The Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union’s pro-Palestinian social media posts are hurting the coffee chain in more ways than one, the company alleges. But the union says that’s just an excuse for Starbucks to hit back at organized labor.
On Oct. 9, the union posted a since-deleted image of a bulldozer tearing down a part of the Israel and Gaza border with the text “Solidarity with Palestine,” while union chapters in Iowa, Chicago, and Boston promoted rallies in support of Palestinians.
Confusing the union’s stance for Starbucks’ stance, disappointed customers are confronting employees at Starbucks coffee shops, and sending graphic and angry messages to the company’s customer service center, Starbucks alleges. A growing chorus is calling for a Starbucks boycott, too. The company says its received more than 1,000 complaints about the union’s post.
To distance itself from the union’s position, Starbucks clarified its stance and sent the union a cease-and-desist letter to stop using the company’s name and images that resemble its logo. When that yielded no response, Starbucks resorted to filing a lawsuit in Iowa yesterday (Oct. 18).
The coffee chain, which has 34,000 locations worldwide, alleges that social media posts “in support of violence in Israel” by the union, which represents around 9,000 baristas from 366 unionized US stores, “have led to property damage, threats, and calls for a boycott.”
Starbucks Workers United sues back
The SBWU hit back with its own complaint against Starbucks, filed the same day in federal court in Pennsylvania, saying no one was confusing the company with the union.
The union is accusing the company of defaming it by implying that the union supports terrorism and violence. It says the unauthorized tweet, which was taken down within 40 minutes of posting, did not indicate the union supports terrorism.
It’s asking the court to rule that it can continue to use the Starbucks name—which it has been using since August 2021—and a tweaked version of the company’s green circular logo. That’s the norm when you consider the likes of the logos for the Amazon Labor Union and National Football League Players Association.
Workers see the litigation as an anti-union ploy.
Quotable: Starbucks vs the union
SBWU on Oct. 17: “Starbucks is seeking to exploit the ongoing tragedy in the Middle East to bolster the company’s anti-union campaign.”
Starbucks on Oct. 18: “Such reckless and reprehensible behavior must be addressed through the lens of our partners’ safety and public clarity of Starbucks official position, which condemns the violence in the region. This position is apart from our continued commitment to good faith bargaining that we have insisted through hundreds of requests and unfair labor practice filings.”
A non-exhaustive list of Starbucks union-busting tactics
A shadow of doubt has likely been cast on Starbucks’ intent because of its hostility in the past. The coffee chain isn’t giving unions the representation they crave. Politicians have called the business out and former CEO Howard Schulz participated in a Senate hearing on the matter.
Often it actively campaigns against labor force organization. Some examples include:
💸 Raising pay for workers at non-union stores.
☕ Closing cafés where workers wanted to unionize.
😠 Enforcing strict policies around dress code, attendance, leave, free food and beverages while working, and more, allegedly to take punitive action against workers attempting to organize.
💼 Overstaffing stores with upcoming unionization votes, bringing on additional employees via transfers or new hires to dilute the pool.
📌 Restricting employees from posting union literature at stores where the posting of other types of literature is permitted.
🕴 Unannounced visits from management that covertly keeps an eye on union talk, and overtly gives speeches against them.
🕒 Delaying bargaining.
However, there could be some hope for a reconciliation. Schultz has been vocal about being a staunch opponent of unions but his successor, Laxman Narasimhan, has not made his thoughts public yet.
A brief timeline of Starbucks and the union sparring since the Israel-Hamas conflict
Oct. 7: Hamas, Palestine’s ruling party that’s been designated as a terrorist organization internationally, unleashes the deadliest Palestinian attack in history on Israel, killing thousands of civilians. Israel retaliates, killing thousands more.
Oct. 9: Workers United posts an image of a bulldozer tearing down a part of the Israel and Gaza border with the text “Solidarity with Palestine”—a since-deleted post that Starbucks will allege reflects “their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas.” The Union chapters in Iowa, Chicago and Boston also promoted rallies in support of Palestinians.
Oct. 10: Mary Kay Henry, the president of Workers United’s parent organization Service Employees International Union (SEIU), shares a statement saying the labor group “stands with all who are suffering, while strongly condemning anti-Semitism, Islamophobia & hate in all forms.”
Oct. 11: Florida senator Rick Scott posts on X, asking people to “boycott” Starbucks for supporting a terrorist organization and calls upon the leadership to denounce the statements. “If you go to Starbucks, you are supporting killing Jews,” Florida state representative Randy Fine chimes in.
Oct.12: Scott says he’s “glad” Starbucks has clarified that it doesn’t endorse Workers United’s statement.
Oct. 13: Starbucks contacts Workers United with a cease-and-desist notice, demanding they stop using the company’s name, logo, and intellectual property, as well as issue an immediate correction.
Oct. 17: Starbucks chief partner officer Sara Kelly, in a letter updating staff, says union president Lynne Fox has rejected the request, and the company will have to take legal action.
Oct. 18: The company sues, and the union sues back.