Not all Crocs. Some have closed heels.
Unless you’re getting a specialized version of Crocs, the uppers are completely holey. Not even close to waterproof.
But see if you (or Starbucks) want to be pedantic, then technically Crocs do meet their standard because it doesn’t say anything about the whole shoe being waterproof, just that it needs to be made of a waterproof material.
I guess that depends on your definition of “waterproof.” Crocs are rubber, they are absolutely waterproof if the goal is to wear them in water and not damage them. But they will not stop your feet from getting wet.
My definition of “waterproof” as applied to shoes is keeps water off feet.
Let’s just say that the pores in Crocs are extra large. So not waterproof.
The article just says “Crocs” which we all interpret to be the classic clog or sandal designs, Crocs makes a whole line of work shoes though. She could have been wearing something like these, that specifically reference baristas and servers as target customers. These shoes have a closed toe and heel. They are ugly enough to be Crocs.
Yes, as has been mentioned numerous times in this thread. Pretty sure it would have been mentioned if she’d been wearing them.
I seem to remember getting a uniform which they then took out of my paycheck. But this was 25+ years ago.
I was probaby two decades earlier. I had to gove it back, but I still have my name badge.
Workers in approximately 500 Starbucks stores will have more pressing concerns than dress codes.