Mall of America Starbucks Employees Join Rising Movement Seeking to Remove SBWU Union
Starbucks partners at Minneapolis location join the growing list of workers looking to decertify Starbucks “Workers United” union
Minneapolis, MN (July 14, 2023) – Rebecca Person, an employee of the first floor Mall of America Starbucks location outside Minneapolis, MN, has just submitted a petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 18 that seek a vote to remove Starbucks Workers’ United (SBWU) union officials from their workplace. The Mall of America Starbucks is just the latest in a growing list of Starbucks locations where employees are seeking to oust union officials. Workers from locations in Manhattan, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo are also receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys in union decertification efforts.
The union decertification petition contains signatures from a majority of workers at the Mall of America location. The majority support for removing the union is far more than the 30% requirement by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) needed to trigger the NLRB to hold a decertification vote among the workers.
With the workers’ petition filed with the NLRB, the NLRB’s rules dictate that a secret ballot election should be promptly scheduled to determine whether a majority of workers want to end union officials’ power to impose a contract, including forced dues, on the workers. Because Minnesota lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, SBWU union officials have the power to enter into an agreement with Starbucks that would require Person and her coworkers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. Meanwhile, in Right to Work states, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
Starbucks Workers Increasingly Seek to Vote out SBWU Union Officials
The Mall of America Starbucks workers are just the latest example of Starbucks workers seeking to exercise their right to vote out unwanted union officials. Foundation attorneys are currently assisting Starbucks employees in Manhattan, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh, in obtaining union decertification votes.
As with the New York and Pennsylvania locations, the SBWU union only came to power at the Mall of America Starbucks a little over a year ago – meaning workers began attempts to vote out SBWU nearly as soon as legally allowed. Federal labor law prevents workers from exercising their right to remove an unpopular union at least one year after installed.
A contributing factor to the growing worker dissatisfaction with SBWU union officials may be the controversial practice of “salting,” which involves union officials surreptitiously paying union agents to obtain jobs at non-union workplaces to agitate for union control. “Salts” generally hide their union-allied status from both managers and their coworkers, and may quickly depart the workplace once a union has been installed. The New York Post reported that one SBWU union agent was paid nearly $50,000 to “salt” a Buffalo Starbucks location, and concealed her affiliation from both her coworkers and Congress.
The push for decertification votes at Starbucks is part of a growing trend, with the NLRB’s data showing a unionized private sector worker is far more likely to be involved in a decertification effort as their nonunion counterpart is to be involved in a unionization campaign. NLRB statistics also show a 20% increase in decertification petitions last year versus 2021. However, union officials still have many ways to manipulate federal labor law to prevent workers from voting them out, including by filing unrelated or unverified charges against management.
“The deceptive tactics SBWU officials took in gaining control of multiple Starbucks locations are finally coming back to haunt them,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Starbucks partners nationwide are seeing how the union organizers, including those secretly paid by the union pretending to be genuine coworkers, manipulated them to do what is best for union bosses but not in the best interests of rank-and-file workers.”
“These Starbucks workers have joined others in taking the first step in exercising their rights to oust an unwanted union, and we call on SBWU union officials and the NLRB to respect the wishes of these workers who simply want a prompt decertification vote,” continued Mix. “The right of workers to oust a union that lacks majority support should not be subjugated to the interests of incumbent union bosses seeking to retain power against the wishes of rank-and-file workers.”
Pittsburgh Starbucks Workers Seek Vote to Remove Unwanted SBWU Union
Pittsburgh employees latest to join growing number of Starbucks employees seeking decertificiation votes to oust union
Pittsburgh, PA (July 13, 2023) – Employees at Pittsburgh’s Penn Center East Starbucks branch just submitted a petition to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), asking the federal agency to hold a vote at their workplace on whether to oust the Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union. The employee who submitted the petition, Elizabeth Gulliford, is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Foundation staff attorneys.
The union decertification petition contains signatures from enough workers at the Penn Center East coffee shop to trigger a vote under the NLRB’s rules. With the petition filed, the NLRB should now promptly schedule a secret ballot election to determine whether a majority of workers want to end union officials’ power to impose a contract, including forced dues, on the workers.
Because Pennsylvania lacks Right to Work protections for its private sector workers, SBWU union officials have the power to enter into agreement with Starbucks forcing Gulliford and her coworkers to pay union dues or fees as a condition of keeping their jobs. In contrast, in Right to Work states, union membership and financial support are strictly voluntary.
“SBWU union bosses have not looked out for the interests of me and my fellow employees,” commented Gulliford. “We simply want to exercise our right to vote out a union that we don’t believe has done a good job, and both SBWU and Starbucks should respect that right and our final decision.”
