NLRB says 8 Twin Cities Starbucks fought union organizing [Pioneer Press]

Submitted by SWU on Tue, 05/05/2009 - 10:46am.

Charges stemmed from Twin Cities union activities

By Julie Forster

05/01/2009

The National Labor Relations Board has sided with union officials who maintain Starbucks Corp. engaged in unfair labor practices at eight Twin Cities stores to thwart efforts to organize workers.

An agency investigation determined 16 charges against Starbucks have merit, and the labor relations board will now propose a settlement.

The Starbucks Workers Union filed the charges in January, alleging a wide range of violations, from forbidding workers from discussing the union to expelling union sympathizers from the stores.

The union, which is affiliated with the Industrial Workers of the World, says it consists of more than 300 current and former Starbucks employees seeking guaranteed work hours and better pay. A union organizing campaign was launched in the Twin Cities in May 2004 [sic].

The finding of merit means there is sufficient evidence to support an NLRB complaint, said Marlin Osthus, regional attorney for the NLRB. "It's not the same as concluding they violated the law."

The NLRB will propose a settlement, but Starbucks doesn't have to agree to it.

"In that case, we would issue a complaint and set the matter for a hearing before an administrative law judge, who would decide if they broke the law," Osthus said.

The union said most of the charges stem from instances when organizers visited stores to talk with workers about the union and were kicked out or told they could not talk about the union.

"If you have the right to talk at all, you
Advertisement
Quantcast
have the right to talk about organizing," said Aaron Kocher, 24, a barista at the Starbucks store at Franklin and Nicollet avenues in South Minneapolis and a union organizer.

Some of the charges center around restrictions Starbucks placed on union organizing, but they also are about workers being unfairly disciplined because they are known as union organizers, Kocher said. "For instance, at one point on my performance review, I was told not to speak on behalf of others and only speak for myself."

Starbucks e-mailed this reply to a request for comment: "We have nothing to share on these specific allegations as we have not seen anything from the NLRB regarding these claims."

Last fall, Starbucks Corp., based in Seattle, agreed to a settlement with the NLRB on charges of anti-union activities at one of its Mall of America stores that stemmed from the firing of a barista who tried to organize workers.

Julie Forster can be reached at 651-228-5189.