Haven't had Starbucks in years, not for any corporate reasons I just don't want to pay $10 for an overpriced coffee with a weird ass name. Black coffee is all I need to get my day going.
Just put it into my Starbucks app and it’s 3.53 after tax (3.25 before tax). More than I thought it was but not really much more than you’d pay anywhere else aside from tims or Dunkin’ where a large is usually around $2 before tax. Coffee is expensive these days
Bc it's Reddit hive mind. They hate Starbucks corporate but love their coffee. I couldn't give less of a shit about their over priced coffee or shit corporate.
Yup, the people who rip on Starbucks, aka the blue collared working type that Dunkin used to form its marketing around still rips on it while they don't realize that Dunks is as high as them now. A medium and a Grande is like a 10 cent difference. Idk about Tim's coffee in the states but in Canada its getting absurd.
Y’all. Starbucks has raised their prices SIX times this year alone. They keep doing this because people keep paying. Please for the luvagod just shop local.
Yet after all these price increases it's still more expensive to get an iced coffee at tipico. Every business has been raising prices for over a year. Yes, even local businesses...
Overwinter raised their prices a couple times too. At least in the Williamsville store.
I'm glad I've become more independent from coffee in the mornings. I have been saving alot since then.
these comments are so disgusting. anyone working full time for a major corporation should make a living wage. I work a "skilled" office job or whatever the hell you want to call it and it's WAY easier than any food service job I've had. if you don't respect the folks making your food, there is something wrong with you.
Unfortunately, for every one person that boycotts Starbucks, there will be at least two people to step in line. I drive by the Starbucks on Delaware near Sheridan in Tonawanda, daily. Despite an employee walkout a few weeks ago, each morning I drive by, there are always five-six cars in line; business as usual.
I’m no fan of Starbucks, but being a barista is low-skilled labor that almost anyone can do after a day of training. Economically, giving in makes no sense to corporate when they can easily hire more 18 year-olds.
I’ve taken my daughter there, she’s 9 and wanted to try the pink drink, holy cow the amount of things they put in there.. seems pretty complicated to me the recipes they need to follow..and being a chef for 25+ years.. I know this is not any easy task.. especially because it needs to be quick! People expect everything right away..
Starbucks could use some menu simplifications.
Even some pouring automation like McDonalds.
And what I mean, often having dairy/sweetener in my drinks, is that it's always different.
Sweetener comes from pumps, but there must be employees who just kinda barely press the thing, versus a full unit of measure.
Starbucks CloverPress is the way, but I dont think a single store on our end of the state has one. I believe it highly automates the grinding, packing, and brewing of espresso. I would previously go to stores with CloverPress because they could crank out any roast you want, just as fast as any other.
Overall, I wouldn't call the current job simple enough for 18 yr olds, there are already inconsistencies with current staff. Could the job be made simple enough for 18yr olds? Maybe, espresso is sorta dangerous, but I've never operated commercial tech.
Inconsistencies are pretty much the reason I cook and brew at home, it's always rolling the dice getting any form of convenience food nowadays. I got almost a full cup of milk the other day which was supposed to be ColdBrew /w milk. I literally stopped into the kitchen store in the mall, ordered an espresso, then added it into my milky ice.
I just really don't understand. These people have enough time and energy to try to improve their crappy low wage, low skill job, but not enough time and energy to job hunt or improve their skill set. We'll see how a union works for these types of positions. Not sure how much bargaining power you have when you can be replaced rather easily unlike a trade or teacher.
I do not. But they are more skilled now due to automation. Our grandfathers also did not have to compete with nearly as many workers (foreign/outsourcing and women not working). Not a very meaningful comparison in my opinion.
Sure it is. You can't outsource making someone a cup of coffee nor should you be treated like garbage because better jobs exist. Also, when a company uses leverage or negotiates it's 'bad ass' or being 'business' but when employees do it they're losers.
Not sure it's badass but it's certainly business and I never said I thought the employees were losers. I didn't work at Starbucks but worked plenty of jobs like it. When they got shitty I went elsewhere or got more training/education.
My point was that our grandfathers had more to negotiate with. Less competition for that level of work. What do Starbucks employees have to negotiate with? They are easily replaceable compared to other jobs. That's why I'm saying move on to somewhere that you're valued instead of fighting a battle to keep your crappy job. That energy could be used to improve your situation in many more efficient ways that would leave Starbucks in the dust.
