In February of this year, a Michigan-based federal judge issued a temporary restraining order against Starbucks, prohibiting them from firing employees for engaging in union-related activities. To date, 28 Starbucks employees have been found to have been unlawfully fired, and many more cases are still before the courts.
As the public continues to focus on SWU’s unionization efforts, one challenge remains paramount: How to distinguish fact from fiction? The game ends in a “he said, she said” mess, with curious onlookers having to piece together what little information they can glean from competing public statements. And in many cases, these disputes often disappear from public view as litigation drags on. However, SWU is committed to bringing the issue to people’s attention and has even claimed that Starbucks is “the worst federal labor law violation in modern U.S. history.” Of 23 court cases decided on this issue, Starbucks has lost 22, resulting in a whopping 230 violations of federal labor law.
Former CEO Howard Schultz and current management have consistently maintained that the company does not use anti-union tactics and supports the right of its partners to form a union if they wish. But even in stores that have successfully formed unions, union contracts have not been negotiated with the company since the first one was formed in Buffalo, New York, two years ago. The SWU is not letting this slow us down. They are calling for Matthews’ reinstatement and will continue to pressure the company to come to the negotiating table in good faith.
