Proper Protocol for Leads/Managers and Subordinates in Dealing with Customer Conflicts

A "minister" who I followed on Facebook and had a great deal of respect for—prior to this—posted about an incident involving an elderly lady who died after a scuffle with a restaurant/coffee shop employee. I had not personally seen any media coverage of the ordeal at that time. Hearing that this elderly lady lost her life after an employee attacked her after she supposedly put hands on her didn't set right with me, however...

To hear this "minister" essentially say that the elderly lady had it coming because she started it readily and thoroughly disgusted me. I pointed out to the minister that attacking someone in a manner that results in their death is only merited if the life of the person who caused the death was endangered, which, clearly, was not the case, since this lady was apparently so fragile that she died as a result of this altercation...

Per the "minister," the elderly lady had "lied" about the restaurant employee jumping on her to the 9-1-1 operator who took her call and the whole thing had been caught on camera. Come to find out this was a 75-year-old lady with congestive heart failure who had raised a concern about a mix-up with her order... 

What the video footage of the ordeal actually reveals is an apparent improper exchange of words between the customer and the shift lead (that could not be heard), the shift lead pointing the customer to the door, and the elderly lady pointing to the employee who happened to be a 17-year-old who was apparently responsible for the mix-up with her order... 

The shift lead places her hand on the elderly lady's shoulder to supposedly separate her from the minor employee, who is standing a considerable distance from the counter, which further separated the lady from the employee(s), and, notably, the lady never entered the counter area to launch an attack. All contact that she made with the shift lead was responsive to the shift lead touching her...

With regards to the 17-year-old, I happen to have a 17-year-old daughter and her safety at her place of employment when she was employed via a city summer work program going into her junior and senior years of high school was one of my utmost concerns. I was equally concerned for my son when he participated in the same program going into his senior year of high school. I certainly would never condone anyone harming a minor or any employee...

...I'm still concerned for my son's safety now that he is an adult in the workforce and will be for my daughter when she is an employed adult. The least of my concerns is my children disrespecting their elders. I raised them better. Every parent should have or re-visit that conversation with their children prior to releasing them into the workforce, this and the need to show respect to all persons and how to constructively manage conflicts with other people. Employers should additionally discuss these things with all employees during the new-hire/orientation process... 

...The proper course of action that the shift lead in the subject ordeal should have taken was to apologize to the customer and offer to fix her order rather than arguing with her. ONLY if the lady insisted on arguing after an offer had been made to correct her order and she was asked to refrain from speaking inappropriately to the employees should she have been asked to leave and/or the shift lead should have contacted law enforcement... 

...In any event, the shift lead moved inappropriately when she exited the counter to attack the lady. Though the elderly lady was in the wrong for pushing the shift lead's forehead, the shift lead's life was not endangered to merit a self-defense claim. She should have stayed behind the counter and called the police. A self-defense claim would have been merited had the elderly lady entered behind the counter to attack either employee and she could not have been restrained...

Valid interrogatories for this case are #1. What was the issue with the lady's order? #2. Had an exchange of words occurred at the drive-through window between the elderly lady and the employee who took her order and, if so, what exactly was said? and #3. Did the employee who took the order and/or the shift lead offer to correct the customer's order?

A drive-through customer should never have to exit their vehicle to resolve an issue with their order. Customers should resolve any issue with their order or change (if they paid with cash) before leaving the drive through the same way they should not leave the in-door counter before checking to see if their order and change are correct. Signs articulating this should be placed at service counters and windows with a statement requesting the patience of waiting customers who'll be given the same courtesy...

The customer should, respectfully, of course, articulate the issue with the employee who distributes their order to them and said employee should allow a reasonable amount of time (at least 1 to 2 minutes) for them to do so, whether this is at the window or at a forward spot where the employee instructs the customer to park to have their order delivered to them... 

Once the customer has articulated a valid issue, the employee should in fact apologize and offer to correct the order or offer and provide a refund to the customer if they prefer. Point blank, issue resolved. Employees should avoid as much as reasonably possible getting into heated debates with customers; they should certainly never incite argumentation by initiating disrespectful dialogue or purposely mishandling an order... 

Again, if a customer is disrespectful, the employee should remain composed and respectfully ask the customer to refrain from improper speech. I am confident that had an apology and a composed request to speak respectfully to the staff in the subject issue been given with a corrected order this ordeal would have never escalated to the extent that it did and the elderly lady would still be alive...