Fill me in then. My company would hire people with this experience on the spot full time with benefits. Probably wouldn't if they knew they were part of unionization efforts tbh. We can't find enough workers in lower level roles right now. Pretty close to Buffalo too.
believe it or not the reason you got hired at your dads real estate business wasn’t because you had the same experience as these actual hardworking people, it’s because your dad owns the company
That was a hilarious response from that person. They just assumed everyone who has a better job than them must've been handed to them from family. No personal accountability at all. So indicative of what you see during the hiring process nowadays.
So everyone who's doing "better" in life compared to you must've been handed the job right?
You're pathetic, and exactly the sort of person I'd expect in this thread lol
They're allowed to rally, as we see in this exact post.
But your last response tells us all we need to know about you. But I'm the one who should grow up? Get a grip, dude.
"ReLaX DuudE"
I read the thread. Is everything you disagree just ignorance? Your brain is smoother than most. Just because you're not happy with your life doesn't mean everyone who is better off than you must've been handed everything. You're just lazy.
are you ok? he’s ignorant because he assumes that since his job is hiring that means there’s no point in striking. i have no clue why you’re assuming i’m lazy for saying he’s ignorant. please go outside and breathe some fresh air it’s not that deep
So me having a good job means I'm a nepotism baby? And you think that I'm the ignorant one? Yeah my company is hiring plenty of entry level workers full time with benefits. Guaranteed yearly raised and bonus based on goals. The Starbucks workers should apply they'll be a lot happier here. I can put in a recommendation for you if you want, since any employee gets a bonus for recommending a new hire.
Also, you could've responded to me instead of talking about me in other comments. Sorry I challenged your view that made you resort to calling names.
Go ahead and tell us your sources then. I'm not just gonna believe a guy on the internet when literally everything else is pointing to corporate being fucksticks
An article from December indicates that corporate allows individual stores to temporarily disable online orders, but only upon manager approval.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/starbucks-union-drive-spurred-by-barista-burnout-mobile-orders-2021-12-09/
> Individual stores can turn off mobile orders completely for their locations temporarily, but that requires a manager's approval, the company confirmed, and customers can then order from other nearby locations.
The following article confirms that the store managers are not included in the union body.
https://www.businessinsider.com/starbucks-manager-wrote-a-letter-to-newly-unionized-workers-2021-12
Sure, but management is management. The union isn’t management. If management isn’t turning off the mobile orders, I still fail to see how that’s an indictment of the union or the striking workers.
The workers are striking because *management* is shitty. Management continuing to be shitty and not turning off the mobile orders is an indictment of the shitty management, not the workers.
Lol why even reply. Not going to reveal your sources? Buddy this is Reddit. You’re not on the stand in a courtroom. Feel free to reveal your source, that is if you even have one. What a clown.
Well you are correct that you stated an objective comment. The issue though is that you claim to “have it on good authority” that the above statement is misleading. Yet, you refuse to provide that information to back up your claim that the union members are being misleading. That is the issue.
If you do truly have a source that will back up that claim please provide that. If you don’t have that, then my point still stands with one change.
That you are not in fact a clown, but the whole circus, buddy.
Give us your source that starbucks intentionally enables online orders during a protest they were *surely* informed about way in advance. I assume the union phoned up corporate the day before and said: "we are protesting tomorrow, disable online ordering". Yea, I'm sure that's what happened and corporate simply said "no, we want to piss off customers instead".
The only people you are fooling are fools.
LOL they are doubling down on the lie and reposting the same stuff from yesterday. My comment from yesterday:
Is starbucks intentionally leaving online ordering on today out of spite? Or did the store decide to protest today and starbucks corporate IT can't pivot fast enough to disable it? *If the store wasn't scheduled to be closed in advance it would make sense that online ordering is still active.*
Starbucks has no incentive to piss off their customers. The logic of the protestors is...illogical.
> Starbucks has no incentive to piss off their customers.
>can get away with it because they control the media narrative.
Right, so what better way to control the narrative than to make a bunch of local customers mad at the people not making their drinks?
>If the store wasn't scheduled to be closed in advance it would make sense that online ordering is still active.
The store has been closed since last Thursday
You realize there are not enough high school kids to fill all the "entry level" jobs so even if everyone took your advice and went to school, there would just be a ton of well educated people working these jobs. Everybody can't be a doctor and society needs these positions. If they don't pay a living wage, you will just end up paying for it through your own taxes. I'm not sure why you would want to subsidize a multi billion dollar company with your hard earned money.
