SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
health insurance
At Home and Abroad, Starbucks is Failing the People it Calls 'Partners'
Despite our different languages and cultures, Starbucks workers around the world are saying the same thing: We want to be treated with respect and dignity.
Jul 11, 2025
For five years, I've been brewing coffee and serving customers at Starbucks. I love connecting with people, crafting creative drinks, and learning about coffee. But what I've witnessed behind the green apron tells a different story than the one Starbucks executives want you to hear.
At the Workers United convention in Ohio earlier this year, I had the privilege of meeting Starbucks workers and the unions that represent them from Brazil, Chile, and the United Kingdom. Despite our different languages and cultures, Starbucks workers around the world are saying the same thing: We want to be treated with respect and dignity. We all shared stories of a company that talks about caring for its partners while systematically failing to support the people who make their business possible in the first place.
The barista from Chile I spoke with described conditions that were heartbreaking. They said they are required to work in extreme heat with no support to address the dangerous working conditions. When they went to bargain for better pay, they told me what Starbucks offered wouldn't even cover basic bills and food. The pay increase they were fighting for—literally less than a dollar—put into perspective just how little this multibillion dollar company values its workers.
Starbucks' issues in Latin America extend beyond how it treats its workers in the stores and into its supply chains, as it is now the target of allegations in a new lawsuit claiming their Brazilian coffee is made under slavery-like conditions. And the pressure campaign has grown as local unions and human rights groups recently demanded the Brazilian retail brand FARM Rio end its partnership with the coffee giant. These aren't just abstract allegations—the allegations involve real workers, real families, and real human suffering in the coffee giant's supply chain.
Starbucks executives can improve operations and public perception right now by listening to union baristas who are committed to building a better company.
This international scrutiny isn't limited to Latin America. In the U.K., workers described navigating complex bureaucratic channels just to organize. Everywhere I looked, I saw the same pattern: Starbucks partners demanding respect, safety, and fair treatment, while the company prioritizes all the wrong things.
Here in the United States, we're experiencing our own version of this neglect. Customers wait 30 minutes for lattes while we're understaffed, underpaid, and undersupported. Mobile orders pour in while only two people work an entire shift. We're forced to enforce policies that put us in danger—like denying the bathroom or water to people seeking shelter—while fearing for our jobs if we speak up. Meanwhile, Starbucks executives are focusing on what color T-shirts we wear instead of bargaining in good faith with the union and addressing real operational problems. The contradiction is stark: a company that claims to care about its partners while baristas rely on Medicaid because we can't get guaranteed hours to qualify for health insurance.
I can't imagine how many more stories there are just like mine that go unheard. Starbucks is under fire around the globe due to allegations of forced Uyghur labor in their Chinese supply chains, exploitation in Mexico, and its use of a Swiss subsidiary to avoid taxes. Yet, CEO Brian Niccol—who made $96 million in just four months last year and commutes to work in a private jet—has failed to address these serious issues abroad, all while the company has committed hundreds of unfair labor practices in the U.S. and he's ignoring union baristas' demand for fair contracts at home.
Starbucks won't turn this business around by allegedly violating labor law internationally and domestically, and failing to finalize fair union contracts. Fighting with baristas—whether in Seattle or São Paulo—is bad for business. We're the ones who open stores every morning, greet customers, make the coffee, and remember favorite orders. We're central to their turnaround strategy, and I have yet to see them address our concerns. We've been bargaining since April 2024 for a fair contract, but Starbucks continues to drag its feet.
But workers aren't staying silent. Just this month, we won our 600th union election in the U.S.. We're growing stronger, and we're building solidarity with Starbucks workers and customers across borders.
Starbucks executives can improve operations and public perception right now by listening to union baristas who are committed to building a better company. We've been ready to consider proposals that include actual improvements in staffing, guaranteed hours, and take-home pay.
The choice is yours, Starbucks. You can continue fighting the people you call "partners" while facing mounting international scrutiny, or you can finally live up to your claims about being the best place to work. The world is watching, and we're organizing.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After The National Day of Action for Single Payer, the Best Defense Is a Good Offense
To eliminate impending Medicaid cuts and other threats to coverage, enact a national, single-payer healthcare system free from all profit, including in the provisioning of care.
