Avoid the Waldorf-Astoria

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**metallifan**

This is just sick. The management of this hotel should resign out of utter shame:

Hotel waiter forced to change his name

by Katharine Watts
A New York City hotel employee is suing after being forced to go by a different name

Waldorf-Astoria hotel waiter Mohamed Kotbi was forced to wear a nametag bearing a different name to prevent guests from being scared.

Kotbi was first given a nametag that said ‘John’ on Sept. 13, 2001 — two days after the Twin Towers were attacked. “I put it on. I was in shock,” he told the New York Post. He later complained to hotel management, but was simply told that they didn’t want to scare their guests.

He was eventually given a nametag with his correct last name—after filing discrimination complaints with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. However, he was recently given a name tag with the wrong name again, and according to the New York Post, was told by a manager that “It’s better to be Edgar than Mohamed today.”

After this condescending and discriminatory treatment, Kotbi is now suing the Waldorf for religious and racial discrimination. He’s also arguing that the hotel management failed to put a stop to tormenting by his co-workers, who he says repeatedly called him names like “terrorist” and “al Qaeda boy”.

When asked, Hilton hotels told USA Today that "the Waldorf has more than 1,600 employees 'representing six continents around the world and operates a non-discriminatory hiring policy'."

Non-discriminatory hiring policy—maybe. But what about a non-discriminatory treatment policy? You would think respect and fair treatment of all employees would be a given, especially at an esteemed hotel, but Kotbi, who has worked at the there since 1984, would argue otherwise.

**Kid_Kyoto**

disgusting. And seriously, in New York? DO they really think NYers go around assuming anyone named Mohammed is a terrorist?

**Avatar 720**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:disgusting. And seriously, in New York? DO they really think NYers go around assuming anyone named Mohammed is a terrorist?

Based on the reaction to the name from people i've met, I wouldn't put it past others.

**Revenent Reiko**

Thats horrifying, and a disgrace...i cant even think of the words to describe this any better than that

**WarOne**

This story appeared in the newspapers locally a few days ago.

Sadly, the hotel does have a point in trying to protect their image, as bad as that point may be and the means they used to protect their image.

I would be more concerned with the employee's saftey. While reports of violence against people assumed to be Muslims became a national focus after 9/11, it would be unlikely anything would be provoked against this one specific man for something he didn't even do.

**Revenent Reiko**

Theres protecting your image and then theres just plain racism and discrimination im sorry.
i kinda understand what you mean, but i dont agree with what they did at all. If they had done it for his safety then maybe, but they didnt, it was solely so they didnt look bad

**Chongara**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:disgusting. And seriously, in New York? DO they really think NYers go around assuming anyone named Mohammed is a terrorist?

I doubt it. However it was a hotel, not some random local spot. That potentially means a lot of Midwestern/Southerners, typically regions that are far more conservative & suspect of foreigners. I'm not saying it makes their actions remotely close to right or acceptable, but I can certainly understand where the concern was coming from.

**dogma**

Guest: Oh noes honey, its a brown man!

Waldorf Astoria: Its alright silly person, he has a good, strong American name!

I'm not sure what's worse, that the Waldorf Astoria felt this was acceptable, or that I can why it might actually be sound business acumen.

Pathetic.

**metallifan**

There's no way to justify this. If they were concerned about the employee's well being and the possiblity of racist violence against him, they should've given him some paid time off after both 9/11 and the bin Laden raid. What's more, the report says that he's been suffering racism and prejudice since he started there, and that he's told management about it but they waved it off.

As Tucker Max noted, a large number of the New York upper class loves to pretend that they're culturally aware, and that they love equality. But scratch the surface, even a little, and you can see that they're really closet racists that try to hide their views behind excuses of ethnic sensitivity. This is an excellent example.

**micahaphone**

They have employees representing six continents? They're even discriminating against Antarctica.

**metallifan**

Clearly it's because Penguins are black. Way to be subtle, Hilton.

**Da Boss**

I demand a Chinstrap Penguin waiter!

**4M2A**

I think it's more of a problem with the populations belief that muslim = terrorist than the hotel staff.

While what they did seems bad if they genuinly believed that it would have a noticable effect there isn't much they can do. They can't change people views. They are stuck with:

Make him change his name tag- this means they are considered racist.

Fire him- again that makes them seem racist.

Pay him and let him not work- How long can they do this for? What if people opinions don't change. They are paying someone for nothing.

Let him wear his real name- Lose customers because they don't want to be served by a "terrorist".

None of these options look good.

**metallifan**

4M2A wrote:I think it's more of a problem with the populations belief that muslim = terrorist than the hotel staff.

While what they did seems bad if they genuinly believed that it would have a noticable effect there isn't much they can do. They can't change people views. They are stuck with:

Make him change his name tag- this means they are considered racist.

Fire him- again that makes them seem racist.

Pay him and let him not work- How long can they do this for? What if people opinions don't change. They are paying someone for nothing.

Let him wear his real name- Lose customers because they don't want to be served by a "terrorist".

None of these options look good.

Here's a great idea that nullifies all those concerns: Let the customer ask for a different server if they don't like the fact that their current waiter has the name Muhammed.

Bam. Problem solved. Customer is just a bigot, and the hotel is just sticking to the "Customer is always right" policy. No harm there.

But by making him change his name out of assumption, they're clearly displaying racist tendancies. They -assume- that because his name is Muhammed, that there's going to be an issue. What's more, AGAIN, he's allegedly been harassed at work about his culture and ethnic background for years, and every time he's complained to management as he should, they told him to sod off.

