On Tuesday in Seattle, as well as in five other cities across the country, Starbucks workers went on strike to demand a fair contract—provoking a police response that included 16 arrests. This occurred one day before Starbucks held its annual shareholder meeting.
It’s the latest episode in a contract battle between Starbucks and its workers that has lasted more than three years.
You may be thinking—“But Conor, weren’t these contract negotiations supposedly wrapping up late last year?” Good eye. As I reported in November, the coffee giant and Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) were engaged in negotiations that both sides swore were moving quickly toward a fair resolution. But given Starbucks’ long history of refusing to accept unions in their ranks and hiring the notorious union-busting law firm Littler Mendleson to argue against workers’ rights in court, some (certainly not me) were skeptical that the company would suddenly start playing nice.
Yeah, they didn’t.
In the final bargaining meeting in December, Starbucks reportedly offered SBWU no new wage increases, only a 1.5% increase in future years, and broke their promise to resolve the hundreds of pending Unfair Labor Practice charges the union has filed with the National Labor Relations Board.
The union viewed this offer as outrageous. “This is backtracking on months and months of progress and promises from the company to work toward an end-of-year framework ratification,” union leader Michelle Eisen said at the time.
In response, SBWU coordinated escalating strikes over five days starting on December 20, typically a very profitable time of year for Starbucks. The strike peaked on Christmas Eve, when 5,000 baristas at over 300 stores walked out.
On January 31, the two sides agreed to bring in the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to help them hash out a framework contract for their 550 unionized stores representing over 11,000 workers. Those talks are ongoing. Neither side will disclose details on how the talks are proceeding, but perhaps this latest action speaks to its progress—or lack thereof.
Tuesday, community members aligned with Starbucks workers staged over 100 actions they dubbed “sip-ins” in six cities: Easton, PA; Chicago, New York, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and here in Seattle at the shop on The Ave and 42nd.
This location, just a couple blocks off the UW campus, has been a hotbed for activity in this years-long saga. In 2022, workers called the store a “high-incident” location with frequent disruptions and security issues they felt ill-equipped to handle, but expressed concerns that if they filed incident reports with corporate, theirs would be the next store closed on dubious grounds.
Last month, on February 11, workers at this store walked out after Starbucks spent millions to run a Super Bowl promotion offering a free coffee at any of their locations—but neglected to staff up for the huge crush of folks who arrived and overwhelmed the staff.
Two weeks ago, UW students protested the school’s relationship with Starbucks, demanding in a letter to UW administration that the school stop serving Starbucks coffee on campus until the company offers their workers an acceptable contract.
On Tuesday morning, nearly 100 workers and community supporters sat inside the shop and protested outside, holding signs and chanting, “No contract, no coffee! No workers, no Starbucks!”
This week, we took direct action to show Starbucks the urgency of finalizing contracts with the wages, staffing, and protections we need to thrive.
We’re doing what it takes to win. And we won’t stop until we do.
— Starbucks Workers United (@sbworkersunited.org) March 13, 2025 at 10:51 AM
“I’m out here because our store won a union election in 2022 and it’s 2025 and we have yet to see our first contract,” said Emma Cox, a barista trainer. “Starbucks pledged to proceed with bargaining in good faith last year but they have not followed through with that promise. It’s never been that they don’t have the money to give us raises. It’s that they don’t put the needs of their workers first.”
Police scanner audio confirms that around 1 p.m., the store manager called the cops and requested seven protestors inside the store be “trespassed”—arrested for trespassing. Store management also informed the police they would “assist in prosecution,” according to police scanner audio.
SPD leapt into action, dispatching officers a mere three hours later to set up a “command post” in a parking lot at 42nd and Brooklyn, equipped with a “crowd management package,” which according to the SPD manual consists of blast balls and pepper spray. A photo a Reddit user posted shows Seattle’s Finest standing around chatting. That same user later reported seeing two more vans and four other officers around the corner, making a grand total of 10 vehicles and 20 officers deployed for a peaceful protest in a little coffee shop. SPD cleared out the protestors by around 5:15 p.m., without altercation.
Your tax dollars hard at work!
“Tuesday’s actions here in Seattle and across the country sent a clear message to Starbucks shareholders: It’s time for fair contracts. Starbucks needs to take care of their workers and the first step of that would be to finalize fair contracts with the wages, staffing, and protections baristas need to thrive,” said Ty Newbill, a Bremerton barista present at the protest.
“It’s disappointing to see Workers United disrupt our stores and undermine the ongoing mediation process for single store contracts,” said a representative from Starbucks. “Since last April, Starbucks and Workers United have made significant progress through respectful dialogue and have reached a number of important agreements. Our success starts and ends with our partners (employees) and we’re committed to providing the best job in retail.”
In January, Starbucks reported $9.4 billion in global net revenue last quarter. Starbucks’ CEO Brian Niccol made $95.8 million in 2024 for four months of remote work from California. Meanwhile, SBWU claims that Starbucks workers make on average only $16.50/hour. The company disputes that—but still claims “the best job in retail” pays $18/hour.
