The Supreme Court considered a case involving Starbucks and its alleged unfair labor practices toward seven employees who were fired during a unionization effort. The justices weighed the criteria that should be applied when the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeks injunctions to reinstate employees while it investigates complaints.
Lower courts have applied different legal standards in such cases, and Starbucks argued that a more stringent test should be used. The coffee giant’s lawyer urged the justices to order lower courts to apply a traditional, four-factor test that would be more difficult for the NLRB to meet.
Several conservative justices appeared sympathetic to Starbucks’ position, asking relatively few questions to its lawyer. Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned why the NLRB should receive special treatment compared to other agencies. The case stemmed from the firing of the “Memphis Seven,” seven Starbucks employees who participated in a unionization effort in 2022. The company claimed they violated company policies, including going behind the counter while off-duty and allowing an unauthorized person to enter the store.
The dispute occurred amidst a broader unionization wave at Starbucks. Starbucks Workers United reported earlier this year that over 400 stores with more than 10,000 workers had joined the union. Starbucks is not challenging the constitutionality of the NLRB, but rather the criteria that should be applied when the agency seeks injunctions. The NLRB contends that it should receive more deference given its role in investigating unlawful labor practices.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett expressed the view that district courts should independently evaluate such requests. However, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson argued that the injunctions in question are not ordinary preliminary injunctions, as the NLRB has a specific role in investigating labor complaints. Lisa Blatt, the attorney representing Starbucks, rejected this notion, stating that it is an ordinary preliminary injunction under an ordinary statute.
A government attorney cited data showing that the NLRB only sought such injunctions in a limited number of cases last year. Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that the NLRB’s win rate under its favored standard is only 61 percent, suggesting that it is not a rubber stamp.
A decision in the case, Starbucks v. McKinney, is expected by the end of June.