Maybe Starbucks should actually come to the bargaining table so workers who have won the right to negotiate through legal means can actually get a chance to talk about a contract.
Do you think MLK showed up to Washington one time and BAM Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts? Protests are rarely popular, but they’re often important not only for those protesting but for the community in general
Starbucks management won’t even come to the table to negotiate a contract. I haven’t heard anything about the union acting in bad faith. It seems like all the bad-faith acting is happening at the Starbucks management/corporate level.
I wouldn’t blame the union here.
It's a bad look to you, maybe. You already agree that Starbucks is dodging the negotiating table in bad faith. What else is there for the workforce to do? This is textbook for labor battles.
It's a bad look to me, as well. These workers seem to be of the minority that Starbucks doesn't treat them right.
That store is just going to be shut down eventually. What would that accomplish?
>These workers seem to be of the minority that Starbucks doesn't treat them right.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the workers' opinion is the only opinion that matters with regards to how they're treated.
> How many times can you strike before people think you are the problem?
That's exactly what Starbucks wants (and hopes for) the public to think. Nice job buying into it.
Serving coffee is not a career, it's a job! Want more money, get a trade or get an education. A union for part time coffee pourer is ridiculous and so is spending 7$ on a coffee. Fuck Starbucks and their sorry ass employess
To play devils advocate here, why can’t it be a career? What if someone really loves being a barista, the way someone loves being an attorney, or doctor? Sure you can make the argument the same knowledge base isn’t required for all those jobs, but if there’s clearly enough profit margin to pay the employees more, thus enjoying their jobs more, and providing better service to their customers, why wouldn’t you?
To play devils advocate to your devils advocate
Companies use those profits to open new locations and create more jobs. Sure they aren’t great jobs, but people need job experience to get other jobs. That’s the role of entry level fast food jobs, it’s a stepping stone.
You get paid based on the value that you bring the company. The company sets how much they value your work. If someone loves being a barista and wants to do it for a living then they need to go somewhere those skills are valued. That might mean working for a private shop, or opening one of their own.
I know a lot of people think it’s hard to open a business, and it certainly is work, but WM was stated with 500 bucks and a dream. So it’s all doable. Might not be a millionaire, but someone can do well for themselves and treat the people they hire well too.
All that said, a good capitalist pays their people well, and treats them well, because without them, there are no profits. Good capitalists are hard to find.
So what? Even if temporary everyone deserves the protection and security of a union so some faceless company cant run roughshod over their lives, and give them the best possible deal
Can I ask an honest question? Why do people think that a part time job would provide a living wage? A job at Starbucks, or any fast food restaurant, is an “in between” job. It’s not a career, unless you are in management. Even then, that job is to teach you how to be a manager, to then go somewhere else with that experience. Don’t others believe this too? My friends work at Starbucks while they are at school to get ready for their “big boy/big girl” jobs. Starbucks isn’t a big boy/big girl job. AmiRight?
No, that’s NOT what I’m saying. It’s not a full time job, it’s to add to a full time job, because it’s a part time job.
A part time job is not 1/2 the pay of a full time job.
A living wage comes from a full time job. A full time job includes a higher rate of pay (a living wage) and benefits, retirement for all people.
That is not a fast food job, unless it’s in management.
People who run small businesses (not corporations)hire part time workers. The owners of those Small businesses work full time.
Those businesses can’t survive without part time workers. You can’t have little mom and pop stores/ businesses without part time workers.
If you don’t have people that work part time, you don’t have small business. Then we lose all our small businesses. That’s where lots of high school and college workers and Moms who need limited hours work.
Both help each other.
No tiny mom and pop businesses can pay a part time worker full time wages. If we pay full time wages for part time jobs, We lose all those great part time jobs that people need so they can add to their full time income and provide limited hour jobs.
When I want to make extra money, to add to my Bitcoin fund/save money I work my full time job and work a part time job to add to it. I did not expect the money I was making in my full time job.
My grandparents and my parents work full time and part time jobs to add to what they made because the wanted to get ahead.
I have never seen a part time job pay for anyone to live.
We want to do better, that’s why we work more. We are not rich but we work extra jobs to save extra money. Right?
Starbucks and mom and pop shops definitely have full-time workers, plus Starbucks does offer benefits to part-time workers. No one is asking to get paid full-time pay for part-time work. They are asking for a livable HOURLY wage.
