Voting on Worker Rights and Leadership at Starbucks

This Thursday, people who own parts of Starbucks (called shareholders) will vote on two big things. First, they’ll decide if Starbucks is being fair to its workers. Second, they’ll talk about how the company plans to choose new leaders in the future.

Starbucks has a new CEO, Laxman Narasimhan, who just started earlier than expected. He took over from Howard Schultz, the old CEO.

But Starbucks has a lot of problems right now. Next week, a U.S. Senator, Bernie Sanders, will ask Schultz questions about whether the company is stopping workers from joining unions. On Wednesday, workers from over 100 stores went on strike, protesting outside Starbucks’ headquarters in Seattle. Even animal rights group PETA is upset about Starbucks charging extra for non-dairy milk.

What the Vote Means

When shareholders vote, their decision isn’t a rule the company has to follow. The Starbucks board, a group of people in charge, can decide to ignore it. However, if many shareholders support something, it can push the company to make changes.

One big vote (Proposal 8) asks Starbucks to check if it’s really supporting workers’ rights, like letting them join unions. Many Starbucks stores want to unionize, and over 500 complaints have been made about unfair treatment of workers. Starbucks says it will do an investigation but doesn’t want shareholders to vote for Proposal 8.

Jonas Kron, a leader at Trillium Asset Management, a group pushing for the vote, says Starbucks hasn’t been clear about its promises. Trillium has asked other companies, like Apple, to look into similar worker issues, and Apple agreed without waiting for a vote.

Kron believes that if at least 30% of shareholders vote for something, it’s a sign that the company needs to listen. Two important groups that give advice to shareholders are telling them to vote “yes” on Proposal 8.

Planning for New Leaders

Another vote (Proposal 6) is about how Starbucks picks new leaders. A group called SOC Investment thinks Starbucks should plan at least three years ahead for leadership changes. They believe this is important because last year, when a CEO left unexpectedly, Starbucks had to ask Howard Schultz to come back temporarily.

While Starbucks has improved its planning, it says the three-year rule isn’t flexible enough. Still, many shareholders and experts think the idea is good and are voting for it.