The planned closure of a Starbucks store in Ithaca, New York, has ignited a significant controversy, raising questions about corporate motives and workers’ rights. While Starbucks cites operational issues as the reason for shutting down this particular location, the timing and circumstances have led to accusations of union retaliation. This situation unfolds against a backdrop of increasing labor activism within Starbucks, making this closure a focal point in the ongoing debate between the coffee giant and its unionizing employees.
Starbucks Cites Operational Challenges
Starbucks announced its decision to permanently close one of its three Ithaca stores, specifically the College Avenue location near Cornell University, effective June 10th. The company attributed this closure to persistent facilities issues and staffing shortages that had been impacting the store’s performance. According to Starbucks management, these challenges made it unsustainable to maintain the standards that both employees and customers expect. This explanation, however, has been met with skepticism and strong opposition from the store’s employees and union representatives.
Union Alleges Retaliation for Labor Activism
Workers United, the union representing Starbucks employees, vehemently disputes Starbucks’ explanation. They argue that the closure is a direct act of retaliation against the store’s employees for their successful unionization efforts. Just two months prior, on April 8th, the College Avenue store voted overwhelmingly, 19-1, to unionize. This victory was part of a broader nationwide movement that has seen over 122 Starbucks stores vote to unionize, with hundreds more petitioning for union elections. The union contends that Starbucks is attempting to send a clear message to other stores considering unionizing: organize and face closure.
Adding fuel to these claims, Workers United points to a recent strike at the same Ithaca store on April 16th. Employees walked out citing unsafe working conditions caused by an overflowing grease trap. They claim that Starbucks itself referenced this grease trap issue when explaining the reasons for the closure, further suggesting that the company is using minor operational problems as a pretext to suppress union activity.
Legal and Labor Law Perspectives
Starbucks maintains that it routinely opens and closes stores as part of its business operations across its 9,000 U.S. locations. The company stated it will engage in bargaining with the affected employees, as legally required, to discuss their options and highlighted immediate job openings in the Ithaca region. However, Workers United has filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). This charge alleges that Starbucks illegally closed the store to retaliate against unionization and to deter similar efforts at other locations.
Risa Lieberwitz, an expert in employment law at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations, clarifies that while U.S. labor law does not prevent Starbucks from closing stores for legitimate business reasons, it prohibits closures intended to retaliate against union organizers or discourage unionization. If the NLRB investigation determines that Starbucks acted unlawfully, the agency could mandate the reopening of the store and order back pay for the employees. Furthermore, the NLRB might find that the decision to close the store should have been subject to collective bargaining with the union.
Community and Employee Response
The closure announcement has sparked significant backlash from the Ithaca community and labor advocates. Dozens of protestors gathered outside the College Avenue store, calling for a city-wide boycott of Starbucks. Employees like Benjamin Smith, a three-year veteran of the store, emphasize the importance of resisting what they see as anti-union tactics. They believe that community support and union solidarity can pressure Starbucks to reconsider its decision.
The situation in Ithaca is being closely watched as it could set a precedent for how Starbucks and other large corporations respond to the growing wave of unionization efforts across the service industry. The outcome of the NLRB investigation and the community’s response will likely play a crucial role in determining the future of this particular store and potentially influencing the broader labor movement within Starbucks.