Jun 24, 2025
In January, 2025, following the shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, National Single Payer and single-payer activists across the country responded to the righteous anger of the people rising against the health insurance industry by writing a “Manifesto,” which included these four demands:
- The recognition by our government that healthcare is a human right.
- The elimination of private health insurance and the banning of for-profit delivery of care.
- The enactment of a publicly financed, national single-payer program that would provide comprehensive coverage to everyone.
- The transformation of care delivery from profit-seeking ventures into services organized to serve the people of our country, a system in which all caregivers are freed from corporate control.
We called for people across the country to join us in the street on May 31 to raise the demand and put single payer on the nation’s agenda, a reference to the Congressional Progressive Caucus’ 2025 Proposition Agenda released last year which conspicuously omitted a national single-payer program from its agenda (or support for a cease-fire in Gaza).
Over 140 local, state, and national organizations, from central labor councils to social justice organizations, from political parties to physicians’ groups, endorsed the four demands, and more than 30 cities in 17 states held actions demanding that single payer be put on the nation’s agenda.
Endorsing organizations representing 28 states plus the District of Columbia were predominately social justice organizations, whose primary mission is not healthcare. Down Home North Carolina, an organization that mobilizes rural communities in North Carolina to improve the lives of working families, endorsed. So did EX-Incarcerated People Organizing in Wisconsin, which works to end mass incarceration. As did the Kentucky Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, founded to mobilize people of color and whites to take action against racism in their community. Large organizations such as the California Alliance of Retired Americans, representing 1 million members in California, and small ones such as Pride on the Patio, a community that creates safe and welcoming spaces for LGBTQ+ individuals in Frederick, Maryland, endorsed. The call to put single payer on the nation’s agenda is popular beyond single-payer activists.
Together, let’s build a movement as massive as “No Kings Day,” so formidable that it cannot be denied or ignored.
More than 30 actions were held across the country, including in “Trump country” states such North Carolina, Florida, Texas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Missouri. Whether from red or blue states, people organized to demand that a single-payer healthcare program free from profit be put on the nation’s agenda.
Notably missing from the list of endorsers were faith groups (only two), “big” labor (aside from the Kentucky State AFL-CIO), and “big” national single-payer organizations.
They still need to be convinced that making a demand of the Democratic Party is acceptable and has broad support.
If the demonstrations on “No Kings Day” are any indication, people are furious with the current administration, but they are no less tired of the Democratic playbook. “No Kings Day” rallies, while enthusiastic and well attended, lacked a central bold demand.
In contrast, activists on May 31 made bold demands, refusing to believe the wealthiest country should have a separate healthcare system for the poor, or that we should wait until we are 65 to access a public healthcare system into which we pay all our working lives. On May 31, activists demanded an end to a system where health insurance CEOs, who worry more about “disappointing investors” than patients, control our health. On May 31, we demanded the end of a system where insurance companies get to make trillions of dollars in earnings and spend millions on federal lobbying to influence government officials who write the laws to benefit the owners and not the people who suffer under it.
In times like these, the best defense is a good offense. To eliminate impending Medicaid cuts; to stop imposing work requirements; to end overpayments to Medicare Advantage and the privatization of Medicare; to prohibit narrow networks, prior authorizations, and delays and denials of care; to end deductibles, medical debt, and bankruptcy, and to negotiate at the bargaining table for higher wages: enact a national, single-payer healthcare system free from all profit, including in the provisioning of care.
National Single Payer and other organizations are going on the offensive, working with labor unions to fight for single payer and mobilizing members of Congress, especially those who have endorsed Medicare for All legislation, to make national single payer a publicly visible fight by asking them to commit to:
- Speak out about national single payer free from profit in “Special Order” speeches on the floor of Congress.
- Support the issue on their website.
- Discuss it at Town Halls.
- Write about it in emails and newsletters.
