The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, in a ruling issued Sept. 4, declined to enforce the three challenged findings but upheld a fourth involving a manager’s statement to a pregnant employee that benefits could not be guaranteed if workers pursued unionization.

The decision reduces Starbucks’ exposure in the Wichita dispute while reinforcing limits on what employers can tell workers about the potential consequences of union organizing.

Court overturns three NLRB findings

The dispute arose from union organizing at Starbucks’ North Amidon Avenue store in Wichita in 2022.

The NLRB had determined that Starbucks unlawfully threatened employees with loss of benefits, created an impression that union activity was being monitored, and linked changes to hiring and store hours to the organizing campaign.

The Fifth Circuit upheld only the benefits-related finding. It concluded that the NLRB lacked substantial evidence for its determinations concerning reduced operating hours, the closure of the hiring portal and alleged surveillance.

Benefits threat remains a violation

The court upheld the finding involving Maia Cuellar-Serafini, who was pregnant when she spoke with store manager Carmella Neri.

According to the court record, Neri discussed Starbucks benefits with Cuellar-Serafini before saying that benefits could not be guaranteed if she was interested in organizing. The Fifth Circuit found the statement could reasonably be understood as a threat that union activity could affect employee benefits.

The court noted that employers may communicate predictions about the economic consequences of unionization, but such statements must be based on objective facts and cannot become threats of retaliation.

Store-hours allegation rejected

The appeals court disagreed with the NLRB’s conclusion that Starbucks unlawfully attributed reduced store hours to union activity.

The Wichita store had faced staffing shortages, prompting its manager to reduce operating hours. When an employee questioned the change, the manager said it was intended to ease pressure that the union had placed on employees.

The Fifth Circuit found that statement insufficient to establish a threat of reprisal for exercising federally protected labor rights.

Hiring-portal finding overturned

The court also rejected the NLRB’s finding involving Starbucks’ online hiring portal.

An employee had learned that customers were experiencing problems accessing the company’s online application system. Testimony cited in the court opinion indicated that an assistant manager said the hiring portal had been closed because of unionization efforts.

The Fifth Circuit nevertheless found the NLRB’s reasoning inadequate to establish an unlawful threat against existing employees. The court said the hiring decision was too removed from employees’ existing terms and conditions of employment to support the board’s conclusion.

Court finds surveillance evidence insufficient

The Fifth Circuit also overturned the NLRB’s finding that Starbucks created an impression that employees’ union activities were being monitored.

The board had relied in part on statements from Neri indicating that she knew about organizing discussions at the store and elsewhere in the district.

The appeals court said those remarks showed general awareness of union activity but did not establish that management was monitoring specific union meetings or organizing efforts.

Ruling defines limits of employer speech

The decision examined the boundary between protected employer speech and unlawful conduct during union campaigns.

The Fifth Circuit cited Section 8(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, which protects employers’ expression of views and opinions about unionization when those communications do not contain threats of reprisal, force or unlawful promises of benefits.

At the same time, the court held that statements reasonably understood by employees as threats of economic retaliation for supporting a union can violate federal labor law.

That distinction was central to the court’s decision to preserve the benefits-related violation while overturning the other three findings.

Second recent Starbucks ruling

The Fifth Circuit decision follows another appellate ruling involving Starbucks and union activity.

Two days earlier, the Second Circuit overturned an NLRB finding concerning Starbucks employees at the company’s Manhattan Meatpacking District location. That dispute involved restrictions on union-supporting T-shirts and multiple union pins.

The Second Circuit found that the labor board had not adequately balanced Starbucks’ interest in its store image against employees’ rights to promote unionization.

The two cases involve separate disputes, but both rulings represent setbacks for the NLRB’s positions in Starbucks labor cases.

Broader union dispute continues

The Fifth Circuit ruling does not resolve Starbucks’ wider conflict with organized labor.

Workers at more than 700 Starbucks locations have voted to unionize, while employees have filed hundreds of complaints with the NLRB alleging unfair labor practices. Starbucks has disputed many of those allegations.

The company therefore continues to face labor disputes nationally despite the recent appellate victories narrowing findings in individual cases.

One violation remains

The Fifth Circuit did not completely clear Starbucks in the Wichita case.

The court ordered enforcement of the NLRB’s determination involving Cuellar-Serafini, finding that the statement concerning employee benefits amounted to an unlawful threat of reprisal.

The ruling leaves Starbucks with one confirmed labor-law violation in the case while overturning the three other findings challenged on appeal.

Business and labor implications

The decision substantially reduces the NLRB findings against Starbucks arising from the Wichita organizing campaign and provides further guidance on how federal labor law distinguishes protected employer speech from unlawful threats.

For employers, the ruling underscores that discussing potential effects of unionization does not automatically violate federal law, but statements suggesting employees could lose existing benefits because of organizing activity can cross that line.

For Starbucks, the immediate legal outcome is favorable, although the company’s broader dispute with organized labor remains ongoing.

Reporting Credit: This report is based on records from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the National Labor Relations Board.

The post Starbucks Wins Major Reduction in Labor Board Case appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Costco Wholesale (COST.O) is set to increase wages for most of its hourly U.S. store employees, raising top-tier worker pay beyond $30 per hour, according to a company memo shared with employees this week.

Pay Increase Details

• The wage increase will be implemented gradually over the next three years.
• In the first year, top-of-the-scale employees will see a $1 increase to $30.20 per hour.
• Over the following two years, wages will continue to rise by $1 per year.
• Entry-level employees will also receive a 50-cent increase, bringing their hourly pay to $20.

Union Pressure & Negotiations

The decision follows growing pressure from Costco Teamsters union members, who recently voted in favor of a nationwide strike.

• Earlier this month, 85% of union members voted to authorize the strike ahead of a Jan. 31 contract deadline.
• The Teamsters union represents more than 18,000 Costco workers across the U.S.

Company Statement

Costco remains confident that its wages and benefits will continue to outpace competitors in the retail industry.

“With these changes, we believe our hourly wages and benefits will continue to far outpace others in the retail industry,” CEO Ron Vachris stated in the memo.

This wage adjustment solidifies Costco’s reputation for offering some of the highest pay and benefits in the retail sector.

Source

The post Costco Raises Hourly Pay: Most Workers to Earn Over $30 appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

In an effort to reshape the federal workforce, the Trump administration has announced a new buyout program for nearly all federal employees, including those working remotely. This initiative, aimed at getting workers back to in-person offices, offers a “deferred resignation” option with a generous payout. The window to opt into the program runs from January 28 to February 6.

Buyout Details and the Push for In-Office Work

Since the beginning of his term, President Donald Trump has been focused on increasing efficiency within the government. One of his early directives required federal employees who have been working remotely to return to the office.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed this initiative on Tuesday, emphasizing the administration’s commitment to improving government productivity:

“After four years of incompetence and failure, President Trump is committed to making our government efficient and productive again. American taxpayers pay for the salaries of federal government employees and deserve workers who show up in our federal buildings, also paid for by taxpayers.”

She continued:

“If they don’t want to work in the office and contribute to making America great again, then they are free to choose a different line of work. The Trump administration will provide a very generous payout of eight months.”

Government-Wide Email Sent to Federal Employees

To ensure all federal workers were aware of the changes, a government-wide email was sent on Tuesday outlining the Trump administration’s plan.

The email highlighted four key pillars aimed at restoring accountability within the federal government:

1. Return to in-person work
2. Accountability for employees with policy-making authority
3. Restored accountability for senior executives
4. Reform of the federal hiring process based on merit

A senior administration official commented on the email, saying:

“We’re five years past COVID, and just 6 percent of federal employees work full-time in-office. That is unacceptable.”

Requirements for Remote Workers

The new plan requires that most federal employees who have been working remotely since the COVID-19 pandemic return to their offices five days a week. The email also mentioned possible office relocations as part of a broader consolidation effort.

The administration expressed gratitude to those already working in person, acknowledging their “renewed focus” on serving the American people. However, it also made clear that continued employment could not be guaranteed for those who refused to comply with the new directives.

Deferred Resignation Program for Employees Who Opt-Out

For employees who do not wish to return to the office, the Trump administration introduced a “deferred resignation” program, which allows them to leave the federal workforce with a dignified, fair departure.

The program, available from January 28 to February 6, offers several benefits to those who choose to resign:

• Eight months of pay
• Continued benefits, regardless of workload
• Exemption from in-person work requirements until September 30, 2025

Exclusions from the Buyout Program

It is important to note that the buyout offer does not apply to military personnel, U.S. Postal Service employees, positions related to immigration enforcement and national security, or any other positions excluded by individual federal agencies.

Source

The post Trump Administration Offers Buyouts to Federal Employees, Including Remote Workers appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.