COMP NEWS – Federal labor regulators have struck another blow against Starbucks’ campaign against union organizers at its company, accusing the popular coffee chain of illegally retaliating against unionized employees with pay and benefits discrimination.
Federal labor regulators have accused Starbucks of illegally discriminating against unionized employees by denying them wage and benefit increases that the company put in place for nonunion employees.
In a complaint on Wednesday, a regional office of the National Labor Relations Board accused the company of breaking the law when its chief executive, Howard Schultz, “promised increased wages and benefits at U.S. stores if its employees rejected the union as their bargaining representative,” and when it withheld raises and benefits from unionized workers.
In the months since over 200 Starbucks locations voted to unionize, Starbucks corporate has announced plans to roll out a series of new benefits – such as extra PTO – but only for nonunion workers and stores not engaging in union activities. Activists and labor regulators claim the introduction of these new benefits is aimed at discouraging union organizations, while Starbucks claims that it can no longer unilaterally change benefits and compensation for members at unionized stores.
More than 225 out of roughly 9,000 corporate-owned Starbucks locations in the United States have voted to unionize since last fall.
Mr. Schultz began indicating that the company would roll out new benefits, but only for nonunion workers, shortly after he began his third tour as the company’s chief executive in April.
The next month, the company announced a series of new benefits — including additional career development opportunities, better tipping options and more sick time — but only for stores that hadn’t unionized or weren’t in the process of unionizing. The benefits were to begin in the coming months.
The company unveiled wage increases as well, some of which had already been announced and which the company said would apply to all workers. But other increases were new and would apply only to nonunion workers.
Confusion about the distribution of wage increases has also sown doubt and confusion for both union and nonunion workers.
For example, according to Reggie Borges, a Starbucks spokesman, all employees stood to benefit from a companywide $15-an-hour minimum wage, but nonunion workers hired by May 2 would get a 3 percent raise if that proved higher than $15.
The wage policy appears to have sown confusion, with some employees briefly receiving a pay increase that was then withdrawn. Colin Cochran, a worker at a store near Buffalo that initially voted to unionize and then voted against the union in a rerun election decided this month, provided pay stubs showing that his $16.28 hourly wage had increased to $16.77 the first week of August, when Starbucks began the pay increases nationwide. But Mr. Cochran’s pay stub for the second week of August showed his hourly pay dropping back to $16.28. (The union is challenging the election loss at this store.)
Workers involved in union campaigns at other Starbucks locations said the denial of pay and benefit increases to unionized stores had slowed their organizing efforts.
To read more about the accusations of Starbucks’ retaliation against union members, click here.
For more Comp News, see our recent posts.
Comp News is brought to you by CompXL, the flexible compensation software provider that enables mid- to large-size organizations to implement competitive pay structures such as long-term awards and variable incentive pay.
