The union representing Starbucks workers on Monday filed a complaint with the International Olympic Committee, opposing the popular chain’s role as the “official coffee partner” of the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles.

The union, Starbucks Workers United, contends in the complaint that Starbucks’ treatment of U.S. workers looking to unionize and bargain a contract — as well as allegations of forced labor abroad — conflict with the Olympic Games’ code of ethics.

The 22-page complaint notes findings by federal labor regulators in recent years that the company had unlawfully retaliated against employees, failed to bargain with the union, and took other actions in an “aggressive, unrelenting campaign of intimidation and interference” to discourage workers from exercising their right to organize.

It also cites legal actions filed in April by Brazilian workers and watchdog groups, alleging the company’s supply chain relies on human trafficking and “slavery-like” labor in Brazil, the world’s largest coffee grower — allegations the company has denied.

Starbucks, which denies accusations made in the complaint, announced its Olympics partnership last month. As part of the deal, it plans to build “a specially-designed” coffeehouse in the Olympic and Paralympic villages, and will serve coffee across competition venues, volunteer hubs and other locations.

Michelle Eisen, a spokesperson for the union and a former Starbucks employee, said the company in negotiations had been “fighting [its] own baristas” and “stonewalling” a union contract.

“Starbucks’ long pattern of disrespecting workers’ rights stands in stark contrast to the Olympic spirit, which celebrates human dignity, fairness, solidarity, and teamwork,” Eisen said. “Until Starbucks starts playing fair … they have no place at the Olympic Games.”

Starbucks maintains, however, that the union is to blame for stalled contract talks by walking away from negotiations in the winter.

Starbucks spokesperson Jaci Anderson said in response to a request for comment Monday that “allegations by Workers United have all previously been debunked and are without merit.”

Anderson said the company denies allegations of forced labor in Brazil and is committed to ethical sourcing. The company has said that the coffee farms it works with are thoroughly vetted.

“Our commitment to bargaining with Workers United and reaching agreements has not changed,” Anderson said. “We are proud to bring connection, culture, community and incredible coffee to the world stage at the LA28 Games.”

The union’s Monday complaint also alleges that Starbucks, by lobbying for the Olympics deal, created a possible conflict of interest, because a prominent former member of Starbucks’ board, Mellody Hobson, also serves on the board of LA28, the organizing committee for the Summer Games.

Anderson said that Hobson left the Starbucks board in March, and that the Olympics deal was finalized after her departure.

Hobson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Complaints alleging ethics violations submitted to the International Olympic Committee are analyzed by the committee’s chief ethics and compliance officer, who, according to the group’s procedures, would then either submit the complaint to an independent ethics commission to make a recommendation or inform the person or group that made the complaint that no breach of ethics had been found.

Games in years past, with billions of dollars in revenue at stake, have at times been beset by corruption and scandal. The IOC set up its independent Ethics Commission in 1999 after IOC members were accused of accepting bribes — in the form of cash, gifts, travel expenses and even college tuition for members’ children — to advance Salt Lake City’s bid to host the 2002 Winter Games.

The accusations lodged by the union come amid a period of strained contract talks.

A nationwide movement to unionize the coffee chain began in 2021, when the first store in the chain won its union election. After several years of heightened union-management tension, hope grew that Starbucks and unionized baristas would be able to hammer out a deal in early 2024, when Starbucks pledged to publicly to work with the union. But talks broke down in December, and the union has said in recent months that it’s gearing up for a potential strike.

The complaint marks the latest point of tension between Southern California workers and their employers in the lead-up to the L.A. Olympics.

L.A. labor groups launched over the summer a campaign for what they are calling a “New Deal” to get the city and the LA28 Olympics organizing committee to invest in the community by building more housing, being more transparent about venue agreements and adopting protections for immigrant workers — as well as foreign visitors and fans — from federal raids.

And in a recent battle over raising wages for hotel and airport workers in the city, business groups launched a petition drive to block the city’s efforts to raise tourism workers hourly wages to $30 in time for the 2028 Olympics. But in early September the business groups fell short of securing the minimum number of valid signatures needed to qualify their initiative for the ballot.

A five-day strike that affected hundreds of Kaiser Permanente clinics and hospitals in California and Hawaii came to an end after the union representing workers said it had “new momentum” to head back to the bargaining table, but no apparent agreement has been reached.

“This strike may be over — but the fight for patient safety is not,” the United Nurses Assns. of California/Union of Healthcare Professionals, known as UNAC/UHCP said in a statement. “Caregivers are returning to work united, energized, and ready to keep up the pressure for a fair contract that puts patients first.”

