HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » CORPORATE INTIMIDATION: S...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:59 AM

CORPORATE INTIMIDATION: Starbucks is basically forcing its employees to lobby Washington D.C.

Last edited Wed Dec 26, 2012, 01:16 PM - Edit history (2)

This is wildly inappropriate

CNN reports that Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has written a letter to his chain’s 120 stores in the Washington, D.C. area to ask employees there to write “Come Together” on coffee cups on Thursday and Friday.

“Rather than be bystanders, you and your customers have an opportunity — and I believe we all have a responsibility — to send our elected officials a respectful but potent message, urging them to come together to find common ground,” Schultz wrote in his letter to the stores. He also apparently cited Fix The Debt, the powerful corporate front group that has been pushing for an agreement to cut Social Security benefits and lower corporate tax rates for months.

In a statement to CNN, the company stressed that these messages are voluntary.

But by even asking employees to voluntarily influence lawmakers to reach an agreement, Schultz is inappropriately pressuring them to take a political stand they may not agree with. For example, some of these employees may benefit from veterans or Social Security benefits that are at risk of being cut in a bad deal.



Read more: http://boldprogressives.org/starbucks-is-inappropriately-enlisting-its-d-c-employees-in-fiscal-lobbying/

UPDATE:
UPDATE II: I talked to a Starbucks employee in the D.C. area. This is what they had to say about being asked to take part in this campaign:

absolutely stupid. I don't get paid nearly enough to write that on all the cups. It's like I'm being punished in elementary school, except instead of a chalkboard, I have hundreds of cups. The message is Starbucks doesn't care about their "partners." They will be forced to do more work that is necessary or good, and not compensate them for it, and try to put out their message even if the "partner" doesn't agree with it. ... Compromise would get something done, but it'll leave a deal for the working poor and the middle class.

33 replies, 2181 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 33 replies Author Time Post
Reply CORPORATE INTIMIDATION: Starbucks is basically forcing its employees to lobby Washington D.C. (Original post)
Report1212 Dec 2012 OP
FreakinDJ Dec 2012 #1
Scuba Dec 2012 #30
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #2
Report1212 Dec 2012 #33
renie408 Dec 2012 #3
Report1212 Dec 2012 #6
renie408 Dec 2012 #9
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #18
merrily Dec 2012 #11
renie408 Dec 2012 #14
Report1212 Dec 2012 #16
renie408 Dec 2012 #21
Report1212 Dec 2012 #22
renie408 Dec 2012 #23
Report1212 Dec 2012 #24
renie408 Dec 2012 #25
Report1212 Dec 2012 #26
renie408 Dec 2012 #27
Report1212 Dec 2012 #28
renie408 Dec 2012 #29
Report1212 Dec 2012 #32
arely staircase Dec 2012 #4
randome Dec 2012 #5
Report1212 Dec 2012 #7
FreakinDJ Dec 2012 #8
Report1212 Dec 2012 #10
renie408 Dec 2012 #12
Report1212 Dec 2012 #15
HiPointDem Dec 2012 #20
randome Dec 2012 #17
Report1212 Dec 2012 #19
merrily Dec 2012 #13
ProfessionalLeftist Dec 2012 #31

Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:03 AM

1. Lower Corporate Tax rates to what - 0%

They already have more loopholes then can be written in a 10,000 page book

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:14 PM

30. They'd actually like it less than that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:04 AM

2. I won't be one of them, I've only drunk the crap they serve up a couple of times. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 01:35 PM

33. Good on you. Read the update. Employees hate it n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:04 AM

3. I am not sure if 'come together' is 'wildly inappropriate'.

He isn't saying which way he wants them to come together, just that they should make a deal.

Of course by waiting, Democrats will get everything they want out of any deal that gets made in January. We will no longer have to make any compromise at all, right? It is all going to go our way if we wait.

Right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:09 AM

6. What if the employees don't like the deal?

Saying make a deal is inherently political. There are a lot of people who won't like the deal, for whom it won't align with their politics.

Starbucks is also buying "Come Together" ads in DC papers that cite Fix The Debt -- which wants to lower corporate tax rates and cut Social Security benefits as part of the deal.

It might sound like an innocuous phrase, but then so again is Drill Baby Drill. It means something in D.C. right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:15 AM

9. What the OP left out of their post which makes

the whole thing NOT 'wildly inappropriate' is this part of the article from CNN:

"The spokesman added that Schultz's request to write "Come Together" on coffee cups is voluntary and that employees are not required to participate if it makes them "uncomfortable.""

It's not mandatory.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #9)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:28 AM

18. it's more than inappropriate, no matter how supposedly voluntary. you don't even *ask* your

 

employees to lobby the public on a political matter at their workplace.

just *asking* already has somple implicit element of coercion in it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #3)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:16 AM

11. Define "our way."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #11)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:19 AM

14. You need to ask the people who think going over the cliff

means that everything is going to be magically delicious come January. Personally, I think we have to compromise either way and no matter what deal gets struck, people here are going to go apeshit. And after the 1st, we will not only have economic repercussions from going over the cliff (AMT patch expiring, loss of consumer confidence, loss of global confidence, possible downgrade of credit rating, etc) we are STILL going to have a deal that cuts the things that Dems don't want cut.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #14)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:21 AM

16. That's your view

You have no right to have a corporate CEO tell his employees to have this view. And don't tell me it's "voluntary." Which employee wants to "volunteer" to stand up and say the billionaire CEO is wrong and risk their job?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #16)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:36 AM

21. For chrissakes, they do not have to 'stand up'

They just have to NOT write something on a cup.

