truthiness

Khalil Cavil is a server at The Saltgrass Steak House in Odessa Texas. Although he shares his fine Arabic first name with the great Lebanese Poet Khalil Gibran, Cavil is an all American biracial Christian - his father gave that name after a friend of his that had died in an accident.

And although the diner whom he served out $108.73 of food to was fine with letting Kahlil handle his steakhouse fare, when it came time to tip he decided to be a jerk.

Washington Post

“Cavil, a waiter from Odessa, Tex., said the note he received Saturday night from one of his tables left him speechless and “sick to my stomach.” The next day he posted an image of the note on Facebook, where it has since been shared 19,000 times and garnered nearly 8,000 comments, most of which were positive.

“I share this because I want people to understand that this r****m, and this hatred still exists. Although, this is nothing new, it is still something that will test your faith,” wrote Cavil, who didn’t respond to a request for comment from The Post.

It’s unknown who those customers were (Cavil redacted the personal information of the person whose credit card was used to pay for the meal). But Terry Turney, chief operating officer of Saltgrass Steak House where Cavil works, said the customer is now banned from the restaurant.

“We stand by and support our employee,” Turney said in a statement. “R****m of any form is unacceptable.”

Some supporters have since found ways to send Cavil money to make up for the tip he didn’t receive. In a follow-up Facebook post on Wednesday, Cavil thanked those who have sent him money.

But he said: “I want to make it very clear that this was never about the tip nor the money. It was about shedding a light on r****m and sharing the love of Jesus. It was about igniting conversations because I believe real change happens when we start talking about the issue and acknowledging it’s there.”
.....
PennyLynn had some interesting legal comments about the Sarah Sanders affair in Virginia. I hope she will comment on whether the complainant in Texas can be "banned" for life for a non-criminal act.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

What was in the note???

bahmer

I would think that the Steak HOuse in Texas should be able to ban whomever they want it after all is money out of their pocket so to speak and they should be able to refuse service to prevent something out of the ordinary happening in their establishment from either side.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

This is the note.

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Ohhhhh!!!This is horrible,but unfortunately these i***ts are protected under 1st Amend!!!.....

bahmer

If I was so afraid that my server was a terrorist I would have left the establishment and gone elsewhere rather than risk my life and possibly being poisoned or something else happen. I mean if you are that convinced then you are tempting fate to have him serve you are you not?

woodguru

That's not a protester, that's a pure dikwad. If you can't be civil to people in a restaurant including the servers you have no business being in that restaurant. As a restaurant owner or manager you have every right to refuse to serve someone who can't treat your help right. The owner would have the right to openly say that in light of the last time he was in the restaurant none of his servers wanted to serve him.

They should have released the guy's name on twitter so that he was at risk for being shunned or losing his job or business, it isn't working well for people who get busted displaying r****t behaviors in public.

Interesting case concerning refusing to serve politicians and public figures. I had a friend in the military that was from Arkansas that was ridiculously prejudiced. In a coffee shop he made a big stink about a n****r cooking his food, said cook put a big booger right on top of his hamburger. If you are so prejudiced that you can't act civil to the help bad things are going to happen, and a restaurant has the right to refuse to serve someone who can't conduct themselves like a civil human being.

How about a "we don't serve r****t bigots" sign, all you have to do to eat there is not act like a r****t bigot even if you are. It's called behavior modification.

Someone who acts like an ass shouldn't want to go back where they've acted like a jerk, their food is going to get trashed, guaranteed.

We're headed toward restaurants putting a sign up that says they are friendly to Trump politicians, lol. It's getting iffy to be seen in public

proud republican Loc: RED CALIFORNIA

Then what do you think about what happened to Sara Sanders and her family...If that owner of said restaurant cant put her political differences aside while serving to people she disagrees with, should she be in a restaurant business???

EmilyD

Very good point!!

bahmer

another excellent point thank you.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Actually the restaurant is wrong, they can not ban a person because they do not tip. There must be a compelling reason for denial of service. A tip is a personal gratuity for services and is not mandatory. Under certain circumstances a restaurant can deny service: Patrons who are unreasonably rowdy or causing trouble, Patrons that may overfill capacity if let in, Patrons who come in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed, Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers looking to sit in, and Patrons lacking adequate hygiene (e.g. excess dirt, extreme body odor, etc.). I think if this was adjudicated the restaurant would loose the case. The note was ugly and in my opinion uncalled for, but not against any Federal or Texas law. Had it included a threat, include the wait person's race, religion or sexual orientation, then the outcome would be different. So, the customer and their note is considered protected speech.

Not knowing all the details I am assuming, which could be wrong, that the only thing the customer did was leave an ugly note and did not tip. They did not make a fuss, disrupt the dining of other customers, or similar activities. If, however, they did then the restaurant can ban that customer or group and procure a restraining order disallowing them to be on the property or a set distance.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

The Red Hen could defend their case by simply saying that Sarah, being well known, could draw an unreasonable crowd. Those who dislike her because she works for President Trump with protests and those that support the President and could have caused logistical issues both inside and outside of the Red Hen. However, Ms. Sanders did not make a scene and politely departed the premises before a crowd could gather. The owner of the Red Hen did follow her and amassed a group of people to protest her. Had she not gone that extra step, she would be home free. But, she incited a r**t. Breaking federal as well as Virginia state law. Inciting a r**t applies to a person who organizes, encourages, or participates in a r**t. It can apply to one who urges or instigates others to r**t. According to 18 USCS § 2102 "to incite a r**t", or "to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a r**t", includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to r**t, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.”

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

I sincerely doubt that the customer had any fears, they were just being Jacks!

bahmer

You're probably right about that, if that customer returned you could ask if they want their sandwich wrapped in an exploding vest and if they are lucky enough to get the vest off of the sandwich before it explodes they will be allowed to eat the sandwich.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

Now that is funny! But, that would also get them in trouble.... as it is a veiled threat.