Michael Harrison fired St Louis Starbucks worker to sue employer after he and another barista were fired for subduing two would be robbers who pistol whipped him as the workers feared for their immediate lives.
A case of self defense? A Starbucks worker has been fired after subduing armed robbers at a St Louis outlet after moments earlier being ‘pistol whipped’ by one of the two masked men who’d entered the store.
Michael Harrison, 20, was manning the drive-thru on December 17 when two masked men entered his downtown St. Louis location around noon and told everyone to get on the ground.
With one of the two would be robbers waving what appeared to be a gun, the roughly ten employees and one customer present got on their stomachs in terror, according to Harrison.
‘I thought he was going to shoot me,’
Many of them, according to Harrison, an aspiring EMT, who was working at the coffee chain outlet to meet his paramedic student bills, were crying in fear.
Harrison said he cooperated with the robbers’ demands and tried to open the register, but did not have the managerial credentials to access the cash.
He asked his supervisor to get off the ground to open the till, but the frozen manager declined to do so, the worker told the nypost.
As one of the robbers went through his pockets, his alleged accomplice, Joshua Noe, whacked Harrison in the back of the head with the gun.
‘At that point I thought he was going to shoot me,’ the barista told the nypost.
One of Harrison’s co-workers noticed a portion of the weapon broke off and he sensed a chance the gun was fake.
Baristas hailed as heroes at time of robbers’ arrest
Devin Jones-Ransom then began brawling with the assailants, with Harrison coming to his aid.
The melee spilled outside, and a bystander from a nearby store jumped in to assist the baristas.
When the fracas ended, Noe, 37, was immobilized on the ground while accomplice Marquise Porter-Doyle fled the scene.
A subsequent mugshot of Noe showed the would be robber sporting cuts and scrapes on his face and scalp.
Arriving officers arrested Porter-Doyle, 35, nearby and arrested Noe at the scene.
Police thanked Harrison and Jones-Ransom ‘for their courage’.
Placed on leave as Starbucks investigated
Following their arrests, Noe faced 11 felony charges, three for 1st-degree robbery, six for 1st-degree attempted robbery, one for 2nd-degree assault and another for 3rd-degree assault. Porter-Doyle faced all of the same minus the 2nd-degree felony assault.
The baristas in turn were placed on paid leave for two weeks as Starbucks officials investigated the incident, with store policy forbidding workers from interacting with would be shoplifters, robbery attempts or armed individuals.
The two young men were lauded in local media for their heroism, and both looked forward to returning to work.
‘But I got a call a few weeks later,’ Harrison told the nypost. ‘Once the media died down. They told me they were terminating me. I was surprised. I was distraught. I was confused.’
The company told Harrison and his co-worker they had violated company policy, but were not specific, according to Harrison’s attorney Ryan Krupp.
‘We were deeply disturbed to learn of this frightening incident,’ a Starbucks spokesperson told the nypost. ‘Partner safety is at the core of how we operate in our stores, and we are so grateful that our partners and customers did not come to greater harm in this situation.
Starbucks defends decision to fire baristas
‘In situations like this, our training and protocols guide our partners to comply and de-escalate, not just for their safety but for the safety of all in the store.’
The spokesperson speaking to MensJournal days earlier emphasized, ‘that all partners go through de-escalation training,’ which ‘includes armed robbery scenarios where partners are asked to comply with demands, and to avoid doing or saying anything that can escalate the situation.’
The company maintains the two ex-employees should not have engaged the two men to the degree they did.
Stripped of his income, Harrison said he is now struggling to pay his tuition.
‘That job was helping me pay for college,’ he said. ‘I just don’t understand it. I thought it was the right thing to do.’
Attention St. Louis employers: Michael Harris and Devin Jones-Ransom would be awesome hires. https://t.co/QyXh8Mkbmm
— Nathan Shumate (@NathanShumate) January 26, 2024
Had the baristas acted in self defense?
Harrison said the busy location had been plagued by unruly and aggressive customers for months, and he and other employees formally complained to management.
He recalled one incident where a deranged customer began firing heavy steel canisters at cowering employees.
‘People are always yelling and screaming at us, threatening to assault us. Throwing things, trying to come up to us,’ he told the nypost. ‘But nothing was ever done. People have left the job because of it.’
The company denied that claim, saying the location was temporarily closed to make safety improvements — including giving employees the option of locking the main section of the location and only using the drive-thru.
Now, Krupp said, a lawsuit is being prepared and will be filed in the coming weeks.
‘When the robbers came in, my client complied and tried to open the cash register when he was struck in the head by one of the gunman,’ Krupp said. ‘At that point you’re in a position to defend yourself.’
Krupp says that after being struck, Harris realized he needed to take action and self defend or risk potential loss of life.
Told the lawyer a few days earlier via the River Front Times: ‘Harris complied with the robbers’ demands until it was no longer an option for himself and others. He needed to take action or risk being killed.’
Krupp decried Starbucks for milking the incident for all of the positive publicity it was worth in the weeks after, before suddenly terminating Harris with a phone call.
“The corporation received great headlines commending the employees’ bravery and prominently displaying their logo,” Krupp told MensJournal. “About a month later, Starbucks corporate called and fired Mr. Harris over the phone.”
Adding: ‘We are looking for justice in this matter and will be taking legal action. Nobody should be terminated for doing the right thing.’
The right thing for whom though… for Starbucks or for the well being and immediate safety of the worker, even if that sometimes is at odds and steep divide from what a corporate employer with potential liability and legal action should the worker be hurt or even killed on the job, suddenly have to face?
