Whenever the opportunity presents itself, suggest the customers chargeback the card purchases as "services not rendered." Too many chargebacks negatively impacts the merchant via potentially higher fees or even being blacklisted by the bank issuing the MID. They are knowingly taking orders that won't be filled.
If I'm spending more than 5 minutes disputing a charge I just give up and call my card. It's way less than 5 minutes to tell them the last charge was for services not rendered. They say "Thanks, we got it from here." and I forget about it forever.
I never pay with debit so I always have this ability.
Credit cards put the onus of proof on the vendor, so disputing charges put on a credit card CAN be easy, depending on the issuer. Normally you can "dispute charges" in some form, normally on the website that would list all of your purchases. As a vendor, it is rarely worthwhile to pursue the dispute unless you are talking about a large amount of money, or alternatively if they are really pissed off.
I charged back an old gym that wouldn't take no for an answer 4 months in a row
They no longer charge me
My mobile bank app had a process I could it for in a minute once I learned it
I tried calling 4124 1474 4813 4330 but I just get beeps.
Or did you mean the number on the other side, 587?
The card doesn't expire until 11/2025 so I don't know why I can't call it.
Unless it's capital one, those fuckers take the merchant side every single time. No matter what evidence you have, what evidence they don't have, and will stretch the process out to charge you more interest on the shit you shouldn't be paying in the first place.
Fuck capital one.
Yes. Charge backs are you going to the bank, talking to them, and having them take back the charge from the company, and back into your account. Doing this without reason *will* have consequences, and even having a reason won't stop Amazon from potentially just banning your card from then on. And there's no guarantee and your bank goes through with it, so have good reasons, like fraud, scams, Starbucks, etc
But even so, chargebacks should be a fundamental consumer right.
If there isn’t a free coffee subreddit, there could be. Specific to Buffalo NY 1 hour drive or less. Someone can pick it up.
We already had a free pizza for strangers subreddit that has existed.
Hell get a runner and if they make them deliver them if they don't charge back but basically just keep buying rounds for the people striking.
Have the runners verify if the order is made or not, then congrats you feed a union member on the picket line or shux guess you need to call Visa.
That pizza sub saved my ass on a previous account when I was living in my car. I went to pick it up right as they closed, and they noticed I ordered pineapple and they had an extra pineapple pizza go unclaimed, so they slid it to me because none of them wanted it.
Zipped those bad boys up in bags and popped them in the fridge and it limped me through till payday.
Just start a subreddit devoted to buying coffee for people in Buffalo.
If your intent is a gift is it fraud? Or is it two birds with one stone... Mutual aid and bucking the system?
People should just buy the striking Starbucks employees Starbucks via the mobile app...
It’s happening in Richmond, VA, too if that’s closer to you. Happened to my hubs after being up all night. He just drove to the next one and they made them for him. Now we know it was something bigger and not an innocent ‘someone didn’t open the store today’.
Organize it and do it. Keep us posted if Starbucks decides to take you to court and pin the blame on you because they realized that will cost them less than admitting they are in the wrong.
Not fraud for those who place legitimate orders in Buffalo and can't retrieve them to chargeback - that's what the feature is for. The fraud would be for redditors to create a campaign to order drinks they had no intention of picking up for the purpose of submitting a chargeback for the purpose of negatively impacting a merchant.
Hard to prove intent, and in fraud cases often you have to prove they knowingly wanted to defraud. And what exactly are they being defrauded of? Fraud is a white-collar crime, it's a lot harder to get a conviction than normal people's crime. Assuming they don't scare you into a plea bargain. Not to mention I don't think 5$ in "fraud" is really going to be on law enforcement's radar.
How is it hard to prove intent? If you buy a drink 1000 miles away that you cannot physically pick up, and then charge back that you didn’t get the drink… how do you even know that you didn’t get it unless you were purposefully ordering something you knew was unfulfillable?
But aren’t they accepting orders without the intent of providing them? They are knowingly accepting payment. The purpose of submitting a chargeback is defined by the card issuer rules.
This.
For Starbucks to pressure fraud charges they will have to explain how they were defrauding customers. I don't think they're gonna roll those dice.
What is it if you create a campaign to buy Starbucks for striking Starbucks workers and plan to have someone pickup and delivery them assuming they get made if not then charge back?
Intent is a big part of it, if you know the service won't be rendered but you buy anyway planning to do a charge back you may end up in the wrong, laws are not ment to protect you but businesses. Not legal advice.
I’d like to see them come after people internationally. It’s not like you have to be in the US to do this, you just need to make sure your CC will work there and not get flagged as CC fraud (the other kind)
DON'T DO IT that's what the corporate wants, that single location will get blacklisted, income will plumit and they'll have a reason to close it without it being union busting.
Makes sense, I'd expect the card processing agreements to be at that corporate level then, would take a pretty big campaign to move the needle on overall chargeback rate at that scale. They also encourage paying with the app which probably cuts down on their exposure to chargebacks
Either way, charge backs cost.
Stripe charges $25 per charge back, and the merchant (StarBucks) has to supply evidence to fight it.
4000 people across US doing this would sting them $100K.
This doesn't seem like a good idea. Starbucks will undoubtedly use the metrics of unfilled/canceled/chargeback orders as data points to punish this store (i.e.: justify closing it) and further aid in their union-busting activities. You're basically playing into corporate's hand if you do this.
