Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

catchnrelease

(2,068 posts)
6. I think I'm missing something
Tue Apr 15, 2025, 03:43 PM
Apr 15

I don't understand the outrage for this situation. I worked for the city of LA, and was in a union, and we were required to wear uniforms of a certain color. When I was hired (1980ish) they gave us two sets of tops/bottoms and a jacket as we worked outside most of the time. Anything after those sets of clothes we had to buy ourselves and it had to be within certain parameters--could be a polo type shirt in a specific color, and later they allowed t-shirts in that color with the city's logo on it. The pants could be jeans or a Dickies type pant, but only in brown. The uniforms saved having to pick out something to wear each day and/or ruining 'normal' clothes.

I get it that the employees feel that their more important issues are not being dealt with and management is stonewalling on them. Is it because the Starbucks baristas have to buy their own? Maybe they feel that this is an issue they can fight back on?

Recommendations

3 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Starbucks union hits out ...»Reply #6