Kaiser and union officials are set to resume bargaining on Wednesday and Thursday.

The union requested a wage increase of 25% over four years, an ask that union officials have said was needed to compensate for the smaller 2% increases workers received in the first year as part of their 2021 contract negotiations.

The union has also pushed for the additional hiring of more staff, and proposed an internal registry of on-call union nurses, so that the company doesn’t rely on contracted traveling nurses.

Kaiser officials have argued that employees on average earn 16% more than peers in the industry, and that the wage increases proposed raised their “already above-market wages over the 4-year contract.”

Company officials said the company offered a 21.5% wage increase over four years before the strike was called, as well as additional improvements to medical plans and retiree benefits.

Kaiser officials said workers returned to work Sunday at 7 a.m.

During the strike, facilities were staffed with doctors, managers and nearly 6,000 contracted nurses and clinicians to minimize disruption to care, officials said.

On Sunday, the UNAC/UHCP announced the end of the strike, stating that the labor action was “sending a resounding message that patient care and safe staffing must come first.”

The union pointed to new staffing standards released by the Joint Commission, a nonprofit that accredits healthcare organizations, that recognized adequate staffing as a component of providing needed care.

The new standard moves staffing levels away from an employer’s choice that could be affected by budget constraints, to a patient safety standard, the union said in a statement.

“The Joint Commission has finally said what nurses have known all along: Unsafe staffing is unsafe care,” said Charmaine S. Morales, president of the UNAC/UHCP in the statement. “It’s now a national patient safety mandate — and UNAC/UHCP will make sure it’s enforced.”

Officials at Kaiser said it was welcoming back the 30,000 employees who went on strike, but in a statement said the main point of contention at the bargaining table has been wages, not staffing.

“While the Alliance has publicly emphasized staffing and other concerns, wages are the reason for the strike and the primary issue in negotiations,” said Terry Kanakri, spokesperson for Kaiser, in a statement.

During bargaining, “the focus will be on economic issues,” Kanakri said in the statement. “At a time when the cost of healthcare continues to go up steeply, and millions of Americans are having to make the difficult choice to go without coverage, it’s critical that we keep quality, accessible healthcare coverage affordable.”

Meanwhile union officials have blasted the company for holding $66 billion in reserves and expanding projects in other states.

The National Labor Relations Board has sued California to block a law that empowers a state agency to oversee some private-sector labor disputes and union elections.

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 288 into law last month in response to the Trump administration’s hampering of federal regulators. It gives the state’s Public Employment Relations Board the ability to step in and oversee union elections, charges of workplace retaliation and other issues in the event the federal labor board is unable, or declines, to decide cases.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, argues the law usurps the NLRB’s authority “by attempting to regulate areas explicitly reserved for federal oversight.”

The lawsuit echos the NLRB’s challenge to a recent New York law that similarly seeks to expand the powers of its state labor board.

NLRB attorneys contend in the lawsuits that the laws create parallel regulatory systems that conflict with federal labor law.

The NLRB is tasked with safeguarding the right of private employees to unionize or organize in other ways to improve their working conditions.

Lawmakers in New York and California said they passed their bills to fill a gap, because the NLRB has been functionally paralyzed since January, when President Trump fired one of its Democratic board members. The unprecedented firing of that member, Gwynne Wilcox, left the board without the three-member quorum it needs to rule on cases.

Wilcox has challenged her firing in court, arguing that appointed board members can only be fired for “malfeasance or neglect of duty.” But her removal was upheld by the Supreme Court for now, until her case can make its way through lower courts.

Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, last month called AB 288 “the most significant labor law reform in nearly a century.”

The California Public Employment Relations Board typically has authority only over public sector employees. But when the new law goes into effect on Jan. 1, workers in the private sector who are unable to get a timely response at the federal level can also petition the state board to take up their cases and enforce their rights.

The state’s labor board can choose to take on a case when the NLRB “has expressly or impliedly ceded jurisdiction,” according to language in the law. That includes when charges filed with the agency or an election certification have languished with a regional director for more than six months — or when the federal board doesn’t have a quorum of members or is otherwise hampered.

The NLRB’s paralysis has put hundreds of cases in limbo, with the agency currently lacking the ability to compel employers to bargain with their workers’ unions, or to stop unfair treatment on the job.

However, the agency’s acting general counsel — Trump appointee William Cowen — has said that only a fraction of cases require decisions from the typically five-member board and that the agency’s work has been largely unaffected, with regional offices continuing to process union elections and unfair labor practice charges.