Starbucks Store Illegally Solicited Complaints, NLRB Judge Says

An Oregon Starbucks location violated labor law by meeting with workers to discuss grievances after a union petition was filed, the judge ruled.

Published on Feb. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

An Oregon Starbucks store illegally solicited grievances from employees in an effort to prevent them from unionizing, according to a ruling by a National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge. The judge said the store's district manager met with workers one-on-one to discuss workplace complaints shortly after a union petition was filed, which violated federal labor law.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between Starbucks and its workers over unionization efforts, with the coffee giant accused of using various tactics to discourage employees from organizing. The NLRB ruling underscores that certain anti-union activities by employers are illegal under labor law.

The details

According to the NLRB judge's opinion, the Starbucks store in Salem, Oregon violated federal labor law when a district manager met with workers individually to discuss workplace grievances shortly after a union petition was filed. However, the judge ruled the store did not break the law by firing a store manager who refused to eavesdrop on workers on management's behalf.

  • The union petition was filed prior to the district manager meeting with employees.
  • The NLRB administrative law judge issued the ruling on Monday, February 9, 2026.

The players

Starbucks

A major coffee shop chain with locations across the United States.

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)

An independent federal agency that enforces laws related to collective bargaining and unfair labor practices.

John Giannopoulos

An NLRB administrative law judge who issued the ruling against the Starbucks store.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We must not let individuals continue to damage private property in San Francisco.”

— Robert Jenkins, San Francisco resident (San Francisco Chronicle)

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between Starbucks and its workers over unionization efforts, with the coffee giant accused of using various tactics to discourage employees from organizing. The NLRB ruling underscores that certain anti-union activities by employers are illegal under labor law.