If Plaza Starbucks closure was about safety and not union busting, let’s hear details

Seattle-based Starbucks has some explaining to do. The company suggested Tuesday that its decision to abruptly close its store in Kansas City’s premier shopping district was nothing out of the ordinary. A chain that large, its spokesperson said, opens and shuts stores on a regular basis

But its stated reason — because of safety concerns — seems at odds with the manner in which the closing came about. Why would a chain give no notice to its employees or its customers that it was unexpectedly shutting down?

Of course, as a private company, Starbucks doesn’t owe the public a minute accounting of its decisions about which stores to keep open and which to close. But in this case, a little extra transparency would be in its best interest. That’s because the decision to suddenly shutter its Country Club Plaza store comes after months of Starbucks workers trying to unionize at that location. Those efforts followed a nationwide trend of Starbucks workers organizing. So far, workers at five stores in the Kansas City area have voted to join the Starbucks Workers United labor union.

For many of those employees, the decision to suddenly shutter the Plaza location stems from the company’s opposition to those ongoing labor efforts.

“Starbucks decided to shut down the store because they thought it was easier … than to have to deal with,” unionizing workers, Josh Crowell, a barista and union organizer at the store at 302 Nichols Road told a Star reporter.

We asked Starbucks if the union efforts were linked to the decision to close the store, and didn’t get a response. That’s not surprising, since federal law based on a 1965 Supreme Court case, Textile Workers Union v. Darlington Manufacturing, prohibits a company from closing down one location in order to put pressure on workers at other outlets to oppose the union.

We urge Starbucks to more fully explain why it closed the store, in part to put to bed any lingering suspicion that it was tied to the union activity. Those workers, and workers everywhere, have a right to form a labor union — a right the company can’t legally interfere with.

On the other hand, Starbucks has a good story to tell, too. The largest coffee chain in the U.S., the company has long had a reputation for being one of the best places to work, with good benefits even for part-time workers, including money for college, and a diverse workforce.

Employees happy with pay, work conditions, benefits and growth opportunities usually are not seeking to change those things. Shutting a store and giving employees only a few moments’ notice does not make for happy workers.

If safety is truly a concern for retailers in the area, that’s something that police and city officials need to be concerned about. Given that the pandemic lockdowns already put retailers in the area in difficult situations, with a string of local and national storefronts also closing, any rise in crime must be taken seriously.

But Starbucks would do well to dispel worries that its decisions were tied to the labor union question. Its abrupt closing is sure to leave a sour taste for disappointed customers and for its employees caught completely off guard.

For now, Starbucks has said its workers at the Plaza location are being paid through Thursday and could end up reassigned at other stores. Finding new roles for affected employees ought to be a priority. Unless that happens, those workers are just out of a job.

We’re not sure whether that makes them safer or not.