business news in context, analysis with attitude

From CNN:

"Starbucks employees are getting more pay and new benefits, but some are only going to baristas that haven’t unionized. A National Labor Relations Board judge previously found that similar moves by Starbucks violate federal labor law, with the company appealing the decision.

"The question of which workers get what perks and benefits has been one part of a bitter fight between Starbucks and union organizers across the country. Since the first location voted to unionize nearly two years ago, Starbucks has fought aggressively against the union drive. The NLRB has said that in some cases, the company engaged in illegal practices, with Starbucks refuting these claims … Non-union employees will be eligible to accrue more vacation time sooner, but when it comes to pay, things are a little trickier. Starbucks said Monday that a 3% annual increase will take into effect on January 1 for all eligible workers at company-operated US stores. Workers who have been at Starbucks for 2-5 years will get a pay bump of at least 4%. And those who have at least five years under their belts will get a lift of at least 5%, Starbucks said.

"Union members will get whatever increases were locked in last year, which vary. That means that many workers will get the 3% or 4% hike, and some the 5%, even if they are unionized. But the company will not offer new increases in pay, or vacation accrual benefits, to unionized workers - unless it is forced to concede those based on collective bargaining negotiations."

The story notes that "as of mid-October, nearly 360 stores had voted in favor of a union, with the results certified by the NLRB. About 70 voted against, with those results certified. There are roughly 9,300 company-operated Starbucks locations in the United States."

Workers United announced in response to what it sees as inequitable treatment, it will file unfair labor practice charges against Starbucks with the NLRB.

KC's View:

Sometimes it just seems like Starbucks is going to keep poking at the NLRB, just to see how far it can go in opposing the unions.