Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
1–10 of 303 posts
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#2Does the NLRB have any teeth? Can they impose fines? I’ve yet to see any of these rulings result in any meaningful changes.
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#3Does the NLRB have any teeth? Can they impose fines? I’ve yet to see any of these rulings result in any meaningful changes.
Allowing the help to negotiate their compensation is punishment enough
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#4Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#5I want to know about closing stores in apparent retaliation against unionizing. This has been happening lately in Boston, with the Cambridge Milk Bar location and the Boylston Starbucks location. It seems like that's the new corporate tactic to try to discourage unionizing.
Of course, if every store unionized, then they'd be forced to concede at some point that they still need to keep stores open in order to make money, but in the meantime it seems like it's an intimidation tactic and that should probably be illegal.
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#6This article made me curious, has any business tried to defend antiunion activities through a desire for free association? As in the business does not want to associate with unions.
It made me curious because I've not seen that argument before, in the function of a union seems like it wants to force the company to associate with it whether the company wants to or not.
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#7This article made me curious, has any business tried to defend antiunion activities through a desire for free association? As in the business does not want to associate with unions. It made me curious because I've not seen that argument before, in the function of a union seems like it wants to force the company to associate with it whether the company wants to or not.
Supreme Court ruled that public sector employees can't be required to pay union fees as a condition of employment, on First Amendment/free association grounds.
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#8This article made me curious, has any business tried to defend antiunion activities through a desire for free association? As in the business does not want to associate with unions. It made me curious because I've not seen that argument before, in the function of a union seems like it wants to force the company to associate with it whether the company wants to or not.
> the function of a union seems like it wants to force the company to associate with it whether the company wants to or not.
The company might not want to associate with the union, but it seems that the workers working at the company do.
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#9Does the NLRB have any teeth? Can they impose fines? I’ve yet to see any of these rulings result in any meaningful changes.
Why would politicians bite the hand that feeds them?
Re: Starbucks illegally fired US workers over union, judge rules
#10Just a tangent that it's strange this is a local story for me (Rochester NY) and there is no local coverage - had to go all the way to the UK to learn about this!