Boycott Starbucks until they start treating their employees better.
I have been a Starbucks barista for 2+ years. I'm an Ivy League grad who chose to stay home with my kids for nearly 18 years. When I decided to re-enter the work force part-time, Starbucks was a great choice and my experience has been mostly positive. Working about 25 hours a week, I take advantage of the health insurance option and it is an excellent plan for my family. On the negative side, the Starbucks "higher ups" are constantly preaching quicker transaction time per customer while at the same time making more of a "connection" with the customer. You don't have to be an Ivy League grad to know that this doesn't really work...
7
I am currently a college student, I worked at Starbucks for a year and a half. I get stressed out just even thinking about it. The pitfall of this company is that it is a corporation, they need to please their shareholders and have consistent growth. It is an emergency for the company if they don't meet their sales goals. My old manager had worked for Starbucks for over 12 years and still hasn't moved up the ladder, she was unhappy about being still a manager...I could tell. The company kept pushing us for to sell stuff, to be aggressive and suggest a pastry or food item with each sale when obviously customers didn't want it. My store held 'competitions', as an example they measured who wasted the most milk during the shift and announced it. They hire outside instead of recognizing people inside who want to make effort and progress. Also I remember the CEO, Schultz sending out a letter to each store about how we needed to sell more coffee so we could provide for coffee farmers in South America, it was emotionally manipulative. Worked 2 Christmas day's and thanksgiving during the time I was there, it was supposed to be an option but sure didn't feel like it. The amount of money huge corporations make each year is absurd. I am not saying Starbucks is downright evil, but just the way these huge corps are structured...it would be impossible for them to be truly ethical and good.
5
As a three year barista, I have had an overwhelmingly positive experience at Starbucks; recent changes, however, have left me exhausted, discouraged and bitter. I am a full-time student and I commute 70 miles to and from campus 5 days/week, in addition to caring for a severely autistic family member and working 30+ hours. My work schedule is very rarely posted within the company's mandated timeline and I have locked horns with my manager on multiple occasions because my availability preferences have not been considered. This week, the schedule was posted four days late and my shifts were changed three days after that without my knowledge. I attempted to discuss this with my manager, but he aggressively retorted that my new shifts were within my availability. Since that conversation I have been taken off a promotion track and had my hours cut, despite my continued efforts (which have been formally recognized) to improve the condition of a severely understaffed, high-turnover store. My location has been struggling to maintain a full staff for months, causing immense mental and physical strain as we struggle to meet Starbucks' quality and cleanliness standards. This article proves that my experience is not unique, and Starbucks is going to lose thousands of hardworking, dedicated partners (as well as regular customers) if they do not respond to these glaring issues.
14
BOYCOTT Starbucks. Buy locacally from many of the awesome coffee shops that make better coffee. Put your money back into small businesses. We, the people need to do this in order to stop this corporate greed off the backs of their employees.
The problem with software derived scheduling is that the value given for the amount of employees t.o have scheduled at a certain point in time is not equitable. What does "1" equal? If it is to stand for an individual, it does not work as said" individual " is just that. Everyone works differently and is subjected to outside influences on their performance. Besides a physical difference, what of the moment when a customer/guest is that more needful than "projected" by a program. Labor performance is key to profitability in food service but the human connection that occurs in the hospitality industry makes it that more appealing. No one enjoys an environment that is understaffed.Comp sales suffer and turnover rates escalate. Stop paying the dweeb designing the spreadsheet and put it toward the labor line.
1
How many billions of dollars did Starbucks take in last year worldwide? In the U.S.?
What was their net return, or profit, worldwide, and in the U.S.?
How millions of dollars did the CEO's and Executive Board members get paid, including stock options and bonuses?
What is the ratio of what those executives got paid compared to an average Starbucks worker who is struggling to raise a family or work their way through school?
Those dollar figures and ratios are more relevant to this story and other stories about income inequality and fair treatment of workers than any of the other "facts" or opinions in this NYT article.
The thread that runs through this article, without being acknowledged, is that the way Starbucks treats its workers is just one more example of mega-corporation capitalism run rampant. (See Wal Mart, Home Depot, etc.)
Where we live, or in cities where we travel, there are locally owned coffee shops that are more friendly and fun than the corporate shops, each with a unique local type personality. Their coffee is much better and usually organic and/ or fair trade, and their food is better, healthier, and usually locally made.
What was their net return, or profit, worldwide, and in the U.S.?
How millions of dollars did the CEO's and Executive Board members get paid, including stock options and bonuses?
What is the ratio of what those executives got paid compared to an average Starbucks worker who is struggling to raise a family or work their way through school?
Those dollar figures and ratios are more relevant to this story and other stories about income inequality and fair treatment of workers than any of the other "facts" or opinions in this NYT article.
The thread that runs through this article, without being acknowledged, is that the way Starbucks treats its workers is just one more example of mega-corporation capitalism run rampant. (See Wal Mart, Home Depot, etc.)
Where we live, or in cities where we travel, there are locally owned coffee shops that are more friendly and fun than the corporate shops, each with a unique local type personality. Their coffee is much better and usually organic and/ or fair trade, and their food is better, healthier, and usually locally made.
6
Starbucks has become like WalMart in how they treat their employees. Boycott. Boycott. Boycott. I never go to Walkmart, and now that I read this, wont go back to Starbucks. I used to spend a lot of cash there too. I thought they were cool in that they paid for employees college expenses. Now I am disgusted and won't give them any more of my hard earned cash.
1
There's only one explanation for a company not being able to provide an employee with the same, regular schedule from the date-of-hire: Incompetence emanating from the very top.
5
So even with a computer program Starbucks cannot schedule employees fairly.
43 years ago I was in the Navy working in a telephone exchange. The 23 Operators had to be scheduled over a 24 hour day ensuring that all full time employees got their 40 hours, part time employee got their 16-24 hours and weaving in the substitutes who covered annual leave and sick leave time with none getting not one hour more than they were hired for.
I did it with 5X7 cards and graph paper. And they can't do it with a computer program?
By the way, we also used the same system to manage inventory keeping track of what items needed to be in stock at all times and in consideration of the sometimes two months it took to get ordered items. With nearly 100 rubber belts for machinery changed every quarter because of the tropical rot. This was all mission critical.
And, we were not allowed to be overstocked because of inventory costs.
My suppliers in recent history are unable to do the same thing with an expensive program called SAP which has cost them nearly $300 Million over the last 10 years.
Computers simplify tasks?
43 years ago I was in the Navy working in a telephone exchange. The 23 Operators had to be scheduled over a 24 hour day ensuring that all full time employees got their 40 hours, part time employee got their 16-24 hours and weaving in the substitutes who covered annual leave and sick leave time with none getting not one hour more than they were hired for.
I did it with 5X7 cards and graph paper. And they can't do it with a computer program?
