within
only a few feet, at risk.

Having any unmasked guests indoors is a serious risk, at any time. Current science shows that coronavirus is
carried through air currents and, when in an indoor location - particularly a small one like the Cxxxxxxxxxx store
- anyone sharing the same air is at risk, even at more than 6ft distance. This is a risk we are already facing as
many customers enter unmasked, many unmask as they wait, many pull off their masks to speak to the cashier.
These are issues that we can continue to address through communication. But allowing further unmasking
increases this risk dramatically.

I am not comfortable with that risk for myself. I am not comfortable with the risk for other partners or to our
guests, many of whom are elderly and/or otherwise high risk.

Ethically, I am not comfortable being asked to violate the health code. I am concerned about working in a place
that is looking to exploit loopholes in the health code rather than looking to keep its employees and customers
safe.

There have been other changes in Starbucks policies and guidelines with which I have been uncomfortable and
which violate or circumvent health code - including the placement of outdoor dining tables within six feet of the
entrance and the sidewalks, the removal of social distancing markings in the highly trafficked areas outdoors,
the lack of sufficient staffing to enable a partner to perform the Concierge role from the door and ensure guests
are masked before entering, encouraging customers to wait for their orders indoors, and more. Looking through
the health code I see a number of additional requirements that we have not been able to consistently meet. I
have communicated some concerns to my manager as they arose. I have appreciated that we have done our
best in a challenging situation. I feel strongly that we should be doing all that we can to meet the health code
and appreciate that will be an ongoing process.

I understand that the pandemic is a new and unprecedented situation. I understand that all of us - partners,
guests, management, corporate, and the government public health bodies - are all learning as we go. I
understand that the government guidelines have been changing and it is an ongoing struggle to keep up, both
for us and for the government bodies themselves, as new scientific evidence becomes available.

As I have previously expressed to my manager, I do not expect guests to be 100% compliant at all times - but I
do expect my workplace to do it's best to follow the legal guidelines. I do expect partners to be able to educate,
encourage, and remind guests of masking and distancing.

We have all been learning together and I have seen significant improvement in guests' masking and distancing
as time has passed. I see this significantly more so at my own store than I do at other stores where partners
have been less proactive with encouraging distancing. Guests' attitudes towards being reminded of masking
have improved considerably, but the need to offer reminders is ever-present as even the most health-conscious
of guests frequently forget or act on an instinct to uncover their faces. Recently, I find myself increasingly being

MASKING POLICY COMPLAINT LETTER

page 2 of 3
thanked by guests for the masking reminders - even those guests I have asked to step outside before they taste
their drinks.

To scale back our ability to offer mask reminders now (particularly at a store which served a large number of
tourists and guests from other locations who are uninformed and inexperienced with LA County guidelines and
who may have no other source of guidance before they enter our space) feels like a dangerous backslide,
undoing all of the work we have done to teach, to learn, and to adapt.

Again, I look forward to speaking with you tomorrow!

Thank you,
Noelle

MASKING POLICY COMPLAINT LETTER

page 3 of 3