• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Starbucks hit with sweeping labor complaint including over 200 alleged violations

I'm for worker organization and representation. Many companies will only give workers what they absolutely have to while taking whatever they can.
 
I make coffee and lattes at home and very rarely patronize Starbucks or Coffee Bean, etc. I dont think the convenience is worth the price. If prices go up more due to unionization, more people may start doing what I do.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
I make coffee and lattes at home and very rarely patronize Starbucks or Coffee Bean, etc. I dont think the convenience is worth the price. If prices go up more due to unionization, more people may start doing what I do.
Click to expand...
or not
 
Maidenrules29 said:
[URLunfurl="true"]https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/06/sta...n-200-labor-violations-in-nlrb-complaint.html[/URL]

Who among you think its a good thing for coffee shop, restaurant, and other service industry workers to unionize? Who thinks it is not?
Click to expand...
All workers who have a "bad employer" should unionize.

All workers who have a "good employer" should not unionize.

Anyone who doesn't know the difference between a "good employer" and a "bad employer" shouldn't be in the labor force.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
I make coffee and lattes at home and very rarely patronize Starbucks or Coffee Bean, etc. I dont think the convenience is worth the price. If prices go up more due to unionization, more people may start doing what I do.
Click to expand...
you still have to buy the coffee...and in the end it doesn't cost you significantly less if you are using the same ingredients that they use....and most folks don't know how to make an espresso, not a real one anyway. People will still go there, because it is convenient and fast...especially, when time is of essence.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
All workers who have a "bad employer" should unionize.

All workers who have a "good employer" should not unionize.

Anyone who doesn't know the difference between a "good employer" and a "bad employer" shouldn't be in the labor force.
Click to expand...
Another alternative is that workers with a 'bad employer' - can leave, and tell others about their experience. And of course, take advantage of the regulatory agencies to file complaints about any wage and hour violations. The market will drive the 'bad employers' out of business, or force them to improve.
 
dcsports said:
Another alternative is that workers with a 'bad employer' - can leave, and tell others about their experience. And of course, take advantage of the regulatory agencies to file complaints about any wage and hour violations. The market will drive the 'bad employers' out of business, or force them to improve.
Click to expand...
yeah, that is going to work fabulously in a 'right to work' state.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
[URLunfurl="true"]https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/06/sta...n-200-labor-violations-in-nlrb-complaint.html[/URL]

Who among you think its a good thing for coffee shop, restaurant, and other service industry workers to unionize? Who thinks it is not?
Click to expand...
It makes little sense with a small scale business. With something like a starbucks, where there is a dozen to two dozen employees - workers have ample opportunity to communicate with and work with their management - or leave if they don't feel valued.
 
dcsports said:
Another alternative is that workers with a 'bad employer' - can leave, and tell others about their experience. And of course, take advantage of the regulatory agencies to file complaints about any wage and hour violations. The market will drive the 'bad employers' out of business, or force them to improve.
Click to expand...
I once worked (in personnel and as a supervisor for field operations) for an employer who totally ignored the statutory requirements for hours of work and overtime. Anyone who was newly hired or was quitting had to deal with me. My invariable advice to all employees was to keep records of where and when they worked as well as what they were being paid AND to take those records to the government agency tasked with ensuring compliance with the labor laws as soon as they left the employ of the company I was working for.

The company had a standard form response to inquiries by that agency and that response ran along the lines of

Pursuant to your letter of _______________ we have checked our records and have discovered that there were payroll errors with respect to the wages paid to __________________. On recalculating what ______________ should have received we determined that they are entitled to an additional $____________, as outlined in your letter, and enclose our cheque in that amount herewith.​

The company ALWAYS paid up in full - PROVIDED that the person actually got off their butt and made a formal complaint.

For some reason the government agency never figured out that the company always knew that it was in violation of the labor laws and all complaints the agency received were always closed out as "Successfully Resolved" (which meant that the case worker's track records looked really good).

No one ever figured out that the company was (in essence) taking interest free loans from its employees.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
I once worked (in personnel and as a supervisor for field operations) for an employer who totally ignored the statutory requirements for hours of work and overtime. Anyone who was newly hired or was quitting had to deal with me. My invariable advice to all employees was to keep records of where and when they worked as well as what they were being paid AND to take those records to the government agency tasked with ensuring compliance with the labor laws as soon as they left the employ of the company I was working for.

The company had a standard form response to inquiries by that agency and that response ran along the lines of

Pursuant to your letter of _______________ we have checked our records and have discovered that there were payroll errors with respect to the wages paid to __________________. On recalculating what ______________ should have received we determined that they are entitled to an additional $____________, as outlined in your letter, and enclose our cheque in that amount herewith.​

The company ALWAYS paid up in full - PROVIDED that the person actually got off their butt and made a formal complaint.

