The National Labor Relations Board issued two rulings last Friday. The first found that Starbucks unilaterally changed the enforcement standards of its dress code without providing room for negotiation, violating federal labor law. The second ruling determined that the coffee chain unlawfully interrogated employees about their potential participation in a strike.

These rulings upheld the original decisions of administrative law judges, finding that the coffee company violated the National Labor Relations Act at some of its stores in the Pacific Northwest region.

The labor disputes between Starbucks and the union have a long history. As the union has worked to organize at many stores across the United States, it has filed numerous unfair labor practice charges with the Board. These latest rulings represent the most recent outcomes in this series of conflicts.

Details of the First Ruling

The Board upheld the January 2024 decision by Administrative Law Judge Andrew S. Golin concerning dress code management at the Jantzen Beach store in Portland, Oregon.

The Board stated that Starbucks unilaterally changed a matter subject to bargaining, tightening the enforcement of its dress code without prior notice to the union or an opportunity to bargain. Consequently, the company's unilateral change and the disciplinary actions taken based on it violated the National Labor Relations Act.

The Board ordered Starbucks to remove from employee files all disciplinary records related to violations of the dress code and to rescind all unilaterally implemented policy changes. The order also prohibits the company from disciplining employees for supporting or engaging in union activities.

In a concurring note, Republican Board Member Scott Meier dissented, arguing that the Board's General Counsel failed to prove Starbucks unlawfully changed the dress code. He stated the dress rule itself was lawful and the company could impose varying levels of discipline, including termination, based on the severity of the infraction.

Additionally, the Board agreed with Judge Golin's findings and dismissed related allegations that Starbucks management threatened to cancel planned wage increases and that an employee was fired for union activity.

Details of the Second Ruling

The Board upheld a 2024 decision by Administrative Law Judge Brian Gee. That decision found that managers at two Seattle stores unlawfully interrogated employees between April and July 2023 by asking them individually if they intended to participate in a strike.

The panel agreed with this finding, determining that Starbucks's actions constituted unlawful interrogation prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act. The Board required Starbucks to cease interrogating employees in a coercive manner about their protected, concerted activities and to post notices informing all employees that the company had violated labor law.

In response to the two rulings, a Starbucks spokesperson said on Saturday that the Board had affirmed several of the administrative law judges' findings that the company's actions were lawful, and that it is evaluating its options regarding the remaining allegations.

The spokesperson stated, "Starbucks has always complied with the law and is committed to providing a positive work environment for all of our partners."