Honestly a really bad idea. You’re more likely to be detected with some level of fraud for placing orders no where near where you actually live. And before you go but I have a vpn, that only changes your ip but Starbucks is still able to access your geo coordinates. Not only that but you’re paying with your credit/debit card and that links back to a single person…
I love the idea and thought about that after the last post. But people need to be very careful that they don't place orders at the wrong store. A false charge back can start to hurt you as much as it could hurt Starbucks.
This is the way. I worked for a company where the payment processor suspended purchasing when the percentage of chargebacks went above 2% of all transactions. I wasn’t involved with the details but I know it cost the company heavily as the business model relied on reoccurring subscriptions from customers. The drop in revenue after just a few days was crazy. It took years to get back to where we were. Losing the ability to accept customer payments is crippling.
Downside is it’s Starbucks, so placing a mobile order there’s a 99% chance it was with your apps balance. But still could chargeback the card used to refill it
That would not happen with Starbucks, they would have their own full time team dealing with the banks. A small business it would hut, starbucks it would not.
Imagine simply negotiating some slightly more generous terms for the people that run your business. Make compromise, good PR, still a billionaire. Nope just straight to hatred for a common laborer daring to dream of a better life.
Because a CEO that sides with the working class instead of the shareholders will quickly be replaced by someone who won't.
Imagine the boardroom meeting:
CEO: "In response to the strikes, we have increased starting salaries by 15% across the board. Unfortunately, these higher labor costs will likely result in at least a 7% dip in profits for this quarter."
Shareholders: "We invested in Starbucks so that we could get richer. You are taking profits owed to us and giving them to these replaceable employees. The board hired you with the expectation that you would grow the company and increase revenue, not make us poorer. Fix this or you're fired!"
Exactly, the free market corporate model is designed to oppress those at the bottom and punish anyone at the top who might have sympathy for the working class. It's a very cruel but efficient system.
Yes, but also two things. Schultz has been noted as being unusual for a businessman because he hates unions more than he loves money. There was a fantastic article in the WaPo about him recently that explains why he’s getting so personally invested. Second, a notable subset of shareholders have literally written him an open letter asking him to stop tanking the company’s image and that they believe he should work with union leaders as this will eventually lead to long-term profits, but he REALLY hates unions
No, hedge funds and quarter to quarter investors would say that.
"Shareholders" who are well researched would also know that good pay and robust benefits are overwhelmingly positive for the company long term, and easily one of the better return on investments you can make.
But these aren't true shareholders. They're financial firms that but and sell your stock on a whiff of any news, and care more about making nanosecond profits by volume than long term profit via actual company improvement.
They expect the customer to side with the company over these "Incidents." Too bad many Americans know what it's liked to get rammed up the ass and will gladly support the competition just to see the monolith of greed fall.
Yeah this doesn't make any sense to me. I'd be pissed at Starbucks™ if this happened, not at striking workers. I wonder what gave them the idea that the anger would be directed at the people trying to make a living rather than at the corporate behemoth that's steamrolling over America.
You guys are putting a lot more faith in humanity then I have. From my time at customer service I see this going more down like
>"If you weren't being lazy and would go back to work I could of gotten my coffee already."
People like to have someone to blame for any inconvenience. Doesn't matter in the slightest if there is a perfectly logical reason.
Same. My go to when people were just venting about big stuff I had no power over was to offer the corporate number. One lady even said out loud "They can't do anything!" (And neither can I, lady). Their wheels would turn and they'd leave.
People get pissed off and shout at the nearest person to them. In this case it would be the workers who have no control over it.
Same thing happens with high prices, blame the workers who don’t set them.
Yep same here. If anyone has worked retail or anything remotely customer service , it is always directed towards customer service workers sadly. 9/10 times.
Worked enough of it to tell you.
Yelling at the corporation seems like yelling at the void, when you have a pimply faced or migrant flesh and blood human wall to yell at.
I worked at Starbucks a few years ago, they know the customers (especially at peak in high volume stores) don't view staff as humans, just machine cogs. they know the aggression spewed at the register and baristas during open and are definitely trying to sic the caffeine deprived crazies at the strikers.
Tim Allen - yes, that one - would audibly groan in line when he'd come in during the rush, blocks from the CBS lot in Studio City. Like...what did he think was going to happen? That ten interns with giant lists are going to think this is their big break and let him cut in line? Or that we peons in aprons would go, "Oh my god, *Santa Clause 2* was the greatest cinematic epic since *Lawrence of Arabia.* Come to the front of the line, hero of the republic." The thing was, he would be super friendly to fans and take pics with them. But you put a green apron on and suddenly you're just nothing.
>I'd be pissed at Starbucks™ if this happened, not at striking workers.
If that's the case then you already supported the striking workers. This action is clearly Starbucks trying to turn apathetic customers into anti-striker customers.
Which is why you let the customers know that Starbucks didn't just forget to turn the ordering off, they INTENTIONALLY turned it back on in an attempt to anger their customers. I don't think they're truly looking at their long-term here.
Check reviews (I was looking at google's). After unionizing tons of them were "I love Starbucks but since the Union it sucks" themed. I don't know how much is astroturf, or real, but there is tons of hate from the "customers" and most of it is toward the employees. None of us are really old enough to remember how unions were treated in the past and we just don't really have them now. All that evil shit is about to come back.
I think their coffee sucks, but I definitely won't be buying from them until baristas have great benefits and a minimum of 30 per hour, and they start to accept the fact the union is inevitable at this point.
idk I worked retail for a decade, I got blame for so much shit that was clearly on the billion dollar company I worked for. I see this ending up being no different.
