How Nathaniel’s Restaurant created a media nightmare for itself
24 Comments
Karen Hamilton
June 7, 2008
A friend turned me on to the story of Owen Sound server Stacey Fearnall, who was recently canned from her job at Nathaniel’s Restaurant for lopping off her hair for Cops for Cancer.
Photo used with permission. Care of John Fearnall of Some Good Noise
The media picked up her story this week and it seems like the entire Canadian dining community is ablaze with righteous indignation. Owners Dan Hilliard and Jeff Ferris are reeling from the negative backlash, which culminated in the Ontario restaurant shutting its doors for Thursday night.
The Details
From what I have been able to dig up,
- Fearnall said that she did inform Nathaniel’s in advance about shaving her head for Cops for Cancer. A regular patron of Nathaniel’s testified in a CBC.ca comment that it had been publicly shared one night in front of diners and the staff.
- Nathaniel’s expressed a measure of discomfort at Fearnall’s plans and communicated it as such, citing their dress code as grounds for not supporting the method in which she chose to fundraise. A few sources describe how Nathaniel’s requested that Fearnall find other means to fundraise that did not involve shaving her head. It was not explicitly stated that Fearnall would be risking her employment by participating in the fundraiser.
- [EDIT: Wearing a wig was suggested to Fearnall before she shaved her head. She was against the idea. See comment thread.] After Fearnall appeared at the restaurant with her head shorn, she was asked to wear a wig. Upon her refusal to wear it, Fearnall was asked to take the summer off (presumably to have her hair grow back). Nathaniel’s did not intend to signify a layoff; rather, the move was seen by the employer as a leave of absence.
- The story reached the Canadian press and resulted in an enormous outpouring of sympathy for Fearnall. Nathaniel’s, on the other hand, and particularly owner / chef Dan Hilliard, have been demonized by the media and its readership for the way that Fearnall has been treated.
- Few articles exist to counterbalance the general pro-Fearnall perspective. TheStar.com, The Sault Star, and the Owen Sound Sun Times come closest to covering the incident with Nathaniel’s points of view taken into account.
- According to the Fearnalls, they did not contact the media themselves. They shared the incident with friends and the scene unfolded from there.
My Two Cents
My knee-jerk reaction to the story was likely the most common one: outrage. Boycott the restaurant! Throw more donation money at Fearnall!
Upon closer inspection, it seems that both sides of the incident could have handled the situation better. There are indications that the owners are not so monstrous as they have been made out to be. Even the Fearnalls have said so.
Regardless of the spin doctoring and my personal feelings on how the incident played itself out, one has to agree that as a business, the actions taken by the restaurant were shortsighted and hurt the reputation of Nathaniel’s a lot more than a bald female server could ever have. As they no doubt have seen, the backlash reaches far beyond the dining community of Owen Sound. A restaurant like Nathaniel’s would have never been on my radar. They could be the best restaurant in Owen Sound for all I know. Today, if my West Coast self ever happened to travel to the area, remembrance of this news frenzy would certainly cause me to avoid Nathaniel’s without ever inquiring about the strength of their cuisine.
A savvy entrepreneur would have been able to spin an employee’s “questionable” fundraising effort into a publicity stunt (and not a public relations nightmare). We support our employees! We care about cancer research! Look at how she has shaved her head! Come back and dine with us because we obviously give back to the community through our staff!
References
Please read these pieces (and more as you find them) to make up your own mind about Fearnall and Nathaniel’s Restaurant.
John Fearnall @ Some Good Noise: The story straight from the Fearnalls
CBC.ca – June 5, 2008: Waitress loses job after shaving head for cancer charity
Owen Sound Sun Times – June 6, 2008: Public rallies behind waitress
TheStar.com – June 5, 2008: Waitress laid off after shaving head for cancer
The Sault Star – June 5, 2008: Shaving head for cancer costs Owen Sound woman her job
How can Nathaniel’s redeem themselves?
Okay, now that you’ve read up on the matter (right?), please share your thoughts. The Fearnalls have expressed on their site and to me via email that they do not wish to see Nathaniel’s go under as a result of this media storm. What do you think Nathaniel’s can do to mitigate the negativity that currently surrounds them?
Let’s stay constructive and forward-looking, pretty please.
Categories: Beyond Vancouver, Food, Restaurants
Comments
24 Responses to “How Nathaniel’s Restaurant created a media nightmare for itself”
Got something to say?