Starbucks Workers Increasingly Seek to Vote Out SBWU Union Officials
The Pittsburgh Starbucks workers are just the latest group of Starbucks workers seeking to exercise their right to vote out unwanted union officials. Foundation attorneys are currently assisting Starbucks employees in Manhattan, NY, and Buffalo, NY, in obtaining union decertification votes. As with the New York locations, the SBWU union only came to power at the Pittsburgh Starbucks about a year ago – meaning workers began attempts to vote out SBWU as soon as legally allowed. Federal labor law prevents workers from exercising their right to remove an unpopular union for at least one year after one is installed.
A contributing factor to the growing worker dissatisfaction with SBWU union officials may be the controversial practice of “salting,” which according to news reports is a tactic the SBWU union employed to install union power at New York Starbucks locations. “Salting” involves union officials surreptitiously paying union agents to obtain jobs at non-union workplaces to agitate for union control. “Salts” generally hide their union-allied status from both managers and their coworkers, and may quickly depart the workplace once a union has been installed. The New York Post reported that one SBWU union agent was paid nearly $50,000 to “salt” a Buffalo Starbucks location, and concealed her affiliation from both her coworkers and Congress.
Currently, the NLRB’s data shows a unionized private sector worker is far more likely to be involved in a decertification effort as their nonunion counterpart is to be involved in a unionization campaign. NLRB statistics also show a 20% increase in decertification petitions last year versus 2021. However, union officials still have many ways to manipulate federal labor law to prevent workers from voting them out, including by filing unrelated or unverified charges against management.
“As more Starbucks workers seek to kick SBWU from their stores, the agenda of these union officials is becoming clearer and clearer,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “SBWU union officials sought to extend their power over as many Starbucks workers as they could through controversial tactics, all in pursuit of greater dues revenue and scoring political points. Meanwhile, workers’ interests were ignored completely.”
“While we are happy that the Starbucks workers are able to take their first steps in exercising their rights oust an unwanted union, we call on SBWU union officials not to attempt to block or otherwise interfere with the rank-and-file workers’ right to hold this vote,” continued Mix. “Union bosses should not be allowed to keep their grip on power simply by disenfranchising those they claim to ‘represent.’”
Starbucks Worker Asks Labor Board to Review Order Denying Vote to Remove Unwanted Union
Request for Review to full National Labor Relations Board says Regional Director erred in dismissing workers’ petition
Buffalo, NY (June 12, 2023) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys have filed a Request for Review with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. This requests asks the Board to reverse a Regional Director’s order dismissing a workers’ petition for a decertification election on whether to remove the so-called Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union, an affiliate of Service Employee International Union (SEIU). The request is part of a case that began when Ariana Cortes, a Buffalo Starbucks worker, filed a petition with the NLRB requesting the decertification election be held at the “Del Chip” Starbucks location where she works.
Cortes’ decertification petition, which was filed on April 28, has support from a majority of her coworkers who also want to remove the union from their workplace. After her initial filing, Cortes began receiving free legal assistance from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
“They have treated us like pawns, promising us that we could remove them after a year if we no longer wanted their representation, and are now trying to stop us from exercising our right to vote,” Cortes said in a statement about why so many of her coworkers support removing the union. “It’s obvious they care more about power and control than respecting our individual rights.”
Under federal law, workers can trigger an NLRB-supervised decertification election with the signatures of 30% or more of the employees in a workplace. After receiving the petition, NLRB officials should then promptly move to schedule an election. However, on May 25, the NLRB Region 3 Regional Director issued an order dismissing the decertification petition.
In response to this order, Cortes’s Foundation staff attorneys filed the request for review with the four member NLRB in Washington, DC. The filing emphasizes the wishes of the employees to continue with the decertification process to remove the monopoly union representation that lacks the support of a majority of the workers, which is a fundamental principle of the National Labor Relations Act that the NLRB is charged with enforcing.
The brief also observes that the grounds for blocking the vote is contradicted by the NLRB allowing union-backed certification elections to proceed. The result is that the SEIU is like a roach motel, easy to enter but impossible to leave.
“The Region dismissed her petition and disenfranchised her and her fellow employees of the right to choose their representative—the same right that has been granted over 350 times to employees seeking certification,” the brief states.
So far, workers at three different Starbucks locations in New York State have filed decertification petitions. In addition to the Del Chip store, Foundation staff attorneys also represent the petitioner in the Starbucks Roastery case, where a majority of workers also support the decertification effort.
The Foundation has also issued a legal notice to all Starbucks employees, offering free legal aid to any worker who may be interested in removing SBWU’s so-called “representation” from their workplace: www.nrtw.org/starbucks
“Workers have a statutory right to decertify a union they oppose, and it is outrageous that the Regional Director has so callously moved to disenfranchise these workers of that right,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “The NLRB must reverse course and cease acting like its mission is simply to protect incumbent union officials against workers who are opposed to unions’ so-called representation.”
Starbucks Worker’s Brief: Proceed with Vote to Remove Union Opposed by Majority of Workers
Labor Board asked to reject union-backed move to disenfranchise majority of workers who petitioned for decertification election
New York, NY (June 2, 2023) – National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys have filed a brief with National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Region 2 asking the NLRB not to dismiss the worker-led decertification effort. The brief is part of the case that began when Manhattan Starbucks Roastery worker Kevin Caesar filed a decertification petition with the NLRB seeking a secret-ballot election to end union officials’ so-called “representation.”
Caesar’s petition, which was filed on May 9, has the support of a majority of his coworkers who want to remove Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) from their workplace. Caesar is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
“We have seen our workplace both with and without the union. We believe that the union is looking out for itself more than it is looking out for Starbucks partners, who do not want forced dues and can advocate for ourselves. That is why a majority of us have decided we would be better off without the union. The fact that the union officials have forced us to go through this decertification process despite the majority of workers stating they do not want to be represented by this union shows how little regard the union has for the will of the workers. We call on union officials to respect our rights and not attempt to fight this vote,” stated Caesar.
Under federal law, workers can trigger an NLRB-supervised decertification election with the signatures of 30% or more of the employees in a workplace. Caesar and his Roastery co-workers’ petition meets the criteria.
However, on May 18, 2023, NLRB Region 2 officials ordered each party to file briefs to determine whether or not to process the decertification petition by the Starbucks Roastery employees. The order suggests that unfair labor practice charge allegations filed by Workers United, an affiliate of Service Employees International Union (SEIU), could stop the petition from being processed. Such claims are often filed with the purpose of completely derailing employee decertification efforts, like the one taking place at the Starbucks Roastery.
In response to this order, Caesar’s Foundation staff attorneys filed a brief, emphasizing the wishes of the employees to continue with the decertification process and the importance of not trapping workers under monopoly union representation that lacks the support of a majority of the workers. This is a fundamental principle of the National Labor Relations Act that the NLRB is charged with enforcing.
“The policy of the Act is not to promote unionism per se; rather, it is to protect employees in their choice of representative,” the brief states. “Dismissing the decertification petition would disregard Petitioner’s and his colleagues protected statutory right to not associate with a union and benefit the Union at the expense of employee rights. Petitioner’s efforts to collect signatures and secure the backing of a majority of his colleagues on his showing of interest should not be so easily disregarded.”
The filing also describes the workers’ reasoning for wanting to exercise their right to remove the union: “Caesar filed a petition to decertify the Union. His petition was supported by a showing of interest indicating a majority of employees no longer want Union representation. Caesar does want to be represented by the Union because, in his opinion, the Union is self-interested, divisive, and unfocused on New York Roastery employees. He does not want to be forced to pay dues and prefers to advocate for himself, rather than have a third party do so.”
The decertification petition at Starbucks Roastery is just the latest employee decertification effort at Starbucks. In just two weeks, three different Starbucks locations in New York filed decertification petitions. Foundation staff attorneys also represent the petitioner in the Buffalo case.
The Foundation has also issued a legal notice to all Starbucks employees, offering free legal aid to any worker who may be interested in decertifying SBWU at their workplace and informs them of their rights in the workplace.
“If union officials cared about the actual wishes of rank-and-file Starbucks Roastery team members they would not be seeking to disenfranchise them by stopping a vote from taking place,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “The workers who oppose the union did nothing wrong, and the NLRB should reject attempts to strip them of their right to vote the union out.”
National Right to Work Foundation Issues Legal Notice to Starbucks Employees as Multiple Locations Seek to Boot Unions
Notice contains details on how employees can petition for union decertification vote, as well as how to resign membership and cut off dues
Washington, DC (May 23, 2023) – After being in contact with multiple Starbucks workers, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation today issued a special legal notice to Starbucks employees who are interested in removing union control in their workplace. The legal notice is available at the Foundation’s website here: https://www.nrtw.org/starbucks/.
The Right to Work Foundation is the nation’s premier organization dedicated to defending workers whose rights have been violated by forced unionism abuses. Foundation staff attorneys are already assisting Starbucks employees at the Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Manhattan, NY, in exercising their right to vote unwanted union officials out of their store, and similar efforts are taking place at Starbucks locations in Buffalo, NY, and Rochester, NY. At the New York Roastery location, a majority of the employees signed the petition asking for a vote to remove the union.
“The Foundation wants you to learn about your legal rights from independent sources,” the notice says. “You should not rely on what self-interested union officials tell you.”
In Addition to Seeking to Vote Out Union, Employees Can Take Individual Steps to Resist Union Activity
The legal notice advises Starbucks workers of their right to petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to hold a vote among employees on whether a resident union should be ousted from the workplace, a process known as a decertification vote. However, it cautions workers that this process is complex and prone to manipulation from union officials, and for that reason workers should consider obtaining Foundation legal aid in navigating the process.
The notice also advises employees of actions they can take as individuals to disaffiliate from the union, including how to exercise their right to resign union membership, revoke cards authorizing direct union dues deductions, and potentially stop funding union activities. The notice provides sample letters to workers interested in exercising those rights.
“If you work in a state that lacks Right to Work protections, union officials with a monopoly bargaining agreement can unfortunately force you to pay some union fees in order to keep your job. However, there are still limitations on how much and under what circumstances you can legally be required to pay,” the notice reads, while counseling such workers of their right to cut off dues payments for union politics as per the Foundation-won CWA v. Beck Supreme Court decision. “If you work in a state with Right to Work protections, you have a right to opt-out of all union financial support.”
“As many Starbucks locations pass the one-year anniversary of unionization, Starbucks employees are now able to hold votes to remove the union, a right many are now seeking to exercise,” commented National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation President Mark Mix. “No one who claims to be pro-worker should oppose simply letting these workers hold a secret ballot vote to determine if they oppose union affiliation.”
“Unfortunately, between union officials who prioritize their own power over the wishes of rank-and-file workers, and an NLRB that is actively seeking to make it harder for workers to even hold decertification votes, it is more important than ever that workers fully understand these legal issues,” Mix added. “That’s why workers should carefully read our legal notice and know that they can request free legal aid from the National Right to Work Foundation for help in protecting their legal rights.”
Starbucks Roastery Workers Move to Oust Union after One Year
NYC Starbucks employees file petition to decertify SEIU union affiliate after just one year under the union’s compulsory ‘representation’
New York, NY (May 10, 2023) – A Starbucks Roastery worker in Chelsea, Manhattan recently filed a petition for a vote on whether to remove NY-NJ Regional Joint Board, Workers United, an affiliate of Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The petition, submitted with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), was filed by Kevin Caesar. Caesar is receiving free legal aid from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys.
On May 9, 2023, Starbucks employee Caesar filed the decertification petition to obtain a vote on whether to remove the union, often called Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) from their workplace. After being unionized for just over one year, the workers have had enough of the union and believe they would be better off without it. Under the National Labor Relations Act, which the NLRB is charged with enforcing, workers must wait one year after a unionization vote before they can seek another vote, such as the decertification election Caesar and his coworkers have demanded.
With the petition filed, the NLRB should now promptly schedule a secret ballot election to determine whether a majority of workers want to end union officials’ power to impose a contract, including forced dues, on the workers. If a majority vote against the union, the workers will join the vast majority of Starbucks workers across the country who are free from union boss-control.
The Starbucks workers are just the latest example of growing dissatisfaction with union officials’ “representation.” Currently, the NLRB’s data shows a unionized private sector worker is far more likely to be involved in a decertification effort as their nonunion counterpart is to be involved in a unionization campaign. NLRB statistics also show a 20% increase in decertification petitions last year versus 2021.
Unfortunately, the NLRB’s union decertification process is prone to union boss-created roadblocks, which can impact the Starbucks workers if union officials plot to stay in power regardless of workers’ wishes. Foundation-backed NLRB reforms from 2020 have made it somewhat easier for workers to escape unwanted union “representation,” such as the “Election Protection Rule” that prevents union bosses from filing trumped-up “blocking charges” to delay or stop decertification elections entirely.
Prior to these Foundation-backed reforms, workers often had their decertification votes delayed by unproven union blocking charges, giving union bosses the power to trap workers in union ranks they oppose nearly indefinitely. Under the Foundation-backed reforms, most votes take place promptly, with union blocking claims adjudicated after the votes have been counted. However, the Biden-appointed NLRB is currently engaging in rulemaking to roll back these protections and make it much harder for workers to decertify a union.
“No worker anywhere should be forced under so-called union ‘representation’ they oppose,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Starbucks workers around the nation that also fall victim to union tyranny should know they can turn to Foundation staff attorneys for assistance.”
