Starbucks along with other forward-thinking retailers are putting safety first. I suspect that Starbucks’ customers will be agreeable to the rules and compliance will likely be high. The more prevalent face mask wearing is, the less of an issue this will become. Face mask wearing is becoming normalized, and I suspect the awkward and unhelpful confrontations with people not wearing them will diminish over time.

It’s not just confrontations between shoppers and store associates — it’s also confrontations between masked and unmasked shoppers that are becoming a problem. Costco, for one, has had few reported incidents because its policy is so straightforward. Starbucks is doing the right thing, in the absence of any consistent governmental approach to the issue even as the numbers of cases rise in many parts of the country. It looks like it’s going to be up to private businesses to “flatten the curve” once and for all, if enough of them follow the lead of Starbucks, Apple and Costco.

This is Starbucks’ decisions. Most customers will not have a problem with this. There will be a small group of customers that won’t agree and believe that this violates their rights. Starbucks (and any other brand) must be willing to lose those customers if they make a decision like this – and they are. The policy must be clear and visible to customers. Managers and employees must be trained on how to handle conflicts. There may be extreme circumstances where law enforcement may need to be brought in, especially if the situation threatens the safety of employees and customers.

It should be simple: no shirt, no shoes, no mask, no service. Sadly, the federal government, fueled by social media and our hyper-partisan climate, has turned a public health issue into a culture war. I agree with Tom’s suggestion that a more unified and consistent approach to mask mandates across states is the key to higher compliance — and fewer confrontations. Here’s hoping many more retailers soon follow the lead of Starbucks, Costco, et al, and we can end this headache for store associates everywhere.

Sadly, I am sure that this will lead to some conflicts. A small minority seem to be hellbent on creating a huge fuss over masks. This is unpleasant for other customers and especially for staff. However it’s really simple: if you don’t like a retailer’s mask policy then don’t visit and go elsewhere or stay home. Despite the hassle it may create, Starbucks has a right to enact whatever policies it sees as necessary for keeping its staff, customers and the community safe.

What the laissez faire policy of the federal government and many governors of states did not accomplish regarding the control of the coronavirus, certain, more conscientious institutions will take upon themselves. Because of their constant exposure to customers, retailers need to be very concerned with the welfare of customers and employees alike (servers’ lives are also important). What the federal government and states will not do, Starbucks and other retailers will. If some customers do not like the restriction, they have the freedom of choice to buy overpriced coffee elsewhere.

Again corporations step in when there is weak leadership at the top. Masks should have never been made into fundraising or clickbait for some. They should have been mandated from the start, as in New York. We can’t look back but until there is a vaccine, more retailers should jump on the bandwagon – especially now as the Texas governor has finally reversed his course and mandated wearing masks.

RILA is absolutely correct that enforcement should not rest on the shoulders of private industry.

As more states make PPE a requirement, it will become moot and no longer a burden for retail or other establishments to bear the brunt of confrontation.

I think Starbucks is thinking about customer safety which is the right thing to do. It is still in awkward stage (dealing with those that don’t want to wear masks) but I believe that will subside as wearing masks for the short term will become the norm.

The opening of dining rooms has not lessened the use of drive-thrus. The lines at drive-thrus have actually increased here.

Good for Starbucks! For those with an issue, there’s Starbucks’ drive-thru.

The masked/un-masked behavior of people, cities, states and countries has become the biggest study of how to prevent disease ever in the history of the world. The results are conclusive — absolutely without question.

Starbucks and all the others are going in the right direction to protect their customers and employees. No mask, no entry, no confrontation.

Sadly it seems that some who refuse to wear a mask are spoiling for a confrontation. A little de-escalation training might be appropriate for managers to stop people at the door who think it is their right to infect others. Hopefully the un-masked will start to understand where they are not wanted and will simply pass by. Will they then start wearing masks? I doubt it.

The place to inform customers regarding your mask policy is before they enter the store. Retailers should post easily readable and highly visible signage that states wearing a mask is required to enter the store. I am sure there is far better wording but I see this as the same type of communication as “no shirt, no shoes, no service.”

While I doubt many will take the added step of putting this requirement in their ads they could state that they are following state rules (where it is applicable) in their ads and on their apps. I agree with Mark that over time this will become far less of an issue.

Safety first, period. It is Starbucks’ responsibility to protect its baristas. Don’t like it? Move on.

Seriously, what took them so long?

This might heighten the risk for confrontations, but that is SBUX’s prerogative and good for them. Science and facts can continue to be a source of debate while cases and deaths mount, but every other leading country in the world has done better than the US in terms of managing the pandemic. Given our federal government’s utter failure here, it’s up to the states, municipalities and the private sector, including SBUX.

There will continue to be confrontations but as more people adopt the common sense solution of wearing a mask, we will all be better off and closer to a world sans COVID-19.

I always remember this sign I would see at my favorite beach diner as a kid on vacation in FL: no shirt, no shoes, no service. I didn’t fight it. Nobody did. Businesses are entitled to create the rules for their business. It makes it easier to respect the rule, even if some customers don’t agree, by making it a universal standard. If the mask rules are the same at every Starbucks, they’ve already taken the first step to reduce conflict.

There is another bigger picture consideration here. I’m pro-mask, but as we create businesses (or societal) cultures that only look for the safe approach, an approach that won’t ruffle any feathers or hurt anyone’s feelings, we’re essentially closing the door to any breakthrough results. I’m not suggesting this is necessarily the case with Starbucks and masks, but it’s worth noting the culture in the background that’s driving decision making and inevitably translating to other parts of the business as well.

Smart move by Starbucks! This should never have been a debate or a political issue if there were proper leadership at the Federal level. The data shows that the worst countries in the world right now with increasing virus numbers are the ones with inconsistent mask mandates. As many of us have said here before, ultimately retail locations are private property. If the retailer chooses to have a policy of “no shirt, no shoes, no mask, no service” then so be it, as it appears corporate America must take the leadership role in trying to flatten the curve so we might all be able to go out one day without worrying about masks or no masks.

Smart decision since it is about protection of associates and the customers. There will be a minority who continue to dispute the need, but at the end of the day, science from experts hopefully prevails over so-called opinions. Science may not be perfect or simple, but I will take that over simple opinions.