Pretty sure that this is -exactly- what it looks like, and no amount of stuttered excuses can save face for these idiots

**4M2A**

As already said people don't like to admit they are racist. They could admit they think he is a terrorist and let everyone know they are racist or they could just go else where. I know what I would rather do.

**ShumaGorath**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:disgusting. And seriously, in New York? DO they really think NYers go around assuming anyone named Mohammed is a terrorist?

Yes, and for a while after 9/11 they pretty much did. Hows that terrorist ground zero mosque doing?

**metallifan**

4M2A wrote:As already said people don't like to admit they are racist. They could admit they think he is a terrorist and let everyone know they are racist or they could just go else where. I know what I would rather do.

I'm pretty sure that being a nationwide chain and part of the biggest hotel partnership in the world, the decision of the microscopic percentage of bigoted customers to avoid the company because of the fact that this particular hotel hired a Muslim is not going to have any noticable impact whatsoever on their revenue.

Again, this is the hotel management being a fustercluck of close-minded racist turds.

**dogma**

metallifan wrote:
Again, this is the hotel management being a fustercluck of close-minded racist turds.

Nah, if that were the case the guy would have been fired. This is hotel management expecting guests of the Waldorf Astoria, at leas a significant chunk of them, to have the logical capacity of 4-year-old children.

**AvatarForm**

WarOne wrote:This story appeared in the newspapers locally a few days ago.

Sadly, the hotel does have a point in trying to protect their image, as bad as that point may be and the means they used to protect their image.

I would be more concerned with the employee's saftey. While reports of violence against people assumed to be Muslims became a national focus after 9/11, it would be unlikely anything would be provoked against this one specific man for something he didn't even do.

Chongara wrote:
Kid_Kyoto wrote:disgusting. And seriously, in New York? DO they really think NYers go around assuming anyone named Mohammed is a terrorist?

I doubt it. However it was a hotel, not some random local spot. That potentially means a lot of Midwestern/Southerners, typically regions that are far more conservative & suspect of foreigners. I'm not saying it makes their actions remotely close to right or acceptable, but I can certainly understand where the concern was coming from.

dogma wrote:Guest: Oh noes honey, its a brown man!

Waldorf Astoria: Its alright silly person, he has a good, strong American name!

I'm not sure what's worse, that the Waldorf Astoria felt this was acceptable, or that I can why it might actually be sound business acumen.

Pathetic.

Ignorance is not a defence in modern society.

Muslim person =/= Terrorist, just as Terrorist =/= Muslim person

**Mannahnin**

That's really douchey.

Way to fail, W-A.

**WarOne**

AvatarForm wrote:Ignorance is not a defence in modern society.

Muslim person =/= Terrorist, just as Terrorist =/= Muslim person

Suprise.

We have people in modern society who cannot do that sort of math.

And hence the Waldorf Hysteria believes it is justified in treating one of their employees like that.

**dogma**

AvatarForm wrote:
Ignorance is not a defence in modern society.

That depends on how fervently you hold on to ignorant opinions.

**asimo77**

If my boss told me to change my "scary" Arab name I think I would uppercut his fool ass. Then again that might make people scared of me... But if people are already going to be terrified by me (supposedly) I might as well earn it.

**AvatarForm**

asimo77 wrote:If my boss told me to change my "scary" Arab name I think I would uppercut his fool ass. Then again that might make people scared of me... But if people are already going to be terrified by me (supposedly) I might as well earn it.

Alternatively, you can act according to common decency and attempt to reason it out.

I have many friends, who happen to be of the Islamic faith, and do not make it their case in life to purpetuate stereotypes.

**asimo77**

AvatarForm wrote:
asimo77 wrote:If my boss told me to change my "scary" Arab name I think I would uppercut his fool ass. Then again that might make people scared of me... But if people are already going to be terrified by me (supposedly) I might as well earn it.

Alternatively, you can act according to common decency and attempt to reason it out.

I have many friends, who happen to be of the Islamic faith, and do not make it their case in life to purpetuate stereotypes.

I wasn't being serious... I deal with plenty of racism, bigotry, and whatever else, and I haven't knocked someone's socks off...yet

**dogma**

AvatarForm wrote:
Alternatively, you can act according to common decency and attempt to reason it out.

I have many friends, who happen to be of the Islamic faith, and do not make it their case in life to purpetuate stereotypes.

I have a Pakistani friend who is basically the Muslim equivalent of a Sunday Catholic.

We often went drinking together, doing shots to the tune of "Praise Allah!"

**asimo77**

Wait he shouts "Praise Allah!" but he drinks alchohol?

**halonachos**

dogma wrote:
AvatarForm wrote:
Alternatively, you can act according to common decency and attempt to reason it out.

I have many friends, who happen to be of the Islamic faith, and do not make it their case in life to purpetuate stereotypes.

I have a Pakistani friend who is basically the Muslim equivalent of a Sunday Catholic.

We often went drinking together, doing shots to the tune of "Praise Allah!"

Sunday Catholics, giving us Saturday Catholics a bad name. Do you know how easy it is to go to church on a lousy sunday morning compared to going to church on a saturday afternoon?

Back on topic, yeah this isn't cool.

**dogma**

asimo77 wrote:Wait he shouts "Praise Allah!" but he drinks alchohol?

Yes.

Without naming names he is a sort of Pakistani scion.

**asimo77**

I'm very confused, what's a Sunday/Saturday Catholic? I though church/mass was always on Sundays.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:
asimo77 wrote:Wait he shouts "Praise Allah!" but he drinks alchohol?

Yes.

Without naming names he is a sort of Pakistani scion.

Now I'm more confused, what do you mean Pakistani scion. Unless my mental dictionary is off he's a Pakistani descendant or somesuch?