Four days after unionization, Starbucks strikes back at Providence workers

"It's been like four days after we won our union and they're coming for us."

Juani Cantu in his union shirt

A little after noon, I met with workers from the Starbucks at One Financial in downtown Providence. On Monday, the store became the first Starbucks in Rhode Island to unionize, and they did so with a unanimous vote. Now the workers were being sent home by Starbucks management, but not being disciplined. Workers say the company is violating their labor rights. I spoke with Asia, Hannah, and Juani.

Asia: So a couple of partners¹ clocked in for their shifts and we showed up in our Starbucks union shirts which is allowed. My manager told me on the floor that I wasn't allowed to wear the shirt and I had to take it off, to which I said, ‘That's illegal.” There's a sign in the back that tells me I can wear this shirt. It is a union shirt. They said, no, I can't. It's a graphic.

Starbucks has a policy against graphic tee shirts, but it is haphazardly enforced, and if the graphic is covered by the apron they wear, usually allowed. Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act makes it unlawful for an employer “to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise” of their rights. There are many examples, but clearly spelled out is this one: Employers are not allowed to prohibit employees “from wearing union buttons, t-shirts, and other union insignia unless special circumstances warrant.”

Hannah: You cannot discriminate, according to the NLRB, as to what [union] graphics are allowed.

Asia: A couple of other partners clocked in, in solidarity, wearing their union shirts as well. They were also told to go home. And then the district manager was brought in.

But before the district manager was brought in we noticed something was off because our mobile orders had been turned off and our deliveries had been turned off. They had just told us that if we were not going to listen, we should go home. But we said, “We're working. It's the middle of peak, it's the busiest time of the day.”

So the district manager came in and took me in the back. I read my Weingarten Rights to them and tried to walk away. Management told me that I was not being disciplined, but that I needed to go home if I was not going to take my shirt off or turn my shirt inside out.

Hannah: They also told me I would be written up for insubordination if I didn't go home.

Juani: These are all changes in laboratory conditions². We've come into work multiple times out of dress code, but now, since our union drive and since we won our union, they've been enforcing all these rules unilaterally. They are making unilateral changes without a bargaining contract.

Just a few minutes ago we marched in on our boss. We all marched into the cafe, stopped business, and read a list of our demands to the managers. They just ignored us, continued serving folks, and did not want to listen to our cries and demands. They invalidate our trauma and our experiences at that store. They do not care about workers' rights, or us, at all.

I believe that our union filed charges through the NLRB [National Labor Relations Board] for kicking us all out today. We also ended our demands with, “Fail to meet our demands and we will continue to strike and have more actions at the store.”

Steve Ahlquist: Is the store open?

Juani: It's still open. It's scabbed by managers. I'm going to go into my shift at 1:30 and I'll probably get kicked out for wearing the union shirt too.

It's been like four days after we won our union and they're coming for us.

I was next door as Juani Cantu reported for his 1:30 pm shift at Starbucks. I filmed his interaction with management through the window:

Afterward, I met Juani outside accompanied by other Starbucks workers and a small group of protesters from POWR [Providence Organization of Workers and Renters] who were there in solidarity.

Juani Cantu: There's never been an issue in the past, but now that we're unionized, they're changing laboratory conditions and are coming for union organizers for expressing their federally protected rights to organize and wear union insignia. Starbucks does not care about its workers, or about bettering our working conditions. None of that.

Steve Ahlquist: Who's working right now?

Juani: Right now, the store is being scabbed by a bunch of managers after they kicked out every worker this morning for wearing their protected shirts.

Steve Ahlquist: CIf you were wearing your apron, I don't even know that you would be able to see that shirt. Is that the case?

Juani: Yeah. You wouldn't be able to see it, really. That's another point that's been brought up. They told another worker at our store that as long as your apron covers your graphic tee, you’re fine. That's what was happening this morning and they kicked us out for having our graphic tees under our apron.

Steve Ahlquist: Your union says that's not legal, correct?

Juani: It's union-busting. In the back of the house, we have a poster from the NLRB stating that we're able to wear union pins and union shirts with insignias of our union.

For some reason, Starbucks just loves breaking the law and making the lives of workers terrible.

Steve Ahlquist: And you're not getting paid for today.

Juani: Probably not, no. It's crazy because this morning, while they were interrupting us in the middle of customer connections, we were saying, “Hey, we're trying to run the store, our shift. Let us continue working.” Nope. They kept kicking us out one by one.

Steve Ahlquist: So what's the next move?

Juani: The next move is that until they meet our demands and until they meet us at the bargaining table, we will not stop with our actions. We will not stop with our strike. We will not stop with marching on the bosses. I've been a partner for two and a half years. I helped organize my store back in San Antonio, Texas and helped bring the fight here with my other coworkers in solidarity. So solidarity with al the workers everywhere!

POWR

1. partner = workers

2. “laboratory conditions” - “In election proceedings, it is the [NLRB]'s function to provide a laboratory in which an experiment may be conducted, under conditions as nearly ideal as possible, to determine the uninhibited desires of the employees.” See the NLRB’s 1948 General Shoe Company case, here.