Labor Board seeks unionization at Starbucks after lost election
The National Labor Relations Board seeks to order Starbucks to recognize a union at the Buffalo-area store where the union had lost an initial vote last year. This move is part of a larger effort by the labor board to scrutinize Starbucks' response to a nationwide union campaign.
In a complaint against the company on Thursday, the agency accused Starbucks of intimidating and retaliating against workers seeking to unionize. It might seem "aggressive" for the board to order the company to bargain at a store where the union didn’t win. But, Matthew Bodie, a former labor board lawyer says it is, within the normal range of remedies for such cases. He added, "The complaint sends a message."
Since December, workers at more than 70 Starbucks stores have voted to unionize and they have filed petitions to hold union elections at more than 150 additional cafes. Meanwhile, the regional office monitoring Buffalo issued a complaint two weeks ago accusing Starbucks of firing employees because they supported a union. The company has also been accused of promising benefits to employees as a way to discourage them from unionizing and intimidating workers who sought to unionize by subjecting them to surveillance and other illegal behavior.
Source: The New York Times
In a complaint against the company on Thursday, the agency accused Starbucks of intimidating and retaliating against workers seeking to unionize. It might seem "aggressive" for the board to order the company to bargain at a store where the union didn’t win. But, Matthew Bodie, a former labor board lawyer says it is, within the normal range of remedies for such cases. He added, "The complaint sends a message."
Since December, workers at more than 70 Starbucks stores have voted to unionize and they have filed petitions to hold union elections at more than 150 additional cafes. Meanwhile, the regional office monitoring Buffalo issued a complaint two weeks ago accusing Starbucks of firing employees because they supported a union. The company has also been accused of promising benefits to employees as a way to discourage them from unionizing and intimidating workers who sought to unionize by subjecting them to surveillance and other illegal behavior.
Source: The New York Times
Category
Promotion
Ethnicity
Job Applications &
Mentoring & Coaching
Religious Accomodations
Employment Testing
Age
Employment Contracts
Retirement Benefits
Workplace Security
Pay Equity
Opening
Salary Surveys
Background Checks
Wellness Benefits
Family & Medical Leave
Business Continuity
Workforce Planning
Opening & Closing
Health Savings Accounts
Labor Relations
Workplace Wellness
Executive Compensation
Drug & Alcohol Testing
Payroll
Leadership Development
Substance Abuse
HR Careers
Data Security
Religion & Spirituality
Sexual Orientation
Retirement & Recognitions
Emergency Response
Disability Benefits
Business Acumen
Benefits
Mental Health Benefits
Relationship Management
Performance Management
Eligibility Verification (I-9)
Inclusion, Equity & Diversity
Employee Resource Groups
Unemployment Benefits
Educational Assistance
Bonuses & Incentives
Time Worked
Inclusion, Equity &
Work Life Integration
Disaster Preparation & Response
Open Enrollment
Tags
Article
Driver Jobs to Watch Out For
If you love being on the road, if you love driving with the wind rushing through your hair, if your ...
COVID-19 - 6 Challenges Staffing Firms Are Likely to Face
Most industries have severely suffered in the ongoing pandemic with a few exceptions, like healthca ...
Return to Office: Tips to cope with Change
The past two years have been a roller coaster ride, we’ve all acclimatized ourselves with the work ...
What Why and How of Background Checks A Useful Guide for Staffing Agencies
Background checks are one of the pre-employment requisites to prevent bad hires. About 96% of emplo ...
Comments