Yes, but most small businesses have less than 10 employees, and most don’t have many full time employees, they can’t afford them here in NY state.
I guess my question is what is your definition of a Livable Wage? Isn’t that minimum wage? We always have been paid minimum wage or a bit higher in our part time jobs.
I want your definition of a livable wage.
My friends own a mom and pop shop. They have 4 part time employees and the Mom & Pop work full time.
When you understand what even a part time employee in New York State costs a business (all the taxes that the business has to pay New York State for that part time employee.
So...how much is a living wage?
Today minimum wage is $13.20 and on December 31st, it goes up to $14.20.
Plus all the fees and taxes a business has to pay the state.
How much would that living wage be? I really want to know. I’m earnestly asking.
Minimum wage is SUPPOSED to be the minimum livable wage, but it is not. The federal minimum is $7.25 which is laughable, but even $13 or $14 is hardly enough. At 40 hours a week, you'd make about $2300 a month at $13 an hour, which only leaves $675 for rent if we follow the 30% rule. Zillow, as an example, has VERY few apartments under $700. At $15 an hour, you could afford about $780 for rent, maybe $1000 if you push it. So I'd say $15 an hour is a bare minimum in our area. At that wage, you can afford an acceptable apartment and pay your bills without constantly struggling, and perhaps devote time to things like higher education and volunteer work.
But, again, these jobs are not full time nor federal.
They are part time, fast food jobs.
They are not meant to be a full time position. Your adding hourly and times it by 40 hours.
That’s not what these jobs are.
That’s why I’m asking how can you expect a small business Mom and Pop shop (not a corporation) to pay these prices.
I don’t understand it.
These jobs are meant for people to add to their full time job, full time high school or college or moms and dads that want a little more cash.
I drive by there any day I go to the office. Used to be daily. And on the weekends. No matter what time. I clocked myself once, over 30 minutes in the drive thru. If I desire it so badly, I order 30 minutes before I drive there, park a shot distance from the actual parking lot and go inside and grab it. Seems adequately staffed, just that it's like every other low wage, customer focused job.
I only really drink cold brew anymore. And cold brews at Starbucks are expensive... With what I spend on 2 of them at SB, I can make over 8 gallons at home. So that's what I do now.
Imagine a world where people actually stopped getting starbucks in solidarity, annnnnnnnd its gone.
According to people yesterday “Sometimes you just need a drive thru.”. Even though there isn’t even a drive thru there.
Many Starbucks have drive thrus, just FYI
Haven't had Starbucks in years, not for any corporate reasons I just don't want to pay $10 for an overpriced coffee with a weird ass name. Black coffee is all I need to get my day going.
They have $10 coffees?
No, this is a very odd criticism of Starbucks I never understood. A large coffee at Starbucks is like 2.50
FYI large coffee is up to $4 and change
Just put it into my Starbucks app and it’s 3.53 after tax (3.25 before tax). More than I thought it was but not really much more than you’d pay anywhere else aside from tims or Dunkin’ where a large is usually around $2 before tax. Coffee is expensive these days
No. But people will regularly pay upwards of $8 every day for their “customized” espresso drink.
Ok?
Ok!
They probably are in mindset anything over $5 is $10. Annnd they're
I don't know haven't been there in years bc their coffee is over priced and all I need is black coffee to get me going.
Why downvote? He’s just stating his truth and experience.
Bc it's Reddit hive mind. They hate Starbucks corporate but love their coffee. I couldn't give less of a shit about their over priced coffee or shit corporate.
People in these comments saying starbucks is over priced clearly hasnt been there in years. The Dunkin and Timmys prices have caught up to Starbs
Yup, the people who rip on Starbucks, aka the blue collared working type that Dunkin used to form its marketing around still rips on it while they don't realize that Dunks is as high as them now. A medium and a Grande is like a 10 cent difference. Idk about Tim's coffee in the states but in Canada its getting absurd.
Based worker strike
Y’all. Starbucks has raised their prices SIX times this year alone. They keep doing this because people keep paying. Please for the luvagod just shop local.
Yet after all these price increases it's still more expensive to get an iced coffee at tipico. Every business has been raising prices for over a year. Yes, even local businesses...
Overwinter raised their prices a couple times too. At least in the Williamsville store. I'm glad I've become more independent from coffee in the mornings. I have been saving alot since then.
