Senator Clinton needs to learn more about the labor movement

[Omaha Steve]

I have been very nice to the Clinton campaign so far. While looking over some notes of the past couple of weeks, an article about Chelsea stumping for her mom in a Butler Starbucks caught my eye.

There are two sides to Starbucks. It is in #16 in the top 100 companies to work for according to Fortune.

The other side. It hires mostly part time staff. It allows managers to split tips with craft. It defies a court action to stop that. A second action was filed this week. The NLRB has filed charges against Starbucks for illegally firing IWW union members of it's staff three times. Two cases were settled out of court with the workers returning. The New York case is in progress. Fewer workers get health benefits than Walmart. It has refused to fire it's contractor Cintas that has killed several employees in the last year. It also is slow to jump on the fair trade coffee and tea band wagon.

IF Senator Clinton wants to court LABOR, they had best stay out of Starbucks! Please pass the word along.

Omaha Steve

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2007/snapshots/16.html

16. Starbucks Coffee (SBUX)
What makes it so great?
The java king steamed ahead in 2006, adding 28,000 jobs globally. Though 85% of “partners” (Starbucks-speak for employees) are part-timers, they’re still eligible for full benefits if they work 240 hours a quarter.

http://dawgnetnews.com/archive/080331/4865.html

By Laura Maddock
Dawgnet Assistant News Editor
Wednesday, April 2, 2008, 16:55 EST

helsea Clinton may have gotten more than she bargained for when she visited Butler's campus to answer questions about her mother's presidential campaign.

Clinton fielded questions from the audience, which filled Starbucks and spilled into the bookstore on March 25. A question asked by one Butler student attracted national attention when Clinton refused to answer it.


Dawgnet photo by Josh Arntz
Chelsea Clinton visited Butler on March 25 to discuss Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Students filled all of Starbucks and some of the Butler Bookstore to hear Clinton and Astin talk.

[flor de jasmim]

1. She's going after the latte-drinking crowd? (couldn't resist)

[Omaha Steve]

2. I mentioned several things nobody even asked for a link on

Do I have a reputation?

[Forkboy]

3. It's early yet...give it time.

;)

[NashVegas]

5. No, You're Just a Hillary Clinton Basher

And therefor, there's no need to challenge any assertion you may put forth. We all know you're on the side of truth and justice.

[Igel]

4. I can't speak to some weightier remarks.

But from discussions here and newspaper articles (which constitute primary sources when the court case is involved), I can comment on some lighter matters.

"It hires mostly part time staff. It allows managers to split tips with craft. It defies a court action to stop that. A second action was filed this week."

That it hires part-time staff may be a necessity. I was involved with a non-profit that hired mostly part-timers. It could have had more full-timers, but few would want the hours: 7 days a week, 10:30-1, for a total of 25 or so, plus some evening dinner shifts. Otherwise you'd have a fair number of people standing around staring at the lone customer at 3 pm or 9:30 am. On the other hand, from a review of the applications, most applicants knew this would be the case and wanted part-time work. Yes, it meant that they didn't get health care or most benefits. On the other hand, they had flexible schedules, which suited them just fine. Off campus this would be less of a plus. But it doesn't alter the fiscal reality. (As one other person involved with the same non-profit who *did* have a problem with the part-time status of most employees said, "Who gives a f**k about 'fiscal reality'. Screw 'fiscal reality'. Six months later she was told that we were going to lose in excess of $500k that year, and she called for the manager's head on a platter. She didn't care that the manager was married with three kids and a mortgage. She was reminded about 'fiscal reality' when it bit her on the ass.)

As for "managers", they're not managers. They're supervisors. They do little more than the baristas, and also work as baristas. They generate tips. It's a quirk of California law combined with a Starbucks organizational quirk that makes them ineligible for the tips that they should properly be considered to earn.

As for defying a court action, the court "action" is under appeal. Enforcement waits for the appeal to be adjudicated. News accounts haven't made that very clear. DUers have.

[Omaha Steve]

7. New York has the same quirk

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/manhattan-barista-sues-over-tip-sharing/

My guess is it isn't only these two states with the quirk. Thanks for joining the conversation.

April 3, 2008, 1:37 pm
Barista Sues Over Tip Sharing

By Steven Greenhouse

Speaking of Starbucks, now comes another big, embarrassing dispute for the coffee chain. A former barista filed a lawsuit on Thursday in United States District Court in Manhattan, accusing Starbucks of cheating thousands of baristas in New York State by giving a share of their tips to shift supervisors.

Lawyers for the barista, Jeana Barenboim, of Brooklyn, point to a state law that says no employer or agent of an employer can accept, directly or indirectly, part of an employee’s tips.

[madrchsod]

6. this is poetic

"The NLRB has filed charges against Starbucks for illegally firing IWW union members of it's staff three times."


the nlrb siding with the against starbucks oh so cool image!

[quantass]

8. .