Starbucks Unionization Effort Gains Momentum - Now in hometown Seattle, WA

[multivita-man]

Workers at a Seattle Starbucks vote to unionize, hoping to send a signal of change to the food-service industry

Employees at a Starbucks in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood voted to join a union, bringing the national organizing wave to the coffee giant's hometown.

www.seattletimes.com

Starbucks is different among fast food service companies in that it has built a labor force that is largely educated, urbane, cultured - whatever you wanna call it. They're also politically active and very aware of their rights and the legal mechanisms by which they can assert them. It's ironic that Howard Schultz built his brand with this workforce. Now they're turning on him.

A bigger question is, will this movement spread to the rest of the food service industry?

 

[highroller]

They’re not turning on him.

 

[Liberal7360]

Workers at a Seattle Starbucks vote to unionize, hoping to send a signal of change to the food-service industry

Employees at a Starbucks in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood voted to join a union, bringing the national organizing wave to the coffee giant's hometown.

www.seattletimes.com

Starbucks is different among fast food service companies in that it has built a labor force that is largely educated, urbane, cultured - whatever you wanna call it. They're also politically active and very aware of their rights and the legal mechanisms by which they can assert them. It's ironic that Howard Schultz built his brand with this workforce. Now they're turning on him.

A bigger question is, will this movement spread to the rest of the food service industry?

The workers aren't turning on anyone.

Unionizing a company isn't turning on management or owners.

What it is, is workers uniting together to have a say in where they work and a contract with the management.

The executives all have contracts with the companies, why shouldn't the rest of the workers?

Are you saying that only executives should have a written contract wtih their employer?

 

[Individual]

The workers aren't turning on anyone.

Unionizing a company isn't turning on management or owners.

What it is, is workers uniting together to have a say in where they work and a contract with the management.

The executives all have contracts with the companies, why shouldn't the rest of the workers?

Are you saying that only executives should have a written contract wtih their employer?

How about a 1 year contract, renegotiable each year? Eliminate employer health care plans and increase wages by $2.52 an hour which would cover a basic ACA plan cost, and let the employee decide what they want.
Do people, aside from perhaps management, see Starbucks as a career job?

 

[multivita-man]

They’re not turning on him.

Well I'm sure Howard Schultz doesn't see it quite that way, lol.

But point taken

 

[Liberal7360]

How about a 1 year contract, renegotiable each year? Eliminate employer health care plans and increase wages by $2.52 an hour which would cover a basic ACA plan cost, and let the employee decide what they want.
Do people, aside from perhaps management, see Starbucks as a career job?

I don't know why you posted such a ridiculous reply.

Why do you have such contempt for workers?

 

[Liberal7360]

Well I'm sure Howard Schultz doesn't see it quite that way, lol.

But point taken

How do you know that?

Have you ever met him?

When did you get such abilities with ESP?

 

[Individual]

I don't know why you posted such a ridiculous reply.

Why do you have such contempt for workers?

What do you find wrong with it?
I have no contempt for workers, or employers.

 

[Peter]

What do you find wrong with it?
I have no contempt for workers, or employers.

So you have no problem with companies giving managers and the CEO long contracts, lavish benefits and even pay-offs if they get fired but as soon as normal staff want longer than a 1 year contract with marginal benefits and zero pay-offs they become entitled crybabies?

 

[Individual]

So you have no problem with companies giving managers and the CEO long contracts, lavish benefits and even pay-offs if they get fired but as soon as normal staff want longer than a 1 year contract with marginal benefits and zero pay-offs they become entitled crybabies?

At the end of the first year they could negotiate a longer contract and other benefits they could convince their employer worth giving to keep them.

 

[Helix]

Workers should have representation.

 

[Peter]

At the end of the first year they could negotiate a longer contract and other benefits they could convince their employer worth giving to keep them.

Why should someone have to work a year to get a permanent contract?
What if they need to get a mortgage in that time?

 

[Individual]

Why should someone have to work a year to get a permanent contract?
What if they need to get a mortgage in that time?

Should there be permanent contracts? Perhaps initially a 30 day contract would give both the employer and the employee the opportunity to decide if they would like to extend the contract.
Employers hire based on the needs of the business.

 

[Peter]

Should there be permanent contracts? Perhaps initially a 30 day contract would give both the employer and the employee the opportunity to decide if they would like to extend the contract.
Employers hire based on the needs of the business.

The 30 day trial period is common in the UK as it gives both sides time to see if the job and person are suitable.

 

[Questerr]

At the end of the first year they could negotiate a longer contract and other benefits they could convince their employer worth giving to keep them.

I know for certain that multi-billion dollar corporations and individual low level employees have 100% equal bargaining power in negotiations. Yep. That’s totally 100% true.

 

[Paradoxical]

The workers aren't turning on anyone.

Unionizing a company isn't turning on management or owners.

What it is, is workers uniting together to have a say in where they work and a contract with the management.

The executives all have contracts with the companies, why shouldn't the rest of the workers?

Are you saying that only executives should have a written contract wtih their employer?

Starbucks, that beacon of liberalism run amok, isn't unionized? PSHAW! What with their coffee costing as much as a lunch meal, I figured their employees got $30.00 an hour or better yet, a living wage.

 

[SuperDS77]

So you have no problem with companies giving managers and the CEO long contracts, lavish benefits and even pay-offs if they get fired but as soon as normal staff want longer than a 1 year contract with marginal benefits and zero pay-offs they become entitled crybabies?

CEOs have more education and skills than the average barista.

 

[Peter]

CEOs have more education and skills than the average barista.

How do you know that?
Plenty of university graduates work at places like coffee shops while they decide where they finally want to work.

 

[Paradoxical]

How do you know that?
Plenty of university graduates work at places like coffee shops while they decide where they finally want to work.

Since you admit this is just a starting job, it should be unionized? In any event, I hope they are because I would LOVE for Starbucks to go out of business because their own employees are clamoring for liberalism like Starbucks management is.