“While we are happy that the Starbucks workers are able to take their first steps in exercising their rights oust an unwanted union, we call on SBWU union officials not to attempt to block or otherwise interfere with the rank-and-file workers’ right to hold this vote,” continued Mix. “Union bosses should not be allowed to keep their grip on power simply by disenfranchising those they claim to ‘represent.’”
National Right to Work Foundation Opposes NLRB Push to Mandate Abusive ‘Card Check’ Unionization Process
Amicus brief in Starbucks case says NLRB General Counsel’s plan will expose workers to coercive union tactics and contradicts SCOTUS precedent
Washington, DC (March 16, 2023) – The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has just submitted an amicus brief at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in a case involving SEIU union organizers’ attempt to impose unionization on workers at Starbucks without a secret ballot vote. The Foundation’s brief, attached to the motion, defends workers at Starbucks and workplaces nationwide from Biden-appointed NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo’s attempt to effectively mandate coercive “card check” organizing campaigns.
In card check campaigns, professional union organizers can pressure workers into signing cards that are then used at “votes” for unionization in lieu of an NLRB-supervised secret ballot vote.
In the ongoing Starbucks case, former union lawyer Abruzzo is attempting to resurrect the long-discredited Joy Silk NLRB theory, which would force union monopoly control on workers who have not had an opportunity to vote in secret on whether they want a union in the workplace. SEIU officials attempted to impose union control on Starbucks baristas using the so-called “card check” process, in which union agents can bypass the traditional secret ballot method of gaining power in a workplace and can obtain union “authorization cards” directly from workers – often using coercive or misleading tactics.
Card check schemes are recognized by court and NLRB precedents and even AFL-CIO organizing handbooks as inaccurate gauges of true employee support for union control. Despite this, the Joy Silk theory that NLRB General Counsel Abruzzo seeks to revive forbids employers from challenging the results of a card check unionization.
Employers can contest the results of a card check by asking the NLRB to conduct a secret ballot union vote among the employees. Conversely, under Joy Silk, the NLRB has the power to force both workers and employers under union control if an employer objects to the results of a card check.
“Now, the General Counsel seeks to upend five decades of settled law to resurrect Joy Silk,” says the amicus brief. “She seeks a regime of instant unionization through compulsory bargaining orders issued to any employer that refuses to recognize a union based on authorization cards, even though such cards were most assuredly not collected through ‘laboratory conditions.’”
Joy Silk Prioritizes Union Power Over Employees’ Will and Conflicts with Court Precedent
The Foundation’s brief argues that card check unionization drives are “notoriously unreliable” for determining whether a majority of employees in a workplace want a union. Because card check schemes lack NLRB oversight and do not permit employees to vote in private, the brief argues, the door is open for union agents to deploy many kinds of pressure tactics, including soliciting ballots, electioneering, keeping lists of employees who have or have not signed cards, and more.
As opposed to employees in a secret ballot election who vote quickly and privately, “[t]his is not true for an employee caught in the maw of a year-long card check campaign, who may be solicited repeatedly and, perhaps coercively, month after month until he or she signs,” the brief says. If General Counsel Abruzzo brings back Joy Silk, that would allow union bosses to “bypass secret ballot elections at will and secure a compulsory bargaining order virtually anytime they are able to collect a bare majority of authorization cards.”
The amicus brief also maintains that the Joy Silk standard is at odds with a large number of court precedents, including from the D.C. Circuit Court (where many NLRB decisions are appealed), other circuit courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court twice. All of these courts have declared at one time or another that “authorization cards are inferior to secret ballot elections,” the brief says.
General Counsel Abruzzo Seeks to Compel Workers into Union Ranks Despite More Than 90% of American Workers Rejecting Unionization
“NLRB General Counsel Abruzzo – a former CWA union official – continues to show her extremist views when it comes to overturning precedent in the pursuit of greater coercive powers for her former colleagues in Big Labor’s upper echelon,” commented National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix. “Inevitably, this comes at the expense of the rights of independent-minded American workers, who want the right to choose whether or not they wish to associate with a union, free from the well-documented coercive tactics union organizers deploy during card check drives.”
“Big Labor advocates previously at least understood that a sweeping change to federal labor law, like eliminating secret ballot elections to mandate ‘card check,’ would at least require an act of Congress,” Mix added. “But with the Card Check Forced Unionism Bill dying in 2010 due to bipartisan opposition, and the so-called ‘PRO-Act’ blocked in the last and current Congress, the Biden Administration is apparently moving forward to radically rewrite federal labor law by bureaucratic fiat.”
