Howard Schultz

When Howard Schultz returned as CEO in March 2022, Starbucks workers had already begun organizing. What followed was what the U.S. Senate HELP Committee called "the most aggressive and illegal union-busting campaign in the modern history of our country." By February 2024, NLRB regional offices had docketed 771 open or settled Unfair Labor Practice charges against Starbucks and its law firm, Littler Mendelson — a number labor scholars describe as almost certainly the most in the Board's 90-year history. On March 1, 2023, NLRB Administrative Law Judge Michael A. Rosas issued a landmark ruling finding Starbucks had violated the National Labor Relations Act hundreds of times through "egregious and widespread misconduct demonstrating a general disregard for the employees' fundamental rights." Rosas ordered Starbucks to rehire unlawfully fired workers, reopen a shuttered store, bargain with the union, provide union access to stores, conduct labor-rights training, and post remedial notices at stores nationwide.

• —771 ULP charges docketed by February 2024 — against Starbucks and its union-busting law firm Littler Mendelson.
• —Documented violation methods: firing pro-union workers; interrogating workers about union activity; threatening to rescind benefits; threatening to call police on workers; discriminatory scheduling to cut hours and eliminate benefit eligibility for union supporters.
• —ALJ Rosas' March 2023 ruling is among the most expansive in modern NLRB history — ordered Starbucks to take corrective actions at stores nationwide.
• —Starbucks retained Littler Mendelson, the nation's largest management-side labor law firm — a firm whose entire specialty is defeating union organizing campaigns.
• —By October 2024, despite the three-year campaign, 500+ Starbucks stores in 40+ states had voted to unionize. The illegal pressure failed. Workers organized anyway.

On February 7, 2022, Starbucks fired seven Memphis, Tennessee baristas — all prominent organizers at the first Starbucks store in the South to file for a union election. The company's stated rationale — violating security policies by allowing a TV news crew to film inside — collapsed under scrutiny: Starbucks had allowed its own PR team to film at the same store in the same period without consequence. A federal judge found "reasonable cause" to believe the firings were illegal and ordered reinstatement pending trial in August 2022. An ALJ ruling in May 2023 found that five of the seven workers had been unlawfully terminated. Starbucks then funded a Supreme Court challenge (Starbucks v. McKinney, decided June 2024) arguing the NLRB's standard for seeking emergency reinstatement of fired workers was too lenient. The Court raised the bar — weakening NLRB's ability to protect fired workers quickly in all future cases.

• —Memphis Seven organizers fired February 7, 2022 — the company said they violated security protocol by letting a TV crew in.
• —Starbucks allowed its own corporate PR team to film at the same location in the same period, under the same conditions, without consequence.
• —Federal judge ordered reinstatement pending trial August 2022, finding "reasonable cause" the terminations were illegal.
• —ALJ (May 2023): 5 of 7 workers unlawfully terminated.
• —Starbucks v. McKinney (June 2024): Starbucks lobbied SCOTUS to raise the standard for NLRB emergency injunctions — won. Future fired workers will be harder to reinstate quickly. Starbucks weaponized the Memphis workers' case to damage labor law for everyone.

In a pattern concentrated around July 2022, Starbucks closed 23 stores nationally — seven in the Seattle area, plus locations in Colorado, Maine, Oregon, and Illinois. Eight of the 23 were unionized. Starbucks also closed non-unionized stores nearby to obscure the pattern. The NLRB Regional Director for Region 19 filed a Consolidated Complaint alleging Starbucks closed the stores "because its employees engaged in union and/or protected, concerted activities." The NLRB sought an order requiring Starbucks to reopen every closed store, offer re-employment to all affected workers, and provide full back pay. Starbucks claimed the closures were for safety reasons. The NLRB's position was that this was pretext.

• —23 stores closed, concentrated in summer 2022. Eight of 23 were unionized; the rest were closed nearby to obscure the targeting pattern.
• —Seattle-area closures were particularly concentrated — seven locations in the company's own home city.
• —NLRB Region 19 Consolidated Complaint: Starbucks closed stores "because its employees engaged in union and/or protected, concerted activities."
• —NLRB also alleged Starbucks closed the unionized stores without giving the union any opportunity to bargain the decision — a separate violation.
• —NLRB General Counsel sought reopening of all 23 stores, re-employment of all workers, and full back pay.

When Schultz returned as CEO, he announced sweeping improvements: raises to at least $15/hour, expanded benefits, and credit card tipping. He explicitly withheld all of it from unionized stores. Under federal labor law, employers must bargain with unions over wages and benefits — they cannot unilaterally offer non-union workers better terms as a carrot to discourage organizing. Starbucks did it publicly. NLRB Administrative Law Judge Mara-Louise Anzalone ruled in September 2023 that this violated the National Labor Relations Act: Starbucks used its "top executive to launch a corporate-wide effort to manipulate its employees' free choice by conditioning their pay and benefits on their willingness to forgo organizing." The discrimination affected 11,000+ workers across 500+ stores for years. In February 2024, Starbucks agreed to provide back pay. In December 2025, Starbucks agreed to a $35 million settlement covering 15,000+ New York City workers for denied stable scheduling and arbitrary hour cuts.

• —Schultz announced raises to $15/hr minimum, credit card tipping, expanded benefits — and explicitly withheld all three from unionized stores.
• —The discrimination applied to every unionized store and 11,000+ workers from approximately May 2022 through the campaign.
• —ALJ Anzalone (September 2023): Starbucks used its "top executive to launch a corporate-wide effort to manipulate its employees' free choice by conditioning their pay and benefits on their willingness to forgo organizing — a direct attack on the Act's central goals."
• —February 2024 back-pay agreement: unionized workers received retroactive raises, tipping access for the period they were denied it.
• —$35M NYC settlement (December 2025): covers 15,000+ workers for denied stable scheduling and arbitrary hour cuts between July 2021 and July 2024 — $50 per week worked.

In 2022, Schultz personally told a California barista who raised concerns about unionization: "If you're not happy at Starbucks, you can go work for another company." The NLRB ruled in October 2024 that this statement was an unlawful, coercive threat under the National Labor Relations Act — meaning Schultz himself, as CEO, personally broke federal labor law. This is separate from the 771 charges against the company. On March 29, 2023, Schultz appeared before the Senate HELP Committee chaired by Bernie Sanders — only under threat of subpoena. Under oath, Schultz denied personal involvement in firing workers or closing stores, and publicly stated he was "not prepared to follow" the ALJ's order requiring him to personally record a video informing Starbucks employees of their union rights. Refusing to comply with a federal ALJ remediation order — stated publicly, under oath, in a Senate hearing — is an extraordinary expression of contempt for the legal process.

• —Schultz personally told a worker: "If you're not happy at Starbucks, you can go work for another company." NLRB ruled October 2024: this was an unlawful coercive threat under the NLRA.
• —Senate HELP hearing, March 29, 2023: Schultz appeared under threat of subpoena. Chairman Sanders: "You appear here only under the threat of subpoena."
• —Under oath, Schultz denied personal involvement in firing union workers or closing stores — despite NLRB findings naming corporate-level decisions during his tenure.
• —Under oath, Schultz stated he was "not prepared to follow" the ALJ's order to personally record a video explaining workers' union rights.
• —No criminal charges have been filed against Schultz personally. The NLRB finding names him; he remains a billionaire.