By the way, we also used the same system to manage inventory keeping track of what items needed to be in stock at all times and in consideration of the sometimes two months it took to get ordered items. With nearly 100 rubber belts for machinery changed every quarter because of the tropical rot. This was all mission critical.
And, we were not allowed to be overstocked because of inventory costs.
My suppliers in recent history are unable to do the same thing with an expensive program called SAP which has cost them nearly $300 Million over the last 10 years.
Computers simplify tasks?
2
Ignorant users depending on computers to think for them = bad results...garbage in, garbage out. I've been using/learning SAP for several months now...few people appear able do anything useful with it outside of accounting, and even those functions are generically complex and difficult to navigate. I am duly unimpressed.
1
I brew the coffee I drink myself in my kitchen. When I am out, and want a coffee, I purchase from an independent coffee house.
4
Many of my students work at Starbucks and most enjoy the work. However, for them the scheduling is an eternal problem because it interferes with their classes and the group work they must do in the evenings on projects. Yes, being a Barista may be a dead end job,but as many of us know, such jobs are often needed to keep body and soul alive until graduation or until the non-dead-end job appears. I would like to congratulate Howard Schultz for his desire to do the right thing. The fact that this is taking longer to institute is not fully his responsibility. I say kudos to Mr Schultz and owners like him who at least consider make ethical and human choices for their employees.
1
So the bottom line is that in spite of Howard Schultz's claims of taking the high road Starbuck's is as guilty as say Home Depot of under staffing stores and abusing employee's work schedules.
7
We, the people of the USA can fight the Home Depot, Starbucks, WalMart, and other corporate chains with our dollars. Simply spend your money on small, local businesses. Boycott these corporations. Buy from USA, buy local, put your dollars back into community businesses, not these bottom-line corporations. If we, the people did this, these huge local-store-crushing entities would GO OUT OF BUSINESS. Spend your money locally with small business owners. Yeah, you pay a bit extra, but quite frankly, you put your dollars to good use locally and not into the hands of these greedy corporations.
1
The customer base of Starbucks is spoiled silly. They will pay twice as much and still smile. Take that money from them and make sure your stores are fully staffed with well-paid employees who make people happy.
Then, cut executive salaries back. Geesh, it's only coffee! You're not building critical infrastructure for the entire nation.
Then, cut executive salaries back. Geesh, it's only coffee! You're not building critical infrastructure for the entire nation.
3
Coffee prices drop ... and you raise your prices.
Now, you're not doing so good with the Lower-Lower-baristas.
What's next, Starbucks? Indentured Servitude.
Now, you're not doing so good with the Lower-Lower-baristas.
What's next, Starbucks? Indentured Servitude.
1
Buy from your local coffee shop not big corporations. Not only could they pay more but because they are local more money stays in your community and justifies the higher wages with benefits.
1
Better yet, make your coffee at home and bring it with you. It will taste better than that burnt stuff Starbucks sells (why do you think it needs all that sweet stuff added?) and you'll save a small fortune.
2
I agree. Buy your coffee at a local coffee shop, or make it at home using anything other than Starbucks coffee. Boycott these corporations that treat their employess terribly while making the top CEOs and stockholders rich. Seriously sick of these corporations and their bottom-line tactics. People need living wages, and normal schedules. Buy locally, put your money back into local businesses. Put the big chains and franchises OUT OF BUSINESS!
"A nonprofit that works with community groups". Why is it that the NYT is so allergic to neutral labeling. If this was a group that was supporting Kim Davis or releasing Planned Parenthood sting videos, they wouldn't be given such a banal and anodyne label. It undermines the credibility of the story and undermines the integrity of the reporter and the NYT as a news organization. Admit your bias openly (i.e. be honest).
Based on five interviews. Really?! You think an enterprising reporter couldn't interview 5 Times employees with a beef?
Based on five interviews. Really?! You think an enterprising reporter couldn't interview 5 Times employees with a beef?
3
Maybe people who feel so strongly about their employment practices should boycott Starbucks, ditto for fast food. Personally, I never go to these sorts of places, but perhaps instead of a strike by the employees, patrons need to strike for better working conditions for employees. Put your stomach where your mouth is.
6
As a frequent Starbucks customer, it's absolutely mind-boggling to learn that sick baristas often have to find their own replacements for the day, or failing that, find that there's no choice but to go to work sick.
Sick workers should NOT be required to serve beverages, and a company that permits this practice has lost the moral high ground in my eyes.
I love my coffee, but I think I'll invest in my own coffee maker and forego Starbucks until it's absolutely clear they've corrected this practice. Starbucks, you owe it to your workers and customers to find a solution to this real soon. I'll be watching.
Sick workers should NOT be required to serve beverages, and a company that permits this practice has lost the moral high ground in my eyes.
I love my coffee, but I think I'll invest in my own coffee maker and forego Starbucks until it's absolutely clear they've corrected this practice. Starbucks, you owe it to your workers and customers to find a solution to this real soon. I'll be watching.
13
Another reason to boycott Starbucks and all other franchises, chains, and corporations. they terat their employees like garbage. I would rather give my hard earned cash to a local business that treats their employees with respect. We, the people, have power in the almighty dollar. Spend you cash locally. Nothing speaks louder than a dollar going to local businesses.
40 years ago, when I was in college, I worked at a McDonalds. I always had my schedule at least a week in advance. Any there were no computers....how come they could do it then and not now?
13
Remember a while back when Starbucks CEO Howard Schultze wanted to have discussions on race in his stores? I thought at first it might be a sly effort at humor...it turned out he was really serious! Why don't Starbucks employees nationally pick a day and start talking to customers about their working conditions and the gap between management's promises and reality? I can't wait to see how Mr. Schultze would respond to that effort at dialogue!!
17
I don't get the big deal over Starbucks. The coffee is bad and the food is even worse. And those prices.
I'll take Dunkin Donuts any day. Coffee is great, the pink and orange colors are stylish and those styrofoam cups -- they last forever.
I'll take Dunkin Donuts any day. Coffee is great, the pink and orange colors are stylish and those styrofoam cups -- they last forever.
6
My wife, who has a B.A. degree with honors, worked for Starbucks for several years as a manager of a retail store. She was promised a fast track to promotion to the district manager level given her prior experience in retail managing a bookstore for a national chain.
Starbucks used to pride itself on the "Starbucks Experience", which was giving excellent customer service and treating employees fairly. After going through several district managers who had been hired from diverse companies such as Friday's and Bojangles who basically had no idea how to run a coffee shop she left Starbucks. During her several years at bucks she saw the level of customer service deteriorate under leadership that had no idea how to execute the Starbucks business model. Great employees were passed over for promotion within the company in favor of folks with little or no retail coffee experience.
The coup de gras came when promised bonuses and raises were reneged on by bucks due to "necessary cost cutting" while Howard Schultz was buying himself a new jet and vacationing in Hawaii.
