• AClassyGentleman@lemmy.world
    1343·
    1 year ago

    Alright as someone who has seen this happen… Don’t. Fist off, if the employee doesn’t already know what the benefits of a union are and how to go about organizing one, this does nothing to change that. Second, it puts them in a dangerous position with management. Obviously, any good Union drive should be fully prepared for union busting tactics, but ideally you want to keep that shit secret from management for as long as possible. And imagine how frustrated you’d be if a customer pulling a stunt like this got you fired.

    Instead what you want to do is talk to your family, friends, and coworkers about what a union can do for them and talk about how to effectively organize a union drive. Make sure that shit is led by the workers, and puts forward strong demands and escalating tactics. They should also absolutely get community support, but in organized, meaningful ways - think things like mailing lists to get the word out about rallies, boycotts, etc.

    Unions are hell of a tool and they should be organized in the most effective possible ways.

  • CupDock@lemmy.world
    121·
    1 year ago

    Better yet: start getting your coffee from a local shop and stop going to Starbucks at all! The trick is finding a local shop with real specialty drinks, not just a variety of syrup flavors.

    • Moonguide@lemmy.world
      31·
      1 year ago

      Or just at least mid coffee. I live in a coffee producing country, and I’ve tried everything from really expensive coffee to bottom of the barrel, both local and from abroad. The only cup of coffee I sipped and spat out was a Starbucks in Houston.

      • jscummy@sh.itjust.works
        24·
        1 year ago

        Starbucks burns the shit out of their beans for consistency … it’s all consistently burnt with no unique flavor

        • zurohki@aussie.zoneEnglish
          9·
          1 year ago

          It’s designed to be the base of a drink that’s 30% sugar. The bitterness helps offset the sweetness.

        • CoffeeGrounds@lemmy.world
          21·
          1 year ago

          It’s also done to increase the shelf life of the beans. So if you get Starbucks coffee, there’s a good chance you’re drinking coffee from beans roasted years ago. As someone who exclusively drinks specially coffee, the thought of drinking coffee from beans that were roasted even 3 months ago grosses me out

    • negativeyoda@lemmy.world
      9·
      1 year ago

      Exactly this. Starbucks coffee is awful and Schultz sucks.

      Easiest way to stop drinking Starbucks is to try drinking their coffee black or look at the nutritional content in your vanilla bean Frappuccino

    • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
      8·
      1 year ago

      So much this!

      What the fuck is people’s fascination with chain or franchise businesses, especially places that serve food.

      Starbucks is worth $120 BILLION. That’s $120 BILLION that gets sucked out of the local economies that these stores are at and gets sent to their HQ in Seattle to pay corporate executive salaries. If you go to a local mom and pop store, that $10 purchase, for the most part, stays local. If you go to Starbucks, they still have rent and equipment to buy and a store manager and a person making your food just like the mom and pop shop. But on top of that, they also have a massive corporate HQ and all the people that work there to pay for. So they HAVE TO either raise prices, lower local wages, or cut corners on the quality of the food to pay for the extra expense of the corporate salaries.

      I find it infuriating how people don’t understand that rather basic concept and continue to frequent these establishments.

      I am not saying that all local food places are good. Far from it, but the good ones spend the money that would have gone to pay corporate salaries instead on buying better ingredients or possibly paying their wrokers better. Having money sent off to the next level up the corporate ladder is like the feudal system all over again where a serf gave some of his earnings/food he grew to his master and then that master gave some to a king and so on and so forth. The serf is the only one in that chain that actually did any real work.

    • CluckN@lemmy.world
      2·
      1 year ago

      This is what Republicans did when Starbucks removed their Christmas branding for a general holiday theme. They made their names “Merry Christmas” and “Santa”.

  • SwiftLime79@lemmy.worldEnglish
    9·
    1 year ago

    I don’t shop there, and wouldn’t want to risk an employee getting fired on my account.

    Also, I’ll stick to “Rusty Shackleford” when i’m asked for a name.

  • Mac
    147·
    1 year ago

    Yes because getting them fired is such a great idea.

    • explodicle@local106.com
      2·
      1 year ago

      Even ignoring the law, there’s a clear paper trail proving they were forced to say it. It would make more sense to ban the customer.

      • Redderthanmisty@lemmygrad.ml
        4·
        1 year ago

        Maybe so, but proving without any possible doubt that was the cause is the burden of the fired employee, who also likely doesnt have money for a lawyer, let alone court fees to persue the case in the first place.

        This difficulty is only amplified in at-will employment areas where your boss can fire you on the spot for no reason at all.

        Its as if the system was built from the ground up to benefit businesses over people.

        • Aezora@lemmy.world
          1·
          1 year ago

          Luckily, unlawful termination doesn’t require proof beyond reasonable doubt.

          So if the employee was fired on the spot, that would pretty much guarantee a win in most states unless the boss could show that they had already planned to fire them before they shouted “unionize”.

          If the boss fired them a month later, that would be a different story. But yeah, the rest of that is valid.