The B.C. Labour Relations Board has found Starbucks wrongfully made 鈥渢hreats of adverse consequences鈥� against an employee for her unionization activity, but found the company had a 鈥渓egitimate business reason鈥� to close down its only unionized location in Vancouver.

The United Steelworkers Local 2009 made a complaint of unfair labour practice against Starbucks Coffee Canada in 2023 for closing the Dunbar Street store less than a year after its workers had been unionized, and for disciplining an employee for 鈥渨earing a union T-shirt.鈥�

The board鈥檚 decision dated Feb. 11, says Starbucks denied closing the coffee shop over 鈥渁nti-union animus鈥� because the company was already considering shutting at the time the union had applied for certification as the lease was expiring and the building was too small.

The union had claimed the 鈥渙bjective impact鈥� of closing the Dunbar store 鈥渨as to dissuade others from unionizing,鈥� but the board rejected the argument, saying Starbucks had a 鈥渓egitimate鈥� reason to shut it down.

Starbucks Coffee Canada spokeswoman Mary Franssen said in an emailed statement that the company was 鈥減leased鈥� that the board found the Dunbar store closure was legitimate and that the decision was 鈥渕ade without regard to union status.鈥�

鈥淪tarbucks applies the same focus to evaluate, modify or close both union-represented and non-union stores based on our ability to provide the Starbucks experience to both our customers and partners (employees),鈥� the statement said.

The second part of the union鈥檚 complaint involved an employee at a Starbucks in Langley, B.C., who had been threatened with discipline for wearing a shirt with a union logo and the slogan 鈥淚 Support Our Bargaining Team鈥� in October 2023.

The complaint alleged a manager told the employee things would get 鈥渕essy鈥� for her if she continued her union activities.

The employee claimed the manager warned her that 鈥渟he did not know what she was getting herself into,鈥� telling her there was a 鈥渂igger picture鈥� and her union activity 鈥渨ouldn鈥檛 look great鈥� before telling her to 鈥渇ind a way out before it gets worse.鈥�

鈥淥n their face, the 鈥� statements are anti-union in nature,鈥� the board鈥檚 ruling says, adding they were intended to 鈥渃ompel鈥� the employee to cease being involved with the union.

The board found Starbucks breached the code by making threats and using 鈥渃oercion or intimidation鈥� to try to dissuade the employee from continuing her union activities.

The board declared that Starbucks breached two sections of the labour code for using coercion or intimidation, and for using threats of a penalty against an employee over her union activities.

The board ordered Starbucks to 鈥渃ease and desist from continuing any of the conduct found to be in breach of the code,鈥� and ordered the company to post a copy of the board decision 鈥渋n a conspicuous location鈥� at two of its coffee shops in Langley and Surrey, B.C.

Starbucks Canada鈥檚 statement said it respects the board鈥檚 ruling 鈥渁nd the company will comply with the requirements of the decision.鈥