The coffee company says the union, Starbucks Workers United, is making people think it stands in solidarity with Palestine after the Hamas attack.


Starbucks is suing its union, Starbucks Workers United, after objecting to the group’s social media post in support of Palestine after the Hamas attack on Israel, according to an internal company note circulated Tuesday and obtained by The Intercept.

The company had previously condemned the post but is now upping the ante, planning to take the union to court. In a message from Executive Vice President Sara Kelly, Starbucks argued that the union’s use of the name Starbucks confuses customers, and that some customers took their anger over the SWU statement out on store employees.

The union’s post read “Solidarity with Palestine!” and quote-tweeted an image of a bulldozer breaking through the fence encircling Gaza. More than 9,000 workers at 360 stores have now voted to join SWU, which is affiliated with Workers United and SEIU, according to its website, but they have been met with stiff resistance from the company on a potential contract. The company previously sent SWU a “cease and desist” order threatening legal action and now plans to follow through with that threat. The message reads, with bolding in the original:

Shortly after October 7, Workers United posted a statement with an image of a bulldozer tearing down part of the Israel and Gaza border, reflecting their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas. Unfortunately, as violence against the innocent in the region continues to escalate, some people are mistakenly tying these remarks to us, because Workers United and its affiliates and members continue to use our name, logo and intellectual property. Starbucks unequivocally condemns acts of terrorism, hate and violence committed by Hamas, and we strongly disagree with the views expressed by Workers United, including its local affiliates, union organizers and those who identify as members of “Starbucks Workers United” — none of these groups speak for Starbucks Coffee Company and do not represent our company’s views, positions, or beliefs. Their words and actions belong to them, and them alone.

Starbucks did not immediately respond to a request for comment, nor did Starbucks Workers United. The full note is below, also with bolding in the original.

Message from Sara Kelly: Affirming Starbucks Position and Addressing Statements from Workers United

Partners,

I hope each of you are finding ways to take care of yourselves and your loved ones in this heavy time. In addition to the heartache we are all feeling during this moment, like many of you, I am also deeply troubled by the spread of misinformation and inflammatory headlines stemming from images used and statements made last week by Workers United.

Shortly after October 7, Workers United posted a statement with an image of a bulldozer tearing down part of the Israel and Gaza border, reflecting their support for violence perpetrated by Hamas. Unfortunately, as violence against the innocent in the region continues to escalate, some people are mistakenly tying these remarks to us, because Workers United and its affiliates and members continue to use our name, logo and intellectual property. Starbucks unequivocally condemns acts of terrorism, hate and violence committed by Hamas, and we strongly disagree with the views expressed by Workers United, including its local affiliates, union organizers and those who identify as members of “Starbucks Workers United” — none of these groups speak for Starbucks Coffee Company and do not represent our company’s views, positions, or beliefs. Their words and actions belong to them, and them alone.

The ongoing confusion from this misinformation has sadly led directly to incidents where angry, hurt customers are confronting partners in our stores and sending graphic and violent messages to partners in our Customer Contact Center (CCC). Our retail leaders and support teams are prioritizing partner care and safety, working to ensure every store and the CCC feels supported in de-escalating these situations.

It is in the best interest and safety of our partners and customers for Workers United to disengage from the dialogue and from misrepresenting Starbucks. Workers United’s actions risk putting partners from all stores, including both non-union and unionized stores, in harm’s way. On Friday, we contacted Workers United demanding they 1) immediately stop using our company name, logo and intellectual property, and 2) issue an immediate correction. This morning, they rejected that request. As a result, Starbucks will file litigation against the union in federal court, and we intend to pursue all legal options in defense of our partners and our company.

We will be in touch as we have more updates. Thank you for continuing to support one another, and for the work you do each day to create environments where everyone is welcome and feels a sense of belonging. Our actions have always been — and will always be — driven through the lens of humanity with our partners at the core.

link: https://theintercept.com/2023/10/17/starbucks-suing-union-israel-palestine/

archive: https://archive.ph/LdkJx

  • stolid_agnostic
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Did you vote for every law congress passes or did you let your elected representatives do that? This is no different.

    • brianorca@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I understand that, but it’s like saying “the people” of the USA don’t support congressional term limits. We do vote for our representatives, but that doesn’t mean we share their view on every topic.

      • stolid_agnostic
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point is that things have to operate in that way until someone much smarter than you and I someday comes up with something better. Up to now, this is the best humans have come up with.

        • brianorca@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, but that doesn’t make it a proxy for how the people feel about something they haven’t been asked yet.