- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Starbucks violated federal labor law when it increased wages and offered new perks and benefits only to non-union employees, a National Labor Relations Board judge found Thursday.
The decision is the latest in a series of NLRB rulings finding that Starbucks has violated labor law in its efforts to stop unions from forming in its coffee shops.
“The issue at the heart of this case is whether, under current Board law, [Starbucks] was entitled to explicitly reward employees,” for not participating in union activity, “while falsely telling its workers that the federal labor law forced it to take this action,” wrote administrative law judge Mara-Louise Anzalone. “It was not.”
You must log in or register to comment.
In Thursday’s decision, Anzalone recommended that Starbucks offer the benefits and higher pay to excluded employees, starting from the date when they went into effect for non-union workers, among other remedies.
Starbucks should also post a notice in its cafes telling workers that the NLRB found Starbucks had violated federal labor law, and detailing employee rights, she said.
This is the part that pisses me off the most - the only punishment is that Starbucks has to pay the unionized employees what they are owed and post a piece of paper correcting their earlier lies. There’s no fine, so they risked nothing by breaking the law.
This isn’t even enough to be considered a slap on the wrist. Other companies will take note and try any creatively dishonest policy they can come up with to prevent unionization.
There really should be jail time for C-levels.
Anything less is being soft on crime.
While I do agree that there should be more of a fine, the judge has torn Starbucks’ anti trust efforts wide open by having them admit to their lies in writing to their employees. The implications for Starbucks can easily be severe here as employees start to doubt the bullshit they got indoctrinated with by anti trust wankers.
My old job had quite a few of these legally mandated “whoopsie we crossed the line a bit and got our hands slapped by the NLRB” posters around. The print was tiny and it covered the whole corkboard, basically just quoting the exact text of labor laws all written in impenetrable legalize. They weren’t exactly causing a wave of class consciousness among the workers.
Oh also there were cameras watching the posters.
Tbh, I’m betting more on the news than on the posters. Starbucks workers will see this shared via social media and such. Or so I hope. This is not at all certain, yet I think it might damage Starbucks more than some fine that will not change anything for the workers either.
Surely concrete, actual monetary damage is more discouraging than some kind of class solidarity revelation that has yet to spark from a news article being shared. It’s not like doing this precludes them also getting a fine. Being unable to do this without serious repercussions would harm them a great deal more, in my opinion.
Oh no, severe implications! That will teach them a lesson for sure 🙄
How about an investigation into precisely whos idea the union busting was and subsequently prison sentences for those responsible?
Fines don’t hurt the rich like they do us. But we all have the same (give or take) lifespans. 5 years in prison hurts a billionaire more than any fine you could levy.
They weren’t even fined, they just had to pay what they owed. But if an employee stole $100 from a register they’d go to jail and be unemployable for life.
That’s why I have no problem believing Epstein killed himself. He knew what he was facing and what he had lost.
It wouldn’t be hard to believe if he didn’t have broken neck bones. People don’t break their neck vertebrae when purposefully hanging themselves, let alone multiple, unless they fall a great distance, which Epstein did not. That’s what has always made me suspicious of the official cause of death.
Man, I remember a time when Starbucks gave decent pay, great benefits, and employee stock to even part time employees.
How things change when you can only see short term quarterly profits.
I worked at Starbucks back in like 04-06 or something like that and it was a great job for what it was at the time. The pace was reasonable, the hours were genuinely flexible, the pay was decent, and the benefits were actual. I was in the highest volume store in the metro area I was living in and I loved working there. It was busy, but the line kept it reasonable, we’d mark drinks ahead of time on cups, and half the time by the time people got to the counter we’d have their drink ready.
After unemployment ran out from COVID I went back for about a year, and it was a completely different beast. Where one line used to create a bottleneck at the register and allow us plenty of time to mark and make drinks, we now had to deal with the drive-thru and mobile ordering all at the same time, which shifts the bottle neck to drink preparation by a wide margin. Working at Starbucks now is essentially standing in the middle of the narrow point of a labor funnel. They’ve also added a lot more tasks and spread them out all over the place, so the footwork is way more than it used to be. Floor mat coverage also tends to be insufficient because of this, and there isn’t really time to slow down to a reasonable pace. Doesn’t help when you’re scheduled until 15 minutes before the hour in order to avoid having to give you another break.
Pay is basically what it was the last time I worked there plus a couple of dollars. Benefits and stock options are still left dangling as bait, but management seems to try to ensure that as few employees as possible actually get enough hours to qualify. Where previously corporate, in my experience anyway, supported positive managers who had their crews backs, they now seem to love slimy corporate boot-lickers who will rake back every bit of benefit and extract as much labor as possible.
With the drive-thru model it’s hardly surprising to see it getting worse, but it is disappointing. What was once a boon to the working class has become just another exploitative company. Not only that, but an exploitative company that’s taken their market share and has moved on to cost cutting and labor squeezing. Replacing nice little local cafes first with a polished corporate cafe and slowly turning it into an expensive McDonald’s.
I do hope the nice little cafes see the opportunity to capitalize on selling a better product and treating their employees better and take back a bit of that market share.
I didn’t even know they stopped doing those things until this made the news, and it’s just another reason why I hate the dystopia that we’re currently trapped in.
Oh sure lets withhold pay increases from the group of workers most willing to take action that impacts the business in order to get pay increases. Beyond being illegal that is also just a incredibly stupid strategy
I mean if the goal was to discourage union membership, then I can understand why they did that. Obviously that backfired…
Treat a company telling you you don’t need a union the same way you’d treat a cop who insists you don’t need a lawyer to “answer a couple of questions”
With the utmost suspicion
Except the “punishment” is a joke, so it seems the strategy was successful.
So now they’re going to revoke the pay raises for the non-ynion employees, and tell them it was the Union’s fault
Let me guess, we fined them 2 sugars and a cream.
deleted by creator