Starbucks used to pride itself on the "Starbucks Experience", which was giving excellent customer service and treating employees fairly. After going through several district managers who had been hired from diverse companies such as Friday's and Bojangles who basically had no idea how to run a coffee shop she left Starbucks. During her several years at bucks she saw the level of customer service deteriorate under leadership that had no idea how to execute the Starbucks business model. Great employees were passed over for promotion within the company in favor of folks with little or no retail coffee experience.
The coup de gras came when promised bonuses and raises were reneged on by bucks due to "necessary cost cutting" while Howard Schultz was buying himself a new jet and vacationing in Hawaii.
15
Here's a cost cutting thing to do...buy coffee at local coffee shops. Boycott these corporations! Starbucks will lose many customers over this article. I grow tired of these huge franchise, chain, corporations making huge profits of the backs of their low-paid, stressed-out employees. BOYCOTT!
I get my schedule 2 days in advance if I'm lucky, work night shifts and then come back in the morning all the time and my schedule is different every single weeks. And I love my job so I'm willing to accept all of that. If I got my schedule even just a week in advance I would be happy. It's hard to have sympathy when so many other professions work with downfalls of the the job like that too. Get a new job if you don't like it?
3
I have sympathy for all workers who labor under schedules which are set at short notice: this includes professionals, including many ER doctors who have child care schedules to juggle as well. So please, it is not just Starbucks where this is an issue. This article is an easy jab at Starbucks; it would have been so much more interesting if these practices were exposed across professions and income levels!
10
I don't buy my coffee from Starbucks because I'm not seeking status or a network. I buy my coffee from MacDonalds and Bojangles for 60 cents and it's pretty good and I've had lots of coffee around the world. It's the same reason I've never taken a selfie.
1
My nephew worked part-time at Starbucks and despite his repeated requests to know his schedule in advance, the manager informed her staff only a mere day or two in advance. How interesting to now learn this is a corporate-wide problem. I mean really, how hard can it be to comply? And why does corporate allow managers to get away with such shoddy practices? Starbucks lost a hardworking young man when my nephew was forced to quit so he could fulfill his other work commitments.
6
This company is run by a guy who actually wrote in an NYT op-ed in August, "[d]espite the encouragement of others, I have no intention of entering the presidential fray."
I'm still wondering who those "others" were. I guess not his employees.
I'm still wondering who those "others" were. I guess not his employees.
8
A&P on Long Island has recently sold all their Waldbaums stores to Stop 'N Shop. The transition is currently underway, and I have spoken several times with the Waldbaums employees, and none of them knows anything about the future plans of the new owner Stop 'N Shop, if they will still have jobs or anything else. Disrespectful -- even contemptuous -- of the peace of mind of their employees does not even begin to describe this situation.
9
See what Market Basket employees accomplished in MA recently.
It used to be that the ma and pa grocery was all about just making a living. These people lived in the neighborhood they served so couldn't get away with the things we see today. Now days, big multi nationals like Starbucks have shareholders to answer for, so profit is their motive. What Starbucks did is try to make us believe they were doing the right thing but the bottom line is still profit. This is what happens when you chase out the unions.
26
Totally agree, especially with the last sentence.
4
Thankfully, I don't drink caffeinated beverages anymore.
If you think about how many coffee transactions happen in one hour (at least 30 during morning coffee rush-hour) x minimum $4 per order, you know that Starbucks is making money hand over fist for flavored hot water. So for argument's sake, they're ringing in $120 in sales, and paying their barista a measly $10 per hour. Managers get rated favourably if they understaff, so there's no motivation to increase the numbers of baristas or their hours. They very least they could do for their staff is give advanced scheduling notice, since the pay is so underwhelming to begin with, and alone is not reason enough to stick around.
If you think about how many coffee transactions happen in one hour (at least 30 during morning coffee rush-hour) x minimum $4 per order, you know that Starbucks is making money hand over fist for flavored hot water. So for argument's sake, they're ringing in $120 in sales, and paying their barista a measly $10 per hour. Managers get rated favourably if they understaff, so there's no motivation to increase the numbers of baristas or their hours. They very least they could do for their staff is give advanced scheduling notice, since the pay is so underwhelming to begin with, and alone is not reason enough to stick around.
12
Sadly .... Your missing a Tasty morning Treat
2
If you believe they are so profitable, but some more shares of their stock. It sells for $57 / share.
2
Coffee loaded with flavoured syrups, whipped cream toppings, chocolate sprinkles, etc. is liquid dessert, not a "tasty morning treat". I don't have a sweet tooth. I find it baffling that people are so addicted to Starbucks beverages that they'll wait 15-20 minutes for one of their macchiatos. Maybe ring0 is right, buying their stock would be a good idea.
In the midst of what we're seeing with VW, I find it sad that so many commenters want to take the opportunity to fault Starbucks, and many of them (go ahead and read the comments) for issues they personally have with the company (kids coughing into the coffee? not recycling enough?) rather than the concerns being tackled in the body of this particular article.
It seems to me that a company that is at least willing to not only make efforts to improve employee work conditions, offer perks, and continue moving forward with the needs of a society, should be applauded and supported. Instead, Starbucks is instantly crucified for not getting it right in time to beat this particular article to press.
There's a very easy way to put pressure on a company that isn't meeting its obligations, and dumping on them here isn't it.
It seems to me that a company that is at least willing to not only make efforts to improve employee work conditions, offer perks, and continue moving forward with the needs of a society, should be applauded and supported. Instead, Starbucks is instantly crucified for not getting it right in time to beat this particular article to press.
There's a very easy way to put pressure on a company that isn't meeting its obligations, and dumping on them here isn't it.
11
barista is a dead end job. young people need good job opportunities which provide valuable training rather than subsistence living in a service industry occupation.
2
But what if there are no other jobs available?
7
"barista is a dead end job."
It can be but it can also be a help to some.
I had a church member who was unable to find work. He was in IT and his skills were old, he specialized in Lotus Notes.
In addition he had lost a kidney to cancer and he was eating up his retirement savings taking care of his family and to COBRA payments. Over the years he had come to the Deacons quite often for help.
I convinced him to go to the local community college for training and certification as a Microsoft Certified Engineer. I sent him over to Starbucks to talk to someone I knew and he was hired. After two months he was eligible for health insurance and that alone was a major savings. He was paying $1800 a month for COBRA.
After he completed his course work he got a good job and was in a better position. The Starbucks manager hated to lose him and offered him an Assistant Manager position because a 40 year old is so much more dependable a worker than the younger people.
It can be but it can also be a help to some.
I had a church member who was unable to find work. He was in IT and his skills were old, he specialized in Lotus Notes.
In addition he had lost a kidney to cancer and he was eating up his retirement savings taking care of his family and to COBRA payments. Over the years he had come to the Deacons quite often for help.
