SWU Letter to Fortune Magazine on Starbucks False Disclosure to "100 Best Companies to Work For" List

Submitted by SWU on Tue, 12/12/2006 - 5:04pm.

Andrew Serwer
Managing Editor
Fortune Magazine
1 Time Warner Center
New York, NY 10019

December 12, 2006

Dear Mr. Serwer,

We write to call your attention to what we believe is a false disclosure by Starbucks in connection with
previous "Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For" features. With the 2007 Best Companies list set for publication next month, we ask for your prompt attention to this matter.

For each firm in the Best Companies feature, Fortune lists the average annual compensation for the largest classification of hourly employees. For the 2006 list, Starbucks submitted a position labeled "Coordinator II" as its largest classification of hourly employees with a yearly income of $35,067. However, the largest hourly job classification at Starbucks is Barista, not the putative "Coordinator II", and an accurate annual income is probably less than one third of $35,067.

Starbucks has never released the average annual compensation of a Barista. However, based on reports
from Starbucks employees around the country, the IWW Starbucks Workers Union [www.StarbucksUnion.org] has determined that the starting wage of Baristas hovers around $6-8.75 per hour depending on location.
Workers report infrequent and small raises or in some cases no raise at all.

Further, each and every Barista in the United States is a part-time employee with no guaranteed work
hours. Baristas frequently complain about getting nowhere close to 40 hours a week- approximately 15-30
hours of work each week seems to be the norm.

Accordingly, the average Barista makes closer to $10,000 per year than the $35,067 per year for a "Coordinator II". The 2006 federal poverty line for a family of two is an annual income of $12,334. Perhaps, Starbucks refuses to release the average annual compensation of a Barista because it pays poverty wages.

Because in our view Starbucks has lied to gain inclusion on the "Fortune 100 Best Companies to Work For", we feel that including the company in the 2007 list would be inappropriate. Starbucks is deceiving not only Fortune readers, but also the American people by constantly highlighting its apparently fraudulent inclusion on the Best Companies list. Please set the record straight. Thank you very much.

Respectfully submitted,

Members of the IWW Starbucks Workers Union