The closure of a unionized Starbucks in Park Slope, Brooklyn, sparked protests and arrests, highlighting the escalating tension between the coffee giant and its organized workforce. Seven protesters, identified as former Starbucks employees and union allies, were arrested during a “sit-in” demonstration at the store, which is slated to close at the end of January. The demonstration, organized by Workers United, the labor union representing Starbucks employees, began as a “sip-in” involving dozens of current and former employees, as well as supporters. The protesters allege that Starbucks is illegally closing the store in retaliation for its unionization, a claim echoed by several employees who pointed to the timing of the closure just two months after the store successfully voted to unionize. They argue that the closure is a blatant attempt to discourage unionization efforts at other Starbucks locations.
The Park Slope store’s closure is part of a larger pattern of closures across the country, with seven unionized stores shuttering their doors in recent months. These closures include high-traffic locations in Williamsburg and Astor Place in Manhattan, both of which unionized shortly before their closures. Workers United has filed a federal unfair labor practice charge against Starbucks, accusing the company of retaliatory closures and refusing to bargain in good faith. The union alleges that Starbucks has not responded to information requests regarding the closures and has walked away from contract negotiations, leaving employees with no economic gains in the first year of their proposed contract. The protesters argue that Starbucks is prioritizing profits over its workers, creating an environment of fear and uncertainty for employees who worry about their livelihoods and ability to afford basic necessities.
Employees of the Park Slope store express disbelief at the closure, citing the store’s bustling location near a hospital and several schools, and its importance as a community gathering space. They emphasize the store’s spacious lobby, which serves as a “third place” for young residents to study and socialize, a feature they say is unique among area Starbucks locations. Employees suspect the closure is a strategic move to dismantle unionized stores and replace them with non-union locations. This suspicion is further fueled by the closure of other high-performing, unionized stores in the city. The employees’ concerns are echoed by City Comptroller Brad Lander, who publicly called on Starbucks to negotiate with its unionized employees and expressed concern over the company’s commitment to fair labor practices.
Adding fuel to the fire is the news of Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol’s substantial $96 million pay package, awarded after just four months in his role. This starkly contrasts with the lack of economic gains offered to unionized workers in their contract negotiations. The disparity between executive compensation and employee wages further underscores the protesters’ claims of corporate greed and disregard for worker well-being. Employees emphasize the struggle to afford living in New York City, despite working for a highly profitable company. They highlight their desire for fair wages and benefits that allow them to thrive in their communities. The significant pay package awarded to the CEO serves as a stark reminder of the financial resources available to the company, juxtaposed against the perceived unwillingness to invest in its employees.
The Park Slope protest followed a nationwide Christmas Eve strike involving over 5,000 baristas at more than 300 Starbucks locations. The strike, also organized by Workers United, aimed to draw attention to the company’s alleged unfair labor practices and the ongoing contract disputes. Workers United has filed over 90 unfair labor practice charges against Starbucks in recent weeks, related to issues of collective bargaining at stores across the country. The widespread strikes and numerous charges filed demonstrate the growing momentum of the unionization movement within Starbucks and the escalating conflict between the company and its organized workforce. The repeated demonstrations and legal actions highlight the determination of Starbucks employees to fight for their rights and secure a fair contract.
Despite the closure of their store, Park Slope employees remain resolute in their commitment to unionization. They plan to carry their organizing efforts to the stores they are transferred to, vowing to continue their fight for fair treatment and better working conditions. They see the closures not as a defeat but as a catalyst for expanding unionization efforts across the company. Their determination sends a clear message to Starbucks: the fight for unionization will continue, even in the face of store closures and other alleged retaliatory tactics. The employees’ resilience and commitment to organizing suggest that the labor dispute with Starbucks is far from over and will likely continue to play out in stores across the country.
