SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
womens march
Hundreds of Progressive Groups Back Starbucks Union Push as New CEO Arrives
"Instead of continuing on the current path Starbucks has taken, we urge you to create and build a healthy working relationship with unionized partners."
Apr 11, 2023
A progressive coalition representing 62 million people and nearly 500 member organizations on Tuesday urged new Starbucks CEO Laxman Narasimhan to end the coffee giant's hostility toward unioned workers and organizers across the United States.
Since workers in Buffalo, New York won a historic election to form Starbucks' first U.S. union in December 2021, employees at hundreds of locations throughout the nation have started organizing—and have been met with union-busting tactics from the company.
Narasimhan took over for former CEO Howard Schultz late last month, just before Schultz—facing a subpoena threat—testified before the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, chaired by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
Ahead of Schultz's testimony, the HELP Committee released a report pointing to dozens of National Labor Relations Board complaints against Starbucks and explaining that "though the coffee giant claims they are a 'progressive' company, there is mounting evidence that the $113 billion-dollar company's anti-union efforts include a pattern of flagrant violations of federal labor law."
In their Tuesday letter, civil rights, environmental, gender justice, and labor groups wrote to Narasimhan, "It's our hope that you uphold Starbucks' reputation as an inclusive and welcoming third place for the community by taking this opportunity to redefine the company's relationship with Starbucks partners working in cafes, reserve stores, and roasteries across the country."
"While our organizations represent many facets of the progressive movement, we know our fights are inextricably linked to that of Starbucks Workers United."
"We stand by workers exercising their fundamental and constitutional right to form a union," the progressive coalition emphasized. "Freedom of association is a constitutional right, and by joining together to bargain collectively with employers, unions give workers the opportunity to have their voices heard and help make decisions to make meaningful changes in their workplaces."
"Unions are good for workers, businesses, our economy, and our democracy," the coalition continued. "They are vehicles that advance equity across class, race, sexual orientation, gender, and immigration status. While our organizations represent many facets of the progressive movement, we know our fights are inextricably linked to that of Starbucks Workers United. We cannot have justice—racial, gender, immigrant, climate—without economic justice."
The letter concludes by highlighting how Narasimhan can chart a new path: "Instead of continuing on the current path Starbucks has taken, we urge you to create and build a healthy working relationship with unionized partners. We encourage you to affirm workers' legal right to organize a union by signing the fair elections principles and by committing to bargain in good faith with over 7,500 workers who have formed Starbucks Workers United."
Signatories include the AFL-CIO, American Federation of Teachers, Communications Workers of America, Community Change Action, Center for Popular Democracy, Greenpeace, MoveOn, National Education Association, People's Action, Public Citizen, Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Sierra Club, Sunrise Movement, UltraViolet, United We Dream, and Women's March.
"Starbucks has repeatedly, shamelessly, and illegally stood in the way of partners who are demanding a voice in their workplace and a strong contract to build a better future for themselves and their families," said SEIU international president Mary Kay Henry. "Narasimhan has an opportunity to stop the company's unprecedented, unpopular campaign of union-busting and instead partner with its workers and their union to build a Starbucks that truly lives up to its stated progressive values."
\u201cIt's a new day.\n\n@Starbucks has a new CEO, and a fresh chance at striking a new tone with workers!\n\nWe're thrilled to see dozens of groups supporting workers, and we too stand with @SBWorkersUnited. \n\nTell Starbucks you do too: https://t.co/eHu6ZalRT3\u201d— Fight For 15 (@Fight For 15) 1681219847
AFL-CIO president Liz Shuler pointed out that "Starbucks has always referred to its employees as partners" and "under new leadership, the company now has the chance to treat its workers like partners."
Community Change president Dorian Warren noted that Narasimhan could "set a powerful example for corporate America by committing to bargain in good faith with the thousands of workers who make his company's success possible."
"The importance of organizing can never be overstated," Warren added. "We are proud to support the Starbucks workers who are forming unions, and asking for higher wages, better benefits, and more control over their workplace conditions. We cannot forget that unions are one of the most important tools we have to protect and strengthen our democracy and build equity for all."
Group leaders also stressed that they represent millions of members and massive movements that support unionization efforts at Starbucks.
"Women's March unites with Starbucks workers—a workforce that is more than 70% women and women of color—as they organize tirelessly to take on the challenges they face in their workplace," said executive director Rachel Carmona. "This is not just a matter of fairness and justice—but a women's rights issue."
MoveOn executive director Rahna Epting declared that "Starbucks' record to date on unions has been distasteful, disrespectful, and disingenuous."
"Millions of members of MoveOn support workers' rights and want Starbucks to do right by the people who work for your company," she told the new CEO. "Your partners should be able to exercise their rights to freely and fairly organize and negotiate over their working conditions without fear of retaliation."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Texas Ruling Could Have 'Devastating' Impact on Access to Abortion Pills Nationwide
"This isn't about what the overwhelming majority of Americans want," said one advocate. "It's about a small group of people who want control over women's freedom to choose, and will seek any means to achieve it."
Feb 09, 2023
Abortion rights advocates are "watching and hoping that evidence-based care will prevail" in a federal court case in Texas, said one physician this week as a judge appointed by former President Donald Trump is expected to rule as soon as Friday on the Food and Drug Administration's authority to approve one of two drugs commonly used for medication abortions.
In a lawsuit filed by the right-wing Christian legal group Alliance Defending Freedom, Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk will review the final arguments on Friday, and is expected to soon rule on whether the FDA's approval of mifepristone should be revered more than two decades after the drug was first made legal.
Less than a year after the right-wing majority of the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and cleared the way for at least 13 states to impose bans on abortion care, a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would cause fresh "chaos" in the reproductive care landscape, according to abortion provider Dr. Kristyn Brandi. If Kacsmaryk rules in favor of the right-wing group, mifepristone would be banned even in states where abortion remains legal.
"A court case in Texas could easily turn into a nationwide ban on the most commonly prescribed medication abortion in the coming weeks through underhanded judicial tactics."
More than 3.7 million people have used mifepristone, which is taken alongside misoprostol in order to induce an abortion, since it was approved in the United States. Medication abortions now account for 53% of abortions in the U.S., and the FDA in recent years has made them more accessible by allowing patients to obtain the pills at telehealth visits and to get them through the mail and, last month, by allowing certified pharmacies to dispense the medication.
Alliance Defending Freedom and other pro-forced pregnancy groups have claimed the FDA was careless with patients' health when it approved mifepristone, even as clinical trials have shown it to be safer than penicillin, Viagra, and Tylenol.
\u201cWe have 20 years of evidence that medication #abortion is safe and effective.\n\nThis is yet another example of antiabortion extremists throwing everything at the wall to see what sticks. The Trump-stacked judiciary once again poses a threat to our rights: https://t.co/JkiuiyTrU9\u201d— Kelly Baden (@Kelly Baden) 1675864084
Advocates say the reversal of the FDA's approval would endanger millions of people who need abortions, as many would be left with only the option of a surgical abortion in clinics, which have become overburdened as people travel from states that have banned or severely restricted access.
"This ruling could be devastating for abortion care," Andrea Miller, president of the National Institute for Reproductive Health, toldThe Guardian on Thursday. "Cutting off critical access to abortion medication—which is the preferred method for more than half of abortion patients in the country—would cause significant harm, especially at a time when Dobbs has made it difficult or impossible for many to get care at clinics."
Some clinics have begun mobilizing to prepare healthcare workers to provide misoprostol-only medication abortions.
"No matter the case outcome, Planned Parenthood health centers will remain committed to doing whatever possible to ensure patients can choose the method of abortion that is best for their circumstances, including medication abortion," Danika Severino Wynn, vice president of abortion access at Planned Parenthood, told Jezebel on Tuesday.
Taking only misoprostol to induce an abortion has a lower success rate than taking the combination of pills—88% compared to 98%—and misoprostol-only abortions carry a greater risk of side effects. Both factors could complicate matters for people who live in states with abortion bans and decide to travel out-of-state to receive care to avoid potential prosecution. As The 19threported on Tuesday:
Some patients will have to decide if they want to take the pills in their home state, where it is outlawed, or if they want to take them before traveling home, navigating severe cramps and even vomiting while making an hours-long drive or flight.
And because misoprostol only has a higher failure rate, patients traveling out of state could face other risks. If they return home and learn the abortion has failed, multiple experts said, patients may not know where or how to find safe care in their home states, or may need to make another expensive trip across state lines.
