Aside from how degrading those costumes are, is it really a good idea to handle hot coffee in teensy clothes?

I don't get why this isn't some kind of OSHA violation--handling steam and boiling liquids in a bikini is asking for trouble.

Fantasy Friday? What if my fantasy is a fair workplace where women aren't objectified?

Well, if anything is a violation and really dangerous work, it's this here (Sorry, I don't know how to put in a link http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19901693/)

Most people I speak to about this coffee shop or the business mentioned in the link say that it's just a way of doing business, and women don't have to do this if they don't want to.

Yeah - and I'll bet they say the same thing about prostitution.

Good for them. And, yes, steam burns plus what is essentially nudity is not a good combination. I can't believe anyone would work in those outfits for minimum wage.

So he said they could do the job or he would find other people who would. They left, and he is in the process of finding other employees willing to do the job as required by his new franchise (with an "overwhelming response"). That'll teach him. [sarcasm]

"Aside from how degrading those costumes are, is it really a good idea to handle hot coffee in teensy clothes?"

No, it's definitely not a good idea. I worked in a coffee shop at college, and we constantly had to keep a little jar of burn cream around. The water from those machines is extremely hot, and I certainly wouldn't be willing to be anywhere near them wearing a bikini. So, aside from the degradation of those costumes, these poor women must have some unpleasant burns at the end of the day.

BK125, that sucks. I never was a barista but my first job was at KFC. I was constantly getting burned from the heat lamps, etc. I definitely wouldn't want to be wearing little clothes in a business like that.

All this for minimum wage? I think that's the worst part.

While I know that places like Hooters can get away with discriminating based on gender and appearance because the service staff is the "product," how does it work when an existing business wants to make that kind of a switch? At least people who apply for jobs at those places know what they're applying for.

Did the owner just decide to fire every barista who wasn't a good-looking 20-something woman? Can an employer arbitrarily decide that he wants to see his employees in their underwear, and change the dress code accordingly? ("I didn't fire them, they quit" is a distinction without a difference here.)

I just hope these young women are able to get unemployment benefits for being constructively discharged. If I were a local Starbucks manager, I would offer each of them a job -- and pay them more than minimum wage, plus benefits for wearing the green apron.

I'm primarily concerned that this is going to become a wider trend. I wouldn't be surprised (shocked yes, surprised, no) if more and more fields were requiring women to work in bikinis and negliges.

I think these women are also getting tips from the men (more than likely) who frequent these coffee shops, so that kind of makes up for the minimum wage, like with stripping.

Schoolgirl Thursday? WTF?

The other 4 themes are tacky, but aren't they going beyond "adult" with that?

I just can't imagine working in a binki in an air conditioned building.

That and I really don't think a coffee shop is the place for that kind of dress.

Basically, I'm highly disturbed that anyone even came up with this idea.

I'm sure bigger girls are going to be discriminated against during the hiring process. 'Cause lord knows the public doesn't want scantily clad fatties serving their coffee. /snark

"Schoolgirl Thursday? WTF?

"The other 4 themes are tacky, but aren't they going beyond 'adult' with that?"

Which reminds me, I heard that in some jurisdictions the public schools expel girls for not wearing short skirts and in some jurisdictions the courts assume rape victims were "asking for it" if they were attacked in short skirts. Have both ever happened in the same jurisdiction?

"I don't get why this isn't some kind of OSHA violation--handling steam and boiling liquids in a bikini is asking for trouble."

bridgetka, Code of Federal Regulations Part 1910 (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations for general industry) does NOT make any references to how much clothes a server or other food server has to wear - nor does it regulate in any way the tempreture of hot beverages, or how those beverages are served.

In any case, OSHA has very few inspectors, and, unless somebody got killed on your job, you probably won't ever see an OSHA inspector on your job.

Even if they do come, they'll give your boss 2 hours notice, and, when they get to your job, they will talk to your boss, and not to you or your co-workers.

And that's if your job is union - if your non union, you will probably NEVER even get an OSHA inspection at all.

Since almost all baristas are non union, the whole OSHA question is a moot point for them.

I'm a Carpenters Union shop steward in New York City - I'm very famillar with OSHA regulations, and how that agency is so biased towards bosses that it's basically useless to call them.

Workers are 1,000 times better off if they stage job actions or strikes (or, in the case of these baristas, mass resignation) then relying on OSHA, which will NOT help them (and will only help the boss cover up his/her hazardous work practices)

"I don't get why this isn't some kind of OSHA violation--handling steam and boiling liquids in a bikini is asking for trouble."

bridgetka, Code of Federal Regulations Part 1910 (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations for general industry) does NOT make any references to how much clothes a server or other food server has to wear - nor does it regulate in any way the tempreture of hot beverages, or how those beverages are served.

In any case, OSHA has very few inspectors, and, unless somebody got killed on your job, you probably won't ever see an OSHA inspector on your job.

Even if they do come, they'll give your boss 2 hours notice, and, when they get to your job, they will talk to your boss, and not to you or your co-workers.

And that's if your job is union - if your non union, you will probably NEVER even get an OSHA inspection at all.

Since almost all baristas are non union, the whole OSHA question is a moot point for them.

I'm a Carpenters Union shop steward in New York City - I'm very famillar with OSHA regulations, and how that agency is so biased towards bosses that it's basically useless to call them.

Workers are 1,000 times better off if they stage job actions or strikes (or, in the case of these baristas, mass resignation) then relying on OSHA, which will NOT help them (and will only help the boss cover up his/her hazardous work practices)

It's fantastic that these women took a stand, but I'm still bothered by the fact that (apparently) a lot of women responded positively to working there.