About Tiny Bites
Tiny Bites is a food blog that explores all things edible and imbibable in Vancouver, British Columbia. More >
Articles by Karen Hamilton
Read the food and non-food articles that I've contributed to sites other than Tiny Bites.
Despite the fact that the owner’s at Nathaniel’s warned Fearnall that shaving her head would most likely result in punitive action, I still find her forced LOA unjust. I realize that they have a dress code to adhere to, but my belief is that so long as staff are being hygienic, dress code should not apply to aesthetics. I even disagree with their policy of no earrings on men.
Thanks for the great post, Karen! I hadn’t heard about the issue elsewhere!
Karen,
I have to say that I think the Nathaniel’s owner/chef made a bad decision here. As some of the CBC comments pointed out, this seems to be more of a sexism issue, and I have to agree with that. Would they lay a man off or offer him a wig if he were bald? And if Stacey were an actual cancer patient going through chemo and thus bald, would they lay her off? NO to both questions. She has a human rights complaint for sure, and Nathaniel’s will probably never be the same.
Just my two cents.
lets reflect on something. The server was hired based on more than just a pleasant attitude, experience, and good character. Her presentation is also taken into account. How many servers do you know that have a Tattoo on their face?
If she had interviewed with one she would not have been employed. The resteraunt is being demonized because the server is not abiding by the standards the resteraunt has set.
Good!
If it was not for the charity element to the story this would be a non-story. the resteraunt should make a large donation to the police charity and then quietly not ask her back at all. Why should they? She obviously cares more about embarrassing her employer than helping the establishment.
Sorry folks, it’s a contract agreement when your server. This is why they get tips instead of salaries in the US and you don’t see too many Fat girls working at Hooters.
Take the charity aspect out of this and you have a story about sexual double standards. Period.
A very dear friend of mine was diagnosed with cancer 3 weeks ago and began his chemo and radiation treatments last Monday. He shaved his head on Sunday night rather than deal with losing his hair piecemeal. Would he have been asked by the owners to “take the summer off” until his treatments were over?
.
I think dress codes are fine. I think blind adherence to them without consideration of the circumstances is stupid.
It was handled very poorly. I do have some concerns about an employer being able to dictate the length of someone’s hair though. Cancer fundraiser or no, dress code; fine. She is certainly more hygeinic, less likely that her hair would fall into your food; but that notwhistanding, it reeks of sexism because the same hair length certainly doesn’t apply to the male employees. Isn’t that the very definition of sexism?
I think legally the owners of Nathaniel’s had every right to lay off this woman. But then she also had the right to go public with the story. She was apparently laid off because she refused to wear a wig… fine but it seems to me to be a bit of sour grapes that the owner felt he had the right to create consequences for her actions (refusing to wear a wig) while expecting to be shielded from the consequences of his own actions in laying her off. He’s upset that she went public, oh cry me a river. So it’s fine if he’s giving the consequences (an entire summer of lost wages) but not OK if he’s the recipient of consequences?
A couple of clarifications:
- According to John Fearnall, the Fearnalls did not speak to the media until *after* the owners of Nathaniel’s had replied to the media. Other people had a role in breaking the story to the press.
- John also mentioned after my post was published that the suggestion of a wig was discussed before Stacey shaved her head (she was against the idea). When she came into work with her new hairstyle, she was not asked after that point to wear a wig. I’ll make note of that in the original post text.
Thanks for your thoughts about what had happened. Now I’d like to hear about the future of the restaurant. What do you think the restaurant can do, from this point forward, to mitigate the bad publicity?
Ideas that have been suggested for Nathaniel’s thus far include a public apology; holding a Cops for Cancer fundraiser at the restaurant; participating in the shave-your-hair concept as a show of suppport.
Yes, they have done themselves a doozy with this……A HUGE public, like, REALLY public apology, donating $ to the said charity along with ones to other cancer research places….and of course, get Stacey back…..at this point that is what will, maybe, bring folks back in. I assume that if they don’t do something really “good” then that restaurant is histoy.
Sean, if it was a contract I would think these owners would have sensed that they should have done somethng other then what they did……sorry, plain dumb.
The future and what to do?
Immediately hold a press conference, say you’re terribly sorry about the misunderstandings, that of course Stacey will come in to work as usual and get paid for the few days she’s missed since the misunderstanding.
Look at the cameras, and say with sincerity that you as the owner, and the restaurant as a business, not only support Stacey’s fundraising efforts for cancer research, but that you are immediately matching the money she raised and call on all other Owen Sound businesses to do the same.
Tell the press you’re going from the press conference with your cheque to the local Cancer Society office to give it to them.
Then say that in order to show thanks for the publics’ understand and for their continued support of cancer research, you’ll donate 25% of the sales during Stacey’s shifts for the rest of the summer.
That last one will get people to come in to the restaurant, show corporate accountability, give Stacey extra tips (we would hope), and make the public want to come to eat there instead of staying away. Oh yea, and raise more needed money.
The key is to swallow whatever issues the owner may have had with Stacey and take the steps almost immediately.
The longer it festers, the more feeble any reparation work looks.
I think the following could be attempted by the owners, and should have been done immediately once this story went public:
1. A VERY PUBLIC and HEARTFELT APOLOGY to Stacey Fearnall and everyone who’s life has been touched by cancer, and those who took offence to their actions.
2. Both Jeff and Dan should volunteer not only financial pledges to cancer research, but their time in cancer wards of hospitals, also, because talk and money are cheap… they’ve got to walk the walk!
3. A handsome cash settlement (at least a year’s wages) to Stacey, who most likely will never return to work for either of these guys. Forget dress code, they have violated her as a woman and as a thinking and free human being who was standing up for a worthy and significant cause in her life. A dress-code is one thing, but the control they want amounts to ownership.
4. Promise to go for professional mental health counselling. For them to believe they could take these actions without consequences is childish and foolish. To be so shallow and show no compassion or understanding is nothing short of a lack of basic human traits and social skills.
5. Donate a significant amount of their earnings to the cause (i.e. at least a month) and heavily advertise that they are doing so.
Short of implementing all of my suggestions 1-5 above, I have one last suggestion: Join the Taliban so we can legally hunt you down.
Good luck to them, and I only wish that for them if that’s truly what Stacey wishes for them, too.
I think people should lay off Nathaniel’s restaurant at this stage. Dan Hilliard made a mistake and has been completely lambasted for it. Give the guy a break. He’s publicly apologized. Fearnalls have forgave them.
Remember Nathaniels’s has other employees who work there too with families to support.
If I’m in Owen Sound, I’ll be stopping by Nathaniel’s.
I think the Shave your Hair concept by all management would be a great show of support.
A choice ‘to wear a wig’?
As a person who loved and lost to cancer, this is very insulting.
There is no shame, but a quiet dignity in losing your hair to cancer; the individuals who shave their heads in support of this cause are the few who, painfully for Mrs. Fearnall, realize how a loss of self can shadow the disease.
Regardless of dress codes, a humanitarian thought was not given on how this would affect those who lost their hair due to cancer, and the ones that supported them as they fought.
I am glad that the restaurant is losing business over this incident. I do think that both sides could of come to some sort of compromise on how to fundraise for cancer. However, I think she has the right to shave her head for cancer if she really wants to. I mean, it will grow back quickly. I am a male, in my mid-fifties and I don’t have much hair left. I would feel funny going to that restaurant to eat, knowing the owner will scrutinize my head. I could wear a hat, but after all it is a restuarant and hats should be off. I think I will just go somewhere else to eat.
What an PR nightmare the owners have created for themselves. As someone who works in the cancer system in Ontario, I am grateful on behalf of all patients for Ms. Fearnalls contribution to research and cancer care. I believe the owners should apologize to the public for their lack of compassion, and make a donation to the cause, through Ms. Fearnalls campaign.
There seems to be a lot of conversation as to Ms. Fearnalls human/charter rights on this issue…it would be nice to hear from an expert as to whether her rights were actually denied.
I am through the Owen Sound area on a regular basis, and will seek out this restaurant and give it my custom, if a proper apology is made.
Thanks for the opportunity to voice my two cents.
Mike
I still think if the owners go Bankrupt. Servers them right. Maybee, this will set an example for other companies to be very careful.
In a written statement Dan Hilliard offered his “sincere apologies to Mrs. Fearnall, the Canadian Cancer Society, Cops for Cancer and the public for failing to resolve the issue of Mrs. Fearnall shaving her head for Cops for Cancer prior to Mrs. Fearnall contacting the media.”
This is an apology??? This says Dan Hilliard is sorry it was leaked and that he was unable to keep it quiet… some apology!!!
Interesting take on this story. What can Nathaniel’s do to mitigate the negativity that currently surrounds them? Firstly, the written statement Dan Hilliard issued is clearly not enough. But it’s not too late to give a heartfelt apology. The owner should hold a press conference, offer his sincere, deep and heartfelt apology for this mistake, while admitting that he is only human and humans make mistakes. He should also get his staff to shave his head for Cops for Cancer, and give the charity a modest donation. All of this would help, but it may still not be enough to save the restaurant.