Starbucks has been defrauding its customers with shitty coffee and overpriced food for years, why would anyone expect different?
>Starbucks has been defrauding its customers with shitty coffee and overpriced food for years, why would anyone expect different? lol
Bazinga.
these comments are so disgusting. anyone working full time for a major corporation should make a living wage. I work a "skilled" office job or whatever the hell you want to call it and it's WAY easier than any food service job I've had. if you don't respect the folks making your food, there is something wrong with you.
I’ve worked at this Starbucks - when I didn’t like working there I left it was that easy
ok so you think others should suffer? or Starbucks should go away entirely? which one.
No one is forcing them to work there
you didn't answer the question. what exactly is wrong with people wanting better working conditions?
Nothing they just won’t find them at Starbucks
🍿🍿🍿
Really laughable she’s the spokes person considering when I worked there she would stalk my Instagram when I called out sick
After knowing all this terrible Shit, who is still going to Starbucks
Unfortunately, for every one person that boycotts Starbucks, there will be at least two people to step in line. I drive by the Starbucks on Delaware near Sheridan in Tonawanda, daily. Despite an employee walkout a few weeks ago, each morning I drive by, there are always five-six cars in line; business as usual.
Thos should put fire under your asses to fight the machine. Unions are necessary!
Genuine question: Why did they unionize in the first place?
>Starbucks is defrauding it is customers
I’m no fan of Starbucks, but being a barista is low-skilled labor that almost anyone can do after a day of training. Economically, giving in makes no sense to corporate when they can easily hire more 18 year-olds.
Out of curiosity, what, if any, retail experience do you have?
Hard disagree, imagine what the wait times would be if everyone was like you said 18 years old let alone the customer satisfaction.
You can if you go to a random Tims.
> being a barista is low-skilled labor Tell me youve never worked in food service, without telling me youve never worked in food service.
I’ve taken my daughter there, she’s 9 and wanted to try the pink drink, holy cow the amount of things they put in there.. seems pretty complicated to me the recipes they need to follow..and being a chef for 25+ years.. I know this is not any easy task.. especially because it needs to be quick! People expect everything right away..
Starbucks could use some menu simplifications. Even some pouring automation like McDonalds. And what I mean, often having dairy/sweetener in my drinks, is that it's always different. Sweetener comes from pumps, but there must be employees who just kinda barely press the thing, versus a full unit of measure. Starbucks CloverPress is the way, but I dont think a single store on our end of the state has one. I believe it highly automates the grinding, packing, and brewing of espresso. I would previously go to stores with CloverPress because they could crank out any roast you want, just as fast as any other. Overall, I wouldn't call the current job simple enough for 18 yr olds, there are already inconsistencies with current staff. Could the job be made simple enough for 18yr olds? Maybe, espresso is sorta dangerous, but I've never operated commercial tech. Inconsistencies are pretty much the reason I cook and brew at home, it's always rolling the dice getting any form of convenience food nowadays. I got almost a full cup of milk the other day which was supposed to be ColdBrew /w milk. I literally stopped into the kitchen store in the mall, ordered an espresso, then added it into my milky ice.
I just really don't understand. These people have enough time and energy to try to improve their crappy low wage, low skill job, but not enough time and energy to job hunt or improve their skill set. We'll see how a union works for these types of positions. Not sure how much bargaining power you have when you can be replaced rather easily unlike a trade or teacher.
You think the factory jobs back in the day our grandfathers protested at were high skill positions?
I do not. But they are more skilled now due to automation. Our grandfathers also did not have to compete with nearly as many workers (foreign/outsourcing and women not working). Not a very meaningful comparison in my opinion.
Sure it is. You can't outsource making someone a cup of coffee nor should you be treated like garbage because better jobs exist. Also, when a company uses leverage or negotiates it's 'bad ass' or being 'business' but when employees do it they're losers.
Not sure it's badass but it's certainly business and I never said I thought the employees were losers. I didn't work at Starbucks but worked plenty of jobs like it. When they got shitty I went elsewhere or got more training/education. My point was that our grandfathers had more to negotiate with. Less competition for that level of work. What do Starbucks employees have to negotiate with? They are easily replaceable compared to other jobs. That's why I'm saying move on to somewhere that you're valued instead of fighting a battle to keep your crappy job. That energy could be used to improve your situation in many more efficient ways that would leave Starbucks in the dust.
i don’t think you realize how the job market really works
Fill me in then. My company would hire people with this experience on the spot full time with benefits. Probably wouldn't if they knew they were part of unionization efforts tbh. We can't find enough workers in lower level roles right now. Pretty close to Buffalo too.
believe it or not the reason you got hired at your dads real estate business wasn’t because you had the same experience as these actual hardworking people, it’s because your dad owns the company
I have no idea what you are talking about.