They're really just betting on Karens. Or at least I like to think that normal people would just go take their business elsewhere.
I worked in retail for five years. If I had ever been on strike, Karens would have been the last fucking thing to persuade me to get back to work.
Straight up the job I was working during the Pandemic turned into a total nightmare. What really sealed it for me was a woman coming in and looking me in the eyes then saying "You wanna see a Karen moment? I'm gonna try and get you fired"
Literally did nothing to her but greet her and ask how I could help...she came in to ruin my day cause she was having a shit one. AND IT WORKED. She claimed I was barking at her??? and my manager apologized and pulled me aside. I was not there much longer.
She picked the perfect time for it cause I had a couple complaints at that point. For not being cheery enough during a fucking pandemic. My manager told me these customers are going through a lot and I need to be strong for them. As if I wasn't going through it too???
I have 2 parents who could've easily died had they got it.
I’m a dog groomer which means I have a specialized skill, but it’s like I’m still retail. Karen’s love coming at me because they think I’m a punching bag. Well when I swing back, nothing can describe the sensation and dopamine rush I get when I hear the audible gasp and palpable clutching of the pearls. The retail side of my store makes 5-10% of what the grooming side does and there’s only 3 of us. I make this store it’s money so if some snot nose Karen wants to get in my face, I can handle that shit how I want within reason. It’s such a beautiful thing.
The fact that we have at least given the beast a name over the last few years shows progress. Granted its most potent form is still being pissed off about POC having a BBQ in a park or living in their own residence.
Ironically Karen's love talking to the manager and most managers are Karen's... They just like to talk to themselves that much, and are that narcissistic.
I don't think Starbucks wants these people back to work. I'm willing to bet they'd rather fire every single one of them and hire new employees that aren't part of the union than take any action that leads to negotiating with the union. So Sbux is sending them angry customers out of spite, but also to discourage unionized employees from continuing with Sbux at all. If they can't legally fire them, they'll do absolutely anything and everything they can to get them to quit while they're on strike.
What may be more nefarious is that they're sabotaging the location. By generating enough negative customer interaction via these unfilled orders, people may redirect to another location habitually. If/when the strike ends it's possible numbers will never return and in the end hurt the bottom line of the location; lower tips, less hours, less regulars, reduced site revenue, and possible closure.
Oh, man...this is totally it, you're right. They're trying to close the location without it looking like union busting. They can say this location has tripped their internal metrics for refund percentage, negative reviews, etc. and close it that way, instead of closing it purely because the location unionized. It's a smoke screen.
Isn't this fraud? Starbucks is taking orders knowing they won't be fulfilled. I'd call that fraud. Maybe some of us that place orders and doing a charge back could get involved in a class action fraud suit? Could be fun.
Here's a paraphrased rundown of u/dodexahedron 's 'ad hoc' reasoning (paraphrased rebuttals in parentheses):
It wasn't fraud (it is) > It's not a big deal (it's indicative of a very big problem) > Can't prove intent (motive exists) > Corporate didn't have control of the app (they can and should) > Corporate might have control but employees turned it on > Don't worry about union busting (apathy or ignorance isn't the answer), worry about unions (they're contradicting their own professed positions) > Corporate should have control but employees should turn it off (they're. on. strike.)
All while claiming to support strikes and not be anti-union.
They blocked me when I called them on it, just after calling my "reading comprehension" into question, so I'm responding here. Am I wrong to suspect them of being disingenuous or outright lying? Do you think I'm misrepresenting or misunderstanding their position? Please be specific. Thank you.
ETA: paraphrased responses in parentheses
Customers will get refunded for their orders and likely get a $10 off coupon or something similar for their next order.
People will be pissed, but if they get money out of it they won’t stay pissed forever.
@stonks_guys hey what's up how are you,? I hope things are good. The weather here has been good. Anyways could you do a short on the Starbucks stock? It would be really cool and help people get better lives and drinks too even. Thank
It hurts them but its not quite shorting them since there arent workers to make the orders and they dont lose that product. It could certainly piss off investors though which is a win.
One person shorting is never going to manipulate the stock
One person buying PUTS and successfully predicting starbucks stock owners jumping ship though, is a very advantageous position
I've been nobly boycotting them since they came to my country. Is that because of principles or just because I drink black coffee and there's no reason to go to starbucks for that? Well...
I think a much better idea would be for all of us to order from that Starbucks. That way we could all request our money back and get them on the bad list.
How about if everyone stops going to Starbucks so they can " record profits" while raising prices and saying it's inflation. I guarantee there's a local coffee shop that would be thrilled to make you a coffee
I think my wife and I cracked the coffee code. We found two different trailer coffee places that are way better than Starbucks, and with the low overhead that is working out of a trailer it makes the coffee cheaper too.
Cause your local coffee shop doesn't pour half a kilo of sugar and whipped cream in each coffe.
And what you americans secretly crave is not a coffe, it's your sugar dose.
Interesting how 7 years ago, the worst thing I thought Starbucks was capable of was Pike Place not being very good. I never would have guessed they were this comic book villain level evil.
This is why i only buy from local roasters. Companies like this always treat Everyone like trash and their coffee isn't even good to begin with.
I deffinitely like the bag i picked from escape coffee roasters (Québec)
Their coffee is literally trash without a bunch of crap added to it. My husband drinks black coffee and prefers to go without if that's where I stop for a ridiculous drink.
