Starbucks Baristas: The daily grind
↑
47
↓
would unionizing give us more hours? (self.starbucksbaristas)
submitted by Hardandspikey
Our hours have gone to in January. Almost every barista has gone from 25 hours, to 15 max. I won't even be able to pay my bills. Is this something unionizing could possibly fix? The workers strife is real right now.
SBWorkersUnited 61 points 6m ago
Ryan here (257xxxx). There is no immediate solution to understaffing. With the proposed contract language, partners will be guaranteed a minimum number of hours for both full-time and part-time workers. However, as another user said earlier, this solution is months down the line when contracts are finalized. The best immediate way to get more hours is to borrow out to other stores in your district to make ends meet.
If your store would like to get the ball rolling on implementing a contract at your store, contact us to start organizing at $1
If your store would like to get the ball rolling on implementing a contract at your store, contact us to start organizing at $1
Rough-Tie-3084 8 points 6m ago
Is corporate actually negotiating finally? I know they straight up walked out on y’all at least once.
Also I know there’s probably nothing y’all can do about it, but their intimidation tactics are working, we’re all (at least those I know) too scared of getting fired to even talk about seriously trying. I want to unionize but I can’t afford to loose this job and it sucks. I’m rooting for y’all and I’m in as soon as I won’t get fired for saying it out loud.
Also I know there’s probably nothing y’all can do about it, but their intimidation tactics are working, we’re all (at least those I know) too scared of getting fired to even talk about seriously trying. I want to unionize but I can’t afford to loose this job and it sucks. I’m rooting for y’all and I’m in as soon as I won’t get fired for saying it out loud.
SBWorkersUnited 7 points 6m ago
Hi, I'm Mari (199xxxx) from Seattle!
Re: negotiating, nope! Their people show up, throw a fit about the zoom, and then leave. We're committed to transparent and accessible bargaining, so that's put bargaining at a standstill for now. More stores to put more pressure on the company would help!
Re: retaliation, it is a valid concern to have! The way Starbucks fires people is actually the reason my store originally was organizing, in 2020 a really dedicated worker lost his job because Starbucks didn't want to let him transfer. No record of discipline, amazing worker, Starbucks is just fucking stupid.
What I'm trying to say is that they can already retaliate against you for whatever they feel like. However when you start organizing you get a couple of protections that you can really leverage. I'm one of the loudest motherfuckers in Seattle, still employed. I owe it partially to legal protections and partially to solidarity. When there's no clear ringleader, the reward of firing someone is less. They could fire me but there's 4 other strong organizers who are also working at the store. Random workers take the lead at times. Taking out me just takes out me, not the movement. Then there's the more personal reason, which is that I am incredibly loud and they know that. When there is a strike happening or some other bullshit going on there's several of us from my store talking to the media. We're calling on personal relationships as much as we are organizational ones to run our strike and otherwise orchestrate a little rebellion. When something illegal happens we quote the exact law being broken and report it immediately, even like health code completely unrelated to organizing.
All of that is really to say that being afraid of retaliation actually makes it more likely. When you try to stay low, you reduce the amount of public proof that you are organizing and therefore weaken your own case that it was retaliatory if that does happen. If there's three or 10 or 15 strong Union organizers in the store, it's less useful to fire just one of them. And as always, keep yourself squeaky clean. Toe the line exactly where the law protects you, because they will start to come after you if they think they can. This is kind of a general, vague explanation, you can get connected to people like me in your area if you fill out the contact form on the website and they can offer more tailored advice for your state!
Re: negotiating, nope! Their people show up, throw a fit about the zoom, and then leave. We're committed to transparent and accessible bargaining, so that's put bargaining at a standstill for now. More stores to put more pressure on the company would help!
Re: retaliation, it is a valid concern to have! The way Starbucks fires people is actually the reason my store originally was organizing, in 2020 a really dedicated worker lost his job because Starbucks didn't want to let him transfer. No record of discipline, amazing worker, Starbucks is just fucking stupid.
What I'm trying to say is that they can already retaliate against you for whatever they feel like. However when you start organizing you get a couple of protections that you can really leverage. I'm one of the loudest motherfuckers in Seattle, still employed. I owe it partially to legal protections and partially to solidarity. When there's no clear ringleader, the reward of firing someone is less. They could fire me but there's 4 other strong organizers who are also working at the store. Random workers take the lead at times. Taking out me just takes out me, not the movement. Then there's the more personal reason, which is that I am incredibly loud and they know that. When there is a strike happening or some other bullshit going on there's several of us from my store talking to the media. We're calling on personal relationships as much as we are organizational ones to run our strike and otherwise orchestrate a little rebellion. When something illegal happens we quote the exact law being broken and report it immediately, even like health code completely unrelated to organizing.
All of that is really to say that being afraid of retaliation actually makes it more likely. When you try to stay low, you reduce the amount of public proof that you are organizing and therefore weaken your own case that it was retaliatory if that does happen. If there's three or 10 or 15 strong Union organizers in the store, it's less useful to fire just one of them. And as always, keep yourself squeaky clean. Toe the line exactly where the law protects you, because they will start to come after you if they think they can. This is kind of a general, vague explanation, you can get connected to people like me in your area if you fill out the contact form on the website and they can offer more tailored advice for your state!
twyg47 7 points 6m ago
Unionized shift here. No, they are not negotiating. They have walked out of over 50 sessions. I have been to two of them in person and over three dozen on zoom. We were scared too. You can't say it out loud. Start organizing with those you trust. Those whose political beliefs match that of your own. This is going to sound stereotypical but your LGBTQ+ partners tend to be very pro union. Start a group chat. I suggest using signal. If you want more help contact Workers United through the website. I am sure there is a link in one of these responses. Also stereotyping but forget talking to any boomers. Seriously, I have found most of them are boot lickers and class traitors. Don't talk to your ASM or SM. Please contact Workers United. We can help.
crankysorc -2 points 6m ago
You’re correct about one thing at least, that is promoting stereotypes- and “class traitors “ ????
