Starbucks loses appeal in unfair labor practices caseStarbucks loses appeal in unfair labor practices case

Joanna Fantozzi

Starbucks Corp. has lost its appeal of a 2022 unfair labor practices ruling by the National Labor Board.

At the end of December, the 3^rd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the NLRB’s initial decision that Starbucks illegally terminated two employees in Philadelphia in January 2020, maintaining that firing the workers — who had organized strikes and were attempting to form a union — was an act of retaliation. 

The National Labor Relations Board said in a February 2023 decision that the employees in question, Echo Nowakowska and Tristan J. Bussiere, were fired due to unionization activity. However, Starbucks argued in its appeal that Nowakowska was terminated due to poor performance and mistreatment of customers, and Bussiere was fired shortly after her allegedly because he spread a false rumor that another barista was going to be fired after Nowakowska was let go.

The company also argued that it should not be required to reinstate Bussiere and Nowakowska because they had recorded conversations with supervisors without their consent. The three-judge appeals panel, however, stated that the latter point was moot because Starbucks was allegedly aware of these recordings before they were used to justify the argument that Starbucks should not have to reinstate these employees. 

Related:Starbucks union votes to authorize strike ahead of final bargaining talks

“Substantial evidence supports the board’s unfair-labor-practice conclusions with respect to Nowakowska’s termination and reduction in hours along with Bussiere’s termination,” the panel concluded, “and substantial evidence supports the finding that Starbucks knew about the recording activity prior to the terminations, so it cannot rely on that activity to avoid reinstatement and limit back pay.”

The court upheld most of NLRB’s decision, but threw out the part of the NLRB order that required Starbucks to compensate Bussiere and Nowakowska, “for any direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms incurred as a result of the unlawful adverse actions against them,” as this order is outside the labor board’s jurisdiction. 

The appeals panel argued that Starbucks “lacked standing” to demonstrate that the company was injured by the conduct in question, and that this injury could be addressed by a court’s decision to overturn the initial NLRB ruling.

According to the court, Starbucks can file a petition for a rehearing within two weeks of the judgment. Starbucks did not respond to request for comment in time for publication.

Contact Joanna at [email protected]