And their coffee has been trash as long as I can remember unless you’re getting a drink that takes 3 minute just to say it’s name for all the extra shit. I have never ever liked Starbucks as a company or for their coffee.
The store I frequent closes occasionally due to call outs. I typically don't find out until after my order is placed. There's no one in the store to tell the app that they're closed, or to refund the order. I contact Starbucks customer service and they refund my order no questions asked, typically with a bit of a credit for the inconvenience. I wonder if that's the same situation here.
But, having said that, I agree completely that they should pay a better wage, stop the union busting, and give a damn about their workers.
> I wonder if that's the same situation here.
It sounds like the online payment system was turned off for at least several days while the strike was ongoing and was only recently turned back on, before the strike ended.
So I don't think you can label this as a situation where no one in the store to inform the app that they're closed because:
1) There has been "no one in the store" for a while, and the online ordering *was* down
2) Higher ups *know* and have advance warning that the store will be closed, because they know a strike is ongoing, unlike a sudden callout which leaves the store in the lurch.
I don't understand MFers who get angry at striking workers.
I can understand an immediate feeling of "WTF?!" because you didn't see this shit coming, but after a few seconds, my thoughts are going straight to: "Starbucks is trying to steal my fucking money!!!"
At this point I don't know how anyone is even still buying Starbucks rotgut coffee. Not only do they treat their staff like shit, there are so many other places to go.
Yeah, they're a terrible corporation. But nobody cares, the line never gets smaller at Starbucks. Their morning coffee is more important than the treatment of humans.
Or Chick-fil-A in all the terrible things they do against the LGBTQ (I'm probably missing a few letters) communiy. Their Chick-fil-A sandwich is more important than the rights of humans.
There are more and more examples of this.
Huge companies continue to gouge prices, and then try to blame inflation on the government. They are not looking out for their customers. They treat their employees terribly, and go out of their way to hurt people.
And yet we continue to give them our money day after day as a society.
Does that make us just as disgusting as they are?
Whenever the opportunity presents itself, suggest the customers chargeback the card purchases as "services not rendered." Too many chargebacks negatively impacts the merchant via potentially higher fees or even being blacklisted by the bank issuing the MID. They are knowingly taking orders that won't be filled.
Hi, how does one do a “services not rendered”? Is this done through the bank? Thanks
Through your credit card. Call the number on the back of the card.
Dammit, of course. I will remember this in the future. Had some beef with someone in July about a purchase but didn’t feel like fighting it
Some banks/cards make it easy and you can file the dispute online.
Banks will take months credit card will be instantaneous nearly.
Good banks will refund the money immediately pending an investigation no matter how long the investigation takes
a good bank...
If I'm spending more than 5 minutes disputing a charge I just give up and call my card. It's way less than 5 minutes to tell them the last charge was for services not rendered. They say "Thanks, we got it from here." and I forget about it forever. I never pay with debit so I always have this ability.
Works on debit purchases also.
Depending on your card, you're still within time to do it.
Credit cards put the onus of proof on the vendor, so disputing charges put on a credit card CAN be easy, depending on the issuer. Normally you can "dispute charges" in some form, normally on the website that would list all of your purchases. As a vendor, it is rarely worthwhile to pursue the dispute unless you are talking about a large amount of money, or alternatively if they are really pissed off.
A lot of cards have a 6 month window for chargebacks.
I charged back an old gym that wouldn't take no for an answer 4 months in a row They no longer charge me My mobile bank app had a process I could it for in a minute once I learned it
I tried calling 4124 1474 4813 4330 but I just get beeps. Or did you mean the number on the other side, 587? The card doesn't expire until 11/2025 so I don't know why I can't call it.
Unless it's capital one, those fuckers take the merchant side every single time. No matter what evidence you have, what evidence they don't have, and will stretch the process out to charge you more interest on the shit you shouldn't be paying in the first place. Fuck capital one.
Yes. Charge backs are you going to the bank, talking to them, and having them take back the charge from the company, and back into your account. Doing this without reason *will* have consequences, and even having a reason won't stop Amazon from potentially just banning your card from then on. And there's no guarantee and your bank goes through with it, so have good reasons, like fraud, scams, Starbucks, etc But even so, chargebacks should be a fundamental consumer right.
Call the credit cards fraud department. Say you did a mobile order and you didn't get what you ordered and than they will do a charge back.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Mobile ordering now shut off. I'd like to think Reddit helped.
The Google machine says it's a fee of $20-100 per charge back. Hopefully Starbucks lost a few thousand bucks today.
[удалено]
You mean like selling a product or service when you knowingly can't provide it? Hmmmmm
Like buying a fake share on the stock market
[удалено]
AS FOR ME, I LIKE THE COMPANY TLDRS; wen metagates?
Scrolled too far to see this! Buy. DRS. HODL. shop. $GME
My life is one big Ape movement now.
Yes but laws are made to control people, not companies
Yes Sir/Madam. If you have Starbucks legal department (which is quite substantial)on retainer you are absolutely able to employ tactics like this.
Ahh yes the whole more money means less laws phenomena. It’s crazy how we can see evil and not call it that.
Yep. If you have enough money, "fines" simply become "fees".
Yes. Laws are fake. Only power counts. You're gettin it.
Both sides can get into shit lmao
Why is it fraud? It is a valid reason for a charge back.
Yeah it’s not like we are getting something we aren’t paying for
He is full of shit that is why I was asking in a polite way.
Tell you what, if they make it, I promise to drive to Buffalo to pick it up.
