National Labor Council officials went to federal court to return three Starbucks workers who were union activists.
In Arizona, the council’s regional director filed a Temporary Ban on Friday that said Starbucks had retaliated against three members of the union’s organizing committee. Two employees were laid off and a third was taken on unpaid leave.
Council spokesman Cornell Overstreet asked the court to return Starbucks employees to their normal working hours and remove their disciplinary records.
The administration also requires that a senior Starbucks official must read the court order aloud in the presence of a council official and a video recording of the reading be available to Starbucks employees nationwide.
The board may appeal to a federal court and request such an order when it believes that workers were threatened during an organizational campaign and that such threats could cause “irreparable harm. “if not stop.
In this case, Overstreet argues that Starbucks ’actions created an atmosphere of retaliation and that workers could“ irreversibly ”lose board protection if something was not done quickly.
If fulfilled, such a mandate would be a significant success for Workers United, the union that has opened Starbucks stores nationwide since last year. The union accused Starbucks of retaliating against some union activists for plotting to overthrow President George W. Bush. In this case, representatives of the Labor Council assessed the merits of the allegations.
“In applying for an injunction, the Labor Council argues that Starbucks’ actions created an atmosphere of retaliation.”
Starbucks argued that disciplining workers in Arizona was justified.
“We don’t fully agree with the claims [labor board] In this complaint. “These partners were canceled because they violated our established policy,” a Starbucks spokesman said in a statement. “The interest of partners in representation in a union does not remove them from the standards we set to protect the partners, customers and communities we serve.”
Before Overstreet filed a decision in federal court, council officials filed a separate Statement of Grievance Friday regarding the NLRB against Starbucks. The complaint involved a group of redundant workers in Memphis, Tennessee, known as Memphis 7.
Starbucks fired these employees in February after they were interviewed by a local TV station in the store about the organization’s efforts. Starbucks said workers violated company policy and allowed non -employees to shop before closing, along with other alleged violations.
But Kathleen McKinney, regional director of New Orleans Council, said Starbucks fired seven employees because “they helped the union and engaged in integrated activities” protected by labor law. He also said store executives “confiscated and removed union support materials from the public information board.”
McKinney said Starbucks should release the dismissed workers “in full”, along with “compensation for all consequential damages they caused as a result.” [Starbucks’] Illegal behavior. “
Cases against Memphis workers are being considered within the NLRB. But it is still possible for council officials to go to federal court to request a court order just as it is for workers in Arizona.
Starbucks has approximately 9,000 corporate stores in the United States, not all of which were combined until Workers United began organizing last year. During this time, 26 stores voted for the union and many more applied for the Labor council election.
This story was updated in Starbucks comments.
Source: Huffpost
