Trouble Brews for China Coffee Chain After Jobseeker Rejected for Being ‘Timid, Weak’
China’s largest coffee chain, Luckin Coffee, is under scrutiny again, this time for rejecting a job applicant due to her perceived lack of experience and personality traits deemed unsuitable for the job.

At the beginning of July, a woman posted on social media that she had applied for a position at a Luckin Coffee branch in Fujian province. After being interviewed by the HR staff and the shop manager, she was informed that she did not pass the interview due to being “too timid, too weak, with zero experience.”

The woman expressed her frustration online, questioning why Luckin Coffee was so selective. She highlighted her willingness to work long hours and her proactive attitude during the interview. Despite this, she was rejected for not having enough experience to serve coffee.

Following her post, the woman claimed that staff from the coffee shop persistently called her, urging her to delete her social media post. When she refused, they allegedly contacted her family.

A customer service hotline worker at Luckin Coffee stated that the branch in question was responsible for the interview details, but did not provide further comments. Luckin Coffee also declined to comment when approached by the Post on July 10.

The incident sparked a significant reaction on social media, with many questioning the necessity of such stringent criteria for a coffee-serving job. Comments ranged from sarcastic remarks about the bravery required to make coffee to criticisms of the rude comments made about the applicant.

This controversy follows a previous incident where Luckin Coffee faced backlash for alleged age discrimination. A manager in Guangdong province reportedly rejected a 26-year-old applicant for being too old, stating that they needed “young and dynamic people” to avoid a generation gap with customers.

Luckin Coffee’s recruitment practices have often drawn attention. In 2020, Coconut Palm Group, a mainland drinks giant, faced criticism for requiring trainee management applicants to promise lifelong employment and mortgage their homes with the company. The unreasonable demand led to intervention by local authorities.