Starbucks has been known for the generous benefits offered to its employees, such as tuition and healthcare. However, employees have voiced concerns over workplace conditions, schedules, and wages in the past few years. Many workers need more shifts to qualify for benefits, even as stores have chronic problems with understaffed shifts. They are under scrutiny as automatic systems log their response times to customers in the drive-through and monitor according to whether customers find them likable. Starbucks holds them to standards that, due to understaffed circumstances, employees say are difficult to meet.
As workers tried to unionize, it became clear how far the company would go to silence them. While Starbucks continues to fight and appeal labor complaints, there are now mountains of evidence demonstrating the company’s refusal to bargain with representatives of the unionized cafes. There are even verified reports of the company spying on activists and harassing or firing them for little reason. For example, it withheld benefits to the stores that voted to unionize, like an option to tip on a credit card. Union busting is illegal, but the company has acted with impunity.
In early March, there was heartening news for unionized workers. The Strategic Organizing Alliance, a coalition of shareholder labor unions, used a playbook out of hedge fund strategizing that paid off. They presented three board candidates before a Starbucks shareholder vote scheduled for March 11. They nominated board members to get corporate Starbucks to engage with them in good faith. Before the nomination of candidates came to pass, the Strategic Organizing Alliance appealed to shareholders to call for fair labor practices. The shareholders passed a resolution directing the company to commission an honest assessment of its labor practices.
After aggressive resistance, Starbucks finally agreed to meet with union representatives and work out a framework for contract talks. As a result, the union alliance withdrew its three candidates for the board and asked shareholders to continue to monitor Starbucks' approach to labor relations.
Shareholders generally support treating workers fairly, yet there is often a disconnect between the sentiment and reality. Shareholders are not a company's lifeblood; the people who work there are. Those of us who invest in the stock market must examine how we might participate in unfair labor practices and pressure companies to treat employees well.
The history of unions is one of both empowerment and contradiction. Many openly excluded groups like people of color and women, or failed to protect members equally. The Civil Rights Movement successfully challenged them to include workers of color in their ranks. As women entered the workforce in large numbers in the 70s, they challenged workplace norms, especially in occupations that men had dominated.
Early union leaders were effective because they were workers embedded in the community. As time passed, lawyers were more likely to represent the union than the workers who once held leadership positions. As labor leaders got further from the community, they were less able to serve, and there were incidents of corruption.
I perceive unions as too often using strategies that maximize contentiousness between workers and management, an "us vs. them" approach. In a way, this perpetuates problematic dualities and power structures. Union leaders must boldly proclaim the value of workers and fight for better conditions while recognizing that management, working in conditions where profit is valued over people, also consists of workers trapped in a late capitalist system that demeans their dignity.
For all the problems that have historically plagued the union movement, which parallels those in society in general, it has created more successful models to ensure decent wages, reasonable work hours, and safer conditions than any prior system. However, to become a force for change again, the labor movement must represent the heterogeneity of the workforce, and fortunately, that is happening. Union membership is highly representative, and serious efforts are being made to diversify union leadership, including mentoring younger, diverse members.
The new labor movement is inspiring in its inclusiveness and savvy. Starbucks employees fighting for the right to choose whether or not to unionize is a beautiful example of this. Momentum builds as workers become more skilled at reaching out in ever-widening solidarity circles. If the framework between Starbucks and its workers is established and leads to contracts, it would be a significant development in labor relations for workers who have fallen through the cracks of traditional union protections.
Great article