For some reason the government agency never figured out that the company always knew that it was in violation of the labor laws and all complaints the agency received were always closed out as "Successfully Resolved" (which meant that the case worker's track records looked really good).

No one ever figured out that the company was (in essence) taking interest free loans from its employees.
Click to expand...
That is a shame. Government bureaucracies have their own issues, for sure.
 
ClaraD said:
you still have to buy the coffee...and in the end it doesn't cost you significantly less if you are using the same ingredients that they use....and most folks don't know how to make an espresso, not a real one anyway. People will still go there, because it is convenient and fast...especially, when time is of essence.
Click to expand...
It costs about $8 for a 16 oz bag of espresso grind coffee. A gallon of milk is $2.35. With that I can make ALOT of lattes in about 5 minutes each. Trust me thats WAY cheaper than the equivalent number of lattes at a Starbucks.
 
We could find 200 total alleged violations, over the course of the past year, at any 3 randomly chosen fast food restaurants. Maybe Starbucks is crap, they sure should pay up for their image, but 200 alleged labor violations is probably nothing and likely commonplace.

If the OP had included something more, then maybe someone could say "but..."
 
Maidenrules29 said:
It costs about $8 for a 16 oz bag of espresso grind coffee. A gallon of milk is $2.35. With that I can make ALOT of lattes in about 5 minutes each. Trust me thats WAY cheaper than theLa equivalent number of lattes at a Starbucks.
Click to expand...

Good Lattes aren't made with milk...it most countries they are made with cream that is steamed and mocha or chocolate....just cream or milk isn't a latte it is a cortadita....also, a good espresso is whole bean, you grind it yourself and never, if you want quality, costs $8. Not all espresso is the same..and whole bean that you grind is going to make a difference. I use an old-fashioned espresso maker...one you use on the stove. It takes a higher amount of ground espresso than what you use in a regular coffee grind. I also only use real sugar, not the white stuff most Americans buy. Americans really don't understand coffee very well...or the differences....I find it gross that anyone buys already ground coffee....ground coffee contains bugs, particularly cockroaches that are ground up with the coffee in the plant. Also, already ground coffee loses most of its aroma minutes after it is ground. I learned long ago how to roast my own coffee beans and then grind them to fine for espresso made over a hot fire.
 
dcsports said:
It makes little sense with a small scale business. With something like a starbucks, where there is a dozen to two dozen employees - workers have ample opportunity to communicate with and work with their management - or leave if they don't feel valued.
Click to expand...
It's a question of exploitation, not feelings. With no union representation an employee has no power whatsoever if the employer decides it's his way or the highway. Unions exist to prevent that happening, and few employees-especially in low-pay jobs, have the luxury of just walking out.
 
snakestretcher said:
It's a question of exploitation, not feelings. With no union representation an employee has no power whatsoever if the employer decides it's his way or the highway. Unions exist to prevent that happening, and few employees-especially in low-pay jobs, have the luxury of just walking out.
Click to expand...
They absolutely have the ability to get another job and walk out - happens all the time. And sure, if you get a 'my way or the highway' boss that may be the option. There are protections in place for illegal firings.

The purpose of the union is to represent and negotiate on behalf of employees. There's little reason to do that in a small workplace where each individual can easily talk to the management of the store.
 
The beginning of the end?

www.marketwatch.com

Starbucks has gotten too expensive for value-conscious customers

There are some who will always find a way to budget their morning cup of Starbucks Corp. coffee into their finances, but John Zolidis, president of Quo Vadis Capital, says price hikes have made that latte too expensive for others and it’s a problem for the company.
www.marketwatch.com www.marketwatch.com
 
dcsports said:
That is a shame. Government bureaucracies have their own issues, for sure.
Click to expand...
Any organization that measures "success" by "clearance rate" tends to end up doing whatever is going to allow a file to be "closed" as rapidly as possible.
 
snakestretcher said:
It's a question of exploitation, not feelings. With no union representation an employee has no power whatsoever if the employer decides it's his way or the highway. Unions exist to prevent that happening, and few employees-especially in low-pay jobs, have the luxury of just walking out.
Click to expand...
But these employees in low pay jobs can afford to have their wages garnished in dues to line the pockets of the union bosses?
 
Napoleon said:
But these employees in low pay jobs can afford to have their wages garnished in dues to line the pockets of the union bosses?
Click to expand...
One thing about unions. The increase in pay and benefits more than compensates for the difference in low wages.
 
RAMOSS said:
One thing about unions. The increase in pay and benefits more than compensates for the difference in low wages.
Click to expand...
Is it? Because one of things they’re whining about is that non union employees will be paid more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom