Sun, Jun 13, 2004 - Page 12 News List

Rebel barista with a cause challenges employee policies at Starbucks

Daniel Gross and a band of disgruntled New York Starbucks java-servers who feel that the company should be held to the standards it preaches have, to the company's dismay, formed a single-shop union

NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE , New York

Daniel Gross outside the Manhattan Starbucks where he works. Gross is a relentlessly on-message mouthpiece for insurgent baristas at the Starbucks on Madison Avenue at 36th Street who have formed their own union.

PHOTO: NY TIMES

In the cozy corporate lingo of Starbucks, the java-servers in company baseball caps and green aprons are so far evolved from folks who, in quainter, less caffeinated and less linguistically sensitive times, were dubbed soda jerks, that the coffee chain graces them with a special name: baristas. The moniker conveys a Euro-cachet, implies a certain skill set and is the entry-level niche at a US$15 billion behemoth with a hot -- in more ways than one -- product and a rung on the Fortune 100 best-places-to-work list.

Baristas like Daniel Gross who pour enough coffee fast enough, and with affable competence, can command US$8.09 per hour after a year on the job, up from a starting wage of US$7.75. Scalding stuff, according to Gross, with or without meager tips. And without a defined workload: No barista is guaranteed a 40-hour week.

Good luck trying to save enough to buy company-sponsored health care or incubate a nest egg, he says. Not with rents on bare-bones railroad flats like his in Bushwick, Brooklyn, pushing US$1,000 a month.

"Starbucks also refers to its employees as partners, which really is sort of Orwellian," says Gross, who is not just a terminally disgruntled barista, but a relentlessly on-message mouthpiece for insurgent baristas at the Starbucks on New York's Madison Avenue at 36th Street who have, to the company's dismay, formed a single-shop union.

Here he is, on his day off, on the sidewalk looking askance at the Starbucks that hired him last year. He'd heard it was a "decent" place to work. Not so, he says now.

"Those who have power over us workers have abused it so egregiously: We feel the company should be held to the standard that it preaches," he declares. "There's something wrong when the chairman is taking in US$17 million in 2003, but baristas, who are the foundation of the company, are living in grinding poverty and serving very hot drinks at unsafe speeds under ergonomically incorrect conditions."

He says complaints to superiors went unheeded, hence his decision to play hardball and unionize; more than half of the store's 13 baristas are on his team, he says.

Two days after Gross announced his group's intentions on May 17, the chairman of Starbucks, Howard Schultz, sent a voice-mail message to employees reminding them of the company's social conscience and commitment to a supportive workplace. Starbucks hired a Manhattan law firm to counter Gross's request that the National Labor Relations Board administer a union election for the store he works in. The would-be local is being represented, free of charge, by Kennedy, Schwartz & Cure. Gross, 25, earnest, articulate and dogmatic to a flaw, can't think of a better way to flex his magna cum laude degree in economics from the University of California, Santa Barbara -- he grew up in Los Angeles, where his parents are "in sales" -- than to organize the first unionized Starbucks in the US.

He sees the move as historic, even if none of the baristas from some 50 other downtown Starbucks have publicly expressed solidarity, and envisions the union as a precedent-setter. He hasn't been this inspired since he read the Dalai Lama's Art of Happiness during college and helped found Students for a Free Tibet at UCSB, then volunteered at the Khana Nirvana Community Cafe in Dharamsala, India, after graduation.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top