"I think these women are also getting tips from the men (more than likely) who frequent these coffee shops, so that kind of makes up for the minimum wage, like with stripping."

I highly doubt it. I've heard the tips at Hooters aren't much better than any other restaurant.
Men tip strippers because it means they get to get closer and touch the stripper or that the stripper will act more sexual in response. Strip club tips aren't "tips" for services rendered, they're incentives for the dancer to continue. It's not like anyone is going to throw the stripper an extra twenty dollars when they see her leaving in her car, fully clothed, because she's not going to do anything but drive off.
Customers don't feel any need to tip women who work at places at Hooters or Tacky Espresso because providing something to leer at is just a service those places provide automatically. Why would they tip the women more if they see the same amount of skin regardless of whether they tip at all?

Regardless, I'm skeeved out by these type of places but understand women CHOOSE to work at them. For a boss to impose this dress code and behavior on employees unexpectedly is completely disgusting.

I used to work at Starbucks and we had pretty strict dress codes about what you could and could not wear. Most of it was because we had to look professional but a lot of it was sheer protection.

I hate that nowadays it seems that the saying "sex sells" now means that it is the ONLY thing that sells. What about looking professional? Being safe? Having dignity? Don't any of those things count?

It also disturbs me that it was a woman who founded Cowgirl Espresso. It just rubs me the wrong way that a woman would exploit girls like that.

And school girl Thursday? I was a school girl and none of us looked like that!

I'm glad that one guy in the video said he was going to go where one of the baristas who quit goes. He should enter the sexy feminist contest.

"I'm sure bigger girls are going to be discriminated against during the hiring process. 'Cause lord knows the public doesn't want scantily clad fatties serving their coffee. /snark"

You basically took the words out of my mouth. If somewhere like Lane Bryant would only hire plus-sized gals, it would be discriminatory and an outrage but nobody would probably care that we ample-assed ladies aren't hired for Bikini Thursday or whatever.

Not that I want to participate, but it's awful to exclude any group.

Anyone know what male employees wear? Or if any of THEM quit out of solidarity with the females who left.

Ha! I loved your response, FEMily.

I've never left a comment here before, but I registered just so I could comment on this.

I live in Monroe, Washington, the town this article is about. I wanted to offer a bit of background on this coffeestand. A month ago, it was called a different name (Northwest Coffee Co.) and I was a frequent visitor. About two weeks ago, it was sold the name changed to Lola Bean. Before the name and ownership change, the employees wore normal clothes (and to answer a question above, there have never been any male employees there as far as I can remember).

One of my friends worked at Northwest Coffee when she was in high school, and even when she wore t-shirts, she made well over minimum wage ($7.93 in Washington state, by the way - not $5.15) with the tips. She made closer to $10 an hour.

I'd like to finish by saying that I will definitely no longer visit that particular espresso stand, and rather take my business to the other remaining Northwest Coffee Co. stand, which has yet to change its ownership or dress codes. I'm upset that the new owner decided to go to the new dress code, and moreso I'm upset that some young women in this town will end up working there regardless.

I am not surprised at all by the "overwhelming response" the owner supposedly received. Women learn that their bodies are their best commodities and are told to feel empowered by earning money from them.
And for some they just need validation and if they can be hired at Cowgirls or whatever, that's a nice self esteem boost that they need.

I am also very sick of "sex sells" - what a cop-out! Heroin and child pornography sells too, but that doesn't make it right. I am no prude, but the constant pandering to male sexuality is tiresome and juvenile.

That's the thing, Nonukar - by "sex" what's meant is "women's bodies."

Women learn that their bodies are their best commodities and are told to feel empowered by earning money from them.

Exactly, and that sort of fake "power" (which can be given or revoked at will by men) is only available to women who fit a certain standard -- young, thin, large breasted, non-disabled and probably white (although women of color can be considered if they're light-skinned, straight-haired and white-featured enough). This is what pisses me off about the "women get power by showing off their bodies" bullshit. Even if it were true, it would only apply to a tiny, tiny minority of women in the world -- and it's not really power at all, because men are still calling the shots by deciding who's hot and whether they really feel like "giving" power to any woman at any given moment. In fact, this attitude is really an admission that men, particularly straight ones, still hold the power in the world, because they're the only ones who would give women points for dressing like sexbots.

On women and "sexual power": I really have a problem with people assuming that sexual "power" translates into political and social and economical power, which is the essence of what gender equality should be about.

In fact, I don't think being sought after for sex is a power at all, but more of being the prey. If women were truly powerful in their sexual power, they'd have power in other spheres as well.

I was lucky enough to have had dinner with Gloria Steinem a few months ago, and she said something to the extend of: "If women truly had sexual power and are sleeping their way to the top, then how come they're still not the ones on top of the political and corporate ladder?" It made me laugh.

So, I worked in coffee shops for some time and I distinctly remember dress codes that did not allow things like sleeveless shirts or open-toed shoes because they were health code violations (Something about the fact that we were preparing the product in addition to serving it). How is it not a health code violation to do the same job in a bikini?

Wow. That reminds me of whta happened to my now-19 year old half-brother 13 years ago.

My brother was scalded when boiling water hit his chest. I didn't get word of the incident until after I got out of school. So, I personally knows how it feels to have someone you care about get scalded because he was naked.

That is why I applaud those women for walking out of Cowgirl Expresso. If my female boss told me to work naked or only in my underwear, then this 23 year old man from Aiken, South Carolina would quit as well, because no employee should have to expose themselves for a paycheck.