IWW: Squeezed Baristas Shut Down 15th and Douglas Starbucks to Protest Cutbacks

[Omaha Steve]

I would have gone to show support. I didn't know anything about this.

Edit: The Omaha World Herald office is just a couple blocks away. The states largest news gathering agency didn't cover the story!

Submitted by intexile on Thu, 08/05/2010 - 3:23pm.

Omaha, NE- Baristas and community supporters shut down the 15th and Douglas Starbucks (SBUX) this morning demanding that management reverse all cuts to healthcare, staffing, and benefits that have been imposed during the recession. The baristas claim that executives have no justification to squeeze working families with Starbucks raking in profits of $977.2 million in the past four fiscal quarters.

"We are being squeezed, and we can't take it any more. Since the recession began, Starbucks executives have ruthlessly gutted our standard of living. They doubled the cost of our health insurance, reduced staffing levels, cut our hours, all while demanding more work from us. Starbucks is now more than profitable again. It's time for management to give back what they took from us," said Sasha McCoy, a shift supervisor at the store.



Since the onset of the recession, Starbucks imposed a series of deep cuts on its workforce. Starting in 2008 as the economic downturn began, the coffee giant shuttered over 800 stores and slashed over 18000 jobs. The remaining skeleton crew workforce was stretched out, forced to push VIA and other promotional products while keeping the stores running with insufficient staffing levels. CEO Howard Schultz then doubled the cost of the company health insurance plan in September 2009, leaving many workers unable to afford medical treatment because of sky-high deductibles and premiums. While the cuts continue, Starbucks made a record profit of $207.9 million in the last quarter according to company figures.

The protesting baristas are members of the Starbucks Workers Union, which is an international campaign of the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. The store action makes the 15th and Douglas location the first Starbucks in Nebraska to have a public union presence. The workers decided to move to unionize after watching their standard of living be whittled away while top executives chose to reward investors with dividends.

Samantha Cole, a Barista at the store said, "I work hard for every dollar I make in order to put food on the table for my family; Starbucks rewards workers with a poverty wage while they give their Wall Street pals dividends. I'm not doing this for myself so much as for the next generation that will grow up in this country. These are the only jobs that are left here- we need to make sure they are good jobs for working families."

FULL story at link.

[skepticscott]

1. Baristas?

You mean people who make coffee drinks out of a machine? This is special and highly skilled labor...why?

[onehandle]

2. 'grande half caf sugar free white mocha soy cappuccino'

Anyone who can keep up with the near infinite combinations of orders that you can place at Starbucks has a special and highly skilled job if you ask me.

[Omaha Steve]

4. Dr ML King Jr Quote

"All labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance and should be undertaken with painstaking excellence."


http://www.afscme.org/about/mlk-memorial.cfm

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. lost his life in Memphis, Tenn., where he had gone to support striking sanitation workers in their fight to get the city to recognize their union, AFSCME Local 1733.


One proud as hell AFSCME member am I.

OS

[skepticscott]

5. And what about labor that

does nothing but feed people's caffeine addiction? Well, OK..I guess there's the muffin thing too.

At least the sanitation workers MLK was supporting hadn't taken on some BS title like Trasheristas.

[Omaha Steve]

6. Definition of "Barista" is industry wide, not a Starbucks term only

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barista

A barista (from the Italian for "bartender") is a person, usually a coffee-house employee, who prepares and serves espresso-based coffee drinks.


I have a caffeine addiction. It is legal. Whats the beef?



A barista at work in a North American coffeehouse

[skepticscott]

8. Thanks, I know what "barista" means

I just think it's a rather pretentious title for a teenager who froths milk and mixes mocha lattes.

[Hannah Bell]

9. seems like you just want to denigrate workers to justify corporations racheting down their wages.

[LostinVA]

20. +1

[skepticscott]

23. I just find it amusing

that people in a job (making coffee drinks and selling muffins) that takes virtually no skill, training or experience are on their high horse about how valuable their labor is, and have adopted a fancy-sounding title, apparently to make themselves seem more like a profession.

And come on...you can't tell me that any of these people didn't know they were hiring on with an evil and exploitive megacorp (into whose shops I have never set foot and never will) right from the beginning. What did they expect? 15 bucks an hour for dolloping frothed milk on cappuccino?

[Brickbat]

28. I'd say their labor is valuable.

Starbucks reported record 3Q earnings last month. If workers want to improve their working conditions and compensation through organizing, more power to them.

And you're being coy. Surely you know that it's more than just dolloping frothed milk. It's cleaning bathrooms, taking out trash, dealing with customers, cleaning the equipment, and so on. Sure, it's not brain surgery. But it does take training, and people who take pride and satisfaction in their labor are a rare thing these days, IMO.

[skepticscott]

33. I'm all for workers getting as much as someone

is willing to pay them. But as I said, I just find it amusing that they have adopted the name "baristas" in an apparent attempt to portray their job as a highly skilled profession. It is not. That doesn't mean their labor has no value, but I'm pretty certain that acquiring the talents of cleaning bathrooms and taking out trash doesn't add very long to the training period, or limit the pool of qualified applicants very much. Plenty of jobs require months or even years of training before you're allowed to touch real work. I'm guessing that making coffee drinks at Starbucks is not one of them. And frankly, I don't know of any evidence that people who make espresso at Starbucks take any more pride and satisfaction in their labor than people in hundreds of other jobs. How many young people do you know that want to be baristas for 20 or 30 years after they get out of college?

[Brickbat]

36. They haven't adopted the name "baristas."

That's the name the company gives them. It did so to make its stores seem more upscale.

That doesn't mean their labor has no value, but I'm pretty certain that acquiring the talents of cleaning bathrooms and taking out trash doesn't add very long to the training period, or limit the pool of qualified applicants very much.

You're right, it doesn't take a long time to learn such things. I don't think these people are agitating for a $40/hour wage. I could be wrong.

Plenty of jobs require months or even years of training before you're allowed to touch real work. I'm guessing that making coffee drinks at Starbucks is not one of them.

I guess it's not clear to me what you think "real work" is. Could you give some examples, and what the difference is?

And frankly, I don't know of any evidence that people who make espresso at Starbucks take any more pride and satisfaction in their labor than people in hundreds of other jobs.

Any time I see someone standing up like this, it tells me they're proud of what they're doing. It's that simple.

How many young people do you know that want to be baristas for 20 or 30 years after they get out of college?

Just because people don't aspire to it doesn't mean the people who do have those jobs now can't be proud of it. Even if you're "stuck" in a job, doing it well can be a point of pride for people.

[skepticscott]

41. "Real work" means work that is not

just practice or simulation. For a pilot, it means getting behind the controls of a plane with real people in it, and not just a simulator. For a surgeon, it means actually cutting into a patient and not a cadaver. For someone working in a crime lab, it means analyzing actual evidence in an actual case, and not just practice samples. Clear now? How long do you think it takes before a new employee at Starbucks is allowed to serve the milk they've frothed to living, breathing humans? Or take out the trash without supervision?

And when I see people standing up like this, it tells me they want more money. Nothing wrong with that, but let's see it for what it is.

The fact that people don't aspire to it does tend to indicate that it is not a highly skilled profession, but a job that you take to make money, not to make a career out of.

[Brickbat]

44. Thanks for the clarification.

I was picking up something you weren't putting down.

We're both right -- they are standing up because they have enough pride that they want more money for what they're doing. Respect from an employer is shown in one way: money. Anything else (awards, parking spaces, health care packages, etc.) is an excuse to not give more money. They are asking for more money because they feel they are worth it. To me, that's pride.

And if it's a job you take just to make money, you might as well agitate for more money and see where it gets you.

[Chan790]

58. Many people aspire to be baristi and train for it.

Some of the best baristi I've ever met are graduates of Le Cordon Bleu and Culinary Inst. of America and Johnson and Wales...if you want to tell them they're not highly trained, feel free but those are culinary programs on par in the restaurant industry with how most people view the Ivy League. They'll probably laugh at you, but they might punch you out.

Given, these culinary school graduates were not working at Starbucks, but the majority of the coffee-slingers under them started at Starbucks or Peet's or Caribou or someplace not much better. So did many of the culinary school grads themselves.

[skepticscott]

74. The question is

did they go INTO Le Cordon Bleu with the sole intent of becoming a barista, or did they just end up in that job? And how much of their culinary training are they really using to mix coffee drinks, and how much better are their mocha lattes than the ones made by the kid who's been working the counter at Starbucks for 3 months?

[Chan790]

95. Most of them went in with the goal...

of being the chef of a coffeehouse. Most of them manage the kitchen as well as the bar. The baristas under them tend to be barista-bartenders, doing both jobs simultaneously. Barista-bartenders usually make bartender types of incomes. $40/shift, $150 for a Friday or Saturday...or more.

The best of the best of the people in question are the ones who mix their own espresso blends from sourced beans, choose artisan-made chocolates, distill their own syrups, make their own whipped creams with real vanilla, went to the farms to see the source of their small-dairy micro-batched milk from grass-fed cows. They kicked my ass in USBC...I felt like I was on stage trying to compete with magicians. I'm a top-line barista, definitely in the top-2%. They're a whole different league.

How good are they? The one who owns the coffeehouse I go to in DC charges $8 for a mocha and it's worth every penny. It's a rare treat...I'd have to take out a mortgage to go daily. He started at Starbucks, same as me...we had a immediate bonding over that fact. There is a world between him and a 3-month Starbucks employee. That gap is about the same though as the one between an entry-level S'bux barista and the DIY at-home barista.

It's just not as easy as it looks. I'm not saying that they should be paid like it's career-track but it's a harder job than bartending and the pay is worse. They should be taking home compensation on-par with that of the bartender of a mediocre restaurant at least. They're not. They make minimum wage and maybe $1/hr. in tips working just as hard.

[Hannah Bell]

47. when starbucks started up, baristas got stock & baristas were encouraged to consider

it a career-type job & give service as if they were part of the company.

i have a friend who raised a family as an early starbucks hire. Ten years with the company, barista for 6, trouble-shooter for 4, then he started his own related business & still does business with the corp.

[Brickbat]

49. Very interesting.

So many companies hit a critical mass and lose touch with what made them great in the first place -- their workers.

[juajen]

55. They still give stock, Hannah, plus you can buy it at a discount.

I'm not sure how long you have to work to get the stock, but the full benefits package is after six months of employment.

I answered down thread about the careers available at Starbucks. This company is a good, blue company and doesn't deserve a pillorring on DU.

[Chan790]

59. 1 year for Bean Stock grants, 1 full quarter for health insurance, 6 months for discount stock,

90 days for 401K.

[juajen]

52. Many do, estpecially the ones who want to be promoted into management. N

[MajorChode]

56. Calling them baristas is like calling a fry cook at McD's a chef

Starbucks was born out of the Seattle coffee scene (which filtered down from Canada). The original Starbucks was closer to the type of establishment that employs baristas (although I still wouldn't call them that), but when they franchised their store it changed dramatically and standards plummeted. Italian baristas (which is where the term originated) undergo extensive education, and training via an apprentiship process. Making espresso based drinks the right way is a serious craft. Since Starbucks redesigned their stores, almost all of them use fully automatic espresso machines where the operator simply pushes a button and out pops espresso.

I'm all for Starbucks employees being paid for what they are worth and the same goes for fry cooks at McD's, but I have yet to see anyone who works at a Starbucks that I would call a barista.

[Hannah Bell]

61. uh, no, the *original establishment* didn't sell drinks & didn't employ baristas.

and they started franchising about a year after they started selling drinks.

and baristas at their original (coffee drink) shop at the market required *less* skill than the ones today do because they just served basic drinks back then. the last exit served espresso long before starbucks did, & the people working there were students & artist types. the original starbucks stores had just a slightly more upscale ambiance when it opened & was a lot smaller.

just because something's a franchise doesn't mean it suddenly requires less skill.

http://seattle.wikia.com/wiki/Last_Exit_on_Brooklyn

[MajorChode]

62. You didn't understand what I wrote

The original Starbucks may have started out pouring brewed coffee only and they may have branched out into coffee stands (which weren't called Starbucks), but before they started franchising out Starbucks, they most certainly were a specialty coffee store.

And it may take "skill" to push a button and make a mocha-crapa-frappy-soy latte (or whatever else they call their foo-foo drinks), but that's not the same as actual barista skills. A cook at McD's might have to know how to make a number of different dishes also, but that doesn't make them a chef. A straight espresso should taste as good as coffee smells and if someone can't make an espresso which rises to that standard, they aren't a barista, regardless of how many and what types of syrup and milk laden coffee-like substances they can produce or whatever other skills they may have. The term has simply been bastardized by Starbucks and other stores to refer to anyone on the other side of the counter.

[Hannah Bell]

63. the original starbucks roasted beans. it sold beans. it didn't pour any kind of coffee.

there was only one store selling drinks before they franchised. it was in the farmers market. and it started selling drinks only about a year before they franchised. before that, they roasted beans. they sold beans & coffee equipment. they were a coffee retailer, not a coffee bar, originally.

the drinks & franchising happened after schultz joined (then bought) the company.

[MajorChode]

64. This is the last I'm going to say regarding Starbuck's history

Schultz was one of the original owners who split off to open coffee bars, when he returned and bought the other owners out, he merged his other locations and they all were Starbucks at that point and most were selling specialty coffee drinks and some had been for years. All of this happened before they started franchising.

That's all I'm going to say because this is a tangential discussion which is getting farther and farther away from anything relevant to the OP.

My central point (which you ignored) was that a Starbuck's 'barista' is no more of an actual barista in terms of the original Italian style coffee it tries to mimick than a fry cook at McD's is a chef. You may call them a barista and the term may generally be accepted by the latte swilling masses in the US who have no idea what true Italian style coffee really is. More power to you. I choose not to and for good reason. It's an insult to true baristas who have worked many years developing their craft.

[Hannah Bell]

65. lol. he wasn't one of the original owners, either. you don't know what you're talking about.

Starbucks Coffee opens first store in Pike Place Market in April 1971.

HistoryLink.org Essay 2075 : Printer-Friendly Format

In April 1971, Starbucks Coffee opens for business in the Pike Place Market, selling high-quality coffee, dark-roasted in small batches, the European way. Starbucks does not sell or brew coffee by the cup, but sometimes offers brewed samples.

Writer Jerry Baldwin, English teacher Gordon Bowker, and history teacher Zev Siegl had been buying their coffee from as far away as Berkeley, California, and Vancouver, British Columbia, and they saw a business opportunity. Each contributed $1,350 and borrowed another $5,000 to open a store that sold coffee beans, which they ordered from Peet's Coffee and Tea in Berkeley.

At first, Zev Siegl was the only paid employee. Bowker and Baldwin kept their day jobs. Sales exceeded expectations and late in 1972, a second store opened in the University District. Siegl sold his stake in 1980 when Starbucks had four stores.

Howard Schultz (b. 1953) entered the scene in 1981. He was a New York-based vice president for a Swedish housewares manufacturer. He was "bowled over by his first sip of the dark-roasted coffee and urged Baldwin to hire him" (Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000). In 1982, Schultz signed on as director of marketing and retail stores.

In 1987, Howard Schultz led a group that bought Starbucks from its founders.

http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&file_id=2075


From 1971–1976, the first Starbucks was at 2000 Western Avenue; it then was relocated to 1912 Pike Place, where it remains to this day. During their first year of operation, they purchased green coffee beans from Peet's, then began buying directly from growers.

Entrepreneur Howard Schultz joined the company in 1982 as Director of Retail Operations and Marketing, and after a trip to Milan, Italy advised that the company should sell coffee and espresso drinks as well as beans. The owners rejected this idea, believing that getting into the beverage business would distract the company from its primary focus. To them, coffee was something to be prepared in the home, but they did give away free samples of pre-made drinks.

Certain that there was money to be made selling pre-made drinks, Schultz started the Il Giornale coffee bar chain in April 1986. In 1987, (the 3 original owners) sold the Starbucks chain to Schultz's Il Giornale, which rebranded the Il Giornale outlets as Starbucks and quickly began to expand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starbucks



about starbucks, or about baristas -- which in italian has no reference to any particular skill level -- the lady behind the counter in a village tav is a barista.

it's all about denigrating workers.

[MajorChode]

68. typical Hannah

Demonstrate your ignorance, then claim someone else doesn't know what they are talking about.

As I said, if you want to call someone a barista, more power to you. There's plenty who call themselves baristas or whose company gives them a shiny new name tag that says they are a barista on their 2nd day on the job, but there are internationaly recognized standards and certifications regardless of what you choose to believe.

http://www.talkaboutcoffee.com/how_to_be_officially_accredited_as_a_barista.html

Cheers!

[Hannah Bell]

70. typical chode: caught in a major error, he ignores it & continues on to another:

the pretense that the word "barista" originated with the founding of the "specialty coffee association of america" in 1982 (or the "specialty coffee association of europe" in 1998) & is only used in italy to refer to "professionals" certified by these industry groups.

instead of being a common italian word, long predating any such corporate industry organization, & referencing any kind of bartender or barmaid, highly or lowly skilled.


the "high standards" & fancy certificates came WHEN THE BIG CORPORATIONS DID. Before that it was just workers in pubs & cafes making coffee and serving drinks.

tell me again how howard schultz was one of the original owners of starbucks & how those original starbucks stores had more highly skilled baristas than today's.

howard schultz started as an EMPLOYEE at starbucks the same year the "specialty coffee association of america" was founded. he probably had something to do with that, in fact.

[MajorChode]

71. You sure are a one trick pony, Hannah

I noted technical errors in several of the things you mentioned and rather than admit your obvious fuckups, you want to keep building your strawmen and obfuscating until the point of ad nausem. That's exactly how you operate, Hannah. Always have, and probably always will. But in your defense, strawman bullshit and obfuscation technically are two tricks.

First you simply invent nonsense that I never claimed and proceed to build your strawman on that basis. I never claimed the SCAA invented the term. It's another example of how you claim the strawman you just constructed was someone else's "major error".

An Italian barista who works at an Italian espresso bar most certainly is a highly skilled individual and was long before Starbucks ever existed. Someone who works at an Italian pub may also be called a barista because the translation just means someone who works behind a bar, but believe it or not the subject here is about coffee (imagine that), not pubs, not taverns, not whatever else you are pretending it's about. Believe it or not, unless you subscribe to the Andrew Breitbart school of duplicitous rhetoric, context does mean something. If you think a 'barista' who works at a Starbucks in any way resembles their namesake in a traditional Italian espresso bar you either have no clue what you are rambling on about (big surprise there) or you just used the wrong kind of mushrooms in your omelet.

Also well before Starbucks was ever created or ever pulled a shot, there were baristi in the US who were perfecting their craft in the true Italian tradition. The SCAA decided to develop measurable standards precisely because Starbucks was McDonaldising the specialty coffee industry.

As you have well exceeded your quota for absurdity (as usual), I'm done here. Feel free to continue your incoherent rant on your own.

Have a nice day.

[Hannah Bell]

73. lol. a barista who works at an italian coffee bar is no more skilled than one who works at starbucks

haven't traveled much, have you?

you don't know anything about starbucks or italian coffeeshops.

before yuppies and corporations invaded the world, most italian cafes were downscale working-class affairs & the baristas were small-time owner-operators and/or hired labor, just like the hired labor in the US. They weren't fashionable, they weren't for tourists, they weren't manned by certificated personnel, they were neighborhood joints.

[Chan790]

96. Um, as one of those highly-trained professionals you're citing...

and a former Starbucks employee (It's where I started.), Hannah's right and you're wrong. On both the history of the Starbucks Coffee Company and on the quality of baristi globally.

I have my cert from the Specialty Coffee Association of America. I was a semi-finalist in the mid-Atlantic regional of the US Barista Championships twice. I'm quantifiably-better than most baristi in Europe...I lazily worked my way through a long semi-vacation after college through Europe as a trainer-for-hire, training the very people you're holding up as exemplar. Are they better than non-new-hire Starbucks employees? Some are. Most are about par. Some fucking stunk...they tended to be someone's poor relation. (Ain't that always the way it is. The bosses kid can't get canned no matter how much they stink up the joint.) Quality varies immensely in both pools admittedly.

Few people working as baristi globally are certified with the credential level you're citing. The argument you've made equates being a barista with being a realtor. 20% or less of real estate agents are Realtors. Does that mean the rest of those people don't sell real estate or do it poorly?

[MajorChode]

103. Nothing you just offered contradicts anything I said

As far as the history of Starbucks goes, on researching what I had offered, the only thing that differed was that Shultz was a senior member of Starbucks management prior to going out on his own rather than an owner as I had claimed. I was going on memory and there's little doubt Hannah was simply reciting what she had googled (as she always does). Hannah would have you believe this is a "major error". Everything else was spot on. Starbucks did have 17 stores prior to the start of franchising and some of those had been open for years and they most certainly were serving specialty drinks and had been for a long time. So there were far more "major error(s)" in Hannah's version, which you are supporting over mine. I find that more than a bit curious if you really are as familiar with their history as you claim.
http://www.catalogs.com/info/food/the-history-of-starbucks.html

Next, I never suggested all of European baristi are "exemplar". Despite what the renowned world traveler Hannah would have you believe, I have lived and visited all over Europe and most serve miserable dreck for espresso that is only certainly on par with the dishwater than Starbucks serves. This is not the case in Italy. While there might be some bars that serve complete shit, Italy still sets the standard that others strive for (although I would say that some American bars have surpassed that standard in the past 10-15 years or so). That's why Starbucks and other Starbucks clones have an Italian theme. That's why the truly "exemplar" coffee houses in the US have an Italian theme. That's why the vast majority of high grade espresso equipment is designed and built in Italy. I pointed out that there are standards and certifications for baristi to show that there IS a higher standard. I'm not trying to suggest that because someone doesn't have those credentials that they aren't good, just that Starbucks doesn't come within a cab ride of them. And sure there are a lot of people who pretend to call themselves a barista who absolutely suck, but anyone who knows the difference can walk into any coffee house and immediately tell a true professional from a wannabe which you allude to with your experience in barista competitions.

Finally, if you do have the credentials you say, then you probably should agree that your espresso skill level far exceeds the typical Starbucks warm milk and syrup dispenser. It doesn't take skill to push a button. You can teach a dog to push a button. That doesn't mean they don't have skills in other areas, it just means they aren't what I would call a barista because I see that as an insult to people who actually do have such skills. I'm just stating my opinion which I clearly qualified as such. Last time I checked I'm allowed to do that here. You or Hannah may not agree with that opinion, but it doesn't make it "wrong" and it doesn't make hers "right".

Cheers!

[Omaha Steve]

37. Respect is a good place to start, try giving them some

You seem to be looking down your nose in this post. These aren't all college kids. There are single parents, single income adults, etc. Pay these people a living wage. That is a D party value. I don't go to Starbucks because of it's nationwide stance against workers unionizing. But I'll be glad to buy a cup from a union member at this location. I'm a good tipper too.

[skepticscott]

40. Respecting them as people

is a different matter than saying that a true (and not sentimentalized) value should be placed on their labor. Agreed?

[Hannah Bell]

46. where in the op or the thread is anyone but *you* trying to compare baristas to brain surgeons?

their claim is: starbucks took $ & benefits away from them; starbucks is now making big profits & can afford to give some back.

they're striking to get it back, & if their strike costs starbucks some profits, maybe we'll see what the "true" price of their labor is.

[skepticscott]

76. Where did even I try to

compare coffee drink makers to brain surgeons?

And yes, we will see what the true value of their labor is, which will depend on (among other things), how easily their skills can be learned, and how many other people out there are willing to do their jobs and for how much. Decry the capitalist model all you want, but the simple fact remans that the value of things depends to a large extent on their scarcity. The scarcity of people who can push a button on an espresso machine or pour syrup into coffee is probably not that high.

[juajen]

50. I really get tired of defending Starbucks on here, but I will anyway.

Starbucks is a very good company to work for. They have flexible hours, vacation days earned, and benefits for part time workers. They also have a high turnover because it actually takes a brain to remember all of the concoctions that they serve. I know all of this because I have a child who works there while getting her Master's Degree. Starbucks is very good about working with students, working mothers, and trying to accommodate many different needs. Raises are regular and depend on evaluations, and even stores without unions cannot fire you without cause and without at least three write ups within a certain period of time,and you have the right to appeal a write up. Their beginning wage is above minimum and as a partner (this is what they call their employees) you get earned stock and can also buy stock at a reduced price. After six months employment, you are eligible for all benefits, including a 401K, dental insurance, vision insurance and life insurance. In addition to the money paid as wages, tips are a normal thing at Starbucks, and can add to your hourly wage, and can increase that wage according to the number of hours you work, as the tips are split equitably. You are also given a markout every week, which is a pound of any coffee you choose which makes wonderful presents for loved ones or friends who love their coffee, and there are a lot of people that do, or for your own consumption.

