Starbucks employees in three states filed legal action Wednesday, claiming the coffee giant broke the law by changing its dress code without reimbursing staff who had to buy new clothes.
Workers, backed by the union organizing Starbucks stores, filed class-action lawsuits in Illinois and Colorado state courts and lodged complaints with California’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency. If California regulators decline to pursue penalties, the employees plan to file a class-action suit there, according to the complaints.
The Associated Press said it left a message with Starbucks Wednesday seeking comment.
Starbucks’ new dress code took effect May 12. It requires all North American employees to wear a solid black short- or long-sleeve shirt under their green aprons. Shirts may have collars but must cover the midriff and armpits. Starbucks issued each employee two free T-shirts that meet the new guidelines.
Workers must also wear khaki, black or blue denim bottoms without patterns or frayed hems, or solid black dresses no more than four inches above the knee. Shoes must be black, gray, dark blue, brown, tan or white, made of waterproof material. Socks and hosiery must be “subdued,” Starbucks said.
The policy bans face tattoos, more than one facial piercing, tongue piercings and “theatrical makeup.” Starbucks said in April the stricter standards would make green aprons stand out and create a familiar look for customers as it seeks to restore a warmer in-store experience.
Until now, Starbucks had a relatively lax dress code. In 2016 it began allowing patterned shirts in multiple colors for more self-expression, and enforcement was loose, the Colorado lawsuit states. Under the new rules, employees who don’t comply cannot start their shifts.
Brooke Allen, a full-time student and Starbucks worker in Davis, Calif., said a manager told her in July that the Crocs she was wearing didn’t meet the new standards and she needed different shoes to work the next day. Allen said she visited three stores to find a compliant pair costing $60.09 and has since spent another $86.95 on black shirts and jeans.
“I think it’s extremely tone deaf on the company’s part to expect their employees to completely redesign their wardrobe without any compensation,” Allen said. “A lot of us are already living paycheck to paycheck.”
Allen also misses the old policy, which allowed colorful shirts and three facial piercings. “It looks sad now that everyone is wearing black,” she said.
The lawsuits argue Starbucks’ dress code violates state laws requiring employers to reimburse workers for expenses that primarily benefit the company. Colorado law also bars employers from imposing costs on workers without written consent. Plaintiffs seek damages for all Starbucks employees in those states, unionized or not.
Several workers said reimbursement requests were denied. Gilbert Cruz, an employee in Aurora, Ill., said he asked for $10 to cover the cost of removing a nose piercing.
The lawsuits mark a shift in worker-led tactics in the years-long drive to unionize Starbucks. Starbucks Workers United, which has unionized 640 of the company’s roughly 10,000 U.S. stores, has filed hundreds of unfair-labor-practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board, including one over the dress code in April.
But the board’s ability to act has been curtailed. President Donald Trump fired an NLRB member this spring, leaving the board without a quorum to decide cases.
This article has been carefully fact-checked by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and eliminate any misleading information. We are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity in our content.
Leave a Reply