Starbucks seems like a nice workplace. The business offers stock options, PTO, and, recently, student debt aid to baristas, managers, and other workers.
The last year has shown that the Seattle-based corporation does not favour unionisation. Four senators have warned Starbucks about its "illegal union-busting practises."
In a letter to Starbucks CEO on October 4, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Richard Blumenthal, and Bernie Sanders accused the coffee business of "intimidating its workers"
Senators want the firm to reveal how much it spends on anti-union initiatives. This "detailed spending report" should contain legal expenses,
consultancy payments, and production costs. Senators inquired whether anti-union spending was billed as a business cost on the chain's taxes.
The letter requests Starbucks management for "written or other instructions" on how to handle "employees forming or joining a union, voting in a
representation election, communicating with unionised workers or union representatives, and participating in legitimate, union-authorized employment activities."
The letter also requests a list of all instances in the previous year in which "Starbucks provided new or amended perks for non-unionized locations while withholding them from unionised staff."
Four senators claim Starbucks "weaponizes" perks to resist unionisation. Remember the student loan tools Starbucks employees may use? These are solely for non-union workers.
The letter mentions a Massachusetts Starbucks that voted to unionise in 2022. Most of the store's employees lost health insurance when their hours were
slashed, and management reportedly introduced a new minimum availability regulation without consulting the union. Employees struck in July.
Since the Buffalo Starbucks decided to unionise at the end of 2021, 245 others have followed suit. The senators have given Starbucks a month to respond.