A work conflict involving Starbucks and hundreds of its baristas.
The coalition representing employees at more than 550 shops has not yet signed a contract with Starbucks more than two decades after negotiations began.
Last week, Starbucks Workers United announced that union representatives had cast a ballot to reject the coffee shop’s most recent plan that guaranteed yearly increases of at least 2 %.
81 % of the company’s more than 550 salaried U.S. stores, according to the union, cast ballots against the proposal out of some 490 staff.
The coalition claimed that the plan did not establish a maximum number of scheduled work time and did not provide instant pay raises or increases for medical benefits.
The reality is that the business is simply no offering anything that would truly reduce the cost of living in Los Angeles, according to Cassie Pritchard, a bartender who represents employees at a Starbucks close to Little Ethiopia in Los Angeles. The proposal was rejected by her.
According to Pritchard,” We are eager and willing to discuss a plan that really addresses the needs of baristas.”
Coffee asserts that it already offers dynamic pay and benefits, with retail workers making more than$ 19 per hour on average.
The business criticized the coalition for putting to a voting what it called an “incomplete construction” rather than a “full proposal” in a statement posted to the Starbucks site.
The government’s actions, sadly, just add more time to the struggle to reach a common goal, the company claimed. In terms of overall pay and benefits,” Coffee is the business head” far above industry standards.
Since early next year, when Starbucks, which had formerly been accused by federal officials of unjustly firing employees, had high hopes that the two sides would be able to reach a deal, pledged formally to work with the coalition.
According to the union, the parties made progress on non-economic proposals, including dress code,” only cause” privileges, and health and safety procedures.
However, a wage debate caused speaks to fall apart. The union organized a five-day attack in big cities leading up to Christmas Day, including many stores in Los Angeles, and filed roughly 90 unfair labor complaints against Starbucks with the NLRRB. Coffee accused the union of early ending negotiations and demanding absurd wage increases.
Federal negotiators were appointed to resolve the dispute in February.
About a month later, the Trump administration abruptly terminated one of the two national mediators who had been working on the Starbucks talks in an effort to slash the costs, which have piqued the interest of unions and employers who rely on mediation to ward off labor disputes and live labor disputes.
According to the coalition, one negotiator has been running the Starbucks intervention sessions.
Brian Niccol, who was appointed past August as Starbucks ‘ new chief executive, pledged to work with the union” constructively and in good trust.”
However, union people continue to criticize how negotiation has been conducted during Niccol’s career and have raised concerns about his$ 96-million compensation package.
___
© 2025 Los Angeles Times.
Tribune Content Agency, LLC distributed.