"It's really hard as a provider to know there's a medication that works better than other options and not be able to offer that because of politics," Brandi, who chairs the board of the advocacy group Physicians for Reproductive Health, told The 19th.
Greer Donley, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh Law School, noted that in addition to harming pregnant people, a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs would have "serious and broad implications" for all drugs approved by the FDA and for the agency's authority.
Rights advocates this week noted that Kacsmaryk recently ruled against a federal program that allows teenagers in Texas to access birth control without their parents' permission.
\u201cI almost forgot that the judge that could ban the abortion pill nationwide also said anyone under 18 can't consent to birth control, basically echoing the arguments being used to deny trans youth care (which is the on-ramp to denying all trans people care) https://t.co/6C8rh2AZ5r\u201d— Gillian Branstetter (@Gillian Branstetter) 1675807742
Rights groups Women's March and UltraViolet on Thursday announced plans for a rally and march on Saturday in Amarillo, Texas, where the ruling will be handed down.
"A court case in Texas could easily turn into a nationwide ban on the most commonly prescribed medication abortion in the coming weeks through underhanded judicial tactics," said Rachel Carmona, executive director of Women's March. "This isn't about what the overwhelming majority of Americans want; it's about a small group of people who want control over women’s freedom to choose, and will seek any means to achieve it."
"This fight is bigger than Roe," she added. "This is about freedom, democracy, and fundamental human rights.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Thousands Across US Demand Reproductive Freedom on Roe's 50th Anniversary
"The overwhelming majority of Americans in all states support abortion rights—and women will fight to protect our rights and our lives," said the executive director of Women's March.
Jan 22, 2023
Thousands of people called for reproductive freedom at rallies around the United States on Sunday—the 50th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that made abortion a constitutional right until the Supreme Court's reactionary majority overturned it last summer.
At more than 200 events in 46 states, demonstrators condemned the court's 6-3 opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which enables states to curtail or even prohibit access to reproductive healthcare. Since the ruling was handed down on June 24, Republican lawmakers have enacted deadly abortion restrictions in 26 states, including near-total bans in several.
"Fifty years after the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a radical right-wing movement hijacked our courts and eliminated federal protections for abortions," said Rachel O'Leary Carmona, executive director of Women's March, which organized Sunday's "Bigger Than Roe" day of action.
"But as the fight turns to the states, they are going to learn that the overwhelming majority of Americans in all states support abortion rights—and women will fight to protect our rights and our lives," she added.
Carmona spoke at the Wisconsin state capitol. Women's March picked Madison rather than Washington, D.C. as the location of this year's national protest because the group wanted to send "a clear message to elected leaders and to our base—we are going to where the fight is, and that is at the state level."
"We'll start in Wisconsin, where an upcoming Supreme Court election this spring will determine the balance of power on the state's Supreme Court and the future of abortion rights in Wisconsin," the group explained.
Due to legal uncertainty around the status of Wisconsin's pre-Roe abortion ban, enacted in 1849, providers have been forced to stop offering abortion care in the state.
\u201cWe're fired up and ready to march for our rights because this fight is bigger than Roe. They thought that we would stay home and that this would end with Roe \u2014 they were wrong. \n\nWe're putting every politician on blast \u2014 if you come for our rights, we'll come for you. Period.\u201d— Women's March (@Women's March) 1674414697
\u201cProud to be in Madison today fighting to let every politician know \u2014 if you come for our freedom, our families, or our futures, we're coming for you.\u201d— Rachel O\u2019Leary Carmona (@Rachel O\u2019Leary Carmona) 1674417721
\u201c\ud83d\udce2 In Wisconsin today to make ourselves clear: \n\nWe will never stop fighting for reproductive freedom! \n\n #BiggerThanRoe @womensmarch\u201d— NARAL (@NARAL) 1674422639
Women's March—with the support of nearly 50 organizations, including Planned Parenthood, Working Families Power, and the National Organization for Women—orchestrated "sister marches" in cities across the country.
"We are taking the fight to the states," organizers said. "From Wisconsin, to Nebraska, to Georgia, to Arizona and Texas, women and our allies are defending abortion rights where they still stand, and working to put measures on the ballot to regain abortion rights in places where politicians are putting their agendas over the will of the people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular