A frontline service worker at a Cinnabon was recently terminated after a video circulated showing her hurling a racist epithet at a Somali couple. The footage spread quickly with millions of views on TikTok. The employer acted swiftly. And, in a development emblematic of the current digital moment, the terminated employee has since raised more than $327,000 in online donations as part of “A Public Awareness Initiative.”
Public consensus around the underlying conduct was immediate. But employment law does not operate on consensus—it operates on process. Viral incidents like this one expose a growing tension between public outrage and the procedural expectations imposed on employers, particularly when discipline unfolds in real time and under intense scrutiny.
The question for employers is not whether racist conduct is unacceptable—it plainly is, and employers have a duty to ensure their workplace is free of discrimination and harassment. The question is whether, and how, employers can discipline such conduct while remaining tethered to their own policies, past practices, and legal obligations in an era when the internet demands instantaneous moral resolution.
What Investigation Was Conducted?
In moments like these, the investigative process itself often disappears. Then video appears and termination follows. What happens in between, including whether anything happens at all, matters significantly.
At a minimum, employers should be asking:
The Trump administration is reviewing diversity-related initiatives at major U.S. companies using a federal civil law that allows the government to recover money lost through fraud, according to r...