How Manners Coffee Culture Meets Cafe Seating Rules
In Chengdu on November 29, a woman drinking at a Starbucks objected to a delivery rider resting inside without buying anything, asked staff to remove him and said the air had been polluted. Starbucks staff and security escorted her out instead, and footage of the exchange spread quickly online, drawing heavy criticism of her remarks about status.
The case opened a wider argument about whether people may sit in a cafe without ordering. Starbucks' third place approach allows non-paying guests to stay, which clashes with some customers' expectations for the dining room. The episode shows how different groups share urban public space, and how staff must weigh courtesy to guests against the rules of the store.
If you were having coffee at Starbucks and a delivery rider who hadn't bought anything sat down next to you, would it bother you? Recently at a Starbucks in Chengdu, a female customer, displeased that a delivery rider was resting inside the store, demanded that staff throw him out on the grounds that "the air had been polluted"—only to end up being escorted out herself. The incident quickly went viral, with netizens fiercely debating two questions: Can you sit down without buying anything? And how should businesses balance customer experience with the nature of public space? Under Starbucks' "third place" philosophy, the policy of allowing non-paying guests to sit clashes with some consumers' expectations for the dining environment. This seemingly incidental dispute reflects a deeper issue: how different groups can coexist in urban public space.
▲
Click to follow | Daily specialty coffee culture magazine Coffee Workshop
Imagine you're sitting in a Starbucks enjoying your coffee when you suddenly notice a delivery rider on a seat by the wall who hasn't bought any drink—would you feel uncomfortable? On November 29, in Chengdu, Sichuan, a netizen reported that a woman, while consuming something at Starbucks, took issue with a delivery rider resting in the store and asked staff to kick him out. According to witnesses at the scene, the rider was only taking a brief rest inside, but the female customer felt he was disrupting her leisure experience and insisted on having him removed.
Qianjiang Video reported that the reason this customer gave for her dissatisfaction was, shockingly, that the air in the store had been polluted by the delivery rider! Bystanders also heard her loudly declare that a delivery rider could never be on the same level as her. In the end, Starbucks staff and security escorted the woman out of the store.
Remarks like "polluting the air" and "not on the same level" immediately triggered a strong backlash online. Many people argued that both the woman and the delivery rider are ordinary workers—so where does this idea of superior and inferior come from? Public places should abide by public order and rules; if someone cares so much about their personal experience and fears the air being polluted, they are free to book out a time slot and ban delivery riders during it—but they must compensate the business and other customers for the corresponding loss of foot traffic.
However, since the delivery rider in this incident wasn't there to consume anything and was merely finding an empty seat to rest briefly, this raises another question: can you sit down without buying anything?
On one hand, some argue that seats are reserved for paying customers; occupying a seat without buying anything not only squeezes into limited space and seating but also siphons off the resources the business invests in service and cleaning, effectively infringing on the rights of genuine customers and hurting the business. One netizen asked: "That said, if one day Starbucks is packed with delivery riders and non-paying people, would customers still be willing to sit in your store and spend money?"
Moreover, some netizens believe whether a non-paying delivery rider should be asked to leave depends on the specific situation: "Some riders really do have poor manners—for example, talking loudly, speaking, coughing or sneezing without a mask at the pickup counter or customer seating, not yielding and bumping into customers, their clothing kicking up dust, their vehicles blocking the door or taking up parking spaces, and so on." Such behavior genuinely ruins the in-store consumption environment. It's suggested that shops with the means and higher standards could set up a separate pickup counter.
Even with this real-world problem before us, in this particular incident the Starbucks store wasn't anywhere near full capacity. If the delivery rider was just quietly sitting in a seat resting and wasn't causing much disruption to those around him, then there was no need to be so harsh on him.
On the other hand, one of the core elements of Starbucks' corporate culture is "creating a brand-new experiential cultural atmosphere" and providing a "third place." According to insiders, Starbucks' policy is not to drive customers away without cause, and its employee handbook explicitly states: "Guests who have not made a purchase are allowed to sit in the store or use the restroom." So the delivery rider's actions were not a major problem in themselves.
Back to the question at the beginning: now that you know the whole story, what do you make of it? Image source: Internet
Disclaimer: Some images in this article are from the internet, and for some content on the site, such as images, we will respect the original author's copyright and indicate the source. However, due to the sheer volume, a few images and texts may not have been credited in time; we ask for your understanding. If the original author has any dispute, they may contact the website and we will handle it; once verified, we will correct it immediately. Compiled and edited by "Coffee Workshop"; please indicate the source when reposting. If there is any infringement, please notify us for removal. Thank you~!
The above content is compiled by CoffeeHunters, a coffee news website.
