Lead: Starbucks Workers United said members voted to strike U.S. company-owned stores beginning Nov. 13 — coinciding with Starbucks’ Red Cup Day — unless a labor contract is finalized. The union announced the action Wednesday, saying workers in at least 25 cities will participate and more locations could join if negotiations do not show “substantial progress.” The date is one of Starbucks’ busiest retail days and would mark a renewed escalation of organizing activity that has grown since 2021.
Key Takeaways
- The union set a strike start date of Nov. 13, the company’s Red Cup Day, a high-traffic retail promotion dating to 2018.
- At least 25 cities reported planned participation; the union did not provide a final store count for the strike.
- Approximately 550 of Starbucks’ roughly 10,000 U.S. company-operated stores are currently unionized.
- The union says progress toward a national contract has stalled since CEO Brian Niccol took leadership after Laxman Narasimhan’s departure.
- Starbucks reported average pay and benefits for hourly partners above $30 an hour; the company disputes the union’s demands.
- Starbucks said it closed 59 unionized stores in September as part of a broader restructuring.
- The union contends some baristas still lack enough guaranteed hours to qualify for benefits and cites CEO compensation — $95.8 million in 2024 — as evidence of skewed priorities.
Background
Unionization drives at Starbucks began gaining momentum in 2021, producing hundreds of local victories at company-operated stores across the United States. Those wins led to formal organizing under Starbucks Workers United and repeated rounds of bargaining with the company over a national contract aimed at standardizing wages, scheduling and benefits.
Starbucks and the union have not reached a national contract. In December 2023 the company pledged to finalize an agreement by the end of 2024 under then-CEO Laxman Narasimhan. Narasimhan left the company last fall; Brian Niccol is now chairman and CEO, and both sides say momentum in talks has shifted since the leadership change.
The labor fights have produced periodic walkouts. Red Cup Day has become a focal point: in 2023 thousands of workers across more than 200 stores staged actions, and a five-day strike late last year closed 59 U.S. stores. At the same time, Starbucks has said it continues to employ a mix of company-operated and licensed locations, with many licensed sites (airports, grocery stores, etc.) operating under different agreements.
Main Event
On Wednesday the union announced members had voted to authorize a strike beginning Nov. 13 if a contract is not reached. The date was chosen to overlap with Red Cup Day, a seasonal promotion that traditionally draws heavy customer traffic and elevated sales volume for many stores.
Starbucks Workers United said workers in at least 25 cities planned to strike but did not list a precise store total. The union added that more locations could be added to the action if bargaining does not produce what it called “substantial progress” toward a final deal.
Starbucks responded that it was disappointed the union chose a strike instead of returning to the table. A company spokeswoman highlighted what Starbucks describes as competitive pay and benefits, saying the employer already offers more than $30 an hour on average for hourly partners and that many stores would remain open even if some workers walk out.
In a separate letter to employees, Starbucks’ Chief Partner Officer Sara Kelly said the union’s proposals included steep wage increases — characterized by the company as a 65% immediate boost and a 77% increase over three years — along with operational changes such as giving workers the authority to pause mobile ordering during busy periods. Starbucks described those proposals as impractical and not evidence-based.
Analysis & Implications
A strike on Red Cup Day would carry outsized symbolic and economic weight. Retail volumes spike around that promotion, so work stoppages could amplify bargaining leverage by timing disruption when revenue is typically high. For the union, signaling readiness to act on a high-profile day raises public visibility and pressure on corporate leadership.
For Starbucks, the operational impact depends on geography and the mix of company-operated versus licensed stores. The company has stressed that roughly 7,000 licensed locations — including many airport and grocery partnerships — will remain open under separate agreements, reducing the scope of immediate customer disruption. Nevertheless, closures or limited service at company-run stores on a key day could dent sales and create logistical strain.
Politically and economically, the action reflects broader trends in U.S. labor — increased organizing in service sectors, rising worker demands for stable hours and benefits, and heightened scrutiny of executive compensation. The union’s emphasis on hours and eligibility for benefits targets scheduling practices that many hourly workers cite as the core grievance beyond headline wage rates.
Negotiations could move faster if both parties perceive tangible downside risk — for Starbucks, lost sales and reputational cost; for the union, the challenge of sustaining prolonged actions across dispersed sites. Absent a near-term settlement, bargaining could extend into the holiday season, which would raise the stakes for both sides.
Comparison & Data
| Metric | Figure | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Company-operated U.S. stores | ~10,000 | Approximate total used by company reporting |
| Unionized company stores | ~550 | Stores with recognized unions as reported |
| Stores closed (Sept.) | 59 | Closure cited as part of restructuring |
| Planned strike cities | At least 25 | Union-listed; store counts per city vary |
The table highlights scale: unionized stores remain a minority of the total, but selective, time-targeted actions can magnify disruption. Company closures and restructuring reduce the pool of contested locations while also shaping bargaining dynamics.
Reactions & Quotes
Starbucks issued an immediate rebuttal emphasizing compensation and operational concerns; the company framed the union’s demands as excessive and impractical. The following statements capture the opposing positions and provide context for each side’s public posture.
“We’re disappointed the union is planning to strike instead of returning to the bargaining table. Any agreement needs to reflect the reality that Starbucks already offers the best job in retail.”
Jaci Anderson, Starbucks spokeswoman (company statement)
Anderson’s comment underscores the company line that current pay and benefits are competitive and that further demands risk operational disruption.
“Our fight is about actually making Starbucks jobs the best jobs in retail. Right now, it’s only the best job in retail for Brian Niccol.”
Jasmine Leli, Starbucks barista and strike captain (union representative)
Leli’s remark draws attention to the union’s argument that executive pay and scheduling practices leave many frontline workers without stable hours or benefits.
“These aren’t serious, evidence-based proposals,”
Sara Kelly, Chief Partner Officer, Starbucks (company letter)
Kelly’s letter detailed the company’s view of the union’s economic proposals and raised operational objections, including items that would change how stores manage mobile ordering and peak periods.
Unconfirmed
- The exact number of individual stores that will participate on Nov. 13 has not been confirmed by the union.
- Whether additional cities or a broader coordinated strike network will join beyond the initially named 25 cities remains uncertain.
- The precise revenue impact to Starbucks from a one-day or multi-day action on Red Cup Day is not publicly available and will depend on store-level participation.
Bottom Line
The announced Nov. 13 strike authorization escalates a long-running dispute between Starbucks and workers seeking a national contract. Strategically timed to Red Cup Day, the action aims to extract concessions by maximizing visibility and commercial pressure on a key retail moment.
Outcomes depend on bargaining posture and risk tolerance on both sides: Starbucks can blunt disruption through licensed locations and contingency staffing, while the union can increase leverage by expanding participation. If talks remain stalled, the conflict could persist into the holiday period, making a near-term resolution central to limiting financial and reputational costs for both parties.