Starbucks waged ‘shock and awe’ campaign on workers, union claims
The union won a landmark vote at a Starbucks in Buffalo, New York in the United States last week. Now, it’s urging the National Labor Relations Board to reject results of another location’s failed union vote.
A labor group accused Starbucks of using a "shock and awe" campaign to intimidate workers against unionizing.
Employees were subjected to "overwhelming psychological force" hurting their morale, the union said.
Starbucks employees voted to form a union in one Buffalo store last week in a first for the coffee chain.
Dozens of managers at a Starbucks location in Buffalo used intimidation tactics and created an atmosphere of fear that led to employees failing to unionize, labor group Workers United said.
Employees at the Camp Road location in Buffalo "were subjected to a massive campaign of overwhelming psychological force from the moment they publicly expressed the desire to form a union," the group wrote in a statement Thursday to the National Labor Relations Board.
"Every medium of attack was used, including one-on-one conversations, group meetings, constant surveillance, and a propaganda extravaganza about the dire consequences a union would bring to Starbucks," it added.
Starbucks did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Insider about Workers United's statement.
Last week, Starbucks employees at another store in the same area voted "yes" to form a union in a first for the coffee giant's company-owned stores across the US.
The unionization vote failed to pass at a second location, where the union filed Thursday's complaints, by a vote of 12 to eight, but the union's lawyer said some votes had gone uncounted. Employees at the store were subjected to a "shock and awe" campaign, affecting their morale and likelihood of voting, the union said.
At the third location, the NLRB is awaiting the outcome of voter eligibility challenges. But yes votes at this location were leading 15 to nine. The union has filed an identical complaint for this store.
Starbucks maintains that its workers don't need a union.
"While Starbucks respects the free choice of our partners, we firmly believe that our work environment, coupled with our outstanding compensation and benefits, makes unions unnecessary at Starbucks," a spokesperson previously told Insider. "We respect our partners' right to organize but believe that they would not find it necessary given our pro-partner environment."
Workers United is trying to reverse the unsuccessful vote to expand its presence across Starbucks stores in the US after last week's win at the first store. Workers at the stores first announced their intentions to unionize in August, for reasons including understaffing at work and long waits making customers unhappy during the pandemic.
The NLRB has the right to make the election results void in response to the manner of how it was conducted, which may have influenced workers in making their choice about unionizing.
If the union wins in one or more elections, Starbucks will be legally mandated to collectively bargain with workers for changes.
Starbucks store goes union
The National Labor Relations Board confirmed a vote Friday to form a union at a Starbucks store in Buffalo, meaning the coffee retailer, for the first time, will have to bargain with organized labor at a company-owned U.S. store.
“We don't want to fight Starbucks — we're asking them to turn over a new leaf,” said Jaz Brisack, an organizer at the store, one of three New York Starbucks locations that petitioned the labor board for a union election in October.
Voting wrapped up last week and the board certified the results of the Buffalo employees' 19-8 vote Friday.
Workers United, the union representing the employees, filed formal objections in the other two elections late Thursday, delaying certification. The objections claim Starbucks waged a “shock and awe” campaign meant to dissuade workers from voting to unionize.
The 50-year-old company has actively fought unionization for decades, saying its more than 8,000 company-owned U.S. stores function best when it works directly with employees.
Workers at a store in the Buffalo suburb of Hamburg voted 12-8 against a union. The outcome of a Cheektowaga store's vote could not be determined because both sides challenged seven separate votes. Union organizers said six of the votes were cast by ineligible employees.
If the outcome of the ballot challenges favors unionization, organizers will drop the objection to the Cheektowaga results, attorney Ian Hayes said.
The objections say Starbucks employees “were subjected to a massive campaign of overwhelming psychological force from the moment they publicly expressed the desire to form a union.”
Dozens of managers were sent in to speak against the efforts in individual and group meetings with employees, according to the filings. Workers were told they could lose benefits under a union, and pro-union employees were spied on and saw their schedules changed and hours reduced.
The actions disrupted the “laboratory conditions” considered necessary for a fair election, the union said.
“These claims are grossly inaccurate. We did not and do not engage in intimidation tactics,” Starbucks responded in a statement. “We are partners and we show up for one another. That’s what we do and what we continue to do.”
If the NLRB determines that the claims could be grounds for setting aside an election, it would order a hearing to determine whether a new election should be held.
Workers at all three stores began voting by mail last month on whether they wanted to be represented by Workers United, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union.
After the Buffalo vote, Starbucks workers at two locations in Boston petitioned the NLRB for union elections. Three other Buffalo-area stores and a store in Mesa, Arizona, also have filed petitions with the labor board for their own union elections. Those cases are pending.
No comments:
Post a Comment