

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

A cashier wears a face mask at a Starbucks coffee shop location. (Photo: Jeffrey Greenberg/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
Capping off what organizers and other labor rights advocates have dubbed "the year of the worker," employees at two more Starbucks stores are seeking to unionize.
Workers at a pair of Starbucks locations in Broomfield, Colorado and Chicago, Illinois filed union petitions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a Twitter account associated with organizing efforts at the coffee giant announced Thursday.
The filings follow the first-ever successful union vote for at least one Starbucks in Buffalo, New York earlier this month and ongoing efforts at locations across the country, which workers--known as "partners"--in Broomfield and Chicago noted in letters to president and CEO Kevin Johnson.
Related Content

"As our fellow partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, Seattle, Mesa, and more have demonstrated, we believe there is no true partnership without the sharing of power, influence, accountability, and success," the Colorado workers wrote.
"We are forming a union to facilitate this belief, and to establish our voices and affect the change we need as true partners to this company," they added, detailing the benefits of an organized workforce for not only employees but also the company, and calling out Johnson and others in Starbucks leadership for their anti-union campaign.
"We are not frightened, we are not intimidated, but we are emboldened, we are disappointed, and we are outraged," the workers explained. "Our unionization is a means to ensure Starbucks can be the best place it can be for all partners, where genuine partnership is fostered, and sustainable, fulfilling careers can thrive."
Related Content

The Chicago workers similarly wrote that "in solidarity with partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, and all those organizing nationwide, we believe there can be no true partnership without power-sharing and equal accountability."
"Our goal in unionizing is to achieve true partnership, not just the title of 'partner.' We see unionizing as a commitment to making our store a staple in the community, and making Starbucks the great company we know it's capable of being," they continued.
Both groups of employees urged Johnson to sign a document attached to their letters detailing "fair election principles," which include recognizing that "the right to organize a union is a fundamental civil right essential to our democracy."
Other principles aim to protect workers who are organizing, including: "If partners choose to unionize, there will be no negative repercussions from management" and "Starbucks agrees not to make any implicit threats (lawful but unethical) or explicit threats (unlawful)."
The announcement about Broomfield and Chicago was celebrated by allies within and beyond those communities, from Colorado Independent Drivers United and Colorado Jobs With Justice to the Chicago Teachers Union.
The west suburban Illinois chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) tweeted, "If anyone in the Chicago suburbs wants to start a union, let us know."
While the NLRB earlier this month certified the results of the 19-8 vote in Buffalo, Workers United, the union representing Starbucks employees, filed formal objections regarding elections at two other nearby locations, citing company leadership's anti-union efforts.
According to the Associated Press:
Workers at a store in the Buffalo suburb of Hamburg voted 12-8 against a union. The outcome of a Cheektowaga store's vote could not be determined because both sides challenged seven separate votes. Union organizers said six of the votes were cast by ineligible employees.
If the outcome of the ballot challenges favors unionization, organizers will drop the objection to the Cheektowaga results, attorney Ian Hayes said.
The objections say Starbucks employees "were subjected to a massive campaign of overwhelming psychological force from the moment they publicly expressed the desire to form a union."
"Under the law, voters are supposed to experience 'laboratory conditions' in the time between asking for an election and casting their vote, so they can make a rational decision based on their interests," Hayes said in a statement. "Starbucks spent millions and did everything it could to comprehensively deprive partners of such conditions. The company robbed Starbucks partners of a fair vote."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Capping off what organizers and other labor rights advocates have dubbed "the year of the worker," employees at two more Starbucks stores are seeking to unionize.
Workers at a pair of Starbucks locations in Broomfield, Colorado and Chicago, Illinois filed union petitions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a Twitter account associated with organizing efforts at the coffee giant announced Thursday.
The filings follow the first-ever successful union vote for at least one Starbucks in Buffalo, New York earlier this month and ongoing efforts at locations across the country, which workers--known as "partners"--in Broomfield and Chicago noted in letters to president and CEO Kevin Johnson.
Related Content

"As our fellow partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, Seattle, Mesa, and more have demonstrated, we believe there is no true partnership without the sharing of power, influence, accountability, and success," the Colorado workers wrote.
"We are forming a union to facilitate this belief, and to establish our voices and affect the change we need as true partners to this company," they added, detailing the benefits of an organized workforce for not only employees but also the company, and calling out Johnson and others in Starbucks leadership for their anti-union campaign.
"We are not frightened, we are not intimidated, but we are emboldened, we are disappointed, and we are outraged," the workers explained. "Our unionization is a means to ensure Starbucks can be the best place it can be for all partners, where genuine partnership is fostered, and sustainable, fulfilling careers can thrive."
Related Content

