Starbucks and thousands of their baristas are locked in a labor confrontation.
More than two years after negotiations began, the union that represents workers in more than 550 stores has not yet reached a contract with Starbucks.
Starbucks World United announced last week that workers' delegates had voted to reject the last proposal of the coffee chain that guaranteed annual increases of at least 2%.
From about 490 baristas who voted on behalf of the more than 550 unionized stores of the company, 81% voted against the proposal, the union said.
The proposal did not offer immediate salary increases or increases to the benefits of medical care, and did not establish a minimum number of hours of work scheduled, according to the union.
“The reality is that the company offers nothing that really provides economic justice to its workers, which will keep up with the cost of living in Los Angeles,” said Cassie Pritchard, 35, a barista that represents workers in a Starbucks near Little Ethiopia in Los Angeles. She voted against the proposal.
“We are anxious and willing to negotiate a proposal that really meets the needs of the baristas,” said Pritchard.
Starbucks argues that it already offers competitive salary and benefits, with the average payment per hour of their retail workers greater than $ 19.
In a statement published on the Starbucks website, the company criticized the union to vote what he said was an “incomplete frame” instead of a complete proposal.
“The union actions, unfortunately, only cause a greater delay in reaching a mutual agreement on the way to follow,” said the company. “Starbucks is the leader of the industry in terms of total payment and benefits that far exceed the retail standards of the industry.”
The hope that the two parties could reach an agreement had been high since the beginning of last year, when Starbucks, who had previously been accused by federal regulators of dismissal workers, publicly pledged to work with the union.
The parties advanced in non -economic proposals, including assistance policies, clothing code, “fair cause” protections and health and safety measures, the union said.
But the conversations broke into a dispute over wages. The union filed about 90 unfair complaints of labor practice against Starbucks before the National Board of Labor Relations and launched a five -day strike before Christmas Day in the main cities, including several stores in Los Angeles. Starbucks accused the union of ending the negotiation prematurely and making unreasonable salary demands.
In February, federal mediators were brought to solve the dispute.
Approximately a month later, one of the two federal mediators assigned to Starbucks conversations was completed by the Trump administration as part of the cost reduction actions that have generated concerns between unions and employers who depend on mediation to defend against strikes and resolve labor disputes.
Starbucks mediation sessions have continued with a mediator, said the union.
Brian Niccol, who was appointed the new executive director of Starbucks last August, committed to work “constructively and in good faith” with the union.
But union members are still critical of how the negotiation has been carried out under Niccol's mandate and have questioned their compensation package of $ 96 million.