- Talk about it in hearings, media, and at all public opportunities.
- Improve the current Medicare for All legislation by removing all profit from the provisioning of care.
On May 31 activists from local organizations gathered to demand the healthcare system this nation deserves.
Moving forward, let’s demand our elected officials speak out, support, discuss, write, talk, and improve current Medicare for All legislation. Together, let’s build a movement as massive as “No Kings Day,” so formidable that it cannot be denied or ignored, a movement of millions in the street and in the workplace to put single payer on the nation’s agenda and heal this country once and for all.
Keep ReadingShow Less
A National Single-Payer Healthcare System Would Be Good for Employers, Too
Job-based insurance poses health-related and financial burdens on company employers and employees. These burdens would disappear with universal healthcare.
May 17, 2025
The National Day of Action is set for May 31, 2025, as a call to action in communities across the United States. The goal is to unite people locally and nationally to eliminate profit-based healthcare. This nonviolent campaign is a collective effort that aims to put National Single Payer on the national agenda. Everyone has a basic human right to healthcare.
This opinion piece shares research findings to advocate for a single-payer healthcare system. Among wealthy countries, the U.S. has by far the most expensive healthcare system, and yet the only one without universal coverage. It is fundamentally broken. The system is inequitable due to differences in insurance availability based on work status, income, and other factors. Individuals of different backgrounds don’t have the same level of access to quality healthcare services. Excess administrative costs for insurers and providers add to an estimate of $504 billion out of $1.1 trillion. The time that it takes providers to complete billing tasks can compromise patient-provider relationships and care delivery.
Employer-sponsored insurance plans are the mainstay of U.S. health insurance. More than 156 million Americans (workers and their families) are covered by job-based insurance. The plans can incur high costs for employees and their families. It also places a burden on employers, including premium payments, time spent managing insurance, and potential compromises to hiring and worker productivity. One study estimated annual transactions costs to companies of $21.6 billion. Time spent by employees dealing with insurance issues may constitute the “sludge” that reduces productivity.
“All my employees are friends of mine. It really pains me to see them not go to the doctor, especially for specialists.”
Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of California, San Francisco studied the consequences of the U.S. system of health insurance on employers. We conducted seven company case studies, with companies in various industries and of varying sizes. Companies were qualitatively and quantitatively explored for the burdens imposed on employers by providing health insurance to their workers and dependents. We interviewed company owners and managers. Below are summaries of the findings:
- All of the companies care about employee health and financial well-being. They strive to provide reliable health insurance, though employees often have other options (spousal coverage or Medicaid).
- Strategies vary widely in terms of types of coverage. Most companies reported substantial management time overseeing the insurance process. Several companies have utilized brokers or consultants for assistance.
- The two largest companies (both in the manufacturing industry) incurred unique costs related to being self-insured.
- Premium and other financial costs represented 4% to 27% of labor costs. The management cost component is up to 50% of the premium cost. Employee productivity lost to insurance activities was not significant. While there hasn’t been a significant impact on business operations, such as strategies to increase production to meet demand surges, it does affect hiring and can lead to significant costs.
Below are direct quotes from some of those interviews:
“Where [health insurance] really has an impact is who we can hire. The people who would want to work for us would want insurance and so that was always a big barrier to getting talent.”—Owner, Custom Gifts and Products company
“The cost of health insurance has limited, I mean that there’s a certain limit to my profit margin and particularly with other factors such as supply chain issues... I’m getting squeezed on a lot of different fronts, and if my health insurance didn’t go up 10% every year, I could pay people 10% more every year... They don’t want to give up their health insurance, but I think they know that it’s suppressing the wages that we can pay.”—Owner, Print and Design company
“All my employees are friends of mine. It really pains me to see them not go to the doctor, especially for specialists... And our specialist cost is very high... And for some of our employees, especially the warehouse employees, they’re not super high compensation.”—Owner, Aviation Distribution company
To conclude, job-based insurance poses health-related and financial burdens on company employers and employees. These burdens would disappear with the implementation of a national single-payer healthcare system.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular