Union backers target Starbucks with new-media campaign
Submitted on Mon, 06/01/2009 - 5:35pm
Disclaimer - The opinions of the author do not necessarily match those of the IWW. The image pictured to the right did not appear in the original article, we have added it here to provide a visual perspective. This article is reposted in accordance to Fair Use guidelines.
Critics use a website and social media to portray the coffee giant as anti-union. The company denies being a bad employer.
By Patrick McDonnell - Los Angeles Times, May 28, 2009
Starbucks a hub of union-busting and worker exploitation?
Say it ain't so, Howard Schultz!
The Starbucks chief executive, who actively
cultivates a socially progressive image, is in the cross hairs of a
new-media campaign designed to bolster union representation at the
retail giant and beyond. For five years, Starbucks has been the target
of a limited but sometimes nasty unionization drive that has tarnished
its reputation for high-minded benevolence.
But last week, Brave New Films in Culver City launched an ambitious "Stop Starbucks" offensive, including a website (stopstarbucks.com)
featuring a four-minute video that was also posted on YouTube assailing
Starbucks' treatment of workers, along with a petition demanding that
Schultz "quit following Wal-Mart's anti-union example." By week's end,
almost 12,000 had signed the petition, while nearly 40,000 had viewed
the video, organizers said.
The anti-Starbucks onslaught also
featured an attempted Twitter "hijacking" designed to undermine a
Starbucks promotion in which contestants vied for prizes by submitting
photos of themselves at Starbucks cafes. The virtual saboteurs
forwarded the required "Twitpics" but hoisted signs blaring seditious
mottos such as "I want a union with my latte" or Schultz "makes
millions, workers make beans."
The new-media assault, Starbucks officials say,
presents a distorted portrait of management's collaborative
relationship with its "partners," a reference to the company's 135,000
U.S. workers. "Calling Starbucks a bad employer simply doesn't ring
true with the overwhelming majority of our partners," said Jim Koster,
Starbucks senior vice president for partner resources.
The
anti-Starbucks blitz is indicative of how some unions and pro-labor
activists have begun to embrace new media. The Communications Workers
of America, representing some 80,000 AT&T employees seeking a new
contract, has also posted videos of its rallies on YouTube. It also
sends text messages to keep its members informed. "It's a good way to
spread the word and get people to participate and feel they're part of
something bigger as well," said Peter O'Brien, organizer and executive
board member of CWA Local 9510, based in Orange. "It goes viral pretty
quickly."
Most major unions boast extensive websites where workplace issues, political objectives and other concerns are thoroughly aired.
"New
media is playing a central role in organizing workers in the service
sector," noted Harley Shaiken, a labor expert at UC Berkeley.
But
employers also have well-developed Web presences and often aggressively
refute what management views as misleading statements posted online. "I
don't see the use of the Internet and social media as giving the unions
a tremendous upper hand, though to some extent it does allow them to
make initial contact with a wide variety of people," said Nelson N.
Lichtenstein, a labor historian at UC Santa Barbara. "The companies
also have the same abilities."
Organizers say the Stop Starbucks
campaign has already resounded through social networks on the Internet.
The video was prominently displayed on the popular BoingBoing blog,
along with others.
"What happens with these things is that
people watch it, send the link to friends, and you can see it build,"
said Robert Greenwald, head of left-leaning Brave New Films, which has
produced previous videos attacking Fox News, Sen. John McCain and
corporate targets. "Its a tool that doesn't cost billions of dollars."
The
campaign against Starbucks was timed to coincide with the titanic
congressional battle anticipated for organized labor's major
legislative goal: the Employee Free Choice Act, which would make it
easier for U.S. workers to choose union representation.
Like
most big businesses, Starbucks is opposed to the act. The coffee giant,
which generates $10 billion a year in revenue, has joined forces with
retailers Whole Foods and Costco in forming the so-called Committee for
a Level Playing Field, which is backing what it calls a compromise plan.
"We
stepped out to take an alternative position, and that makes us a
target," said Koster, the Starbucks vice president. "The video, for us,
is a one-sided attempt at a lobbying campaign for the Employee Free
Choice Act."
The video opens with a radiant Schultz, the
Starbucks CEO, proclaiming to a CBS interviewer: "We're not in the
business of filling bellies. We're in the business of filling souls."
Former
and current Starbucks employees then speak on the video about the
company's alleged hostility to unions. The Industrial Workers of the
World -- whose members were known as the Wobblies during its early-20th
century heyday -- has been organizing Starbucks baristas in New York,
Minnesota, Illinois and elsewhere.
Starbucks officials said that
employees enjoyed favorable working conditions compared with others in
the retail industry. "We're proud to be one of the most progressive
employers in the United States in terms of benefits, offering stock
options, healthcare and working conditions," Koster said.
But
pro-union employees have denounced what they call low wages (typically
from $7.50 to $10 an hour), inadequate healthcare benefits and a
grueling scheduling regimen.
The new-media campaign "puts the
lie to this widely promulgated notion that Starbucks is a socially
responsible company," said Daniel Gross, a former barista in New York
who is an organizer with the IWW Starbucks Workers Union. "The bottom
line is that Starbucks baristas are not rewarded with respect for the
hard work they put in every day."
In December, a National Labor
Relations Board judge in New York ruled that Starbucks had illegally
fired three baristas, including Gross, and violated other labor laws as
it sought to squelch an organizing drive. Starbucks is appealing.