Starbucks is increasing pay and benefits for most of its U.S. hourly workers after ending its fiscal year with record sales.
But the company said Monday that unionized workers won’t be eligible for some of those perks, a sign of the continuing tension between the Seattle coffee giant and the union trying to organize its U.S. stores.
The union is, of course, complaining.
Logically, if you’ve a union negotiating your contract, pay and benefits, then the company cannot change those things without theunion agreeing.
Starbucks’ actions go against a September ruling by an administrative law judge for the NLRB, who ruled that the company acted illegally last fall when it raised pay only for non-union workers.
Starbucks has appealed that ruling, saying NLRB’s standards don’t allow employers to make unilateral changes in the wages or benefits of unionized employees.
Quite.
This is the sort of nit-picking bullshit a lawyer would think up.
I’ll be entertained to see what the results of this case turn out to be.
This is somewhat brilliant, and fun to watch.
The unionists, and the pro-union NLRB, have always lived and thrived by nit-picking. Starbucks’ lawyers figured out that they can play that same game, and maybe win.
To watch as the NLRB gets hoisted by their own petard . . . pure entertainment.
This reminds me of a writ of habeas corpus brought against the Australian government to import more of the ISIS brides and their kids from Syria. The lawyers pointed out that the Commonwealth does not have any control over the detention of anyone in camps in Syria.
Thus importing them would be a political decision not a legal matter.
PS. In case you’re wondering, I prefer to leave them in Syria so they can murder Syrians. Instead of bringing them to Oz so they can murder me!!