Elias Decker is a student at Harvard Law School.
In today’s news and commentary, Starbucks prevails against claims it denied shifts to union workers and Center for State Labor Innovation aims to address labor law shortcomings.
Also on Wednesday, August 5th, Starbucks — once again — prevailed at the Republican-controlled NLRB, this time over allegations that it had prevented unionized workers from picking up shifts at non-union stores. In 2023, an Administrative Law Judge and found that a Starbucks manager had been instructed by higher-ups that “unionized and nonunionized stores could not borrow from one another.” (Here, “borrowing” means a worker from one store picks up hours at another nearby store in order to increase their hours, since Starbucks rarely schedules workers for 40 hours a week.) The Administrative Law Judge held that this impermissibly limited and restrained workers’ right to organize. In overturning this lower decision, the NLRB relied heavily on the actual interaction that brought this case to the Board. In this interaction, a unionized worker reached out to a supervisor of a non-union store after hearing rumors about this limit on “borrowing.” The manager confirmed the rumors, but equivocated, saying “I said that’s what I heard/read at a union seminar but that doesn’t mean I truly know.” The manager also said “You are always welcome at [my store].” The NLRB’s sole Democratic member dissented, saying “I do not assign [the manager]’s lack of certainty and her assurances about borrowing at the Green Lake store the same weight that my colleagues do.”
On Wednesday, a group of labor leaders, academics, advocates, and practitioners announced the formation of the Center for State Labor Innovation (“CSLI”). The organization simultaneously launched its publication on Substack: Labor Innovation. The project identifies the ways that existing labor law has failed workers and seeks to remedy these failures by two main means: state-level innovation and sector-level worker power. It envisions state-led action via what it calls Workforce Standards Councils. These Councils would be “state-created and state-supervised public bodies that bring workers, employers, and regulators together to establish baseline standards for particular industries or occupations.” Their scope would extend to “give workers a consequential role in decisions about wages, benefits, scheduling, training, health and safety, and enforcement.” Labor Innovation‘s first article adds that Workforce Standards Councils are not a panacea but “just one policy idea” and that the group will “seek and welcome others,” publishing “deliberation, not polemics.”
Daily News & Commentary
Start your day with our roundup of the latest labor developments. See all
August 27
NLRB GC targets Biden-era precedent; Starbucks Workers United calls for boycott; Encore Boston Harbor workers authorize strike
August 26
Trump administration proposes $103,000 H-1B visa fee after court blocks earlier attempt; Illinois governor signs law enabling state investment in AFL-CIO housing trust; Deloitte pays $21.5 million to settle DOJ probe alleging DEI-related discrimination in federal contracts.
August 25
Hyundai workers reach a tentative agreement; Federal-sector unions sue the Trump Administration over OPM rule changes; Federal judge dismisses a teachers’ union free speech suit.
August 24
Boeing engineers and technicians reject contract proposals and authorize a strike; Ninth Circuit holds that unions charged under 8(b)(4)(D) cannot invoke the work-preservation defense to disregard 10(k) determination.
August 23
Hyundai Motors workers launch full-day strike; federal judge rules in favor of Vermont dairy plant in closure dispute
August 21
Tyson workers respond to abrupt plant shutdown; DOL ends its power to police federal contractor bias.