US Appeals Court Narrows Starbucks Anti-Unionisation Case

A US federal appeals court has overturned most of a National Labour Relations Board (NLRB) ruling that found Starbucks illegally threatened employees with reprisals for attempting to unionise and falsely suggested it was monitoring organising efforts.

In a 2-0 decision, the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected claims that the coffee chain violated federal labour law when managers at a Wichita, Kansas, store told employees that hiring had been paused and working hours reduced because of union or other protected activities.

However, the court upheld the finding that Starbucks illegally threatened to deny maternity leave benefits to a pregnant employee if workers voted to unionise.

The court said statements about the hiring portal and store hours did not amount to threats of reprisal, as the hiring pause did not appear to threaten job security and understaffing could have justified shorter hours. It also found that comments about union discussions and the possible impact of a successful vote were not coercive.

The ruling comes as employees at more than 700 Starbucks stores have voted to join unions, while hundreds of complaints alleging unfair labour practices remain pending before the NLRB.

The decision follows a separate ruling by a Manhattan appeals court that overturned an NLRB finding against Starbucks over restrictions on union-supporting T-shirts and pins.