NLRB filed a complaint after a Starbucks employee in Minnesota

Tag : Starbucks
 Starbucks Corp. is facing another complaintfrom the National Labor Relations Board alleging that the gourmetcoffee chain engaged in unfair labor practices by firing a baristain Michigan.
The complaint, filed last month by the Detroit office of the NLRB,stems from an investigation into a charge made by employee ColeDorsey earlier this year.
According to the NLRB complaint, Dorsey — a member of theIndustrial Workers of the World union at Starbucks — wasfired June 6 from his job at a store in Grand Rapids, Mich. Beforebeing fired, Dorsey had been given two prior disciplinary warningsby his store manager.
The complaint alleges that Dorsey received the warnings and wasfired because of his "sympathies for and activities on behalf of"the IWW Starbucks Workers Union. The union has been attempting toorganize workers at the chain.
"We have reasonable cause to believe there may be a violation herewhen Starbucks terminated" Dorsey, said Stephen Glasser, regionaldirector at the Detroit NLRB office.
The NLRB is requesting Starbucks re-hire Dorsey, compensate him forloss of wages, rescind the disciplinary warnings and post noticesin the store saying workers have the right to unionize.
Starbucks has until Oct. 14 to formally respond to the complaint.If the company does not settle the case, it will go to trial infront of an administrative law judge on Nov. 20.
In a statement, Starbucks said Dorsey was fired after he was morethan 30 minutes late to work. The disciplinary notices, the companysaid, were also related to tardiness.
The company said the charge that his firing was due to unionactivity is "without merit."
Starbucks also noted that the NLRB dismissed several charges madein Dorsey's case, including that the company encouraged co-workersto investigate Dorsey and did not allow employees to postunion-related notices on the company bulletin board.
The latest dustup with the NLRB follows the settlement of a caselast week. In that case, the NLRB filed a complaint after aStarbucks employee in Minnesota, Erik Forman, said he was fired forpromoting union activity.
Starbucks, which fired Forman after he was 30 minutes late to work,later reversed its decision and re-hired him, saying his firing was"ill-considered." As part of the settlement, it also paid him forlost wages and posted a notice on his store's bulletin boardaffirming the rights of workers.
That was the chain's third settlement of an NLRB complaint allegingthat it was attempting to dissuade employees from joining a union.
Starbucks has had a somewhat contentious relationship with theunion, which says it represents about 200 current and formerStarbucks workers. The union is now "vowing action" against thechain for a new scheduling system in which fewer employees willwork more hours.
The system is meant to foster an environment where baristas knowtheir customers better in a bid to boost sales. The program is alsomeant to allow baristas to secure more hours each week.
Starbucks does not guarantee full-time work hours, so employeeshave consistently complained that they have not been able to workas much as they would like. Under the new system, baristas can get"full-time" status if they work at least 32 hours a week.
The union, however, says the new system still does not offer aguarantee that employees will get the 32 hours they need and itrequires full-time baristas to be available to work 70 percent ofthe hours that stores are open.
Starbucks shares fell 69 cents, or 5.1 percent, to end at $12.97.