Starbucks seeks to pause labor injunction during appeal

Update:

• A federal judge in Michigan has temporarily halted an injunction placed on Starbucks last month requiring it to rehire a fired Workers United union organizer as it appeals the decision.
• The coffee company argues it should not be required to offer reinstatement to its former employee while its appeal of the decision in the 6th Circuit is ongoing.
• Starbucks has been ordered to offer to rehire fired union organizer Hannah Whitbeck and to post a copy of the court’s decision at the Ann Arbor, Michigan, location where she works. 
• The company is accused of firing Whitbeck in retaliation for her support of Workers United. 
• A nationwide cease-and-desist order is also in place to prevent Starbucks from firing union workers.

Starbucks firing ban overview: 

• Who: A request for injunction filed against Starbucks by Detroit’s National Labor Relations Board Region 7 has been partly granted by a federal judge in Michigan. 
• Why: The injunction prevents Starbucks from being able to fire union organizers from around the country. A cease and desist has also been put in place against the multinational coffee company.
• Where: Nationwide.

(Feb. 22, 2023)

A federal judge in Michigan has okayed an attempt by Detroit’s National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) office to prevent Starbucks from being able to terminate union organizers from around the country. 

The judge — who partly granted the board’s request for injunction against Starbucks — had initially been skeptical about allowing a complaint requesting such a large amount of injunctive relief, reports Law360. 

Detroit’s NLRB Region 7 had filed a request for an injunction against Starbucks after the company fired an employee from a store in Ann Arbor, Michigan who had organized with Workers United. 

In granting the injunction against Starbucks, the judge ruled that there was a “reasonable cause to believe” that the multinational coffeehouse had unlawfully fired the employee, Hannah Whitbeck, due to her work with Workers United. 

A NLRB judge reportedly previously determined that Starbucks had broken the law when it terminated Whitbeck from her employment, while ordering the company to fulfill several remedies in response to the conduct. 

Starbucks workers in more than 270 stores across U.S. have voted to unionize 

Starbucks workers in a more than 270 of the company’s locations across the country have reportedly voted to unionize. There are currently around 497 open or unsettled charges against Starbucks revolving around labor practices, meanwhile, reports Law360. 

The company has also reportedly been hit with a nationwide cease and desist that was put in place to prevent Starbucks from being able to terminate union workers and to reinstate Whitbeck to her position with the coffee chain. 

Starbucks baristas from across the country made waves last November after they staged walkouts — while being represented by Workers United — at more than 100 store locations across the country. 

The walkouts came during the holiday season and were done in an attempt by the Starbucks workers to try and negotiate a union contract. 

Have you been terminated from your job because of your union status? Let us know in the comments! 

The Starbucks firing ban cases are Kerwin v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 2:22-cv-12761, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and Starbucks Corp., Case No’s. 07-CA-292971 and 07-CA-293916, before the National Labor Relations Board Region 7.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Kona class action over false labeling settled for $6.15M
• FDA warns Lyons Magnus after ‘serious violations’ following Oatly, Glucerna recall
• Sirius XM class action claims company placed unsolicited telemarketing calls
• Justice class action alleges company deceives customers with falsely advertises discounted prices