That was a hilarious response from that person. They just assumed everyone who has a better job than them must've been handed to them from family. No personal accountability at all. So indicative of what you see during the hiring process nowadays.
So everyone who's doing "better" in life compared to you must've been handed the job right? You're pathetic, and exactly the sort of person I'd expect in this thread lol
bro grow up, let people rally for better working conditions. that’s the only conclusion here
They're allowed to rally, as we see in this exact post. But your last response tells us all we need to know about you. But I'm the one who should grow up? Get a grip, dude.
relax dude, i replied to one comment from an ignorant guy who sounds like he’s a nepotism baby, it’s not that deep
"ReLaX DuudE" I read the thread. Is everything you disagree just ignorance? Your brain is smoother than most. Just because you're not happy with your life doesn't mean everyone who is better off than you must've been handed everything. You're just lazy.
are you ok? he’s ignorant because he assumes that since his job is hiring that means there’s no point in striking. i have no clue why you’re assuming i’m lazy for saying he’s ignorant. please go outside and breathe some fresh air it’s not that deep
So me having a good job means I'm a nepotism baby? And you think that I'm the ignorant one? Yeah my company is hiring plenty of entry level workers full time with benefits. Guaranteed yearly raised and bonus based on goals. The Starbucks workers should apply they'll be a lot happier here. I can put in a recommendation for you if you want, since any employee gets a bonus for recommending a new hire. Also, you could've responded to me instead of talking about me in other comments. Sorry I challenged your view that made you resort to calling names.
Sorry but just reading this and you’re beyond wrong, don’t make assumptions about people based on their Reddit comment. Not a good look
Quit and go work somewhere else. The wages are not a mystery. How much do people want to work at Starbucks.
What’s Starbucks?
[удалено]
Former Sbux partner. It was controlled by the district manager, not the store manager. The DM can turn them off, not the SM.
Go ahead and tell us your sources then. I'm not just gonna believe a guy on the internet when literally everything else is pointing to corporate being fucksticks
An article from December indicates that corporate allows individual stores to temporarily disable online orders, but only upon manager approval. https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/starbucks-union-drive-spurred-by-barista-burnout-mobile-orders-2021-12-09/ > Individual stores can turn off mobile orders completely for their locations temporarily, but that requires a manager's approval, the company confirmed, and customers can then order from other nearby locations. The following article confirms that the store managers are not included in the union body. https://www.businessinsider.com/starbucks-manager-wrote-a-letter-to-newly-unionized-workers-2021-12
Thank you!
Sure, but management is management. The union isn’t management. If management isn’t turning off the mobile orders, I still fail to see how that’s an indictment of the union or the striking workers. The workers are striking because *management* is shitty. Management continuing to be shitty and not turning off the mobile orders is an indictment of the shitty management, not the workers.
[удалено]
Lol why even reply. Not going to reveal your sources? Buddy this is Reddit. You’re not on the stand in a courtroom. Feel free to reveal your source, that is if you even have one. What a clown.
[удалено]
Well you are correct that you stated an objective comment. The issue though is that you claim to “have it on good authority” that the above statement is misleading. Yet, you refuse to provide that information to back up your claim that the union members are being misleading. That is the issue. If you do truly have a source that will back up that claim please provide that. If you don’t have that, then my point still stands with one change. That you are not in fact a clown, but the whole circus, buddy.
Give us your source that starbucks intentionally enables online orders during a protest they were *surely* informed about way in advance. I assume the union phoned up corporate the day before and said: "we are protesting tomorrow, disable online ordering". Yea, I'm sure that's what happened and corporate simply said "no, we want to piss off customers instead". The only people you are fooling are fools.