I convinced him to go to the local community college for training and certification as a Microsoft Certified Engineer. I sent him over to Starbucks to talk to someone I knew and he was hired. After two months he was eligible for health insurance and that alone was a major savings. He was paying $1800 a month for COBRA.
After he completed his course work he got a good job and was in a better position. The Starbucks manager hated to lose him and offered him an Assistant Manager position because a 40 year old is so much more dependable a worker than the younger people.
Starbucks benefits from publicizing their intentions, but they rarely live up to the hype. This study demonstrates how they continue to screw over employees, and other studies demonstrate how they fail their pledge of fair trade coffee, too.
http://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_problem_with_fair_trade_coffee
http://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_problem_with_fair_trade_coffee
6
I have been a Starbucks customer for at least seven years, the last five at a Starbucks store in Kew Gardens, Queens, New York City (Store No.11933). For well over than a year now, the service has declined markedly, the baristas are more impersonal and try to push customers through the line as fast as possible, often without even saying hello. The store has become dirty and unkempt. Frankly, if I had another convenient place to go, I would transfer my business elsewhere. This company used to have a spirit underlying its business transactions, now it is just another coffee joint.
5
You know I've seen the same thing. The overall friendliness of the baristas has gone down markedly. Around 5 -8 years ago, if they saw that you were a regular customer, they would just give you your drink free every once in awhile. I saw this at multiple locations, so it was obviously a policy.
Not today. I have to remind many baristas that their own website says that refills are only 50 cents (and free if you have a gold card).
I have been in many Starbucks where they were mopping the floors an hour before they closed. Yuck.
And it is obvious that they are running the stores understaffed because the garbage cans are often overflowing and bathrooms are dirty.
I still like my coffee, but I'm thinking more and more about switching to an independent if I can find one in my area.
Not today. I have to remind many baristas that their own website says that refills are only 50 cents (and free if you have a gold card).
I have been in many Starbucks where they were mopping the floors an hour before they closed. Yuck.
And it is obvious that they are running the stores understaffed because the garbage cans are often overflowing and bathrooms are dirty.
I still like my coffee, but I'm thinking more and more about switching to an independent if I can find one in my area.
1
EXACTLY. Ditto all stores in Durham and Chapel Hill, NC. No mo' "Starbucks Experience."
It doesn't get any more convenient than making coffee at home.
It seems to me that Starbucks offers its employees a lot more than the vast majority of retail businesses. Tuition reimbursement, profit sharing, 401k matching. Most businesses today run very lean and try to squeeze every penny of profit that they can. If they don't, they go out of business. If you don't want to work at Starbucks because of the scheduling issues, then don't. Take your skill set and find a job someplace else.
13
ah yes, the old "race to the bottom" answer. History has shown that standing and fighting achieves more than running away. God Bless the American who stands and fights.
14
Dear Marie Antoinette,
Thank you for your comment. It's a pleasure to serve you!
Thank you for your comment. It's a pleasure to serve you!
13
I think it's very easy as an outsider to claim that the benefits outweigh the cons of working at this job. It is beyond exhausting. The quality standards are rigorous, overwhelming, and expectations beyond achievable. Try for yourself. The most important thing, though, is that this isn't an uncommon experience in retail or food service. All jobs have similar negatives. So "take your skills elsewhere" is an ignorant piece of advice, particularly when we're talking about the laborers in this industry - many work there because they don't have any other skills.
The worst thing about Starbucks is their coffee!!
1
Well, funny thing. I was just Googling "what to know when you visit Scandinavia," and it turns out the Swedes are like the biggest coffee drinkers in the whole world, and take sociable coffee breaks several times a day, usually with colleagues and family.
So there must be a whole lot of coffee-making and selling over there in Sweden, and yet they manage to do it without plantation-style labor conditions.
One more thing we can learn from our Northern friends....
So there must be a whole lot of coffee-making and selling over there in Sweden, and yet they manage to do it without plantation-style labor conditions.
One more thing we can learn from our Northern friends....
15
Absolutely correct. And a latte at Wayne's - a Swedish coffee chain more-or-less equivalent to Starbucks - is about the same price as a latte at Starbucks. But much better!
2
While the lapses identified in the article are problematic, at least Starbucks has the corporate awareness to recognize problems and to do meaningful work in correcting them. MANY other companies in the US would benefit greatly from a similar level of awareness and effort.
Knowing someone who is in management of a Starbucks store, the biggest challenge is simply finding enough people to run the store. Given the (appropriate) corporate limits on who can be hired, it's frankly surprising Starbucks doesn't do worse than it does.
While I'm not a fan of their coffee, I can respect the company for saying it will try to do the "right thing" in many areas - and in taking clear steps to follow through. We should encourage more companies in the US, and the world, to do the same.
Knowing someone who is in management of a Starbucks store, the biggest challenge is simply finding enough people to run the store. Given the (appropriate) corporate limits on who can be hired, it's frankly surprising Starbucks doesn't do worse than it does.
While I'm not a fan of their coffee, I can respect the company for saying it will try to do the "right thing" in many areas - and in taking clear steps to follow through. We should encourage more companies in the US, and the world, to do the same.
3
The Breakfast Blend is drinkable, but the rest of Starbucks Coffee has been correctly called 'Charbucks' for how burnt and bitter it tastes. No wonder Dunkin' Donuts sells more coffee in this country.
3
This is a story about the employees, not the coffee. Try to stay with us.
3
he just had to get his charbucks joke online
2
Add a expresso shot to a cup of Dunkins and you get a Taste Treat.... That's hard to beat
" In April, it pledged to pay the full cost of tuition for them and full-time workers who pursued an online degree at Arizona State University."
Please stop repeating this highly misleading and disingenuous PR language from Starbucks. The vast majority of the costs for the ASU-Starbucks program is borne by ASU (hugely reduced tuition) and the federal government (student loans and Pell grants).
Essentially, Starbucks will pay a portion of the out-of-pocket costs, after the reduced tuition and federal aid is factored in, and only for employees who have already completed about half of their college education. One estimate has the average outlay by Starbucks as $500-$3500 per participating employee.
The undeserved hype about this program is very depressing. I stopped buying my morning coffee at Starbucks because of it.
Please stop repeating this highly misleading and disingenuous PR language from Starbucks. The vast majority of the costs for the ASU-Starbucks program is borne by ASU (hugely reduced tuition) and the federal government (student loans and Pell grants).
Essentially, Starbucks will pay a portion of the out-of-pocket costs, after the reduced tuition and federal aid is factored in, and only for employees who have already completed about half of their college education. One estimate has the average outlay by Starbucks as $500-$3500 per participating employee.
The undeserved hype about this program is very depressing. I stopped buying my morning coffee at Starbucks because of it.
17
How many companies offer the benefits Starbucks does to part time employees? It is so easy to put a target on the back of a successful company. There are always haters. Starbucks is a huge company that offers its employees the opportunity to move into other divisions and offers many different jobs. If you work for any company as a basically unskilled worker part time, there are few companies that offer you the opportunities Starbucks is does. This article is very biased against one company when many corporations and many more professions do the same or worse.
1
The decline of working conditions for retail and fast-food started with the end of the "Blue Laws" which mandated that most stores would be closed on Sunday.
It's hard for most people under the age of 50 to realize that almost everyone working in a store environment and (many in restaurants too) did not work on Sundays. This made it much easier to schedule workers and people really could count on one day when they could schedule their life months in advance.
Curiously, the religious right spends absolutely zero time talking about bringing the blue laws back to help lower paid workers (and allow more people to attend services on Sunday as a bonus). Maybe they like to shop too much after church to get behind that idea.
It's hard for most people under the age of 50 to realize that almost everyone working in a store environment and (many in restaurants too) did not work on Sundays. This made it much easier to schedule workers and people really could count on one day when they could schedule their life months in advance.
Curiously, the religious right spends absolutely zero time talking about bringing the blue laws back to help lower paid workers (and allow more people to attend services on Sunday as a bonus). Maybe they like to shop too much after church to get behind that idea.
33
"Blue laws" apply to Christians only; what about Jews, whose day of observance is Saturday, and what about Muslims, whose day of observance is Friday? What about atheists, who don't care?
When I was first working (early 1970s), retail stores, including groceries, closed weekdays at 6:00 P.M. It was impossible to get a quart of milk after working until 5:30 P.M.; by the time I got home, everything was closed. All shopping had to be done on Saturday, and there were no convenience stores at the time, with the exception of the first 7/11s, which was a revolution at the time.
In the Philippines, which is predominantly Catholic, the Church has brought Mass to the mega-mall. Every Sunday at 5:00, mass is said in the mall, and attendance is very high. So everyone is happy, although this would work only in a country with a majority of one religion.
When I was first working (early 1970s), retail stores, including groceries, closed weekdays at 6:00 P.M. It was impossible to get a quart of milk after working until 5:30 P.M.; by the time I got home, everything was closed. All shopping had to be done on Saturday, and there were no convenience stores at the time, with the exception of the first 7/11s, which was a revolution at the time.
In the Philippines, which is predominantly Catholic, the Church has brought Mass to the mega-mall. Every Sunday at 5:00, mass is said in the mall, and attendance is very high. So everyone is happy, although this would work only in a country with a majority of one religion.
The religious right is a business and serves the interests of business, not employees.
2
Reading the scheduling practices in this article -- with the exception of short-notice scheduling -- was like reading about my employer: Target.
After nearly two decades with the company, I have seen stockroom staffing plummet from having 14-15 backroom team members scheduled for a replenishment shift during the holidays to 2. Two people to pull 8-12 hours' worth of merchandise from the stockroom, each getting only a four-hour shift!
Freight is carried over for a day or two before it reaches the sales floor when it used to be done in 6-8 hours, due to understaffing. Back stock items sit in the stockroom for a week or two before they are located in the inventory system. Price changes on clearance merchandise are left undone for weeks, also, creating a logjam in the logistics process while inventory drops in value until it is written off, never even getting to the sales floor.
Four or five hour shifts are standard for hourly workers while managers receive year-end bonuses in five figures -- more than many hourly workers earn in a year -- for choking the hourly payroll numbers.
The practice is unsustainable but gets worse and worse. Next time you are shopping in a Target and cannot find what you are looking for, know that whatever it is probably sits in the back of the store, unaccounted for, just so managers can get their bonuses and stockholders can see the share value falsely inflated.
After nearly two decades with the company, I have seen stockroom staffing plummet from having 14-15 backroom team members scheduled for a replenishment shift during the holidays to 2. Two people to pull 8-12 hours' worth of merchandise from the stockroom, each getting only a four-hour shift!
Freight is carried over for a day or two before it reaches the sales floor when it used to be done in 6-8 hours, due to understaffing. Back stock items sit in the stockroom for a week or two before they are located in the inventory system. Price changes on clearance merchandise are left undone for weeks, also, creating a logjam in the logistics process while inventory drops in value until it is written off, never even getting to the sales floor.
Four or five hour shifts are standard for hourly workers while managers receive year-end bonuses in five figures -- more than many hourly workers earn in a year -- for choking the hourly payroll numbers.
The practice is unsustainable but gets worse and worse. Next time you are shopping in a Target and cannot find what you are looking for, know that whatever it is probably sits in the back of the store, unaccounted for, just so managers can get their bonuses and stockholders can see the share value falsely inflated.
27
Shocking ... But True
1
"Finding your own replacement.."--where have I heard that before?
Oh, I know! In the army of Imperial Russia...you know, the realm where things were so bad, Communism seemed like a really great idea...
Good employers--whether large corporations or various-sized nonprofits--are as scarce as philosophers' stones. In my employed years in Noo Yawk, stretching over more than four decades, even those organizations supposedly devoted to social welfare and the betterment of the world were more than capable of showing their Simon Legree sides.
This is why strong federal worker-protection laws are essential. but you don't get union representation in a three-person office. We need nationwide, vigorously-enforced standards with no exceptions. If your business requires longer hours than the federal mandate permits, you'd better hire more workers and equitably divide their time.
There is no other solution.
Oh, I know! In the army of Imperial Russia...you know, the realm where things were so bad, Communism seemed like a really great idea...
Good employers--whether large corporations or various-sized nonprofits--are as scarce as philosophers' stones. In my employed years in Noo Yawk, stretching over more than four decades, even those organizations supposedly devoted to social welfare and the betterment of the world were more than capable of showing their Simon Legree sides.
This is why strong federal worker-protection laws are essential. but you don't get union representation in a three-person office. We need nationwide, vigorously-enforced standards with no exceptions. If your business requires longer hours than the federal mandate permits, you'd better hire more workers and equitably divide their time.
There is no other solution.
21
I can just imagine those black helicopters landing at Starbuck$...
My brother-in-law's aunt and uncle were on the ground floor of investment in Starbucks. They gave my sister and BIL fifteen thousand dollars as a wedding gift -- an unheard-of and extraordinarily generous amount, according to my family's working-class traditions.
I'm sure that the gift was greatly appreciated, but that doesn't mean that I don't think that system is broken. Stockholders need not be making that kind of money on the backs of those who struggle financially; nor should CEOs or anyone else. Sports players don't need millions while the cheer team makes less than minimum. No one should be allowed to charge $750 for a pill. The wealth of the Waltons and Zuckerbergs is repulsive, considering the trade-offs.
I saw something on facebook recently about hanging one-per centers from lamp posts. I'm not interested in violence, but I would like to see better regulation. The wealth inequality that we allow to flourish in this country is inhumane and unethical.
I'm sure that the gift was greatly appreciated, but that doesn't mean that I don't think that system is broken. Stockholders need not be making that kind of money on the backs of those who struggle financially; nor should CEOs or anyone else. Sports players don't need millions while the cheer team makes less than minimum. No one should be allowed to charge $750 for a pill. The wealth of the Waltons and Zuckerbergs is repulsive, considering the trade-offs.
I saw something on facebook recently about hanging one-per centers from lamp posts. I'm not interested in violence, but I would like to see better regulation. The wealth inequality that we allow to flourish in this country is inhumane and unethical.
24
You are completely missing the point of how investment and stock sales work. Someone wins. Someone loses. Period.
Nonsense. I'm not missing the point at all. Investment does not mean that someone has to lose. Investment is ostensibly for growth. Returns (the win) should be part of that, but ratios can be adjusted for reinvestment, growth, and sustainability. Which ought to include a living wage for employees.
7
Sports players and Actors make millions BECAUSE THEY HAVE A UNION. Otherwise all that money would stay in the Owners pockets.
4
"If you don't come in on Saturday, don't bother coming in on Sunday" - Jeffrey Katzenberg.
A perfectly crisp summary of unrestrained American capitalism
A perfectly crisp summary of unrestrained American capitalism
24
Slightly off-topic, but (in addition to tender, loving care for their employees) I'd love to see Starbucks do more about the waste stream leaving their stores. No attempt to recycle, although a lot of their food containers could be (lids, cardboard sleeves...). Noticing more and more the use-one-time-and-then-to-the-landfill items our society produces.
15
True, although at least we don't see Styrofoam cups much anymore. I know some coffeeshops offer plastic lids that are actually compostable ('Vegware'). It would be great if people could actually bring in their own reusable drink cups with lids, though I suspect that may not be allowed?....'health code violations'?
Yes, about recycling, and Dunkin' Donuts, big in MA does no recycling and serves in big plastic cups with curved tops. I do not know how to contact Dunkin' about that and it bothers me a lot, so I hope this is heard by them, somehow.
Starbucks does recycling in the communities that will work with them.
My son was a Starbucks barista. Take note: the employee who could not find a replacement and had to come to work sick, is making your latte. The kids at my son's Starbucks were coughing, sneezing and blowing their noses, while he went to work for a week with a bad throat infection. Croissant, anyone?
Bad labor practices affect us all. Starbucks polices are sickening - for real.
Bad labor practices affect us all. Starbucks polices are sickening - for real.
53
Why is this article framed by the reporter with his own excuses and explanations for the company?: "Jeez - sorry I have to tell everybody you are terrible employers who need to suck every last penny out of the business off the labor and lives of other human beings. I sympathize so with your need to hold onto your billions."
5
If any new labor laws are going to be enacted, a much longer break than 8 hours should be required between shifts. Seven to 8 hours of sleep per night is recommended for good health, then add on commute time, eating, child care. A minimum of 10 hours should be the law, better yet 12.
17
Maybe this is all true, but reaching this conclusion from interviews with five "former or recent" employees out of workforce of tens of thousands and a report from an org with a proudly activist agenda seems unlikely to paint a complete or balanced picture...
9
Maybe building a business on having underpaid workers serve overpriced coffee isn't a great idea to begin with.
7
The overall success of Starbucks suggests that this is not the case
Better labor practices...Hmmm. How about better service. While they worry themselves sick over cultural issues: income inequality and race... the service in their stores is getting worse and worse. They get 2 bucks for about 50 cents worth of product and service.
4
So we are meant to draw meaningful conclusions about Starbucks, a company of 182,000 full time employees, from 5 interviews? Really? Talk about cherry-picking.
12
In addition to the interviews conducted by the Times, current Starbucks labor practices were documented in this report from the Center for Popular Democracy, which is prominently cited in the article.
13
That's still only about 1/10th of 1% of their overall workforce.
1
And I am sure that The Center for Popular Democracy is a neutral, unbiased source and not a pro-union front.
1
Yes Starbucks uses fair-trade coffee and this is really important to the coffee producers which are small farmers in very remote places and it allows them to buy food and clothing for their children and hopefully send them to school.
On occasion I must meet folks at the local Starbucks and about all I can drink there is there sort of warm chocolate drink. My coffee brewing friends call it Charbucks simply because they must over roast to keep their taste consistent over time. Roasted coffee has a 2 week shelf life.
I roast, grind and brew my own coffee and just finished some great coffee from Yemen. Gesha from Guatemala is the Burgundy of coffee.
Being on an ever changing work schedule is sort of like being in the Navy and having 3 section duty underway. It is obviously cheaper to not have enough employees to permit regular work schedules.
If you want to know more about coffee - check out sweet marias.
On occasion I must meet folks at the local Starbucks and about all I can drink there is there sort of warm chocolate drink. My coffee brewing friends call it Charbucks simply because they must over roast to keep their taste consistent over time. Roasted coffee has a 2 week shelf life.
I roast, grind and brew my own coffee and just finished some great coffee from Yemen. Gesha from Guatemala is the Burgundy of coffee.
Being on an ever changing work schedule is sort of like being in the Navy and having 3 section duty underway. It is obviously cheaper to not have enough employees to permit regular work schedules.
If you want to know more about coffee - check out sweet marias.
1
While everything in the article may be true, I have some serious difficulty with a sample size of just five people.
5
It sure is easy to criticize and condemn Starbucks (and, not incidentally, virtually the entire retail sector) when one is sitting in a newsroom or in an academic office building in front of a computer, drinking a fancy coffee beverage that was served exactly WHEN and WHERE you wanted it.
Just about every article and commentary that labels retail labor practices as "inhumane" ignores many real-world truths. While in an idealized world workers would all be perfectly reliable and motivated, American consumers would be content with shop hours limited to 9-5, five days a week, and it would be somehow possible to run a business that pays high wages yet charges low prices, we do not live in such an environment. In fact, no society has been able to create and sustain such conditions throughout history.
The bottom line is this: to be successful, retailers and restaurants must provide what their customers demand. When these demands include long opening hours, wages and benefits imposed by governmental fiat, constant novelty and change in product offerings, and fast service, it is inevitable that one of the few aspects of running a business that can be changed in real-time, staffing, will be constantly manipulated, often to workers’ detriment.
Just about every article and commentary that labels retail labor practices as "inhumane" ignores many real-world truths. While in an idealized world workers would all be perfectly reliable and motivated, American consumers would be content with shop hours limited to 9-5, five days a week, and it would be somehow possible to run a business that pays high wages yet charges low prices, we do not live in such an environment. In fact, no society has been able to create and sustain such conditions throughout history.
