In December, a Starbucks (NASDAQ: SBUX) store in New York became the first company franchise in the U.S. to unionize on behalf of workers. Now, those workers say they don't have the resources or staff to work safely as COVID-19 cases surge. On Wednesday, Jan. 5, six employees at the Buffalo Starbucks walked out on their shifts, forming a picket outside the store.
Starbucks was forced to close the store as a result; although, three other workers had stayed inside. According to the union, roughly one-third of the staff at the store was already out due to illness or virus exposure.
"Pressure to go to work is being put on many of us, when some of us already have other health issues. The company has again shown that they continue to put profits above people," the union wrote in a statement.
Starbucks union members are covered by Workers United, an affiliate of the massive group the Service Employees International Union.
As of Jan. 3, all Buffalo-area Starbucks stopped offering in-store seating, instead transitioning to "grab-and-go". Erie County, where Buffalo is located, has recently seen record-breaking new infection levels. During the seven-day period prior to the walkout, the county reported the highest number of new coronavirus cases for that region, ever.
Starbucks, meanwhile, says that it's met and exceeded the safety guidelines laid out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including by offering to pay workers during isolation.
"Over and above that, all leaders are empowered to make whatever changes make sense for their neighborhood, which includes shortening store hours or moving to 100% takeout only, which is the case in Buffalo," Starbucks spokesperson Reggie Borges said.
The union employees say that they will return to the store once their satisfied that working conditions are safe and the store is able to be fully staffed. It's possible that employees could return to work by Monday, Jan. 10.
The Buffalo-based Starbucks may be the first to implement labor organization, but they aren't likely to be the last. Two other locations in the area voted on unionizing, and while one store voted down the proposal, the other failed to reach a decision one way or the other. Another three New York locations and an Arizona Starbucks are in the process of proposing labor organization.
Workplace safety has been a hot-button issue since this pandemic began. During his campaign, Joe Biden promised to empower the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to enforce workplace rules for worker protection. One of Biden's first acts in office was an executive action calling for the creation and enforcement of COVID-19 worker protections.
However, that executive order didn't actually create or specify any rules or guidance. By the time some provisional powers, known as emergency temporary standards (ETS), were given to OSHA in November, business representatives had already convinced officials that enforcing coronavirus safety guidelines wouldn't be necessary or helpful.
"Declaring an emergency fourteen months into a pandemic would convey the false notion that American workplaces are dangerous and would run counter to all Administration messaging regarding COVID-19," the National Retail Federation said in a letter to Congress regarding the OSHA ETS.
Instead of requiring employers to follow a set of rules, OSHA is instead leaving most decisions up to employers. While the ETS encourages employers to impose vaccine mandates, these mandates aren't required. If a worker won't or isn't able to get vaccinated, under OSHA's guidelines, the worker will need to cover the cost of weekly COVID testing and masks themselves.
The rule "does not prohibit the employer from paying for costs associated with face coverings required by this section", but also leaves that choice up to business owners. Despite the fact that the OSHA guidelines do not require businesses to impose vaccine mandates, conservatives are challenging the special guidance, claiming that the ETS is a vaccine mandate.
With a conservative majority on the Supreme Court, any power currently in the hands of OSHA to protect workers is likely to be limited even further.