Please tell me what you do for a living and what your benefits are. I can assure you, workers at Starbucks are generally very happy and glad to have a job with these benefits. Some people only work at the store for the benefits, as they are as available to a person who works 10 hrs. a week as well as the one who works 30, and shift supervisors who work over 30 and managers, of course, who work 40. The requirement is that you have worked at the store for six months.

Another really wonderful benefit is that you can transfer to other stores very easily, if you are interested in traveling. You can actually work yourself around the world, picking up shifts in other Starbucks with your benefits continuing. You have to go where there is a needed barista, but, there are almost always baristas that need shifts picked up.

I hope your superciliousness is put on, since you claim to have never been in a Starbucks before, and can't possibly know how many repeat customers come in every day to spend time there. Perhaps you applied for a job there and were turned down. That might explain your behavior on this thread.

BTW, management at Starbucks can also be attained by a hard working and knowledgeable barista, and these salaries equal those of a University teacher, with the exception of tenured professors, and since raises are automatic there are probably many Starbucks managers who make as much or more than professors. Their salaries do not stand still you know?

I'm guessing that you have the same opinion of mothers. After all, anyone can raise a baby and sweep floors and cook, right?

[Chan790]

57. "takes virtually no skill, training or experience "

And that's why you don't understand.

It's easier than it used to be but it's harder than just about any other job in food-service and pays fast-food wages. The average Starbucks employee receives over 30 training hours a year, the average barista in a SCAA-affiliated independent coffeehouse receives twice that almost. The best baristi in the world, WBC-competitors, are on average culinary-school graduates and/or trained tasters of varietal coffee on par with wine-stewards and chefs in **** restaurants.

When you can tell me the difference between Kenyan-AA, Sidamo-Gold, Jamaican Blue Mountain, Kona, Sulawesi and Columbian-XX...and can ID them by taste, you can have an opinion on the level of skill required to be me.

Chan790, Mid-atlantic-regional USBC-semifinalist twice.

[readmoreoften]

66. Most Starbucks workers I know have college degrees.

Maybe when you grow the fuck up you'll be lucky to work at a Starbucks too--lucky enough to have any job in this economy. Now take your anti-working class right-wing shit somewhere else, thanks.

[LostinVA]

93. What you said -- all of it

Is startd off debating, but quickly realized their game and stopped.

[LanternWaste]

11. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

Much like the sobriquet "skeptic" is little more than a pretentious, trendy, successfully marketed and over-used word purchased and sold on t-shirts in all the best resorts world-wide. Except to those who don't share the same opinion.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other...

[skepticscott]

16. If you knew anything

you'd know that true skepticism is anything but "trendy" and has never been "successfully marketed". Nice try at fact-free snark, though...keep at it.

[juajen]

51. Many more adults than teenagers, as they are not the steadiest workers. NT

[LanternWaste]

12. Weren't sanitation workers merely "trash men" at one point?

Weren't sanitation workers merely "trash men" at one point? When did they receive their pretentious titles?

[JVS]

14. I'm sure that at one point they were "trash boys" in that city.

Because that's how things were back in the day.

[LanternWaste]

13. delete dupe

delete dupe

[LostinVA]

19. "Barista" is an industry-wide term and an historical one

And, it's more than just making a cup of coffee.

Ugh. Job snobbery.

[REP]

27. Starbucks gives them that title, too - not like they're thinking up 'fancy names' between orders

[smalll]

97. Since when? Since Starbucks got big?

Anyone ever heard of "baristas" in the 80s? Certainly not in the 70s or before.

Last time I checked, this was the United States -- not Italy. :shrug:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

109. "Last time I checked, this was the United States -- not (insert country here)"

Now, where did I hear THAT phraseology before?

[EstimatedProphet]

111. Free Republic IIRC

[Radical Activist]

105. "If a man or woman is called to be a barista,

she should make make espresso even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. She should make drinks so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, damn that was a good cup of java.”

-Paraphrased MLK quote :hangover:

[JVS]

10. If it's so easy, make your own damned drink.

[skepticscott]

15. I do

every damned time I feel like it.

[LostinVA]

22. Then why are you grouching about hardworking folks wanting a fair shake?

Since it's no skin off your nose.

[skepticscott]

25. When you say

"hardworking" folks, what other kinds of working folks is that label intended to distinguish them from?

[skepticscott]

80. No answer, eh?

I think you know that "hardworking" is just a political code word designed to accentuate class divisions.

[LostinVA]

82. I did answer you, as did many other people -- you have moved on to

Baiting now.

[SidDithers]

85. I don't see anyone answering the question about the "hardworking" labour label...nt

Sid

[Hannah Bell]

92. it doesn't deserve an answer. the labor bashers here = one big fail.

[skepticscott]

106. And your implication that

those you classify under the label of "labor" are the only people who work hard or who do useful, productive work is just as big a fail. When a politician uses the phrase "hardworking Americans" in a speech, it is a deliberate attempt to accentuate and aggravate class differences, and to imply to his audience that people who don't do physical labor, people who wear ties to their job or people who make above a certain income level don't do real "work", don't work hard, and produce nothing but smoke and mirrors. All the more ironic since the politician is almost always one of those people, while trying to convince his audience that he's one of them.

[LostinVA]

94. Because it speaks for itself

And the anti-labor baiting is blatant.

[LostinVA]

21. +1!!!

[LostinVA]

17. Honest labor is honest labor and should be rewarded

And, anyone who works a public service position and does it well has a special gift.

[skepticscott]

24. Honest labor should be rewarded

to what extent? To the extent of its true value, or far beyond that?

[LostinVA]

26. Honest labor should be rewarded and respected

[skepticscott]

34. Not an answer to my question

Try again.

[LostinVA]

38. Yes, it is n/t

[skepticscott]

42. I asked to what extent

honest labor should be rewarded, in terms of its monetary value. Your "answer" said nothing about that.

You're really not very good at this, are you?

[Hannah Bell]

67. you're awfully good at denigrating people, though. aren't you?

i bet such skilled labor pays well.

[U4ikLefty]

72. Yeah, I wonder what they do for a living? I bet it isn't serving customers.

Bad people skills

[skepticscott]

107. Know what I hate about the Internet?

people are so freaking presumptuous. They think they know you when they don't. In fact, I serve customers all day every day, and have been for 25 years. None of them have ever complained about my people skills, despite having known me for far longer than you.

So try again.

[Maine-ah]

108. what is your job title?

what is it that you do for a living that requires you to serve customers? You don't have to answer, I'm just curious.

I manage and bartend at a large restaurant.

[skepticscott]

77. When people pretend to try to debate

with intellectual honesty, but continually duck direct questions with babbling non-answers, then yes, I do point that out. And yes, sometimes with sarcasm towards their inability to acknowledge anything that weakens their preconceived notions. Cope. Or put me on ignore, since I'm sure that's your favorite debating tactic. Despite your own snark, I won't be doing the same, however.

[Hannah Bell]

79. no snark there, golly gee, no.

[LostinVA]

83. Because you don't want to debate -- you have shown us all what you think

Of food-service and customer-service workers. You talk of their jobs with contempt. I don't "debate" with anti-labor posters.

[Brickbat]

29. To the extent that the worker and the employer can bargain to something that's good for both.

If they can bargain the company up, why does that deserve contempt? Why mock them for trying?

[Brickbat]

18. The IWW brings together skilled and unskilled labor.

Just because it's unskilled doesn't mean it requires no training, has no industry standards, or deserves contempt from people who don't do it.

[Ignis]

39. That's a Grande Italian FAIL, hold the whip.

"Barista" is simply the Italian word for "bartender."

Only in America has it come to mean exclusively "coffee-drink-maker."

[skepticscott]

43. Exactly

it's just a phonied-up term, applied in American coffee shops to give an air of skill and sophistication to a job that doesn't really merit it.

[LostinVA]

81. So, it's the workers' fault and not the company's

Wow. I am so glad you're not my manager is all I have to say. The contempt you have for workers "under you" is astounding and shameful. I'm a white-collar worker, but didn't always used to be so.

SOLIDARITY!

[blogslut]

53. Because they have to do it with a smile

And believe me, serving the public, while remaining calm and cordial, is one of the hardest jobs in existence.

[Chan790]

54. Why are baristas skilled labor?

Because having been a barista, coffeemaster,shift-super and eventually a store manager, you couldn't do my entry-level job. You think you can...but you can't. You can't produce 10 perfect beverages a minute accounting for 164,000 options, variations and combinations while making sure to maintain acceptable HAACP food-safety standards and internal company guidelines for beverage quality...and if it's not perfect, we remake it and do it without slowing down the line. We're friendly, we're polite and we remember your name, face and beverage...or else you don't last at Starbucks.

That said, Starbucks baristi are rank amateurs compared to the folks at a high-end indie coffeehouse. Artists of caffeine and dairy-foam they are.

[Starry Messenger]

3. I hope they all unionize.

The amount of work they do is insane, especially since they also have to upsell crap at the register.

[Omaha Steve]

7. I made contact with the IWW

I'll be at their next rally.

[Yavin4]

30. Well, Since The Skilled Jobs Are Being Outsourced

Might as well fight for better wages at the jobs that remain here.

[Cairycat]

31. This doesn't apply so much to Starbucks, but I think about

many restaurants need workers who know about and use their knowledge of food safety. You can get deadly ill from improperly prepared food.

I also think about day care workers, who are responsible for keeping children safe.

Maintenance workers who don't do a job properly can create hazardous conditions.

Just because someone's job doesn't take years of training, doesn't mean it's not important. And if it's important, it's deserving of respect and a living wage, IMO.

[Brickbat]

32. Clearly you haven't read this thread.

Otherwise you would have learned that people who take pride in their work and try to improve conditions and compensation are worthy only of being laughed at.

[Hannah Bell]

48. yes, they're mere scum on the boots of people getting paid big bucks for highly skilled functions

like offshoring jobs to slave labor dictatorships & stealing food from the mouths of widows & orphans.

a pox on all such arrogant assholes.

[Chan790]

60. You're now one of my favorite people for this post.

I just wanted you to know that.

