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
Dependent Benefits
Opening & Closing
Health Care Benefits
Business Continuity
Work Life Integration
Technology
Closing
Global Mindset
Termination
Communicable Diseases
Employment Contracts
Hiring & Firing
Leave Management
Religion & Spirituality
Employee Engagement
Workplace Culture
Contracts & RFPs
Retirement & Recognitions
Communication
Leadership Development
Teamwork
Job Descriptions
Religious Accomodations
Leadership &
Retaliation
Gender Identity
Eligibility Verification (I-9)
Whistleblowing
Employment Offers
Sexual Orientation
Time Worked
Parental Leave
Records & Reports
Mentoring & Coaching
Bonuses & Incentives
Unemployment Benefits
Paid Leave
Policies & Practices
Inclusion, Equity &
Vendors & Software
Employment Branding
Age
Business Acumen
Drug & Alcohol Testing
Employee Surveys
Overtime Eligibility &
Pay Equity
Mental Health Benefits
Environmental Health Hazards
Employment Law & Compliance
Tags
Article
The Future of Gig Employment
There’s no denying that the gig economy has seen much growth since the last recession. With the spr ...
All you need to know about the teaching profession
Teaching jobs: transformative teacher roles you can undertake amidst the teacher shortage in the US ...
I-9 Compliance for Remote Employees - A Guide for Companies
More than 50% of the US workforce is working remotely as of now. According to experts, about 25-30% ...
Top paying Careers in 2021
The economy may be taking its time with recovery, but hiring and job hunting are at an all-time hig ...
Comments