The article details how Starbucks has failed to secure a timely union contract despite ongoing negotiations and increasing frustration among its baristas. This reflects a significant deficiency in upholding labor rights and fair working conditions—a core aspect of ethical business practices. Such inaction contributes to broader concerns about corporate complicity in systems of worker exploitation and authoritarian business practices.

One year later, a union contract for Starbucks baristas is still brewing

The strike organized by Starbucks baristas underlines chronic issues with labor relations at Starbucks. The protest over unresolved unfair labor practices and inadequate worker protections signals a systemic neglect of labor rights, undermining ethical business practices. This negative event directly reflects how the company has failed to uphold its responsibilities towards its workforce.

Baristas From Seattle Starbucks Join Nationwide Strike

The data indicates that a significant proportion of Starbucks Corporation’s lobbyists have previously held government positions. This revolving door dynamic suggests potential regulatory capture, where corporate influence undermines fair policy-making and benefits entrenched interests, thereby contributing to a political environment conducive to authoritarian practices.

Starbucks Corp Profile: Summary • OpenSecrets

The reported supply chain practices indicate a failure to adequately monitor and enforce ethical sourcing standards. Allegations of ghost farms and informal contractual arrangements that facilitate labor abuses point to severe shortcomings in Starbucks' supply chain ethics.

Labor Violations Alleged in Starbucks and Nestlé Supply Chains in China

In this event, Starbucks engaged in a political contribution by providing in-kind support (coffee for first responders) at both Republican and Democratic convention host committees. Although the donation is nonpartisan and presented as community support, the company's active participation in politically charged events can be seen as a strategic use of its resources in the political arena. From an anti-fascist perspective, while the event is not overtly endorsing authoritarian policies, the involvement in political events does warrant scrutiny.

Starbucks provides in-kind donation to GOP convention host committee

The adoption of AI surveillance tools by Starbucks demonstrates complicity in deploying repressive technologies. Such tools, originally designed for compliance and governance, can be used to suppress dissent and monitor employee sentiment in real-time, reinforcing trends toward authoritarian control in the workplace.

Starbucks, Walmart, & AstraZeneca all using AI to monitor employee messaging | Employee Experience | HR Grapevine USA | News

The article raises serious concerns regarding Starbucks' supply chain ethics, citing instances where its suppliers in Brazil, Guatemala, and Kenya were implicated in severe human rights abuses. These allegations challenge Starbucks' claims of ethical sourcing and transparency, thereby casting doubt on its commitment to responsible supply chain management.

Starbucks sued over claims of labor and human rights violations in making of products

Despite promoting a '100% ethical' sourcing image, Starbucks is accused of continuing to engage with suppliers that have documented forced labor and child labor issues. This misrepresentation undermines consumer trust and raises serious concerns over its supply chain ethics.

Starbucks sued for allegedly using coffee from farms with rights abuses while touting its ‘ethical’ sourcing

The complaint highlights that Starbucks relies on suppliers and certified cooperatives with documented histories of forced and child labor. This raises serious concerns regarding the robustness and credibility of its supply chain ethics and the veracity of its ethical claims.

National Consumers League sues Starbucks, alleging coffee giant deceives customers with claims of “100% ethical” coffee, tea

Starbucks' use of biometric surveillance technology in select NYC stores, without proper customer notification as required by law, represents a clear case of corporate overreach into personal privacy. This behavior is indicative of complicity in enabling repressive surveillance technologies that can be used to monitor and control public behavior. From an anti-fascist perspective, such practices are highly problematic as they contribute to the normalization of surveillance measures that may bolster authoritarian agendas.

Class Action Claims Starbucks Illegally Hid Biometric Surveillance From Some NYC Customers and Illegally Shared Customers’ Biometric Data With Amazon — S.T.O.P.

The detailed report on Starbucks' political contributions and lobbying expenditures, including over $2 million in federal lobbying, signals active engagement in influencing policy. Although the transparency measure is commendable, the substantial financial commitment to lobbying activities contributes to corporate influence in politics, which can indirectly support authoritarian practices and undermine democratic processes.

Starbucks Coffee Company Corporate Political Contributions and Expenditures: 2023 Report

The lawsuit claims that Starbucks uses biometric surveillance technology (via Amazon’s 'Just Walk Out' system) without proper disclosure to customers. This practice raises significant concerns about privacy rights and reflects an adoption of surveillance methodologies that could be leveraged in authoritarian regimes. The use of such repressive technologies, particularly without transparent consent processes, is seen as directly contributing to a climate in which individual freedoms are compromised in favor of corporate profit.

Starbucks Biometric Surveillance Class Action Lawsuit — S.T.O.P.