In an unprecedented move, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted Starbucks an audience to contest a pivotal judicial decision compelling the coffee giant to reinstate seven terminated employees at its Memphis, Tennessee cafe. This legal battle stems from a federal agency’s determination that the workers were dismissed for their active support of unionization, marking the first case of its kind to reach the nation’s highest court amidst a widespread campaign to unionize Starbucks stores nationwide.
The Memphis establishment, one among the 370 Starbucks locations in the United States to embrace unionization since 2021, finds itself at the center of a controversy that has propelled the Seattle-based company, traditionally non-union, into uncharted legal territory.
The U.S. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) concluded that Starbucks’ termination of the Memphis employees was unlawful, driven by their backing of the union initiative and an attempt to send a deterrent message to other workers. Seeking redress, the NLRB obtained an injunction compelling Starbucks to reinstate the employees, a decision upheld by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2023, citing Starbucks’ questionable actions.
Starbucks has defended its actions, asserting that the workers were fired for breaching a company safety policy by opening the store without consent and permitting journalists inside. Despite complying with the reinstatement order, Starbucks pursued an appeal to the Supreme Court, criticizing the 6th Circuit for setting a low threshold in requiring the NLRB to demonstrate only “reasonable cause” for labor law violations.
Major business groups, supporting Starbucks’ appeal, argue that federal courts, including the 6th Circuit, have made it excessively easy for the NLRB to secure judicial orders mandating businesses to address alleged labor practice violations.
The legal skirmish with Starbucks is not an isolated incident. Over 700 complaints have been lodged with the NLRB, accusing the coffee behemoth of various unlawful labor practices, from terminating union advocates and worker surveillance to store closures during labor campaigns.
Beyond the Memphis case, the 6th Circuit is deliberating on another Starbucks appeal, challenging an NLRB ruling preventing the company from disciplining employees at an Ann Arbor, Michigan location. Simultaneously, other U.S. appeals courts are scrutinizing NLRB decisions regarding Starbucks’ alleged illegal firing of union organizers in Philadelphia and the company’s refusal to negotiate with unionized workers in Seattle.
Starbucks vehemently denies any wrongdoing, asserting that it provides competitive wages and benefits to employees while respecting their rights under federal labor law. As the legal saga unfolds, the Supreme Court’s decision could potentially reshape the landscape of employer-employee relations in the United States.
