Striking Barista on Starbucks' Endgame: “They Don’t Want Working People to Have a Voice"

In 2022, when I first applied at the Philadelphia store where I now work, I was vaguely aware that Starbucks workers were unionizing, and I liked the idea of building democracy at work. Once I started as a barista, I quickly discovered why so many Starbucks workers were organizing in the first place: the store was unsupported by management, staff were overwhelmed and the company was at war with its own workers. We often had to close at noon because of understaffing. Soon, it became clear this wasn’t happening only at my store, where my coworkers had already formed a union to begin solving these problems. Understaffing and lack of support had been systemic for years. To combat these failures, we kept organizing, and thousands of workers across hundreds of stores have since joined Starbucks Workers United. 

All across the country, Starbucks baristas are struggling to make ends meet. Many rely on SNAP and Medicaid because they don’t receive enough hours to pay their bills or access benefits. Starbucks claims the average compensation, including benefits, is $30 an hour, which is little more than PR nonsense. In 33 out of 50 states, baristas start at $15.25 (here in Philly, we’re lucky to start at $16.50). According to union data, the average barista receives just 19 hours of work per week, leaving them one hour short of the cutoff to receive company benefits. In other words, our stores are understaffed while baristas want more hours. It’s a problem with a simple solution: Improve the workplace by locking in better pay, hours and staffing through collective bargaining.

In 2024, I was elected to represent my store as a bargaining delegate. I had a direct role in drafting, debating and finalizing tentative agreements through good-faith negotiations with Starbucks executives. That includes more than 30 tentative agreements that will improve our workplace through measures like an end to at-will employment, health and safety protections, non-discrimination measures, dress code guidelines that match the CROWN Act, and a grievance process to resolve disputes through diplomacy, not war.

That progress slowed after we proposed a menu of economic options last fall. We hoped to negotiate over what combination of these proposals — as well as any the company proposed — could ultimately get us higher pay, reliable hours and better access to benefits. Some of our ideas included a $20 wage floor to match California’s, or guaranteed minimum hours that could give workers peace of mind. Starbucks flatly rejected all of our proposals and offered no immediate wage or benefit increases, instead making a vague promise of raises of just 1.5% in future years.

At a time when costs are rising faster than our pay, we couldn’t accept that unserious offer. And after delegates put so much work into our thoughtful proposals, Starbucks’ refusal to address the financial hardship baristas experience was a slap in the face. To add insult to injury, Starbucks has since told the media that our union ​“proposes pay increases of 65% immediately and 77% over three years.” That is false — a complete lie. It’s akin to walking into a Starbucks, adding up the entire menu and saying a drink costs $1,000. It’s a heinous insult to the workers who produced the company’s $3.76 billion in net profit last year. Our union filed an unfair labor practice charge last December, alleging that Starbucks was not bargaining in good faith as required by labor law.

So, why does this matter to our broader economy and progressive movement?

First, Starbucks says we have the ​“best job in retail.” Union baristas disagree, but we know that could be the case if executives stopped union-busting and actually listened to the workers who run their stores. Starbucks is the biggest labor law violator in modern history; National Labor Relations Board administrative law judges have found that Starbucks has committed more than 400 labor law violations. When one of those judges issued a cease and desist order this fall, directing Starbucks to stop union-busting, she noted that the company had ​“engaged in a scorched earth campaign and pattern of misconduct in response to union organizing at its stores.”

It’s a pretty bleak state of affairs for every worker in this country if, even at the ​“best” job available, you can’t get stable hours and your bosses can crush you when you dare ask for better.

Second, it’s clear this fight isn’t really about money, since it would take less than one day’s sales to finalize this contract, based on our internal estimate. Instead, this movement is about who has power in our economy. Bajillion-dollar corporations like Starbucks don’t want democracy in the workplace, and they don’t want working people to have a voice; they want to pocket as much profit as possible with no regard for the human cost.

But now Starbucks has a fight on its hands, and union baristas have the power of the people on our side. Organizations representing over 85 million people have backed our demands. Elected leaders—from moderates to progressive firebrands to newly-elected democratic socialists—are standing with us. They see workers here in Philadelphia and in Maine, Wyoming, California, Texas, Florida and beyond calling for fair pay and dignity on the job, and they’re joining our cause.

Meanwhile, Starbucks’ business is struggling. As a company, it’s more divided and its brand is more divisive than ever. Sales are down, wait times are up and customers are turning away. It’s time for executives to realize that they can’t turn this company around without listening to the baristas behind the counter. Peace with union baristas and a fair contract are the first steps towards the Starbucks we know is possible.