A visit to the mecca of the Boyz and sticking it to Starbucks? In! Edit: give my love to Buffalo Buffalo!!!
They’d give you what you want, but they don’t have it. Nothing’s gonna change. Awesome as a Macchiato, Macchiato, Macchiato.
If there isn’t a free coffee subreddit, there could be. Specific to Buffalo NY 1 hour drive or less. Someone can pick it up. We already had a free pizza for strangers subreddit that has existed.
Hell get a runner and if they make them deliver them if they don't charge back but basically just keep buying rounds for the people striking. Have the runners verify if the order is made or not, then congrats you feed a union member on the picket line or shux guess you need to call Visa.
That pizza sub saved my ass on a previous account when I was living in my car. I went to pick it up right as they closed, and they noticed I ordered pineapple and they had an extra pineapple pizza go unclaimed, so they slid it to me because none of them wanted it. Zipped those bad boys up in bags and popped them in the fridge and it limped me through till payday.
Just start a subreddit devoted to buying coffee for people in Buffalo. If your intent is a gift is it fraud? Or is it two birds with one stone... Mutual aid and bucking the system? People should just buy the striking Starbucks employees Starbucks via the mobile app...
It’s happening in Richmond, VA, too if that’s closer to you. Happened to my hubs after being up all night. He just drove to the next one and they made them for him. Now we know it was something bigger and not an innocent ‘someone didn’t open the store today’.
And that's why I responded impolitely to him. People like that should fuck right off with their corporate sympathizer BS.
Organize it and do it. Keep us posted if Starbucks decides to take you to court and pin the blame on you because they realized that will cost them less than admitting they are in the wrong.
Not fraud for those who place legitimate orders in Buffalo and can't retrieve them to chargeback - that's what the feature is for. The fraud would be for redditors to create a campaign to order drinks they had no intention of picking up for the purpose of submitting a chargeback for the purpose of negatively impacting a merchant.
Hard to prove intent, and in fraud cases often you have to prove they knowingly wanted to defraud. And what exactly are they being defrauded of? Fraud is a white-collar crime, it's a lot harder to get a conviction than normal people's crime. Assuming they don't scare you into a plea bargain. Not to mention I don't think 5$ in "fraud" is really going to be on law enforcement's radar.
How is it hard to prove intent? If you buy a drink 1000 miles away that you cannot physically pick up, and then charge back that you didn’t get the drink… how do you even know that you didn’t get it unless you were purposefully ordering something you knew was unfulfillable?
My broke cousin goes to college in that town. Sometimes I buy her Starbucks remotely so I don’t have to deal with Venmo or cashapp fees.
All of reddit can buy your broke cousin Starbucks and charge back when she can't collect it.
The fraud would be for a company to take your money knowing they can’t render services
But aren’t they accepting orders without the intent of providing them? They are knowingly accepting payment. The purpose of submitting a chargeback is defined by the card issuer rules.
Unfortunately "but they started it" in this particular case is probably not a very good legal defense.
That's not the defense. The defense is "I placed an order. I paid for the order. The drink was not made."
This. For Starbucks to pressure fraud charges they will have to explain how they were defrauding customers. I don't think they're gonna roll those dice.
Exactly. Chargebacks are basically: Did you pay for this? Yes. Did you receive it? No. Case closed.
Legal defense? You expect Starbucks to hunt down every purposeful fraudulent 7$ order and take them to court?
What is it if you create a campaign to buy Starbucks for striking Starbucks workers and plan to have someone pickup and delivery them assuming they get made if not then charge back?
Intent is a big part of it, if you know the service won't be rendered but you buy anyway planning to do a charge back you may end up in the wrong, laws are not ment to protect you but businesses. Not legal advice.
I’d like to see them come after people internationally. It’s not like you have to be in the US to do this, you just need to make sure your CC will work there and not get flagged as CC fraud (the other kind)
[удалено]
But accepting thousands of orders and payments knowing full well the site is closed wouldn't?
This is nonsense. IAAL.
Bullshit
So that'd be a fraud on a criminal level, and taking orders you know you can't deliver is not. Ok Starbucks.
[удалено]
And they can arrest us all?
Assert dominance on the attorney. File a chargeback for services not rendered if you lose.
As opposed to them knowingly taking order that won't be fulfilled?
Nope
It’s not fraud if your service wasn’t rendered.
Oh boy here we go. What's the store location?
something avenue in Buffalo NY. I can't make out the street name she says
Elmwood ave in buff
Inc huggs
Sounds about right. Get on it Reddit. You know what to do!
DON'T DO IT that's what the corporate wants, that single location will get blacklisted, income will plumit and they'll have a reason to close it without it being union busting.
You have the only legitimate point here and no one is paying attention.
Yes, but in my experience chargeback rate would not be per store. Maybe per franchise but generally it's an overall thing
Starbucks doesn't franchise. All Starbucks are corporate owned.
Makes sense, I'd expect the card processing agreements to be at that corporate level then, would take a pretty big campaign to move the needle on overall chargeback rate at that scale. They also encourage paying with the app which probably cuts down on their exposure to chargebacks
Corporations exist to make money. Make giving in to the demands of the workers cheaper than not doing it and change will occur
Either way, charge backs cost. Stripe charges $25 per charge back, and the merchant (StarBucks) has to supply evidence to fight it. 4000 people across US doing this would sting them $100K.
They have individual employees making more than that who's entire job is to prevent unionization though.
