Starbucks will rehire seven employees who were sacked in February after a federal court lifted a stay on an injunction stating the workers were fired for unionizing.
The Court of Appeals rejected the company’s plea for a stay, which attempted to halt an injunction imposed by a lower court.
The ruling forced Starbucks to rehire the seven terminated employees in Memphis, Tennessee.
The NLRB and the union allege the termination was due to organizing efforts, but the firm argues it was due to policy violations.
The 6th Circuit Court order says the court considered the union’s narrative of the events acceptable but did not provide a final interpretation of the firings.
The court order said: “The court found reasonable cause that Starbucks retaliated against an employee after making public announcements, did not penalize other employees for similar infractions in the past.
“Closed its lobby to interfere with planned union sit-ins, and removed union literature from the community bulletin board.”
The verdict by the circuit court is the latest legal hit for the coffeehouse company.
It has faced a steady stream of unfair labor practice charges, complaints, and now injunctions since the first union win last December.
Members of Starbucks Workers United applauded the court’s ruling but said that the firm had dismissed almost 100 union supporters.
Starbucks insists that no employees have been fired in reprisal for organizing.
Need Career Advice? Get employment skills advice at all levels of your career
A company representative said the firm does not know how many workers who back the union or work at unionized stores were sacked.
The coffee giant stated that it had only dismissed employees for violating company policies.
Kylie Throckmorton, one of the fired workers said: “We hope the win helps provide the precedent for other cases like ours and helps show workers that we have the power to stand up for a better work life for ourselves and every other worker out there.”
Starbucks Workers United stated that all seven workers planned to return to work and that the company was required to offer the workers their jobs back quickly following the court’s ruling.
Source: Restaurant Dive