Senior Vice President, Employment Policy Division, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
There’s an old saying regarding our nation’s criminal justice system: you are innocent until proven guilty. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has a slightly different take on that when it comes to Starbucks. Apparently, you can be found guilty for attempting to prove you are innocent.
In one of the more unusual twists in the saga of the union campaign against Starbucks, an NLRB Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) has ruled that Starbucks violated federal labor law by issuing more than 20 subpoenas approved and upheld by an Article 3 court in litigation against the company. The irony is that the litigation was brought by the NLRB itself, which skipped its normal administrative procedures and went straight to federal court to seek what is known as a 10(j) injunction against the company.
As part of its defense against the injunction, Starbucks is seeking underlying information about the injunction request. Which is what defendants in court cases typically do. The 22 subpoenas issued by Starbucks were approved by a federal district judge last September.
Starbucks Employees File Petitions to Leave Union
Apparently, the novel strategy of defending itself upset the NLRB and the Service Employees International Union, which is the real force behind the campaign (its public face is the so-called Starbucks Workers United union). The union and the NLRB’s General Counsel requested that the Second...
Abbott Laboratories, the Illinois-based healthcare company that manufactures and sells infant formula and nutritional therapy products, has agreed to pay $384,999,040 to resolve allegations that i...