The bottom line is this: to be successful, retailers and restaurants must provide what their customers demand. When these demands include long opening hours, wages and benefits imposed by governmental fiat, constant novelty and change in product offerings, and fast service, it is inevitable that one of the few aspects of running a business that can be changed in real-time, staffing, will be constantly manipulated, often to workers’ detriment.
7
Depressing. The obvious solution is to schedule more staff per shift, but somehow this is beyond Starbucks. It is taking a relatively simple problem and complicating it to no end.
5
Part of the problem seems to come from the idea that retail work is "low-skill". Behind Professor Ton's advice that "Investment in employees" improves outcomes must be his recognition that the work requires certain skills that turn out to have value that in turn benefits the company. So why not just start calling the work "skilled"?
8
Well, let's see. "Eight hours between shifts?"
We've been advised for a long time now--often by the NY Times!--that the average adult needs at least eight hours sleep, perhaps ten, and the average teenager needs more.
So, in the eight hours between shifts, the employee needs to get home, eat, sleep, perhaps do some shopping before getting home, take care of some household and family responsibilities, and get back to Starbucks.
I'm lousy at math but somehow even I can see that there's no way to fit all that into those eight hours, which are all supposed to go towards sleeping, anyway.
So, you know, Starbucks' benchmark standard is a fraud from the get-go.
We've been advised for a long time now--often by the NY Times!--that the average adult needs at least eight hours sleep, perhaps ten, and the average teenager needs more.
So, in the eight hours between shifts, the employee needs to get home, eat, sleep, perhaps do some shopping before getting home, take care of some household and family responsibilities, and get back to Starbucks.
I'm lousy at math but somehow even I can see that there's no way to fit all that into those eight hours, which are all supposed to go towards sleeping, anyway.
So, you know, Starbucks' benchmark standard is a fraud from the get-go.
25
Having owned and managed just a single retail store, it is very true that managing weekly labor hours is one of the most difficult tasks encountered. My casual observation is that consumers are less forgiving about having to wait in line at physical location than they would about being put on hold when calling for customer service. Unlike inventory or supplies, a human employee can’t be put in a supply closet to be pulled out on short notice so that any over scheduling of labor results in a real monetary loss. The practice of “on-call scheduling” attempts to do this – thankfully many large retailers are discontinuing that practice.
I am surprised that Starbucks does not currently have a regional substitute worker program like the one employed by Quik Trip that it described toward the end of this article. Sounds like the type of system that most school districts use for substitute teachers. A quick look at that company’s reviews on Glassdoor.com shows that most of their employees have a positive view of their employer. With Starbucks having over 12,000 locations in this country, many in close proximity, this sounds like an ideal solution.
NY Times has written many excellent articles on this subject. But to use a quote from someone who last managed a store seven years ago – however appropriate to the current story – appears to be very poor journalistic research, especially since there are thousands of current Starbuck’s managers.
8
Managers being pressured to 'staying within budget'. Budgets in corporations such as Starbucks are very fluid. Management has plenty of money, it's just that, they spend it where they want to spend it. All the little pions need to push back. Starbucks has the money to pay better wages. They simply don't want to. It has nothing to do with ensuring they remain 'competitive' and has everything to do with ensuring that upper management continues to get their fat paychecks.
Also, while we need more jobs and better-paying ones, individuals also need to take more responsibility for their own poor decision-making. The story alluded to 'low income mothers and fathers'. Some low-income parents did not suddenly become 'low-income'. They'd always been low-income, yet made a decision to bring children into the world, either consciously or through lackadaisical behaviors/attitudes. Having children is not a 'right'. It's a massive privilege and responsibility that requires a lot of planning and savings.
Some of us more responsible people might love to own a house or a car but if we know we can't afford the monthly payments, guess what?...we don't buy that house or that car. Yet why do so many think they shouldn't make these same considerations before bringing another life into this world? Do they think constant financial struggles, stress, etc., is going to bode well for them or their children? Everyone wants a mini-me, but it's more about the 'me' than the mini.
Also, while we need more jobs and better-paying ones, individuals also need to take more responsibility for their own poor decision-making. The story alluded to 'low income mothers and fathers'. Some low-income parents did not suddenly become 'low-income'. They'd always been low-income, yet made a decision to bring children into the world, either consciously or through lackadaisical behaviors/attitudes. Having children is not a 'right'. It's a massive privilege and responsibility that requires a lot of planning and savings.
Some of us more responsible people might love to own a house or a car but if we know we can't afford the monthly payments, guess what?...we don't buy that house or that car. Yet why do so many think they shouldn't make these same considerations before bringing another life into this world? Do they think constant financial struggles, stress, etc., is going to bode well for them or their children? Everyone wants a mini-me, but it's more about the 'me' than the mini.
6
Is the FIRST part of this statement, from the article, remotely true? -
"In the last two years, the combination of a tight labor market and legal changes..."
Does anyone really believe Starbucks has a hard time finding people to work at it's stores? Really?
"In the last two years, the combination of a tight labor market and legal changes..."
Does anyone really believe Starbucks has a hard time finding people to work at it's stores? Really?
4
Welcome to retail! I don't care if it's Starbucks, Macy's or Home Depot - the majority of retail stores will never hire enough workers to adequately service the customer, expect during the holidays because it costs money and frankly, the attitude is "if you want a better job with more hours, more pay and more benefits - look elsewhere."
I used to work retail and was even an asst. manager at a GNC store while going to college and graduate school. That employment helped pay the bills and college expenses (at least back then in the late 1970s). Scheduling and employees not showing up was a constant issue and one in which other employees had to work around. Most of the time, the newest employees got stuck with either opening or closing the store (or both) because they were the lowest on the totem pole, not because of any kind of personal vendetta. As long as corporate offices refuse to acknowledge a manpower shortage and focus primarily on profits, the many assorted pains of work retail will never lessen nor soften. I will give Starbucks credit for one thing - the fact that they offer benefits to employees who only work 20 hours. That one benefit is huge in the retail world.
15
Just imagine all those latte-cappuccino-double-shot drinkers taking their coffee business elsewhere in support of Starbucks workers receiving better scheduling hours from management. I bet it wouldn't take another year for one of those infamous memos from the desk of Howard Schultz. But this time, with a directive that actually benefits his own workers.
4
Why aren't these people unionizing? Same for Home Depot and all of the others. These working conditions beg for organized labor. Where are the UNIONS???
17
Another instance of "Welcome back to the 19th century," before labor laws existed and 1 percent of the population owned 99 percent of the country's wealth. Shame on all companies that treat their workers in such ways. That's a lot of companies, actually.
46
Some things haven't changed, like that part about the 1%.
3
Right on. We need to import the enlightened regulation of the Venezuelas, North Koreas, and Chinas to be truly free.
No difference. The 1% in those countries also control 99% of the wealth.
For decades, Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that capitalism is a good thing only to find out that by supporting it, they've only robbed themselves.
