NPR reported back in June that Starbucks was firing workers in retaliation for union activity. It was just one item in a laundry list of union busting tactics as the corporation faces a union wave with 220 locations nationwide voting union since December 2021. In August we can add another: endless, bad faith delays at the negotiating table.

To review, NPR reported that Starbucks were “allegedly fired illegally” and the matter found its way to court via a NLRB filing:

The National Labor Relations Board is asking a court to reinstate seven Starbucks workers who were allegedly fired illegally because they were involved in union organizing.

If approved by a judge, the NLRB filing would allow the former Starbucks employees, who worked at multiple Buffalo, N.Y. locations, to return to work while anti-union allegations against Starbucks are heard in court, a process that can take months. The case is set to be heard on July 11.

In addition to directly busting union employees, Starbucks has also taken up indirect strategies, including massive incentives delivered to non-union workers. Via NPR:

In order to tamp down unionization efforts at multiple Buffalo Starbucks locations, the company raised wages and promised improvements such as centralized training and store renovations, according to court documents.

Lauren Kaori Gurley of the Washington Post adds more granular detail on benefits and perks Starbucks dangled in front of non-union workers:

“Starbucks has tried to fend off the union effort as organizers have built momentum. Schultz announced in May that the company would raise pay and double training hours at its more than 10,000 corporate-owned stores. But he said those changes would not apply to recently unionized stores or stores in the process of unionizing, where workers had filed for union elections…

“Nonunion stores would see new investments in equipment and technology and enhanced tipping options for customers. Further communications stated that the dress code would be updated to allow more flexibility on piercings and tattoos, but only for only nonunion workers. According to the labor board, these benefits have been withheld from unionized workers since May.”

As with retaliatory firings, the anti-union incentives run afoul of labor law according to the NLRB, which filed a complaint:

The complaint alleges that the company has also withheld faster sick time accrual benefits, career growth opportunities and expanded credit card tips from workers at unionized stores.

The labor board says that not extending these benefits and wage increases to union workers violated the National Labor Relations Act, which protects workers’ rights to engage in union activity free from interference, coercion and retaliation.

Starbucks has filed its own complaint, alleging that the National Labor Relations Board was “helping workers organize” — which sounds like you’re complaining that water is wet. The Seattle Times reached out to legal expert Elizabeth Ford to clarify:

As the NLRB’s responsibilities include making sure employees can choose to unionize, the “complaint that the NLRB is ‘helping workers organize’ does not make a lot of sense,” said Elizabeth Ford, a distinguished practitioner in residence at the Seattle University School of Law.

“Sometimes employers get confused about this, thinking that the board’s job is to facilitate a contest between the employer and the union over whether there should be a union,” Ford said. “That’s not it at all; the Board’s job is to allow employees to choose for themselves.”

If Starbucks can’t fire all its union workers or chase them away with lower compensation, it plans to sit on its thumbs at the negotiating table. Like a child that won’t eat his vegetables, it looks like Howard Schultz’s Starbucks intends to wait for the union push to lose its steam. Via Vox:

Some workers believe the coffee company is using these delays as one of many union-busting tactics meant to prevent workers from exercising their right to organize: The longer it takes to create and agree on a contract with the company, the longer it will take for union workers to actually enjoy the benefits of being in a union and the more likely the union movement will lose momentum.

Delays are especially acute at Starbucks.

Why so acute? Because Starbucks employees don’t have the resources to wait as long at the negotiation table as a team or corporate lawyers who eagerly lap up every newly billed hour. The workers have debts, bills, rent, and school supplies for their kids that need to be paid for now, not later. Via Vox:

[T]he union has every reason to want to bargain while Starbucks has every reason not to.

“They’re grasping at straws. They’re trying every delay tactic that they can think of,” Rebecca Givan, associate professor at Rutgers University’s labor school, said of Starbucks. “You’re not bargaining in good faith if you’re not bargaining.”

How will the Starbucks union effort respond to the delay tactics? Stay tuned as the story develops.