Going bald for Cancer, why and why not;
Why; We unfortunately, are still in the process of (hopefully) transcending our narrowminded society that doesn’t tolerate anything out of place, be it the result of misfortune or harmless choice. The most insanely insignificant ‘deviation’ have led to the the minority group in question being ghettoized and left to rot.
People who have the misfortune to suffer from cancer, in addition to the pains of the disease itself, have also long suffered the stupid, judging, disgusted stares of others, when they lose their hair to the treatments. They were made to feel alone and less human by the stupid General Public. THAT’S why the fundraising events feature going bald. When the owner of Nathaniel suggested that the waitress chose another means of fundraising, he’s saying, “chose something that is less disturbing, because bald people are disturbing, inhuman”.
2. Why not bald? Even if she didn’t do it for a cancer charity, it’s her head. It doesn’t interfere with her job. If standards must be set for appearance, it must at least be equal, which it is not, because there are bald men serving at Nathaniel, and the owner has outright said that men aren’t allow to wear earrings. That’s gender discrimination. Probably with a big heap of homophobia underlying it too. I don’t care if SOME customers are disgusted, their inhuman narrowmindedness shouldn’t be legally catered to.
Simply stated, the owners of Nathaniels only option in my book is to hang their head in shame tuck their tails between their legs and set up shop in a new town, then pray to the business gods that their reputation does not follow them.
Sounds harsh right, think about the harshness millions of people go through everyday fighting cancer and watching their hair fall out. I have personally seen it over a dozen times and have buried some that lost.
The owners of Nathaniels can say that the employee was warned before she underwent her transformation however by admitting that they can literally start adding to the lawsuit.
So how can Nathaniels redeem themselves, simply put, they cannot, they buried themselves by recognizing an amazing feat ( $2700 is an amount to be proud of) with a slap in the face, not only to their employee but to all cancer survivors, cancer victims and cancer victims families which translates out to me as a slap in the face to the entire world.
Hopefully Nathaniels is suffering from a loss of business and when he closes the doors I would sincerely hope that cooking in McDonalds is about the best employment he evr finds
Nathanial’s was 100% correct in their decision. They have a business to run, their business being a higher end restaurant which relies on their servers to appear neat and personable. If this means no shaved heads then that’s what it means.
I find that the mob who is crying ‘Kill Nathanial’s’ so full of hate that it’s pathetic.
I have seen much dishonesty on the mobs part in particular trying to ruin Nathanial’s by posting downright lies on the restaurant review site. Shame on you, you go along bots who have not an original thought in your heads.
Hmm…Karl Jungblut…your comment is disturbing…no shaved heads?…no pregnant women?…no black people?…no asian people?…no one who’s name is Jungblut?…no one who is not like me!!!! Very reminiscent of the late 1930′s/early 1940′s….NO?
Have to agree with Phil here, an apology at this point, no matter how heartfelt, is to little to late. The same is probably largely true about charity donations and all the related activities suggested – great Karma but the effect on public opinion is liable to be minimal. Hilliard need to pray like hell that, though annoying, a lot of this “public opinion” won’t amount to much anyway since most of the protestors are probably not “fine dining clientelle” to begin with. I’m not saying this is necessarily true, just that it is probably about the only thing he can really hope for. One thing he should be able to do right away is get the rest. review websitesto eliminate the obviously false reviews (Google says this hasn’t been done, or at least not successfully.) Two wrongs don’t make a right in this case and site owners/moderators should certainly understand that that kind of bashing destroys THEIR credibility. If business is down badly enough, then SELL. “under new management” may be the only effective counter to the mob psychology. As another poster suggested, try to move far away enough that your reputation hasn’t preceeded you (New Zealand might be about right) and start over. If there is a darwin award for businesses, you are probably a strong contender. Unfortunately, there is little likelyhood of any cash award being part of the prize.
North Bay just had their annual “Cops for Cancer” fund raiser last Sunday. My brother raised 9,000.00 for the cause and had his “long” hair shaved and donated for wigs.
Myself my 10 years old nephew and my 12 year old daughter have also had our heads shaved for the cause on other years.
I am outraged at the actions of Nathaniels owners!
I will do my outmost best to make sure that this restaurant does not get any business from anyone that I know and I will NEVER go back there myself.