God, if you rise to this level of outrage over things this small, your blood pressure must be off the charts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #21)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:40 AM

22. Or you don't have any sympathy for minimum wage employees who are

being told to do something against their values by a billionaire CEO

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #22)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:45 AM

23. Yep. That's me.

I just hates me some minimum wage workers.

Or maybe I am experiencing outrage burnout. I do not have an endless supply of outrage to tap like you do and I am starting to have to pick and choose. I choose not to be outraged over a CEO asking employees to voluntarily write 'come together' on a fucking coffee cup. I find it somewhat inappropriate. I readily accept that there are employees who will feel pressured and that is not good. I am not off to write my poster to picket the nearest Starbuck's, though, and I don't see the point of writing a post designed to engender the maximum amount of angst by leaving out a key portion of the article and inferring that the CEO is deliberately trying to sway Congress so that his company can pay lower taxes.

He might be trying to sway Congress to come to a deal because he thinks going over the fiscal cliff is BAD and that Congress displaying a total inability to do what they are there for is BAD.

And I get a little sick and tired of the breast beating martyrs on here who make assumptions about anybody who doesn't agree with them 100%. I happen to be a self-employed person who WISHES I made minimum wage. With the hours I put into my business, we wouldn't have any financial problems if I did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:47 AM

24. You sound more outraged than anyone else here

I suggest you calm down

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #24)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:49 AM

25. Wait, I thought it was wildly inappropriate to make suggestions.

But I guess assumptions and misleading posts are OK, huh??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #25)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:50 AM

26. Am I your employer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #26)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:00 PM

27. No

Good point.


I am getting a little tired of being told what I think by people who have no idea what they are talking about. Your assertion that I have no empathy for minimum wage employees was incorrect and out of line. THAT did get me a little outraged. I find the level of outrage exhibited for a voluntary request a little out of proportion. Particularly a request that does not ask employees to tout a particular viewpoint, that is merely asking Congress to do what they have been sent to Washington to do....govern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #27)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:02 PM

28. Cutting a deal is a viewpoint

What if you don't want a deal? It's a valid view to hold. Especially when we don't know what's in the deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:09 PM

29. So you don't write anything on the cup.

Does anybody really think that Starbuck's is going to punish workers who don't write anything?

And we are either getting a deal (whether we get it now or we get it in a month) or we are living with sequestration. I have yet to hear anybody who says they want to just go over the cliff and then live with the sequestration. Everybody seems to think that we are going to get a better deal in January. Which might be true. But no matter what, the cliff WILL cause a problem. I have a customer who estimates that JUST the failure to pass an AMT patch will cost him $30,000 THIS year. Before April 15. The AMT patch is retroactive and it's not being passed kicks in immediately and raises the taxes owed THIS year for 75% of Americans. At least that is what I have read.

My family will not be directly effected by that, but since many of my customers will be, I am afraid it is going to hurt my business. We are JUST NOW starting to gain back some of the ground we lost during the recession. I am worried that the people that think that no deal is a good deal are not thinking ahead very well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #29)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 01:13 PM

32. When the boss man tells you to do something, you do it

Have you ever had a job before? See the update. The employees hate it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:07 AM

4. so far this is the least outrage-worthy thing i have read today

and that includes a Chili's meu.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:08 AM

5. They're not 'forcing' anyone to do anything. But the CEO is definitely being an ass.

Politics should NEVER intrude into the workplace. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:10 AM

7. I just don't think these corporations are being honest

When they say they are putting out voluntary ideas to employees. Employees are not going to ignore their own CEO. They are being pressured. Why did he only send these instructions to the D.C. stores otherwise? It's a stealth lobbying campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:14 AM

8. Forcing employees to make a political statement should be illegal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:16 AM

10. I agree but they'll parse the definition of force

They'll call this voluntary. How about this. If you're a CEO, don't say ANYTHING to your employees about politics. Just. Shut. Up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FreakinDJ (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:16 AM

12. They are not being forced. If it makes them uncomfortable, they don't have to write anything.

Now, I do understand the case that they may feel pressured by the CEO making a suggestion, but it was a suggestion, not an order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:20 AM

15. When the CEO of your corporations writes you a letter telling you to do something..

..trust me you don't want to be the one guy at work who doesn't do it.

I work in the DC area and I'm already hearing reports of employees who are upset about this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renie408 (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:30 AM

20. they *are* being pressured.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:27 AM

17. Sure it is. But there is no 'enforcement', either.

It's an ignorant use of CEO influence but it probably makes no difference whatsoever to the employees. If they want, they can say, "Sure, I made a suggestion."

Of course the best answer should be, "Mind your own fucking business!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:28 AM

19. I agree.

But let's remember minimum wage employees are not going to have a lot of incentive to stand up. Starbucks is an anti-union company that suppresses its employees' rights let's never forget that part of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #5)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:18 AM

13. Agree. No political "suggestions" from the boss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Original post)

Wed Dec 26, 2012, 12:45 PM

31. Crappy coffee and corprat cronyism. Two reasons....

...to avoid Starbucks like the plague.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread