The Inside Scoop: Why 100 of Starbucks Employees are Striking Over Pride Decor
The coffee chain disputes claims that some of its establishments have limited or outlawed the display of decorations honouring LGBTQ+ rights.
Employees at more than 150 Starbucks outlets went on a week-long strike after they claimed that employees at dozens of U.S. sites had been forbidden or limited from erecting Pride displays. The firm has refuted this assertion.
The walkout, involving over 3,000 employees from at least 28 states, started on Friday at the company’s flagship location in Seattle, according to Starbucks Workers United. Employee strikes at other places will impact less than 2% of company-operated stores across the United States this week.
Moe Mills, a shift manager from Richmond Heights, Missouri, stated, “Starbucks is scared of the power that their queer partners hold, and they should be.”
However, a spokesperson for the corporation said that the union was distributing inaccurate information and described the strike as a “tactic used to seemingly divide our partners.”
It’s the most recent instance of a culture war breaking out in the workplace, with several businesses coming under fire from employees and customers for their perceived commitment—or lack thereof—to divisive social topics.
The union charged regional Starbucks executives and shop managers of hindering employees from erecting Pride flags and other decorations honouring LGBTQ+ rights last week. The association noted claims made by employees that they had been told they couldn’t or couldn’t put up decorations, as well as messages and a memo citing regional managers’ instructions to ensure stores follow a more “consistent experience.” The Post was unable to verify the exchanges independently.
According to the union, it is not being claimed that the measures were a product of “corporate top-down national policy.” However, given that the alleged occurrences were numerous, it is “very hard to believe that corporate was unaware” of the acts, according to a statement.
Parker Anthony Davis, a 21-year-old barista in San Antonio, stated, “We find this weird restriction — or in some stores, downright refusal — to have Pride decorations to fly in the face of Starbucks values.”
Davis, who self-identifies asexual, continued, “That is alarming in our contemporary context — and that makes me anxious. “I want to make sure that I am working for a company that will advance these values and protect people who are merely human,” the employee said.
Although Davis said that his store’s staff had no issues hanging Pride decorations, he predicted that they would strike on Thursday in support of the businesses, which the union claims had been subjected to restrictions.
Starbucks has vigorously refuted the claims, which cites decades of support for LGBTQ+ employees through measures including “gender transition guidelines” and the inclusion of gender reassignment surgery in the company’s health plans. Additionally, Wall said that the business has traditionally supported “partner celebrations and recognition of a variety of heritage months.”
When asked if the local leaders and managers of the stores might have deviated from corporate directives, Wall replied, “As for in-store displays, partners and store leadership continue to find ways to authentically celebrate with their diverse communities year-round within our safety standards, signage policies, and dress code.”
“All reported partner concerns on this matter are being taken seriously, and are being routed for leadership review and to be addressed,” she continued.
The union claims that the incidents involving the decor have been added to a litany of punitive actions against employees, including denying workers access to benefits and dismissing a barista organising a union drive at her location.
Starbucks and the workers seeking union recognition have been engaged in a conflict that forced Howard Schultz, the founder and former CEO of the firm, to testify in front of a congressional committee in March over his company’s alleged labour-bashing practices. Schultz asserted that he was not engaged in the decision to close unionised stores and denied being involved in any decisions to fire or punish union organisers.
Only a few weeks before, a federal administrative law judge had determined that Starbucks had engaged in “egregious and widespread” breaches of federal labour law by attempting to put an end to unionisation drives.
One of the most well-known brands in the world is Starbucks, which has 250,000 employees in the United States and 450,000 internationally. Last year, it brought in more than $32 billion in revenue. According to MarketWatch, shares dropped 2.5 per cent on Friday, bringing the company’s market worth down to around $116 billion.
Brands from Target to Anheuser-Busch have recently seen blowback in stores and online due to divisive societal concerns. Anheuser-Busch came under fire and faced boycotts in April for their Bud Light collaboration with transgender actor Dylan Mulvaney. The extreme right has also criticised retailers, including Kohl’s, Walmart, and PetSmart, for carrying goods that promote acceptance and equality for gay, lesbian, and transgender people.
Target removed several LGBTQ+-related products and marketing materials from locations in late May, just before Pride month, claiming concerns for employee safety.
Since then, retailers have received bomb threats from at least eight states; however, no explosives have been found. Law enforcement has not confirmed any allegations made by those who claimed to be upset about the removal of Pride-related products.
