Judge Orders Starbucks To Rehire 7 Union Organizers

Post Reply
Alpha8472
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts: 2923
Joined: February 24th, 2009, 8:55 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 159 times
Status: Online

Judge Orders Starbucks To Rehire 7 Union Organizers

Post by Alpha8472 »

A Judge ruled that Starbucks fired 7 union organizers wrongfully. The Judge says Starbucks has 5 days to rehire them.

https://www.nrn.com/quick-service/feder ... -activists
storewanderer
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts: 9520
Joined: February 23rd, 2009, 3:54 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 538 times
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Judge Orders Starbucks To Rehire 7 Union Organizers

Post by storewanderer »

The company found other reasons to terminate them; which evidently did not stand up in court.

I would let them rehire me now, give me the back pay owed (I assume they are getting back pay...?), then leave.

There comes a point a hostile work environment isn't worth it, and a Union isn't going to change that.

I am surprised all they got was "must be rehired" and they didn't get some kind of cash settlement to go away or similar.
veteran+
Veteran Member
Veteran Member
Posts: 1171
Joined: January 3rd, 2015, 7:53 am
Has thanked: 1259 times
Been thanked: 111 times
Status: Offline

Re: Judge Orders Starbucks To Rehire 7 Union Organizers

Post by veteran+ »

A hostile work environment is better mitigated by a labor union and/or a STRONG Labor Commissoner over an often compromised HR department OR expensive legal fees.
storewanderer
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts: 9520
Joined: February 23rd, 2009, 3:54 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 538 times
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: Judge Orders Starbucks To Rehire 7 Union Organizers

Post by storewanderer »

veteran+ wrote: August 19th, 2022, 8:38 am A hostile work environment is better mitigated by a labor union and/or a STRONG Labor Commissoner over an often compromised HR department OR expensive legal fees.
I think a hostile work environment is better mitigated by the employees walking and leaving. I have worked in multiple hostile work environments. No unions involved. It is a dead end. There are two solutions: wait it out and hope things get better, or just get out. I have learned over the years when it is clear the hostile work environment is coming from the top (and not a bad immediate supervisor or something), it is better to just get out.

I also question why people would want to work for a company that allows for a hostile work environment. Why put out effort to make money for that type of company? Go work somewhere that actually makes you feel at the very least, neutral, about going there and putting a significant portion of your time and effort into making the ownership money.

Still did not answer my question and I can't find an answer- did they get their jobs reinstated with back pay in full for the time period between termination date and re-hire date? Did the lawsuit include payment of their legal fees by Starbucks since Starbucks lost the case? Typically in a wrongful termination scenario, back pay (along with some extra for diminished reputation, pain and suffering, or similar) would be given. If they couldn't even negotiate payment of back pay, it seems like their case was pretty weak. And legal fees would be paid by the corporation that lost the lawsuit. Did any of that happen here?

I do think there is some interesting stuff going on with some of these smaller unions. They desperately need to align with larger unions to strengthen their offer/benefits ability and gain additional resources.
Post Reply