The Chicago workers similarly wrote that "in solidarity with partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, and all those organizing nationwide, we believe there can be no true partnership without power-sharing and equal accountability."
"Our goal in unionizing is to achieve true partnership, not just the title of 'partner.' We see unionizing as a commitment to making our store a staple in the community, and making Starbucks the great company we know it's capable of being," they continued.
Both groups of employees urged Johnson to sign a document attached to their letters detailing "fair election principles," which include recognizing that "the right to organize a union is a fundamental civil right essential to our democracy."
Other principles aim to protect workers who are organizing, including: "If partners choose to unionize, there will be no negative repercussions from management" and "Starbucks agrees not to make any implicit threats (lawful but unethical) or explicit threats (unlawful)."
The announcement about Broomfield and Chicago was celebrated by allies within and beyond those communities, from Colorado Independent Drivers United and Colorado Jobs With Justice to the Chicago Teachers Union.
The west suburban Illinois chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) tweeted, "If anyone in the Chicago suburbs wants to start a union, let us know."
While the NLRB earlier this month certified the results of the 19-8 vote in Buffalo, Workers United, the union representing Starbucks employees, filed formal objections regarding elections at two other nearby locations, citing company leadership's anti-union efforts.
According to the Associated Press:
Workers at a store in the Buffalo suburb of Hamburg voted 12-8 against a union. The outcome of a Cheektowaga store's vote could not be determined because both sides challenged seven separate votes. Union organizers said six of the votes were cast by ineligible employees.
If the outcome of the ballot challenges favors unionization, organizers will drop the objection to the Cheektowaga results, attorney Ian Hayes said.
The objections say Starbucks employees "were subjected to a massive campaign of overwhelming psychological force from the moment they publicly expressed the desire to form a union."
"Under the law, voters are supposed to experience 'laboratory conditions' in the time between asking for an election and casting their vote, so they can make a rational decision based on their interests," Hayes said in a statement. "Starbucks spent millions and did everything it could to comprehensively deprive partners of such conditions. The company robbed Starbucks partners of a fair vote."
Capping off what organizers and other labor rights advocates have dubbed "the year of the worker," employees at two more Starbucks stores are seeking to unionize.
Workers at a pair of Starbucks locations in Broomfield, Colorado and Chicago, Illinois filed union petitions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a Twitter account associated with organizing efforts at the coffee giant announced Thursday.
The filings follow the first-ever successful union vote for at least one Starbucks in Buffalo, New York earlier this month and ongoing efforts at locations across the country, which workers--known as "partners"--in Broomfield and Chicago noted in letters to president and CEO Kevin Johnson.
Related Content

"As our fellow partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, Seattle, Mesa, and more have demonstrated, we believe there is no true partnership without the sharing of power, influence, accountability, and success," the Colorado workers wrote.
"We are forming a union to facilitate this belief, and to establish our voices and affect the change we need as true partners to this company," they added, detailing the benefits of an organized workforce for not only employees but also the company, and calling out Johnson and others in Starbucks leadership for their anti-union campaign.
"We are not frightened, we are not intimidated, but we are emboldened, we are disappointed, and we are outraged," the workers explained. "Our unionization is a means to ensure Starbucks can be the best place it can be for all partners, where genuine partnership is fostered, and sustainable, fulfilling careers can thrive."
Related Content

The Chicago workers similarly wrote that "in solidarity with partners in Buffalo, Boston, Knoxville, and all those organizing nationwide, we believe there can be no true partnership without power-sharing and equal accountability."
"Our goal in unionizing is to achieve true partnership, not just the title of 'partner.' We see unionizing as a commitment to making our store a staple in the community, and making Starbucks the great company we know it's capable of being," they continued.
Both groups of employees urged Johnson to sign a document attached to their letters detailing "fair election principles," which include recognizing that "the right to organize a union is a fundamental civil right essential to our democracy."
Other principles aim to protect workers who are organizing, including: "If partners choose to unionize, there will be no negative repercussions from management" and "Starbucks agrees not to make any implicit threats (lawful but unethical) or explicit threats (unlawful)."
The announcement about Broomfield and Chicago was celebrated by allies within and beyond those communities, from Colorado Independent Drivers United and Colorado Jobs With Justice to the Chicago Teachers Union.
The west suburban Illinois chapter of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) tweeted, "If anyone in the Chicago suburbs wants to start a union, let us know."
While the NLRB earlier this month certified the results of the 19-8 vote in Buffalo, Workers United, the union representing Starbucks employees, filed formal objections regarding elections at two other nearby locations, citing company leadership's anti-union efforts.
According to the Associated Press:
Workers at a store in the Buffalo suburb of Hamburg voted 12-8 against a union. The outcome of a Cheektowaga store's vote could not be determined because both sides challenged seven separate votes. Union organizers said six of the votes were cast by ineligible employees.
If the outcome of the ballot challenges favors unionization, organizers will drop the objection to the Cheektowaga results, attorney Ian Hayes said.
The objections say Starbucks employees "were subjected to a massive campaign of overwhelming psychological force from the moment they publicly expressed the desire to form a union."
"Under the law, voters are supposed to experience 'laboratory conditions' in the time between asking for an election and casting their vote, so they can make a rational decision based on their interests," Hayes said in a statement. "Starbucks spent millions and did everything it could to comprehensively deprive partners of such conditions. The company robbed Starbucks partners of a fair vote."