Restaurant Should Be Boycotted Over Incident With Waiter and LGBT Customer, Say Netizens
ULLI’S STREETS OF ASIA – Netizens have launched a boycott campaign against the restaurant where a waiter was forced to stand for two hours in front of an LGBT+ customer, Jude Bacalso, who was mistakenly addressed as ‘sir.’
In response to the controversy, the restaurant issued a statement affirming their commitment to inclusivity and declaring that discrimination has no place in their establishment. They emphasized respect for all individuals, including the LGBTQIA+ community.
The restaurant later expressed deep concern, noting that they had spoken with the involved waiter and their team to provide support and discuss the situation. They committed to educating their staff and prioritizing their welfare. The restaurant also apologized to their guests, acknowledged the concerns raised, and promised to enhance the customer experience.
Despite this, many netizens were dissatisfied with the initial statement, feeling it did not fully address the issue. In a follow-up statement, the restaurant reiterated their support for the employee involved and reaffirmed their commitment to both staff and guests. They emphasized the importance of maintaining a safe and respectful environment and outlined plans to improve their handling of similar situations in the future.
However, the damage to their reputation had already been done. Many former patrons vowed never to return, expressing their discontent with the restaurant’s handling of the incident. Comments from netizens highlighted concerns about the restaurant’s ability to protect its employees and emphasized that respect and equality should be extended to everyone, including the staff.
Meanwhile, Jude Bacalso issued a public apology after meeting with the restaurant’s management, a crew member, and the supervisor to address the incident where a waiter was made to stand for two hours. Although the waiter was not present, they agreed to implement more inclusive practices. Bacalso admitted he could have been more considerate in his advocacy and expressed his desire to apologize directly to the waiter. He clarified that he did not demand the waiter stand the entire time; the waiter chose to stand while awaiting management’s input.