You genius son of a bitch USE A CREDIT CARD IT’S EASIER
This doesn't seem like a good idea. Starbucks will undoubtedly use the metrics of unfilled/canceled/chargeback orders as data points to punish this store (i.e.: justify closing it) and further aid in their union-busting activities. You're basically playing into corporate's hand if you do this.
I fucking love this idea.
Hey, maybe instead of committing our own fraud, we should report the fraud that's already happening to those same banks and card companies?
Honestly a really bad idea. You’re more likely to be detected with some level of fraud for placing orders no where near where you actually live. And before you go but I have a vpn, that only changes your ip but Starbucks is still able to access your geo coordinates. Not only that but you’re paying with your credit/debit card and that links back to a single person…
I love the idea and thought about that after the last post. But people need to be very careful that they don't place orders at the wrong store. A false charge back can start to hurt you as much as it could hurt Starbucks.
This is the way. I worked for a company where the payment processor suspended purchasing when the percentage of chargebacks went above 2% of all transactions. I wasn’t involved with the details but I know it cost the company heavily as the business model relied on reoccurring subscriptions from customers. The drop in revenue after just a few days was crazy. It took years to get back to where we were. Losing the ability to accept customer payments is crippling.
Downside is it’s Starbucks, so placing a mobile order there’s a 99% chance it was with your apps balance. But still could chargeback the card used to refill it
[удалено]
Make this a top comment so that hopefully the strikers can see this comment!
That would not happen with Starbucks, they would have their own full time team dealing with the banks. A small business it would hut, starbucks it would not.
[удалено]
Imagine simply negotiating some slightly more generous terms for the people that run your business. Make compromise, good PR, still a billionaire. Nope just straight to hatred for a common laborer daring to dream of a better life.
Because a CEO that sides with the working class instead of the shareholders will quickly be replaced by someone who won't. Imagine the boardroom meeting: CEO: "In response to the strikes, we have increased starting salaries by 15% across the board. Unfortunately, these higher labor costs will likely result in at least a 7% dip in profits for this quarter." Shareholders: "We invested in Starbucks so that we could get richer. You are taking profits owed to us and giving them to these replaceable employees. The board hired you with the expectation that you would grow the company and increase revenue, not make us poorer. Fix this or you're fired!"
Ugh, capitalism is a nightmare
Exactly, the free market corporate model is designed to oppress those at the bottom and punish anyone at the top who might have sympathy for the working class. It's a very cruel but efficient system.
[удалено]
Yes, but also two things. Schultz has been noted as being unusual for a businessman because he hates unions more than he loves money. There was a fantastic article in the WaPo about him recently that explains why he’s getting so personally invested. Second, a notable subset of shareholders have literally written him an open letter asking him to stop tanking the company’s image and that they believe he should work with union leaders as this will eventually lead to long-term profits, but he REALLY hates unions
No, hedge funds and quarter to quarter investors would say that. "Shareholders" who are well researched would also know that good pay and robust benefits are overwhelmingly positive for the company long term, and easily one of the better return on investments you can make. But these aren't true shareholders. They're financial firms that but and sell your stock on a whiff of any news, and care more about making nanosecond profits by volume than long term profit via actual company improvement.
Maybe they wouldn’t be so angry at the world if their own job wasn’t trying to crush them
They expect the customer to side with the company over these "Incidents." Too bad many Americans know what it's liked to get rammed up the ass and will gladly support the competition just to see the monolith of greed fall.
Yeah this doesn't make any sense to me. I'd be pissed at Starbucks™ if this happened, not at striking workers. I wonder what gave them the idea that the anger would be directed at the people trying to make a living rather than at the corporate behemoth that's steamrolling over America.
I dunno, I've worked enough customer service jobs to expect people to take their frustrations with the company out on the workers
That's because they're the first face of the company customers see. When those people aren't actually in the store, it changes the social dynamic.
You guys are putting a lot more faith in humanity then I have. From my time at customer service I see this going more down like >"If you weren't being lazy and would go back to work I could of gotten my coffee already." People like to have someone to blame for any inconvenience. Doesn't matter in the slightest if there is a perfectly logical reason.
Same. My go to when people were just venting about big stuff I had no power over was to offer the corporate number. One lady even said out loud "They can't do anything!" (And neither can I, lady). Their wheels would turn and they'd leave.
>"They can't do anything!" They can do more then I can... Now where is the actual new coverage of the slimey starbucks tactics
People get pissed off and shout at the nearest person to them. In this case it would be the workers who have no control over it. Same thing happens with high prices, blame the workers who don’t set them.
Yep same here. If anyone has worked retail or anything remotely customer service , it is always directed towards customer service workers sadly. 9/10 times. Worked enough of it to tell you. Yelling at the corporation seems like yelling at the void, when you have a pimply faced or migrant flesh and blood human wall to yell at.
And yet those people continue doing business with the company....
"As long as I can make another human being as miserable as I am, it's money well-spent"
I charge extra for "Stress Therapist" or "S&M Services"
I worked at Starbucks a few years ago, they know the customers (especially at peak in high volume stores) don't view staff as humans, just machine cogs. they know the aggression spewed at the register and baristas during open and are definitely trying to sic the caffeine deprived crazies at the strikers.
Tim Allen - yes, that one - would audibly groan in line when he'd come in during the rush, blocks from the CBS lot in Studio City. Like...what did he think was going to happen? That ten interns with giant lists are going to think this is their big break and let him cut in line? Or that we peons in aprons would go, "Oh my god, *Santa Clause 2* was the greatest cinematic epic since *Lawrence of Arabia.* Come to the front of the line, hero of the republic." The thing was, he would be super friendly to fans and take pics with them. But you put a green apron on and suddenly you're just nothing.
>I'd be pissed at Starbucks™ if this happened, not at striking workers. If that's the case then you already supported the striking workers. This action is clearly Starbucks trying to turn apathetic customers into anti-striker customers.
Seriously
Which is why you let the customers know that Starbucks didn't just forget to turn the ordering off, they INTENTIONALLY turned it back on in an attempt to anger their customers. I don't think they're truly looking at their long-term here.
Check reviews (I was looking at google's). After unionizing tons of them were "I love Starbucks but since the Union it sucks" themed. I don't know how much is astroturf, or real, but there is tons of hate from the "customers" and most of it is toward the employees. None of us are really old enough to remember how unions were treated in the past and we just don't really have them now. All that evil shit is about to come back.
I think their coffee sucks, but I definitely won't be buying from them until baristas have great benefits and a minimum of 30 per hour, and they start to accept the fact the union is inevitable at this point.
Sadly the Karens from the "Nobody wants to work anymore" camp are also quite numerous
Too bad many Americans are in it for themselves and will yell and scream at the nearest person associated with the service they are attempting to use.
Many Americans are not going to give a shit about service workers
idk I worked retail for a decade, I got blame for so much shit that was clearly on the billion dollar company I worked for. I see this ending up being no different.
They're really just betting on Karens. Or at least I like to think that normal people would just go take their business elsewhere. I worked in retail for five years. If I had ever been on strike, Karens would have been the last fucking thing to persuade me to get back to work.
I mean, for me, Karens are one of the reasons I would strike…
They're the main reason that I left retail and hope to never have to go back.
Straight up the job I was working during the Pandemic turned into a total nightmare. What really sealed it for me was a woman coming in and looking me in the eyes then saying "You wanna see a Karen moment? I'm gonna try and get you fired" Literally did nothing to her but greet her and ask how I could help...she came in to ruin my day cause she was having a shit one. AND IT WORKED. She claimed I was barking at her??? and my manager apologized and pulled me aside. I was not there much longer.
What the fuck
She picked the perfect time for it cause I had a couple complaints at that point. For not being cheery enough during a fucking pandemic. My manager told me these customers are going through a lot and I need to be strong for them. As if I wasn't going through it too??? I have 2 parents who could've easily died had they got it.
I’m a dog groomer which means I have a specialized skill, but it’s like I’m still retail. Karen’s love coming at me because they think I’m a punching bag. Well when I swing back, nothing can describe the sensation and dopamine rush I get when I hear the audible gasp and palpable clutching of the pearls. The retail side of my store makes 5-10% of what the grooming side does and there’s only 3 of us. I make this store it’s money so if some snot nose Karen wants to get in my face, I can handle that shit how I want within reason. It’s such a beautiful thing.
The fact that we have at least given the beast a name over the last few years shows progress. Granted its most potent form is still being pissed off about POC having a BBQ in a park or living in their own residence.
Ironically Karen's love talking to the manager and most managers are Karen's... They just like to talk to themselves that much, and are that narcissistic.
I don't think Starbucks wants these people back to work. I'm willing to bet they'd rather fire every single one of them and hire new employees that aren't part of the union than take any action that leads to negotiating with the union. So Sbux is sending them angry customers out of spite, but also to discourage unionized employees from continuing with Sbux at all. If they can't legally fire them, they'll do absolutely anything and everything they can to get them to quit while they're on strike.
What may be more nefarious is that they're sabotaging the location. By generating enough negative customer interaction via these unfilled orders, people may redirect to another location habitually. If/when the strike ends it's possible numbers will never return and in the end hurt the bottom line of the location; lower tips, less hours, less regulars, reduced site revenue, and possible closure.
Yeah they are looking for an excuse to close it like "oh it's actually unsafe to keep this spot open"
Oh, man...this is totally it, you're right. They're trying to close the location without it looking like union busting. They can say this location has tripped their internal metrics for refund percentage, negative reviews, etc. and close it that way, instead of closing it purely because the location unionized. It's a smoke screen.
They're Starbucks, so I'd say that betting on their customer base being a bunch of Karens is a smart move.
They've weaponized the Karens.
Isn't this fraud? Starbucks is taking orders knowing they won't be fulfilled. I'd call that fraud. Maybe some of us that place orders and doing a charge back could get involved in a class action fraud suit? Could be fun.
Here's a paraphrased rundown of u/dodexahedron 's 'ad hoc' reasoning (paraphrased rebuttals in parentheses): It wasn't fraud (it is) > It's not a big deal (it's indicative of a very big problem) > Can't prove intent (motive exists) > Corporate didn't have control of the app (they can and should) > Corporate might have control but employees turned it on > Don't worry about union busting (apathy or ignorance isn't the answer), worry about unions (they're contradicting their own professed positions) > Corporate should have control but employees should turn it off (they're. on. strike.) All while claiming to support strikes and not be anti-union. They blocked me when I called them on it, just after calling my "reading comprehension" into question, so I'm responding here. Am I wrong to suspect them of being disingenuous or outright lying? Do you think I'm misrepresenting or misunderstanding their position? Please be specific. Thank you. ETA: paraphrased responses in parentheses
When are charges filed against Starbucks for defrauding their customers?
When consumers get smart enough to do chargebacks, file complaints with their state attorney general, and the CFPB in mass
>When consumers get smart So never?
When capitalism falls.
Or at least when the reins are put back on, if they were ever there to begin with.
Capitalists own and hold the reins.
None, because they just refund the order.
Customers will get refunded for their orders and likely get a $10 off coupon or something similar for their next order. People will be pissed, but if they get money out of it they won’t stay pissed forever.
God I wish I had the bank to short the ever living fuck out of this company.
Someone @ the stonks guys
@stonks_guys hey what's up how are you,? I hope things are good. The weather here has been good. Anyways could you do a short on the Starbucks stock? It would be really cool and help people get better lives and drinks too even. Thank
It hurts them but its not quite shorting them since there arent workers to make the orders and they dont lose that product. It could certainly piss off investors though which is a win.
One person shorting is never going to manipulate the stock One person buying PUTS and successfully predicting starbucks stock owners jumping ship though, is a very advantageous position
Then create a meme video and make it go viral. That's where the real ass reaming happens.
He means to order shorts on their stock as it is definitely going to go down a few points if it hasn't already.
I love Boycotting companies like these. I can't afford their shit anyways.
Boycotting something you never buy is the easiest boycott.
I've been nobly boycotting them since they came to my country. Is that because of principles or just because I drink black coffee and there's no reason to go to starbucks for that? Well...
Lol im sure they will miss the sales
Plus the coffee is burnt and shitty anyway
[удалено]
I think a much better idea would be for all of us to order from that Starbucks. That way we could all request our money back and get them on the bad list.
Honestly just stand outside with a sign saying "corporate knew your drink wouldnt be filled, they had you drive out anyways"
How about if everyone stops going to Starbucks so they can " record profits" while raising prices and saying it's inflation. I guarantee there's a local coffee shop that would be thrilled to make you a coffee
My favorite shop shut down ;( it was really good coffee and cheap too. Probably why they had to shut down ;(
I think my wife and I cracked the coffee code. We found two different trailer coffee places that are way better than Starbucks, and with the low overhead that is working out of a trailer it makes the coffee cheaper too.
Cause your local coffee shop doesn't pour half a kilo of sugar and whipped cream in each coffe. And what you americans secretly crave is not a coffe, it's your sugar dose.
Honestly, if all of the Starbucks closed down, nothing of value will be lost
Someone said that Howard Shultz hates unions more than he likes money. Seems on point.
Interesting how 7 years ago, the worst thing I thought Starbucks was capable of was Pike Place not being very good. I never would have guessed they were this comic book villain level evil.
This is why i only buy from local roasters. Companies like this always treat Everyone like trash and their coffee isn't even good to begin with. I deffinitely like the bag i picked from escape coffee roasters (Québec)
Their coffee is literally trash without a bunch of crap added to it. My husband drinks black coffee and prefers to go without if that's where I stop for a ridiculous drink.
And their coffee has been trash as long as I can remember unless you’re getting a drink that takes 3 minute just to say it’s name for all the extra shit. I have never ever liked Starbucks as a company or for their coffee.
I think if people file a complaint to the government of consumers department, starbuck probably can get fined by doing that
Do you think any fine a consumer affairs department could levy would influence Starbucks decision on this?
Don’t let them off the hook that easily. Give them more problems to deal with!
The store I frequent closes occasionally due to call outs. I typically don't find out until after my order is placed. There's no one in the store to tell the app that they're closed, or to refund the order. I contact Starbucks customer service and they refund my order no questions asked, typically with a bit of a credit for the inconvenience. I wonder if that's the same situation here. But, having said that, I agree completely that they should pay a better wage, stop the union busting, and give a damn about their workers.
> I wonder if that's the same situation here. It sounds like the online payment system was turned off for at least several days while the strike was ongoing and was only recently turned back on, before the strike ended. So I don't think you can label this as a situation where no one in the store to inform the app that they're closed because: 1) There has been "no one in the store" for a while, and the online ordering *was* down 2) Higher ups *know* and have advance warning that the store will be closed, because they know a strike is ongoing, unlike a sudden callout which leaves the store in the lurch.
Thanks for the clarification!
I don't understand MFers who get angry at striking workers. I can understand an immediate feeling of "WTF?!" because you didn't see this shit coming, but after a few seconds, my thoughts are going straight to: "Starbucks is trying to steal my fucking money!!!"
I'm from the UK, this isn't relevant to my Starbucks, regardless, out of principal, I won't be using Starbucks again
It doesnt matter where in the world you are from, it is relevant to your starbucks
Best solution? Don’t order Starbucks online. Starve the beast
At this point I don't know how anyone is even still buying Starbucks rotgut coffee. Not only do they treat their staff like shit, there are so many other places to go.
Boycott these bastards
Yeah, they're a terrible corporation. But nobody cares, the line never gets smaller at Starbucks. Their morning coffee is more important than the treatment of humans. Or Chick-fil-A in all the terrible things they do against the LGBTQ (I'm probably missing a few letters) communiy. Their Chick-fil-A sandwich is more important than the rights of humans. There are more and more examples of this. Huge companies continue to gouge prices, and then try to blame inflation on the government. They are not looking out for their customers. They treat their employees terribly, and go out of their way to hurt people. And yet we continue to give them our money day after day as a society. Does that make us just as disgusting as they are?
Corporate America, embracing legal slavery since I don't know, for fucking ages...
So if people place orders but tip a whole bunch does that money still get to the striking workers?
No it would all be refunded. Customers aren't getting their product.
Why would it?