Labor Relations Board issues complaint of Starbucks intimidating workers who unionized

The National Labor Relations Board has issued an unfair labor practices complaint against Starbucks and its treatment of workers who unionized at four Pittsburgh stores.

The stores are located in Market Square, Oakland, East Liberty and Bloomfield. The baristas are represented by Workers United, an affiliate of the SEIU.

In the spring and early summer, Workers United filed unfair labor practice complaints focusing on Starbucks management allegedly intimidating workers and attempted union busting. The union said some Starbucks employees in the Pittsburgh area were fired because of union activities, but those issues were not part of the recent NLRB complaint and are being investigated separately.

Nancy Wilson, the NLRB’s Pittsburgh director, released the complaint about the four Pittsburgh Starbucks on Friday.

The union provided evidence and witnesses for the NLRB, said Philip Halin, an organizer with Workers United in Philadelphia.

The NLRB’s complaint asked Starbucks to file a response by Sept. 22; a hearing is set before an NLRB administrative law judge on Jan. 23 in Pittsburgh.

“This is vindication for the workers in those stores who dealt with union busting campaigns and won (union) elections despite that,” Halin said. The NLRB complaint illustrates that the “workers were not just complaining about nothing,” he said.

Halin said Starbucks’ pattern has been to exhaust every avenue of appeal to slow down the process. “I wouldn’t be shocked if they did so here,” he said.

He wishes NLRB had more actual power to force a settlement. “We expect it will take a while to get full relief and justice for these workers,” he said. “It is a violation of labor law, and we will hold Starbucks accountable for that.”

In the NLRB complaint, Wilson wrote, “the policy of this office is to encourage voluntary adjustments.”

The union is not relying on NLRB to discipline Starbucks, Halin said.

“That will not save people and have them reinstated,” he said. “What actually get results are strikes, petitions, collaborating with other unions and publicly pressuring people (Starbucks) to come to the table.”

Responding to the NLRB’s complaint, Starbucks released this statement to the Tribune-Review: “We believe this complaint is without merit and intend to defend against the alleged violation. To date, Starbucks has not been found to be in violation of any of the allegations.”

The company previously said it will respect the NLRB’s process and bargain in good faith with the stores that chose to be represented by Workers United.

There are 11 Starbucks stores in the Pittsburgh area that within the last year voted to unionize with Workers United, Halin said. More than 240 Starbucks stores have unionized nationally within the last year, he added.

The allegations in NLRB’s complaint on four Pittsburgh area Starbucks include:

• The company threatened employees that they would not receive a previously announced pay raise if they unionized.

• Unionized employees would receive a smaller pay raise than employees at nonunion stores.

• All benefits would be frozen. Employees would lose college tuition benefits.

• Unionized employees would not receive unspecified benefits available to workers in nonunion stores.

• Nonunion stores will not hire unionized employees.

• Starbucks threatened to discipline employees who unionized.

• The Starbucks Craig Street would close if employees unionize.

• If employees unionized, they would lose their jobs.

• Starbucks equated employees’ union activities with harassment and disrespect.

• Unionized employees would face stricter enforcement of dress code policies.

• Starbucks would remodel a bathroom if employees refrained from union activity.