Had I been the manager of this establishment and witnessed a woman consuming “drink after drink” while breastfeeding, I would have asked her to leave the restaurant on the grounds that she was upsetting the other customers. (NOT because she was breastfeeding.) Depending upon the circumstances, I may or may not have alerted police. But regardless, what bothers me is the assumption that the server — one Jackie Conners — was fired in retaliation for reporting this woman.
How do we know she wasn’t fired for something completely unrelated? The answer is, we don’t. The fact that Conners may have none a noble deed does not necessarily mean she was a model employee. I’m not saying her claim should be discounted, just that it needs to be verified. This story was reported by a local news source which took the time to question the manager. They couldn’t have tried to verify her story with an ex-coworker? Surely, she could have put reporters in contact with someone who could lend some credibility to her claim. It’s not as if she were fired on the spot; according to the news outlet which originally broke the story, Conners’s employment was not terminated until a number of days later.
(You’d think the media might have learned a thing or two after the Dayna Morales fiasco.)