“We are still without a first contract, from a company who can certainly afford to do right by its workers,” said union leader Michelle Eisen, one of 16 protestors arrested nationwide yesterday. “We deserve better.”
The Starbucks shareholder meeting the day after the protests was a spicy one. One shareholder from the well-funded conservative anti-labor National Legal and Policy Center advocacy group proposed that Starbucks consider the “commission of a report on human rights risks related to labor organizing.” (The board recommended voting against it.)
Shareholders also grilled CEO Brian Niccol on his private jet usage and interrogated the company’s lack of diversity on their board of directors.
Later, a shareholder asked when Starbucks would negotiate its first union contract.
Niccol stumbled through the beginnings of an answer before throwing the ball to Sara Kelly, their head of human resources. Kelly talked about how much they value their “partners,” and how much progress they’ve been making in negotiations.
She concluded by saying, “When a partner elects a union to represent them, we are committed to engaging in good faith with that union and the partners who have selected that union to negotiate fair contracts.”
Sound familiar?
20 cops at the beck and call of a major corporation, but let your car get broken into and good luck getting even one to respond. And some people still think the issue is we haven’t thrown enough money at them.
What human being is worth $98,000,000? This country is being bled dry by socio-pathic oligarchs. Anyone who patronizes Star..ucks is complicit. There is always an alternative. Support local businesses or endorse the oligarchy with every sip.
Get a real job, then you can join a union.
@1 Well, the car prowler doesn’t let everyone know when they are gong to show up and then stick around waiting for the cops to arrest them. But other than those pesky “facts”, great analogy! You’re really on top of your game!
If they don’t like working at Starbucks and think the wages and benefits are too low, why don’t they go to another coffee shop or fast food restaurant where the benefits are better than Starbucks?
I would guess they don’t go to another coffee shop down the street because Starbucks already pays more and has better benefits than 99% of other coffee shops
No one is chaining them to Starbuck, but themselves.
Maybe these people struggle to contain they’re entitlement and annoying personalities?
@4 you’re missing the point: do they have a staffing crisis or do they have 20 cops free to sit around for hours just watching striking workers? Can’t be both.
@1/6 what’s the problem? Sounds like they are doing exactly what you and your fellow acab crew wanted. Haven’t you all been telling us these are crimes of poverty and shouldn’t be pursued? I’m sure they were just checking to see if there was some day old bread in the car.
@6: It is odd, but maybe there’s more to the story we don’t know about about what the police were doing.
@7 well I just thought people who do care whether police respond to their calls might be interested and upset they apparently had plenty of available officers for this bullshit. Obviously people who only cry about the “staffing crisis” as an excuse to perpetually raise police spending won’t be bothered. Which are you?
@6 JoeTourGuideMcCarthy is totally for putting striking workers under police surveillance since he is probably certain that Putin and the “far left”are behind the strike
@7 “Haven’t you all been telling us these are crimes of poverty and shouldn’t be pursued?”
Nope. That’s what you repeatedly claim to tar progressives. Progressives actually say that although public safety is always an issue, crime overall is at a near ~30 year low so your hyping crime incidents as if they were rampant like never before is fearmongering demagoguery
@9 as was pointed out above its much easier to have officers available to deal with a known event that will most likely result in the need for police intervention than it is to deal with an isolated incident well after the fact. SPD is has one of the lowest officer ratios in the county so it is not surprising that they do not send an officer out to look at something they have little hope of solving.
@10 This is such a bad faith argument. Crime can be down on average but that doesn’t mean we don’t have issues here in Seattle. It’s like saying poverty is historically at an all time low so why should we bother spending money on poor people. Try harder.
Buried in one of the linked stories is why the workers wanted Starbucks to provide more protection:
“She’s witnessed people in the store on drugs, having mental health crises, and—less frequently—becoming violent.”
In other words, they wanted Starbucks to hire more security because they couldn’t get the city to protect them from random incidents. Oh, the irony…
Funny thing is, Starbucks is simply following the letter of the law. Labor contracts take a long time to negotiate, far longer than most baristas will stay at their jobs. I mean, it’s not like you’re building ships, airplanes or laying commercial pipes. You’re slinging coffee FFS.
@4 at my last job we had a crazy person with a garbage can lid walking around the playground next to us with a knife, and the teachers at the school literally had to lock the gate so he couldn’t get in and the cops took six hours to get there… so… maybe shut up?
the garbage lid was on his head and he was scraping the knife along the fence like a horror movie while screaming… six hours. SIX hours. With 15 children a few feet away. We (the managers at the grocery store) each called to report it and so did multiple customers. They kept saying they were on the way. SIX HOURS.
Protect and Serve*
*Property and Capital. Courts said human beings don’t make the list.
Well, when you make the businesses pay all the taxes, who do you expect to get the services?