The National Labor Relations Board has issued yet another complaint against Starbucks for breaking labor laws as it attempts to break its workers’ will to organize and fight for better working conditions and more respect in the workplace.
This is far from the first NLRB charge against Starbucks, with many focusing on the company’s pattern of obvious retaliatory firings of union activists. In this case, though, the issue is that Starbucks responded to the unionization wave at stores across the country by announcing pay and benefit increases for workers only at non-union stores. Company management claimed they couldn’t extend the increases to union workers unilaterally—but then refused to give those workers a raise after the union said it would be just fine. It’s an obvious union-busting tactic: “You get a raise if you don’t get a union,” but Starbucks somehow expected it to fly.
The NLRB is calling on Starbucks to provide the affected workers back pay and benefits and to have CEO Howard Schultz read a statement, on video, about union rights. If Starbucks refuses to settle, the case will go before an administrative law judge in October.
● Sweet!
● Trader Joe's union campaign takes two steps forward, one step back, reports Jonah Furman at Labor Notes.
● A teachers strike in Columbus, Ohio, ended after teachers and the district reached a preliminary agreement.
● Yikes, New York Times, just yikes. The newspaper’s union analyzed performance evaluations and found astonishing racial disparities.
● Workers at two dozen nursing home facilities in Pennsylvania announce plan to strike.
● Biggest influx of union workers isn't from Starbucks—Starbucks accounts for a lot of wins, but since each store only has an average of less than 30 workers, the overall number of workers is not huge.
●
● 500 days into the Warrior Met coal strike, where are Joe Biden and the Democrats?
Sign and send the petition to Starbucks company leadership and board: Stop union-busting and sign the Fair Election Principles.