Starbucks wins tip suit in appeal.

Last year, former and current employees won a suit against Starbucks for allowing shift supervisors a portion of tips, and required that the coffee giant pay 100 million in restitution. A California appeals court overturned the findings yesterday. A gent in my Arabic class last summer was insulted that someone would bring the suit and win. He stated that they're doing the same amount and type of work, and thus deserved a share of tips. While discussing the topic, his impassioned commentary convinced me to avoid any disputes while I still faced five hours of Arabic. And, in part, his logic made sense to me until I read an article in today's Trib. I'm sympathetic with the shift supervisors because they have to work as baristas and, in this time the same as any, those folks need the money to survive.

But I have a problem with Starbucks' defense and my former classmates' argument. The shift supervisor earns three dollars more an hour, and can work up to 95% of the time as a barista. The average tip sharing is 1.71 an hour, according to Starbucks. I don't think I understand why they deserve the tip sharing if they're earning more and working 95% of the time as a glorified barista with even a little supervisory responsibility, according to Starbucks' insistence:

"Although supervisors have some authority to supervise or direct baristas, they can't enforce those directions and can't hire, discipline or terminate them, the Seattle company said."

Of course, there's a large problem with permitting any supervisor to dip into the pool of tips of the regular barista, regardless of wage disparities. I am open to argument in favor of Starbucks, but I'm not convinced that the shift supervisors deserve any apportionment of the tips if they're already paid three dollars more an hour, still retain some supervisory function, and the average tip sharing doesn't allow the regular barista to ease the wage difference. There's no guarantee that the shift supervisor will out perform a standard java jockey. Despite Starbucks' claim, obviously they can enforce directions otherwise they wouldn't be a supervisor. Yes, they might have to work harder, but that's a given once you rise into a management position (at any level) and one's remuneration increases.

It's obvious why Starbucks wants to win. 100 million at a time when the economy is failing, Starbucks battered stores, and it tried to reinvent itself with an all-day training session for baristas and new drinks, the company doesn't want to pay. Even though Starbucks treats its labor force well with perks such as health care, stock options, and tip sharing, corporate welfare exists for a reason: to prevent a potential organization of its workers into a union. Labor organizers, such as UFCW, have a more difficult time appealing to workers at Starbucks and Costco who benefit from corporate welfare than those at Wal Mart and Sam's Club. I don't want to paint Starbucks as a behemoth that cares little for its massive labor pool, because I'm not sure it's the case. That being said, Starbucks opposes EFCA and organized labor due to the elemental reason that it could stand to lose if workers unionize and demand better treatment.

It's not an accident that a part-time barista can earn a modicum of health care through Starbucks. In an economy based on consumption and service jobs, baristas and the folks working at malls are the modern-day auto workers and other non-skilled laborers who filled the ranks of the CIO.

Edit: Okay, I spoke with a friend who worked as a shift supervisor. She informed me that her pay increase was nothing over a dollar, and she remember it as a sixty cent pay difference. While that was a couple of years ago, she also said that her responsibilities were minimal and entailed knowing the safe combo, having keys, and retrieving and dropping off money. I know that's not scheduling, managing a store budget, hiring, firing, etc., but that's a hell of a lot of responsibility. I have less of a quibble if it's only a dollar's difference in wages, but three and tips still seems too much for me when someone has that level of responsibility.