Connect with us

News

Starbucks baristas' 'strike before Christmas' has reached hundreds of U.S. stores

Published

on

Starbucks baristas' 'strike before Christmas' has reached hundreds of U.S. stores

Starbucks workers hold signs as they picket in Burbank, Calif., on Friday.

Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images

Starbucks’ union says workers are walking off the job at hundreds of stores across dozens of cities on Tuesday, the last planned day of what it is calling “the strike before Christmas.”

“Starbucks Baristas at over THREE HUNDRED stores have walked off the job to demand Starbucks bargain a fair contract from coast-to-coast,” Starbucks Workers United (SBU) wrote in an Instagram post, touting it as the largest unfair labor practices strike in the coffee chain’s history.

Workers United told NPR that “nearly 300 locations and growing are fully shut down” across 45 states as of midday Tuesday. Starbucks offered a different figure, telling NPR that only around 170 Starbucks stores did not open as a result of the strike.

Advertisement

The union says the strike is in response to Starbucks backtracking on its commitment to negotiate a “foundational framework” — for collective bargaining and resolving outstanding litigation on unfair labor practices charges — by the end of the year.

“Our unfair labor practice (ULP) strikes will begin Friday morning and escalate each day through Christmas Eve … unless Starbucks honors our commitment to work towards a foundational framework,” it said last week.

The strike began on Friday in three cities: Los Angeles, Seattle and Chicago.

It has expanded every day since, with the list of participating stores now including Boston, Buffalo, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Portland, Seattle and San Jose.

Starbucks said Monday that about 60 stores nationwide were closed due to the strike, but stressed that that the “overwhelming majority” of its more than 10,000 U.S. locations remain unaffected. It said some of the stores that closed during the weekend had already reopened.

Advertisement

“The public conversation may lack the important context that the vast majority of our stores (97-99%) will continue to operate and serve customers, and we expect a very limited impact to our overall operations,” Executive Vice President Sara Kelly said in a statement.

The union is urging customers to boycott Starbucks stores during the strike and show up at picket lines to show their support for workers.

Why baristas are striking

SWU, which first unionized in 2021, represents some 10,000 employees across 535 U.S. stores. It celebrated a milestone in February when Starbucks said it would work with the union to reach a labor agreement and resolve litigation by the end of the year.

But last week, with matters still unsettled ahead of the last scheduled bargaining session of 2024, a whopping 98% of union partners voted to authorize a strike to “to protest hundreds of still-unresolved unfair labor practice charges (ULPs) and win a strong foundational framework for union contracts.”

The union acknowledged that both sides have engaged in “hundreds of hours of bargaining” and “advanced dozens of tentative agreements” in recent months.

Advertisement

But it said hundreds of complaints accusing Starbucks of unfair labor practices — including retaliatory firings — remain unsettled, with more than $100 million in legal liabilities still outstanding. Plus, it said, the company “has yet to bring a comprehensive economic package to the bargaining table.”

People hold signs outside of a closed Starbucks as employees strike on Monday in New York City.

People hold signs outside of a closed Starbucks as employees strike on Monday in New York City.

Adam Gray/Getty Images North America


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Adam Gray/Getty Images North America

Starbucks’ latest proposal included no immediate wage increase for union baristas, and a guarantee of just 1.5% wage increases in future years. The union called that “insulting,” especially compared to the salary of its new CEO, who started in September.

“This year, Starbucks invested $113 million into CEO Brian Niccol’s compensation package at a time when baristas’ wages aren’t keeping up with the cost of inflation,” it said. “Workers regularly struggle to receive the hours we need to qualify for benefits and pay our bills. Starbucks needs to invest in the workers who run their stores.”

Ruby Walters, who works at a Starbucks location in Columbus, told member station WOSU from the picket line over the weekend that most workers “have a very similar experience of the company not affording them enough resources that they need, not only to take home and improve their lives, but literally on the job.”

Advertisement

“So as far as I’m concerned, what we’re fighting for isn’t just for us,” Walters added. “It’s for all Starbucks workers across the country.”

What Starbucks is saying

Kelly, the Starbucks executive, said the union’s proposals amount to an increase in the hourly minimum wage of 64% immediately and 77% over three years, which she dismissed as unrealistic.

“These proposals are not sustainable, especially when the investments we continually make to our total benefits package are the hallmarks of what differentiates us as an employer — and, what makes us proud to work at Starbucks,” she said.

Those benefits include health care, free college tuition, paid family leave and company stock grants, Starbucks says, adding that the combination of average pay and benefits equates to an average of $30 per hour for the vast majority of baristas working at least 20 hours per week.

Workers United, however, disputes Starbucks’ characterization of its wage increase proposals — bargaining delegate Michelle Eisen, a 14-year Starbucks barista in Buffalo, N.Y., called it “false and misleading and they know it.”

Advertisement

“We are ready to finalize a framework that includes new investments in baristas in the first year of contracts,” Eisen told NPR.

The union is asking for a base wage of at least $20 an hour for all baristas with annual 5% raises and cost of living adjustments, enrollment in a Starbucks-sponsored retirement plan, more consistent schedules, enhanced paid leave protocols and better healthcare, among other initiatives.

In the final stretch of the four-day strike, it is calling on Starbucks to present a “serious economic offer at the bargaining table.”

The company, for its part, says the union “prematurely ended” the most recent bargaining session and is urging it to come back.

“The union chose to walk away from bargaining last week,” Kelly said. “We are ready to continue negotiations when the union comes back to the bargaining table.”

Advertisement

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending