General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDemocrats aren't radical leftists and Schultz isn't a "Centrist"
The story of the Democratic Party in the 20th century was about standing up for common sense, basic rights of working people. FDR presided over the New Deal, and JFK signed an executive order granting federal employees the right to join unions. Bill Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act, and Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The party has not moved radically left. Its Schultz who has generally run his business in a way that runs against the partys history of standing for basic workers rights.
During Schultzs long tenure as CEO, Starbucks repeatedly fought against workers attempts to organize a union. In 2008, for example, a National Labor Relations Board judge found that the company had illegally fired three workers for their union activities, as well as violated other aspects of the law. Starbucks workers in our country still dont have a union. Although the right wing has tried for years to paint unions as extreme, a recent Gallup poll showed that 62 percent of Americans approve of labor unions; similarly, an MIT survey found that most workers wanted a greater voice on the job, and that almost half would join a union if given the opportunity. Squelching union organizing efforts may be routine for companies, but its not where our countrys political center lies.
Starbucks also pays its workers poverty wages. According to PayScale, an online salary information company, the average hourly rate for Starbucks employees is around $11 per hour. Baristas average $9.77 per hour, and wages dont reach $15 per hour until a worker becomes a retail store manager ($17.44) or assistant manager ($15.17). And for years, Starbucks workers had unpredictable work schedules that impeded their ability to plan child care and other aspects of their lives. The company even had something workers unofficially named clopenings, in which the same person would be assigned to close the store and then open the next morning, leaving little time for anything in between. After negative media coverage, Starbucks announced in 2014 that schedules would be reliable and shared in advance, yet a year later workers still reported persistent problems.
How about access to courts? If workers want to bring a lawsuit for anything from race discrimination to sexual harassment to wage theft, they cant, because the company requires employees to sign an arbitration agreement as a condition of employment, and also to give up their right to bring a class action lawsuit. The #MeToo movement has helped to illustrate how harmful forced arbitration is: It typically results in denying workers the ability to vindicate their rights and hiding misconduct from public view. Schultz made much of his Race Together corporate campaign to spark conversations about race, but if a Starbucks employee were actually discriminated against, the company would prevent her from going to court.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/howard-schultz-starbucks-ceo-workers-bad-job.html
Wounded Bear
(58,584 posts)Hell, the headline is worth a K&R by itself. I about threw a shoe through my TV the other day when one of the talk shows labeled Schultz as "center left." I mean, really? Schultz may have grudgingly allowed some progressive social issues in his stores, but fiscally and financially, he's a hard right asshole.
jalan48
(13,839 posts)The idea is to keep some political ideas (wealth tax for example) off the table simply by labeling those ideas with a term that is meant to scare the public.
Taraman
(373 posts)He's nothing except a rich guy. No public experience, like our current guy, and that sure worked out swell.
Running the country is NOT like running a business.
Should have been a one-day story. With Schultz' expensive consultants this will get dragged out till summer.