Two Starbucks employees who stepped in during a violent robbery at a St. Louis store were later fired by the company, despite helping stop the suspects who had just attacked workers and demanded money.
FOX 2 St. Louis investigator Chris Hayes obtained surveillance video of the December 2023 robbery at the Starbucks inside the well-known flying saucer-shaped building near Saint Louis University. The footage, which had not been publicly released before Hayes’ report, shows how an ordinary Sunday afternoon suddenly turned into a frightening confrontation behind the counter.
One employee, Michael Harris, said he was working the drive-thru when two robbers entered the store. Within seconds, he said, one suspect walked behind the counter and shoved a female employee to the ground.
The robbers demanded money. Harris said one of them struck him with what appeared to be a gun.
“After that point, my vision went black,” Harris told Hayes. “I was like, I’m about to get shot.”
What happened next would eventually lead to robbery convictions for the two suspects. It would also cost Harris and another employee their jobs.
A Normal Shift Turns Into a Violent Robbery
Harris told FOX 2 that the workers had been going about a normal day when the two men walked inside.
“We were just going about our normal day. Two robbers walked in,” he said.
The surveillance video reportedly shows one suspect forcefully pushing a female worker down after getting behind the counter. That moment alone made the situation serious, even before the men began demanding money.
Harris said he was scared but tried to remain calm because his main goal was simply getting the robbers out of the store.
That is the part people often forget when watching robbery footage later. Workers do not know whether a weapon is real, whether a suspect has an accomplice nearby, or whether a sudden movement will make things worse. They are trying to make decisions in seconds with almost no reliable information.
A customer in the drive-thru saw what was happening inside and backed her car away, according to Hayes’ report.
Harris described the moment as a life-or-death situation.
The Gun Was Later Found to Be Fake
The situation changed after another worker noticed something important: the weapon being used by one of the robbers appeared to be fake.
According to Harris, the trigger broke off when the suspect used the gun to hit a co-worker.
That employee then told the others that the gun was not real.
“The trigger broke off when they hit [the co-worker] with it,” Harris told Hayes. “He announced that it was a fake gun like right as he got it off of them and that’s when we jumped and started to fight them a little bit more.”
The workers then fought back.
That decision may be easy to understand emotionally, especially after an employee had been shoved down and Harris had been struck. But it is also exactly the kind of choice companies warn workers not to make during a robbery, because employees often cannot know whether a weapon is real until it is too late.
The fact that the gun turned out to be fake does not erase the fear inside that store. From Harris’ point of view, he believed he might be shot after being hit.
Both robbery suspects were later arrested and convicted, Hayes reported. They are now in prison.
Corporate Call Brings Immediate Termination
After the robbery, Harris said he received a phone call from Starbucks corporate offices.
“They said, ‘This is Starbucks. We are terminating you, effective immediately,’” Harris told FOX 2.
Another employee involved in stopping the robbery was also fired, according to Hayes’ report.
The terminations have created a sharp public debate over whether Starbucks punished workers for protecting themselves and their coworkers, or whether the company was enforcing a safety policy designed to prevent an already dangerous robbery from becoming deadly.
Harris hired attorney Ryan Krupp after the firing.
Krupp argued that the employees had a right to protect themselves when they believed they were in danger.
“You have the right to self-preservation,” Krupp told Hayes. “You have the right to make sure that you and your family are not going to be physically harmed – full stop.”
His argument is straightforward: when someone is attacked in a workplace, especially with what appears to be a gun, workers should not be expected to remain passive if they believe they are facing immediate danger.
Starbucks Says De-Escalation Is the Priority
Starbucks gave FOX 2 a statement explaining why it views robbery-response policies differently.
The company said its main priority in situations like this is protecting everyone inside the store, including employees and customers.
Starbucks said it was disturbed by the incident and grateful that no one was more seriously injured.
But the company also said its training tells employees to comply with demands and avoid actions that could make an already volatile situation worse.
“Our training and protocols are designed to support partner safety by emphasizing de-escalation,” Starbucks said in the statement provided to Hayes. “All partners are trained at hire and annually on these practices, including robbery scenarios that reinforce complying with demands and avoiding actions that could increase risk.”
From a corporate safety perspective, that logic is not difficult to understand. Companies generally do not want unarmed employees fighting robbers because a suspect may have a real gun, a knife, or another weapon that no one has seen.
The problem is that real emergencies are rarely as neat as a training video.
Harris and the other employees were not reacting to someone calmly demanding cash from a register. They were reacting after a coworker was shoved to the ground, another worker was hit with a gun-shaped object, and the suspects had already crossed from intimidation into physical violence.
The Fight Over Self-Defense at Work
Krupp said Starbucks’ decision could send the wrong message to workers facing danger.
“All it’s going to do is dissuade people potentially from protecting their own lives when they may need it the most,” he told Hayes. “And that is not a world that we can live in.”
That may be the central issue in the case.
Employers want rules that reduce risk across thousands of stores. Workers, meanwhile, have to make immediate personal decisions when a stranger is standing in front of them with what looks like a weapon.
There may never be a perfect policy for that moment. Telling employees not to resist can reduce the chance of escalation in many cases, but it can also feel deeply unfair when workers believe they acted to protect themselves and others.
The Starbucks employees did not know the gun was fake until after the robbery was already underway. By that time, Harris said, he had been struck and feared for his life.
That is why the firings have struck a nerve. The two workers were not accused of starting a confrontation or provoking the suspects. They were allegedly responding after violence had already entered the store.
Robbers Are in Prison, Workers Are Out of Jobs
The two robbery suspects are behind bars after their convictions.
Harris and the other Starbucks employee, however, lost their jobs after helping stop them.
That contrast is what makes the story so difficult for many people to accept. The criminal case appears to be over, but the workers who helped end the robbery are still dealing with the professional consequences.
Hayes’ report does not say whether Harris is seeking reinstatement, financial damages, or another legal remedy through his attorney. But his case has already raised a larger question for workers everywhere.
What should happen when an employee breaks a company rule because they believe the alternative is getting hurt?
Starbucks says its policy exists to prevent violence from escalating. Harris and Krupp say the company punished workers who acted in self-defense during a terrifying robbery.
Both sides are focused on safety, but they define safety in very different ways.
For Harris, the danger was immediate and personal. For Starbucks, the policy is designed for every robbery that could happen in every store.
The surveillance video may show a robbery being stopped. The fallout shows something more complicated: what happens after people survive the emergency, but still have to live with the consequences of the choices they made in it.
Growing up in the Pacific Northwest, John developed a love for the great outdoors early on. With years of experience as a wilderness guide, he’s navigated rugged terrains and unpredictable weather patterns. John is also an avid hunter and fisherman who believes in sustainable living. His focus on practical survival skills, from building shelters to purifying water, reflects his passion for preparedness. When he’s not out in the wild, you can find him sharing his knowledge through writing, hoping to inspire others to embrace self-reliance.