[skepticscott]

86. You are the first and only person

in this thread to invoke the word "scum" to describe the people in question, so please stop projecting and point the finger at yourself.

And as far as the value of skills, would you trust yourself to a surgeon who was paid no more than someone making coffee drinks? Should all labor and all skills be compensated at the same rate, since all workers have the same inherent needs and the same inherent dignity? Despite your sneers, some skills are rarer and require more time, effort and resources to acquire. Why should those skills not be more highly valued?

[skepticscott]

78. And what about people who

DON'T take pride in their work? According to you, the vast majority of people don't (why you're denigrating most of the American workforce while upbraiding me for poking fun at a pretentious title of a few is a mystery). What evidence do you have that the coffee drink makers at Starbucks are special in this respect as compared to people in hundreds of other jobs? And should we respect the people who don't take pride in their work just as much as those who do, and should we value their labor just as much?

[Brickbat]

87. Oh, come on! You can do better than that!

While I think that people who are agitating to make their jobs better do have pride in what they're doing, that doesn't mean I think that people who DON'T agitate improve their lot DON'T have pride in what they're doing.

[skepticscott]

90. Really nice try at deflecting from my point

But Major Fail. You yourself said (#28 above if you've forgotten) that most workers do not take pride in their labor. So answer the questions, please:

Why are you denigrating most of the American workforce while upbraiding me for poking fun at a pretentious title of a few?

What evidence do you have that the coffee drink makers at Starbucks take special and particular pride in their work as compared to people in hundreds of other jobs?

Should we respect the people who don't take pride in their work just as much as those who do, and should we value their labor just as much?

[Odin2005]

35. Go Wobblies!

:woohoo:

[BuddhaGirl]

45. my local Starbucks is closed this week for remodeling

and I don't know what the hell for! They had only recently put in new tables and chairs. The store is not that old either :eyes:

[Seneca]

69. Real people are going broke paying for health care

These are people who NEED these jobs not just to pay the rent, mortgage, bills, food, and clothes for themselves or their kids, but they *need* the health care benefits.

And people on here are denigrating their work?? Nitpicking their JOB TITLE? :wtf:

I am thankful for baristas. They provide the fuel which helps get my mornings on the job off to the right start.

They aren't spoiled slackers looking for freebies. They weren't exactly raking in $80,000 doing their jobs, but they deserved the benefits they used to have, for the kind of wages they get.

The anti-worker bullshit on this site (not to mention anti-teacher, anti-science, anti-GLBT, anti-just-about-anything-progressive) just gets more staggering and wretched every week.

[Hannah Bell]

75. amazing, isn't it. who are these people? this is the new democratic party?

no wonder the country's going to hell in a handbasket.

[LostinVA]

84. Which is why I refused to "debate" with them

And was called anti-intellectual or something. I didn't really read their replies that well. I have, in my time, worked plenty of retail and food service jobs, and it is hard and backbreaking, and many customers treat you like garbage (see above). If anyone deserves to be unionized, they do.

[skepticscott]

89. Of course you refuse to debate

you simply state your beliefs as if they were self-evidently and irrefutably true, then walk away if anyone actually challenges you to defend them. But that's no way to get at the truth, which should be the point of any debate and which is always more complex than the views of any one person would make it, don't you agree?

[Starry Messenger]

88. It's every Democrat for themselves in the "New Economy", what what!

I can practically hear some people polishing their monocles as they type.

[MilesColtrane]

91. Solidarity

We are all working for "the man".

Some of us who undergo more training, or have more "legitimate" titles, or wear a suit and tie on the job, just don't realize that fact yet.

[smalll]

98. Boo hoo. A bunch of nose-pierced hipsters are getting screwed over.

Maybe they can go work at American Apparel instead. :shrug:

[asdjrocky]

100. Your respect for labor is overwhelming.

Not.

[EstimatedProphet]

110. This one only has respect for himself - or maybe it's admiration.

[burnsei sensei]

99. Thank God for the IWW.

They made the government and its stooges shake in their boots once.
And they'll do it again.

[Omaha Steve]

101. Responses I didn't expect

Great banter back and forth.

I'll be sure to post after their next event. Maybe they will be a union shop by then.

OS

[asdjrocky]

102. My mother- god rest her soul- was a server for 20 years.

The last and in many ways, the best years of her life. This was still in the days when what she did was called a Waitress, and she did the job with pride.

My mother was lucky enough to be at a Union restaurant that was attached to the local bowling ally. She belonged to a local, and paid her Union dues. She got a decent wage, a vacation and very limited health and pension.

To see a few of the responses in this thread really makes me sad. My mom wasn't worth being represented by a Union? She had no skills? Because she is not manufacturing a car, or building a sky scrapper, she somehow is not as, I don't know, speical as all the other laborers?

I guess my mother was just some unskilled worker who should have been delegated to second class employment.

I'd like to say fuck you to a few of the respondents in this thread, but I won't do that, because that would be against the rules.

I'm sorry, but this stuff really hurts.

[Radical Activist]

104. I wouldn't mind meeting a barista who joined IWW.

Especially if she had multiple tattoos and piercings.