Outgoing Starbucks boss Howard Schultz, an emblematic figure in the rise of the American coffee chain, defended his anti-union stance within the company and dismissed allegations of labor law violations at a US Senate hearing on Wednesday.
Since December 2021, Starbucks has been the subject of an organizing movement of hundreds of employees with the formation of a first union in three of the company’s locations in Buffalo (in the northeastern United States).
According to the Starbucks Workers United union, almost 300 coffees followed, which affects around 7,000 employees of the Seattle-based company (northwest).
In early March, an administrative judge found Starbucks guilty of multiple labor law violations, which the judge said were part of an approach aimed at preventing the company’s employees from organizing into a union.
According to the judge, the company fired workers for unionizing, threatened others and offered various benefits to those who voted against forming a union.
In particular, the judge ordered Howard Schultz to record a filmed message in which he recalled the rights workers enjoy in relation to unionisation.
The man, who just days ago ceded his position as general manager to Laxman Narasimhan, told the Senate Committee on Social Affairs (HELP) on Wednesday that he would not comply with the decision “because Starbucks did not break the law.” “.
The Group has appealed, or indicated its intention to do so, every decision made against it in this case, none of which is final.
“We respect the law” and the right of company employees to form a union, but “we prefer to maintain the direct relationship with our employees,” explained Howard Schultz, who no longer has an operational role but retains a seat The board of directors.
“We treat our employees fairly,” said the 60-year-old, who turned Starbucks from a small local chain into a global coffee giant. “We don’t do anything outrageous. We care about our employees and we have the service records to prove it.”
Howard Schultz has also accused the Labor Law Enforcement Bureau (NLRB), on which Administrative Judge Michael Rosas, who ruled Starbucks earlier in March, is biased, on which he depends.