Bernie Sanders questions Howard Schultz on Starbucks’ labor practices

New York (CNN) Senator Bernie Sanders, who strongly criticized former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz for the company The apparent attempt to shut down the union’s own efforts, finally got Schultz questioned during a hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on Wednesday.

For nearly two hours Wednesday morning, the senators questioned Schultz, who is now chairman emeritus of Starbucks, about the company. Those on the left pressed Schultz over the coffee company’s labor practices, and wondered how the former CEO could claim the company acted lawfully, despite findings by the National Labor Relations Board that it did not .

Those on the right paint Schultz as a successful CEO who has created hundreds of thousands of jobs, while others seize the opportunity to defend business leaders in general and skip the question entirely.

Later, a former and a current employee described seeing union members punished and punished themselves.

“Across the country, workers are struggling. They want to join unions. They want better wages, better working conditions. They want that at Starbucks,” Sanders told reporters during a break in proceedings.

“I hope that what has been done today is to tell Mr. Schultz that the time is now to do what is legal, do what is appropriate, sit down and negotiate a first contract with their workers.”

Schultz and Sanders face off

Sanders, who has accused Schultz of “illegal anti-union activities” in the past, reiterated Wednesday that “the fundamental issue we face today is whether we have a justice system that works for everyone, or whether the billionaires and big corporations can. break the law with impunity.”

Sanders mentioned that Starbucks and the union have not yet signed a contract.

“What angers me is not just Starbucks anti-union activities and their willingness to break the law, it’s their calculated and deliberate efforts to stop, stall and stall,” he said. “What Starbucks is doing is not only trying to break the unions, but worse. They are trying to break the spirit of the workers who are struggling to improve their lives. And that is unforgivable.”

Senators aren’t the only ones who want more answers from Starbucks. During the company’s annual shareholder meeting last week, investors voted to approve a proposal to have the board of directors “commission and conduct an independent, third-party audit of Starbucks’ compliance with the stated commitment to freedom of association of workers and collective bargaining. .”

Companies are not required to follow approved proposals — but if they ignore them, they risk angering investors. The results of the vote were shared in an SEC filing Wednesday afternoon, following the hearing.

Starbucks said in its filing that it has a previously announced third-party human rights impact assessment underway, which includes an “examination of the principles of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining.”

As of December 2021, nearly 300 Starbucks stores have voted to unionize and have been certified by the NLRB. This is a small number compared to the roughly 9,300 company-operated Starbucks stores in the United States. But union organizers are fighting an uphill battle against the company.

NLRB administrative law judge Michael Rosas recently said Starbucks had shown “gross and widespread misconduct” in its dealings with employees involved in unionization efforts. store in Buffalo, New York, including the first location to join the union. Starbucks repeatedly sent high-level executives to Buffalo-area stores in a “relentless” effort, the judge wrote, that “likely left a lasting impact on the importance of voting against representation.” As a result, the company has had to bring back and complement several workers who were let go from locations in or around Buffalo, Rosas said. The judge also said that Schultz, then interim CEO, and another company leader must read the notice to employees, or attend a meeting where the rights are read.

When Sanders asked if Schultz would read the announcement, Schultz said no. “I’m not, because the Starbucks coffee company didn’t break the law,” he said.

Schultz said during his testimony Wednesday that “without a doubt,” Starbucks “did not break the law.” He called Rosas’ findings “allegations,” adding that “we are confident that those allegations will be proven false.” Starbucks said in a statement at the time of Rosas’ order that it was “considering all options to obtain further legal review,” and added that “we believe the decision and the remedies ordered were inappropriate.” the record of the matter.”

When Sanders asked Schultz to commit to exchanging union proposals within two weeks of the hearing, he refused to do so, saying instead that “we will continue to negotiate in good faith.” Starbucks argued that the union was dragging its feet at the bargaining table.

Like getting 100 speeding tickets and pleading not guilty

Later in the morning, Senator Christopher Murphy questioned Schultz on his claim that Starbucks was operating legally, saying that he tried to square Starbucks and Schultz’s claim that it did nothing wrong. with repeated official findings otherwise.

“It’s like someone who’s been ticketed for speeding 100 times saying I never broke the law, because every time — every time — the cop got it wrong,” Murphy said.

Some senators defended Schultz as a stand-in for business leaders in general. “Mr. Schultz, I applaud you for your success. And I applaud all the CEOs out there for their success,” said Senator Markwayne Mullin, who a few weeks ago engaged in a heated exchange with the general president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Sean O’Brien during another HELP hearing.

Senator Mitt Romney stonewalled his fellow committee members. “It’s pretty rich that you’re being grilled by people who haven’t had a chance to do a job,” said Senator Mitt Romney. “And yet they think they know better how to do it.”

In prepared words available on a Starbucks website, Schultz reiterated his position that while he recognized that Starbucks (SEX) Workers have the right to decide whether to join a union, he doesn’t think they should.

“Starbucks respects the right of all associates to make their own decisions about union representation,” Schultz said.

Regional NLRB offices issued multiple complaints against the company, covering more than 200 unfair labor charges.

In prepared remarks for the hearing, Schultz said, “Starbucks complied with the National Labor Relations Act,” by recognizing unions after they were certified by the NLRB.

Schultz served three stints as chief executive of Starbucks, most recently as interim CEO from April 2022 until earlier this month, when he replaced current CEO Laxman Narasimhan ahead of schedule. In his prepared remarks, Schultz also talked about the history of the company, and its character as he sees it.

“Starbucks follows its guiding principles, lives its mission and values, celebrates diversity and inclusion, and welcomes everyone in the belief that our differences make us better and stronger,” said he. “We are a different kind of public company that balances profitability with social conscience. Trying to achieve that vision is my life’s work.”

‘You can’t be pro partner and anti union’

Schultz on Wednesday praised the many perks and benefits that Starbucks offers. He acknowledged in his prepared remarks that when he returned last year it was because the company had “lost its way,” but said it is now back on track.

That rosy image of the company, however, has been tarnished by Starbucks’ high-profile anti-union efforts, which unfolded under Schultz’s leadership in 2022 and continued this year.

“You can’t be pro partner and anti union,” said Maggie Carter, a barista and union organizer at a Starbucks in Knoxville, Tennessee, during the hearing. Starbucks uses the word “partner” for its employees. “It’s past time for the company to bargain in good faith,” he said, adding, “Howard Schultz doesn’t feel like a partner to me.”

Carter, who worked at Starbucks during the pandemic, said that when she raised concerns about store conditions with managers at the time they did not respond. “It’s a big reason why we want to organize,” he said.

Jaysin Saxton, a former employee who said she was wrongfully fired, described what she saw as vindictive behavior from Starbucks after she began organizing.

“We were disciplined by the little things that happened in the store, like being written two minutes late, which had never happened before,” he said. Saxton said he has filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB and hopes to be reinstated at Starbucks.

“We’re coming together to demand better wages, affordable health coverage and stronger safety practices,” he said. “I am proud to be a leader in this new labor movement.”