36
Capitalism is a very good thing, it just requires continued maintenance to run healthily. Workers need only to have a unified, equal voice in the company policies that run their labor practices. This is why unions are important. Negotiations determine the value of a job description, as opposed to the value of an individual employee (a very important distinction often misunderstood by opponents of unionization), and then the company screens for candidates qualified to satisfy that job duty. They also create contracts that forbid practices like "clopening," or only allow them with consent and mutually agreed upon compensation for the extra effort.
Union yes.
Union yes.
2
I always liked being a customer at Starbucks because of the tuition program and the health insurance they offer their employees, (and because of their fair-trade coffee and community programs). You can see the difference in makes in the Starbucks workers--they seem like happy to work there, happy to get me my coffee, etc. So, seriously: WORK IT OUT. Your coffee is good, but your employees have always been a major draw for people. Especially in NY--they are upbeat, friendly, and (most of all) you know they are not being exploited... and many even remember my name the next time I come in! If you loose that.... you'll loose a lot of your customers too.
36
I agree. I almost always patronize locally-owned stores over chains, but my neighborhood Starbucks has such a wonderful group of friendly, conscientious and cheerful young people working there that I love going in. You can tell when people like their jobs and when they don't. I hope the company will live up to its promises to them.
2
All those things you stated above are available at LOCAL COFFEE SHOPS, and they make BETTER coffee. Dump these corporate brands where they make their cash off the backs of slave labor.
If Starbucks store managers are incented to understaff -- as the article says -- and marked down if they don't, they will understaff.
And this is where the rubber hits the road and PR-friendly principles about human values come up against the profit expectations of the private equity managers. Guess which side is still winning.
And this is where the rubber hits the road and PR-friendly principles about human values come up against the profit expectations of the private equity managers. Guess which side is still winning.
56
Look, Howie Schultz is a salesman. His social activism is 1 inch deep. Veterans,
workers in the fields. He even gets to pontificate in occasional Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times, which I figure feels obligated to advertise his faux philosophy given Starbucks' ads.
Coffee futures were down this year. He raised the price of coffee 10-15 cents.
In Starbucks, as in America, it's all about money. I'm sure Howie forgot his "vows" on the way to the bank.
workers in the fields. He even gets to pontificate in occasional Op-Ed pieces in the New York Times, which I figure feels obligated to advertise his faux philosophy given Starbucks' ads.
Coffee futures were down this year. He raised the price of coffee 10-15 cents.
In Starbucks, as in America, it's all about money. I'm sure Howie forgot his "vows" on the way to the bank.
31
Ah, the magnificent self-correcting genius of the unregulated free market and its magical-mystical invisible hand, producing maximum prosperity for all, from the lowest-paid part-time employees to CEOs to stockholders. Why anyone would want government to step in and "fix" things is beyond me. Economically, we live in the best of all possible worlds!
9
I wish the Times would clarify how many locations is 'several' and the length of time the 'recent' workers have not been with Starbucks as it makes unclear the depth and breadth of this problem.
15
It seems a bit strange that the Times would base such a critical article on a mere five interviews, along with unverified reports from organizations with agendas. Even at that, Starbucks sins seem trivial. Some employees don't get three weeks advance notice of work schedules? That, the Times sees as unfair?
Pushing minor grievances to the front page to get Starbucks name up there smells of, once again, link bait, a charge we've seen many times in these pages. Apple, along with Starbucks, seems a consistent whipping boy for headline writers. Take, for example, today's combination of Apple and Omen for an article that features a subject far from exclusive with Apple, as the writer himself exposes.
When I was young and striving to make a career for myself, my boss dismissed petty complaints from employees this way: "This company was started for the customers, not the employees." Balance matters, but considering the level of these alleged grievances, I feel sorry for Starbucks. The field of available workers strikes me as a weak one.
Pushing minor grievances to the front page to get Starbucks name up there smells of, once again, link bait, a charge we've seen many times in these pages. Apple, along with Starbucks, seems a consistent whipping boy for headline writers. Take, for example, today's combination of Apple and Omen for an article that features a subject far from exclusive with Apple, as the writer himself exposes.
When I was young and striving to make a career for myself, my boss dismissed petty complaints from employees this way: "This company was started for the customers, not the employees." Balance matters, but considering the level of these alleged grievances, I feel sorry for Starbucks. The field of available workers strikes me as a weak one.
13
While my father was very good to his customers he was also good to his employees. He cared about them and understood how important their jobs were to them. They re-payed him with hard work and loyalty, even love.
What your employer didn't understand, is that happy employees provide better service than unhappy ones.
What your employer didn't understand, is that happy employees provide better service than unhappy ones.
20
On the other side of the coin (as in an article here about "toxic work") people (really women) are demanding more and more control over their work schedule so they can not work when they feel it necessary to (not) do so.
Trouble is, one person's ad-hoc "I'm not coming in today" is another person's ad-hoc "Wake up, we need you to come in today".
Trouble is, one person's ad-hoc "I'm not coming in today" is another person's ad-hoc "Wake up, we need you to come in today".
3
No worries. I'm sure as soon as it's possible everyone who can be will be replaced with software or robots. Pledges of better labor practices, increased minimum wage all hasten the day.
1
Starbucks, like most food and goods stores, is encouraging online ordering. What is currently considered understaffing will be sufficient, as soon as more customers start ordering online. The cashier will be free to assist more with food and drink prep.
Aint our current form of capitalism~grand! Causing misery, outrageous wealth disparity and bad health. And Americans think this is a 'good' system? Delusional!
24
Starbuck's net income for 2014 was $ 2.068 billion and it's understaffing in order to squeeze a few dollars more out of their bottom line. What's the point of making all that money if you can't make your employee's lives happy along with the top earners at the company? A tired and miserable barista won't make the experience of getting coffee better for anyone, including the customers.
102
Because the people who run and own these corporations measure their own value and success purely by how much money they make and are worth. Lower it by only a tiny bit in order to improve the lives of their employees or make better products and they fall into a deep, deep depression and start questioning the point of even being alive.
10
How many people go to "experience a barista"? Raise your hands. Now how many will keep going to get coffee if there is no barista, and your coffee is made to the same standards by software?
2
I shop at a grocery store that has had the same employees for as long as I can remember. Their boss is good to them and they reward him with their loyalty. The people who work there know many of their customers by name and shopping there gives the feeling of human connection, something a robot can't give.
7
Having worked retail for twenty plus years, I can attest that "clopening" causes mistakes, illness, and irritability due to sleep depravation not. Mistakes cost money, irritability creates customer dissatisfaction, and illness spreads to coworkers and customers! Being sick creates a downward cycle if one is not encouraged to stay home when ill. I am deeply concerned about food service workers coming to work when they are sick! I sympathize with all the worker concerns, but for a food service company to allow (and seemingly encourage) staff to work while ill is inexcusable!!
64