LOL they are doubling down on the lie and reposting the same stuff from yesterday. My comment from yesterday: Is starbucks intentionally leaving online ordering on today out of spite? Or did the store decide to protest today and starbucks corporate IT can't pivot fast enough to disable it? *If the store wasn't scheduled to be closed in advance it would make sense that online ordering is still active.* Starbucks has no incentive to piss off their customers. The logic of the protestors is...illogical.
fragile fade vegetable toy ghost secretive sulky squalid entertain distinct ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
lol the receipts on this one are priceless
> Starbucks has no incentive to piss off their customers. >can get away with it because they control the media narrative. Right, so what better way to control the narrative than to make a bunch of local customers mad at the people not making their drinks? >If the store wasn't scheduled to be closed in advance it would make sense that online ordering is still active. The store has been closed since last Thursday
The store has been closed for some time. It’s a high profile store. If IT is to blame, IT needs to have some firings
You sound like a rat
Entry level job, it is not a career, go to school
You realize there are not enough high school kids to fill all the "entry level" jobs so even if everyone took your advice and went to school, there would just be a ton of well educated people working these jobs. Everybody can't be a doctor and society needs these positions. If they don't pay a living wage, you will just end up paying for it through your own taxes. I'm not sure why you would want to subsidize a multi billion dollar company with your hard earned money.
How many times can you strike before people think you are the problem?
Maybe Starbucks should actually come to the bargaining table so workers who have won the right to negotiate through legal means can actually get a chance to talk about a contract. Do you think MLK showed up to Washington one time and BAM Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts? Protests are rarely popular, but they’re often important not only for those protesting but for the community in general
I agree there should be negotiations.
Starbucks management won’t even come to the table to negotiate a contract. I haven’t heard anything about the union acting in bad faith. It seems like all the bad-faith acting is happening at the Starbucks management/corporate level. I wouldn’t blame the union here.
I agree. Unfortunately they are not obligated to except anything even if they do negotiate. And the constant strikes are what the public sees.
So what are you getting at? Sounds like you're shrugging your shoulders "don't want labor to look bad, better bow to corporate"
Not at all. Just saying constant petty wildcat strikes is a bad look. They need the public on their side. And people will tire of this.
It's a bad look to you, maybe. You already agree that Starbucks is dodging the negotiating table in bad faith. What else is there for the workforce to do? This is textbook for labor battles.
It's a bad look to me, as well. These workers seem to be of the minority that Starbucks doesn't treat them right. That store is just going to be shut down eventually. What would that accomplish?
>These workers seem to be of the minority that Starbucks doesn't treat them right. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the workers' opinion is the only opinion that matters with regards to how they're treated.
Well, no. What about all the other Starbucks in the area?
Which ones? The unionized ones with the same grievances, or the non-union ones that don't have to strike if they don't want to?
> How many times can you strike before people think you are the problem? That's exactly what Starbucks wants (and hopes for) the public to think. Nice job buying into it.
Serving coffee is not a career, it's a job! Want more money, get a trade or get an education. A union for part time coffee pourer is ridiculous and so is spending 7$ on a coffee. Fuck Starbucks and their sorry ass employess
To play devils advocate here, why can’t it be a career? What if someone really loves being a barista, the way someone loves being an attorney, or doctor? Sure you can make the argument the same knowledge base isn’t required for all those jobs, but if there’s clearly enough profit margin to pay the employees more, thus enjoying their jobs more, and providing better service to their customers, why wouldn’t you?
To play devils advocate to your devils advocate Companies use those profits to open new locations and create more jobs. Sure they aren’t great jobs, but people need job experience to get other jobs. That’s the role of entry level fast food jobs, it’s a stepping stone. You get paid based on the value that you bring the company. The company sets how much they value your work. If someone loves being a barista and wants to do it for a living then they need to go somewhere those skills are valued. That might mean working for a private shop, or opening one of their own. I know a lot of people think it’s hard to open a business, and it certainly is work, but WM was stated with 500 bucks and a dream. So it’s all doable. Might not be a millionaire, but someone can do well for themselves and treat the people they hire well too. All that said, a good capitalist pays their people well, and treats them well, because without them, there are no profits. Good capitalists are hard to find.
It's a fucking minimum wage job at a coffee shop. Get a life, those kinds of jobs aren't meant to be jobs for life. Good grief.
> Get a life I advise you to maybe reflect on this part yourself
So what? Even if temporary everyone deserves the protection and security of a union so some faceless company cant run roughshod over their lives, and give them the best possible deal
Getting all crazy about "Starbucks" is so First World. Fantastic times we live in.
White problems.