Canadiansbux 49 points 6m ago
Depends on what the contract says. My union contract says part-time has to get at least 12 hours or no hours. Full time has to get 32 - 40. It also goes by seniority. So if you were hired last, you are more likely to get less to no hours. My company has almost all part-time employees.
Shoddy_Teach_6985 24 points 6m ago
My union contract mandates 20 hour minimum for pt with iam
Comfortable-Plane944 18 points 6m ago
Yes. Unionizing helps protect people from these types of issues, along with other things. If you need help with resources or who to reach out to, feel free to dm me. My store filed to unionize but lost our election, and now I’m leaving sbux to work for the union that represents other sbux stores.
cheeercamp 33 points 6m ago
This is misleading. This barista is struggling to pay their bills, and telling them that unionising is going to solve this very immediate and emergent issue is harmful. I hope your skills improve as you move into campaign organising and union representation. You will be held to a higher standard as staff, and comments like this are negligent. Do better.
_Winning our contract_ is going to fix this, OP. So yes, unions are the solution, but in all honesty, a contract is months down the line.
In the mean time, OP, pick up around your district. Keep fighting. Organise your coworkers. You got this.
Edit: For transparency’s sake: union-represented employees are also desperate for hours. Starbucks does this every single year immediately after the holidays.
_Winning our contract_ is going to fix this, OP. So yes, unions are the solution, but in all honesty, a contract is months down the line.
In the mean time, OP, pick up around your district. Keep fighting. Organise your coworkers. You got this.
Edit: For transparency’s sake: union-represented employees are also desperate for hours. Starbucks does this every single year immediately after the holidays.
HamburgIar_ 16 points 6m ago
No, it would not guarantee you more hours. Anyone telling you different is a liar. The amount of hours a store has is based on the current labor model. The store would have the same bucket of hours to dispense however the way the hours are dispersed would likely depend on seniority under a typical union contract.
PortionOfSunshine 3 points 6m ago
You are 100% correct. It would put in place a set of standards for minimum hours but 15 is still in the range of minimum for a lot of places. If your store is low on hours (most/all are after the holidays; including other jobs not just SBUX) then there’s not much you can do about it and unionizing would not change that.
Rough-Tie-3084 1 points 6m ago
They can negotiate a minimum number of hours. That’s like one of the most basic things unions do. However, that isn’t short term solution. Corporate has pushed back hard at every turn, an actual contract is months away at best, but it can mandate the minimum and maximum number of hours, the minimum turn around time between shifts, etc. You know *working conditions*
tourniquette2 3 points 6m ago
I’m not sure how they’d negotiate that. They’d have to be willing to sacrifice some of the partners. Corporate isn’t going to negotiate out more hours than their sales can justify. So the only real solution would be to lose some partners, and if the union is there to protect them too, that won’t happen.
But your union can negotiate weekly minimums for hours. It’s up to them to do it though. My experience at a union store was terrible. We got paid less than everyone else and our union rep didn’t really do anything. It was frustrating. We paid them to help us and they basically just collected a check and left us on our own. Didn’t even try to negotiate our wages when the corporate stores raised theirs.
You should take it to your union rep and the other partners. If there’s enough traction behind at least instating weekly hourly minimums and maximums, then the rep should do something about it.
But your union can negotiate weekly minimums for hours. It’s up to them to do it though. My experience at a union store was terrible. We got paid less than everyone else and our union rep didn’t really do anything. It was frustrating. We paid them to help us and they basically just collected a check and left us on our own. Didn’t even try to negotiate our wages when the corporate stores raised theirs.
You should take it to your union rep and the other partners. If there’s enough traction behind at least instating weekly hourly minimums and maximums, then the rep should do something about it.
Zealousideal-Star448 1 points 6m ago
Honestly as someone with a dirty store I would love for us to maintain normal hours and instead of constantly being on the floor we deep clean and reorganize. I do clean play and we never get everything done. Basebords? Got cleaned once last year and it was in a huge rush, deep dust of our industrial style celing with all the pipes and shit. Let’s actually get that trash out of drive through. Clean the trash cans for once! But no no because it’s slow we get less hours and for everyone to be in a bad mood
Brief_Coat6526 1 points 6m ago
No
looker009 1 points 6m ago
The reality is that Starbucks does union busting. If your contact says x hours for full time, they will just make everyone part-time. Once it start costing them too much, they will find a way to close the store, be it for safety reasons or performance. If you can try looking for a different job.
MaxKarma6 0 points 6m ago
No, the only solution really is for some partners to switch stores, or to leave starbucks entirely. So each store has a certain amount of hours that they can schedule. The more partners there are the less hours per partner, the less partners the more hours for each. It comes down to employe count management on your sm side of things
Alec_Malenfant -1 points 6m ago
Yes
MasterMischievous 2 points 6m ago
Can you elaborate on how unionizing would get us more hours?
verdeuce 2 points 6m ago
It wouldn’t.
MasterMischievous 1 points 6m ago
That’s my opinion sure, but maybe there’s something I’m missing, just trying to get some insight
This nonprofit website is run by volunteers.
Please contribute if you can. Thank you!
Our mission is to provide everyone with access to large-
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
scale community websites for the good of humanity.
Without ads, without tracking, without greed.
©2023 HumbleCat Inc • HumbleCat is a 501(c)3 nonprofit based in Michigan, USA.