Merrill Lynch fired and removed all corporate traces of Jim Iannazzo in 24 hours -- after he went ballistic in a bigoted tirade caught on video-- but he still has a possible future as... an RIA

If your kid has a peanut allergy why in the world order something that normally has peanuts so you can tell them "no peanuts" and take the risk?

Little hard to be charged with a hate crime if you’re not a racist. Disgusting that anyone would defend this creep who was literally, knowingly, assaulting and threatening CHILDREN. Anyone who follows this dirtbag and let’s him keep his wealth after this disturbing display of violence against GIRLS should be investigated.

Correction: The guy stenciling his home in San Francisco was Filipino, not Black.

Thanks X. Correction made.

a managing director, after a video showed he and his wife confronting…” | grammar check: it should be “showed him and his wife confronting…”

Extremely regrettable that Mr. Iannazzo was unable to control his rage. I know I've been ramped up to similar levels myself but have so far been able to back myself down without major damage to myself or others. It would be nice if the world were a kinder place all around, but we don't seem to be heading in that direction.

I understand why he would be mad over his child being hospitalized. If he handled it like an adult he could have easily sued the company. However, he decided to confront four female minors by threatening, assulting, and harassing them. The video shows him being excessively hostile and shows him attempting to access the employee only area the girls were in. His intention was to physically harm the girls over a mistake, which is not acceptable. Being blinded by parietal rage does not allow you to assult people and does not excemt you from repercussions.

The fact that he doesn't know exactly who and how that smoothie was made proves that he was not diligent as the parent of an allergic child. Most parents would not bother trying to get something out a place that is working with peanuts all the time because the chance of cross contamination is so high. If he would have done this correctly, it would have involved a long drawn out conversation about cleaning and prep procedures with probably the manager and verifying before and after and mentioning life threatening allergy. All that said, there is STILL a chance of cross contamination in a setting like this. This guy KNOWS this was his own fault and was looking for someone else to pin the blame on.

It's been repeated that he became this enraged because of his son's life threatening situation. Obviously any parent would be upset and even angry, but I unfortunately have also had personal experience with Mr. Iannazzo at my place of employment where he raged and used profanity in the presence of other patrons and was incredibly aggressive towards me. He even took time about a week after the incident to call me and further harass me. My experience with him was because he was being told no and had nothing to do with a life threatening emergency. Sadly, this is a regular reaction he displays when he is not getting the answers that he is looking for.

1) Why would the parent of a 17-year child order something at a fast food chain - moreover a smoothie/ice cream chain that ALWAYS has nuts and nut-containing ingredients in its options - for that child? If the child had recently been diagnosed and the parent still wasn’t aware of the risks associated with the mere presence of such allergens, I might better understand. But the father is adamant that he mentioned a life-threatening allergy…in which case, I’d expect him to understand the substantial risks inherent when ordering from an establishment like Robeks. Furthermore, if he did, in fact, clearly communicate the life-threatening allergy, I’d expect him to ensure that the employee thoroughly wash the prep containers, source ingredients from closed containers, etc. I imagine that there is store video of him exercising such protective/cautious behavior, even if it doesn’t include audio. I also suspect that had he actually mentioned such a threatening allergy, staff would have been trained to refuse/deny the order based on the significant risk of cross-contamination. 2) The deepest - and sometimes darkest - truths of our character are reflected when we are in crisis mode. We might not even realize such aspects exist until crisis hits, but to deny such truths demonstrates that we lack self-awareness and choose not to be accountable for or self-reflective about our actions and how they impact the world. My hope is that anyone that holds a title like VP of something at a very large corporation would not only be both self-aware and self-reflective, but also be quick to accept responsibility for inappropriate actions (without an exceptional disclaimer…”I’m sorry, but I was in crisis mode/but I told you no peanuts/but your attitude made me mad/but…”).

Well, if Tyrone is going to be the grammar police, he should be corrected himself. That sentence should read, “...showed him and his wife's confronting…” Possessive is used to point to a participle. Just sayin'

When I checked BrokerCheck today he still shows as an employee. Why is this?