Republicans forced to defend liberal Starbucks at ‘union-busting’ hearing
David Sivak
Video Embed
Republicans were put in the awkward position of defending one of the most liberal corporations in America at a hearing to address the “union-busting” activities of Starbucks.
Howard Schultz, who was the coffee company’s CEO until he stepped down last week, testified before the Senate Wednesday on Starbucks’s labor practices after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), the chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, threatened to subpoena him.
STARBUCKS CEO AGREES TO TESTIFY BEFORE CONGRESS FOLLOWING SANDERS SUBPOENA THREAT
The socialist senator, who is a staunch defender of labor rights, spent his opening remarks accusing Starbucks of mounting the “most aggressive and illegal union-busting campaign in the modern history of our country” amid a push by the Starbucks Workers United to organize.
More than 300 of the company’s stores have voted to unionize since 2021 despite the company’s stated preference to have a “direct relationship” with employees. Amid the push, the National Labor Relations Board has filed more than 80 complaints against the company claiming it has violated federal labor laws.
Democrats at the hearing pressed Schultz on reports of retaliation by Starbucks, including the firing of unionized employees, surveillance of workers, and the shutdown of unionized stores.
Schultz, who remains on the board of Starbucks despite stepping down from his interim role as CEO, vehemently denied that the company has broken the law and touted the benefits provided to its employees, including health insurance, college tuition reimbursement, and stock equity in the company.
The sharp scrutiny has created somewhat of a political reversal after years of Democrats hailing the company for its liberal ethos.
Starbucks has not shied away from culturally sensitive issues, much to the chagrin of conservatives. It sought to encourage a conversation about racial tensions in America as part of its 2015 “RaceTogether” marketing campaign. More recently, it pledged to cover travel costs for abortion after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
But it was Republicans who were put in the uncomfortable position of defending a company that they have for years railed against, most notoriously for a “war on Christmas” they say the company is waging because of the lack of Christian imagery on its cups during the holiday season.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), the ranking member on the Senate HELP Committee, stated his own reluctance to defend Starbucks over the alleged labor violations lodged against it but said the Schultz hearing lacked balance, calling it a “smear campaign against an individual and a company based upon allegations that everyone knows are still under litigation.”
“I am not here to defend Starbucks,” he said in his opening remarks. “I agree with the chair that no one should be above the law. But let’s not kid ourselves. These hearings are anything but a fair and impartial proceeding.”
He questioned whether the NLRB can be considered a neutral party in evaluating the complaints against Starbucks, implying it had become “weaponized” by its employees to side with unions.
“There are credible whistleblowers who are saying that the NLRB is putting their thumb on the side of the employees,” Cassidy said.
Throughout the hearing, Republicans gave Schultz a reprieve from the at-times heated back-and-forths with Democrats on the panel.
Schultz bristled at Sanders calling him a billionaire and angrily defended his company’s employee benefits after Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) invoked Schultz’s father, a World War II veteran and blue-collar worker whom he has cited as part of his inspiration for the way he has run the company.
Democrats repeatedly cited a March 1 ruling from a federal judge who found that Starbucks committed “egregious and widespread” violations of labor law and showed a “general disregard” for employees’ rights, a ruling Starbucks is expected to appeal.
Meanwhile, Republicans on the panel gave Schultz additional time to present his arguments. Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) circled back to a 2022 remark Schultz made to a pro-union barista the CEO wanted to clarify — “If you hate the company, you can go work somewhere else” — that was interpreted as a threat.
Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS) gave Schultz an open floor to address the allegations leveled against his company.
“You do have 645 unfair labor cases brought against you. Based on the size of the crowd, there may be some smoke and fire together there,” he said. “So, this is your chance: Tell me your side of the story. Tell me why you have so many complaints.”
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) alluded to the irony of the role reversal while slamming Democrats as being beholden to labor unions. He hailed Schultz, who briefly considered running for president as an independent in 2020, for his success in creating jobs.
“I recognize at the outset there’s some irony to a non-coffee-drinking Mormon conservative defending a Democrat candidate for president in perhaps one of the most liberal companies in America,” Romney said.
“That being said, I also think it’s somewhat rich that you’re being grilled by people who have never had the opportunity to create a single job. And yet they believe they know better how to do so,” he added.
Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) extended the same respect to Schultz, at one point catching himself for the sympathy.
“And I’m not trying to defend your company because, quite frankly, politically, we’re on totally different ends of the spectrum, and so, the irony of this hearing is actually kind of funny.”
Mullin, in the most explosive exchange of the hearing, took direct aim at Sanders, accusing him of hypocrisy since Sanders, whose income topped $1 million in 2016 and 2017 after he wrote a bestselling book, is wealthy.
“If you can be a millionaire, why can’t Mr. Schultz and other CEOs be millionaires and be honest, too?” Mullin said. “If that’s the case, then why is it that Mr. Schultz, who actually creates jobs — and a bestseller of a book isn’t creating any jobs — why is it that he’s corrupt and you’re not?”
Sanders laid into Mullin for the remarks, disputing his claims that he is worth $8 million and believes “all” CEOs are corrupt.
Sanders concluded the hearing by reiterating a demand he had made to Schultz in his opening remarks: that Starbucks sign a first contract with union workers, noting that it had been more than 450 days since the first stores voted to unionize.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
“At the end of the day, this hearing is not about my bestselling book,” Sanders quipped. “It’s a good book — people should read it. But the issue is pretty simple. Workers have a right to join a union. In hundreds of shops that you control, workers have voted to join a union.”
“Sit down in the next two weeks, come back to us, tell us the success that you’ve had in finally negotiating a first contract,” he said. “That is my hope.”