Started By
Message

re: Employees at Starbucks on S. Sherwood have Unionized

Posted on 1/11/24 at 7:43 pm to
Posted by chinhoyang
Member since Jun 2011
24295 posts
Posted on 1/11/24 at 7:43 pm to
quote:


For a single location it’s not hard for Starbucks. Don’t agree to their demands, let them strike, close the store because there is no business.


Risky. The current NLRB is very pro-union and would likely take the position that the closure of the single location was due to its unionization. A permanent closure due to a strike likely won't pass muster.

They can shut all of their stores down, which of course they won't. Companies have the absolute right to shut down everything, even if they admit they are doing it because they don't want to deal with a union.
Posted by BigBinBR
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2023
5341 posts
Posted on 1/11/24 at 8:11 pm to
quote:

Risky. The current NLRB is very pro-union and would likely take the position that the closure of the single location was due to its unionization.


Yeah, but there is nothing that says that they have to give in to union demands. Especially when their demands are: asking for better wages, racial and gender equity, and fairer scheduling.

They are already paid better than the BR average for unskilled labor, “racial and gender equity” is nonsense(look at the photo of the employees), and “fairer scheduling” is totally subjective.



first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram