Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) struggles to finalize its first collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with Starbucks. Despite representing workers at around 500 locations and more than a year of contentious negotiations, the union has yet to deliver a first collective bargaining agreement. This has fueled frustration among its members and raised questions about its bargaining team’s effectiveness.
Wilma Liebman, former chair of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), weighed in on the impasse with remarks that cast doubt on the union’s ability to succeed. While acknowledging earlier progress, she didn’t hold back: “What they could use is some extra oomph and extra skill in helping them get over the hurdles and close the deal.”
Liebman’s comments seem to throw some shade at a union under intense pressure to deliver. Is this a reality check for SWU or a subtle suggestion that its bargaining team is failing?
A Stalemate That Won’t Budge
Negotiations between Starbucks and SBWU broke down late last year, primarily over issues related to pay and benefits. The union demanded a $20/hour minimum wage, annual raises, and fully employer-paid healthcare. Starbucks countered with more modest proposals, labeling SWU’s demands economically unsustainable.
The stalemate recently escalated when SBWU filed 34 new complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, accusing Starbucks of retaliatory firings and bad-faith bargaining. Meanwhile, Starbucks claimed the union had walked away from negotiations. “We’re ready to continue negotiations when the union is ready to return to the bargaining table they walked away from,” the company said in a statement.
Michelle Eisen, a Buffalo barista and SBWU organizer, reflected on the workers’ frustration: “We’re ready to do what it takes to show the company the consequences of not keeping their promises to baristas.”
Management’s Advantage
From Starbucks’ perspective, the impasse presents an opportunity to maintain strategic control. Prolonged delays could weaken SWU’s standing with its members, especially if the union fails to secure a first CBA—a critical milestone for any organizing campaign.
As Liebman suggested, Starbucks could bolster its image as a cooperative negotiator by agreeing to mediation. Such a move would reinforce the company’s willingness to engage while highlighting SWU’s struggles to close the deal.
Challenges for SBWU
Liebman’s critique points to a larger issue: First-time CBAs are difficult to secure, and SWU faces significant challenges. While the union gained momentum organizing stores in 2022 and 2023, its inability to turn those wins into contracts risks undermining its credibility. Workers who supported unionization may begin to lose faith in SBWU’s ability to deliver on its promises. SBWU risks becoming another cautionary tale in the labor movement without securing a first CBA.
The Path Forward
Starbucks’ focus should remain on balancing operational stability while maintaining its reputation. Mediation offers a path to reset negotiations without conceding to unsustainable demands. For SWU, the challenge is clear: regroup, rethink, and demonstrate that its leadership has the skills to overcome these hurdles.
As Liebman said, “Rather than have this fester, I think it’s crazy not to look for some way to get it back on track and get the deal closed.” Whether Starbucks Workers United can rise to the occasion—or prove Liebman’s critique correct—remains an unanswered question.