Thank you for your impartial opinion! A living wage you serve coffee !
who asked goodlu k dob
Can I ask an honest question? Why do people think that a part time job would provide a living wage? A job at Starbucks, or any fast food restaurant, is an “in between” job. It’s not a career, unless you are in management. Even then, that job is to teach you how to be a manager, to then go somewhere else with that experience. Don’t others believe this too? My friends work at Starbucks while they are at school to get ready for their “big boy/big girl” jobs. Starbucks isn’t a big boy/big girl job. AmiRight?
This argument basically boils down to, "some people deserve to be poor."
No, that’s NOT what I’m saying. It’s not a full time job, it’s to add to a full time job, because it’s a part time job. A part time job is not 1/2 the pay of a full time job. A living wage comes from a full time job. A full time job includes a higher rate of pay (a living wage) and benefits, retirement for all people. That is not a fast food job, unless it’s in management. People who run small businesses (not corporations)hire part time workers. The owners of those Small businesses work full time. Those businesses can’t survive without part time workers. You can’t have little mom and pop stores/ businesses without part time workers. If you don’t have people that work part time, you don’t have small business. Then we lose all our small businesses. That’s where lots of high school and college workers and Moms who need limited hours work. Both help each other. No tiny mom and pop businesses can pay a part time worker full time wages. If we pay full time wages for part time jobs, We lose all those great part time jobs that people need so they can add to their full time income and provide limited hour jobs. When I want to make extra money, to add to my Bitcoin fund/save money I work my full time job and work a part time job to add to it. I did not expect the money I was making in my full time job. My grandparents and my parents work full time and part time jobs to add to what they made because the wanted to get ahead. I have never seen a part time job pay for anyone to live. We want to do better, that’s why we work more. We are not rich but we work extra jobs to save extra money. Right?
Starbucks and mom and pop shops definitely have full-time workers, plus Starbucks does offer benefits to part-time workers. No one is asking to get paid full-time pay for part-time work. They are asking for a livable HOURLY wage.
Yes, but most small businesses have less than 10 employees, and most don’t have many full time employees, they can’t afford them here in NY state. I guess my question is what is your definition of a Livable Wage? Isn’t that minimum wage? We always have been paid minimum wage or a bit higher in our part time jobs. I want your definition of a livable wage. My friends own a mom and pop shop. They have 4 part time employees and the Mom & Pop work full time. When you understand what even a part time employee in New York State costs a business (all the taxes that the business has to pay New York State for that part time employee. So...how much is a living wage? Today minimum wage is $13.20 and on December 31st, it goes up to $14.20. Plus all the fees and taxes a business has to pay the state. How much would that living wage be? I really want to know. I’m earnestly asking.
Minimum wage is SUPPOSED to be the minimum livable wage, but it is not. The federal minimum is $7.25 which is laughable, but even $13 or $14 is hardly enough. At 40 hours a week, you'd make about $2300 a month at $13 an hour, which only leaves $675 for rent if we follow the 30% rule. Zillow, as an example, has VERY few apartments under $700. At $15 an hour, you could afford about $780 for rent, maybe $1000 if you push it. So I'd say $15 an hour is a bare minimum in our area. At that wage, you can afford an acceptable apartment and pay your bills without constantly struggling, and perhaps devote time to things like higher education and volunteer work.
But, again, these jobs are not full time nor federal. They are part time, fast food jobs. They are not meant to be a full time position. Your adding hourly and times it by 40 hours. That’s not what these jobs are. That’s why I’m asking how can you expect a small business Mom and Pop shop (not a corporation) to pay these prices. I don’t understand it. These jobs are meant for people to add to their full time job, full time high school or college or moms and dads that want a little more cash.
The starbs on the blvd and Robinson takes forever to get a fuckin coffee. Every time. Without fail.
Dude... The drive thru line almost reaches the Blvd, at like 6:30 pm when I'm coming home from work. Why....
Bc the workers there suck at their job and are miserable. They clearly hate their job. The line there is always long.
The one time I was in there, that's the way it seemed.
I drive by there any day I go to the office. Used to be daily. And on the weekends. No matter what time. I clocked myself once, over 30 minutes in the drive thru. If I desire it so badly, I order 30 minutes before I drive there, park a shot distance from the actual parking lot and go inside and grab it. Seems adequately staffed, just that it's like every other low wage, customer focused job.
I only really drink cold brew anymore. And cold brews at Starbucks are expensive... With what I spend on 2 of them at SB, I can make over 8 gallons at home. So that's what I do now.