You know that scene in The Joker where he burns the mountain of cash and says "it's not about the money, it's about sending a message"?

Well. Starbucks baristas just sent their message. And the mountain of money is still on fire.

What went down

The Starbucks Workers United union presented the company last month with a full contract proposal — the first serious attempt to close a collective bargaining agreement with the coffee giant. The news broke during an investor call on Friday, and the contents are spicier than a triple espresso with no sugar.

Here's what the baristas are asking for:

  • A $17/hour wage floor. Fun fact: they originally asked for $20 and already backed down. Starbucks' current floor is a measly $15.25 to $16 per hour across 43 states. In other words, the union already came in "let's be reasonable" mode, and the company is still likely to cry about it.
  • 4% annual raises. In a country where inflation ate everyone's purchasing power over the past few years, asking for 4% a year isn't a luxury — it's survival.
  • Protection against unjust firings, discrimination, and store closures. Translation: "stop shutting down unionized locations as retaliation."
  • A minimum of three employees on the floor at all times. Anyone who's walked into a packed Starbucks with two desperate baristas knows this should be a no-brainer.
  • A requirement to offer overtime to existing employees before hiring new ones. Basic. Elementary. And yet it still needs to be in a contract.
  • Resolution of hundreds of pending unfair labor practice charges. Hundreds. Not dozens — hundreds. Let that sink in.

And Starbucks' response to the proposal's contents? None. Zero. Zilch. Deafening silence.

What the company told CNBC was that it "proposed resuming in-person negotiations on March 30." So: they didn't even properly read the proposal but already scheduled a meeting two weeks out. Classic corporate stall game — kick the can down the road and hope it goes away.

The context nobody's telling you

Negotiations between Starbucks and the union stalled at the end of 2024. The last formal round was in December of that year. Then came mediation sessions, and in April the barista delegates voted down the economic package the company offered.

What came next? An open strike during the holiday season. Baristas in more than 40 cities walked off the job for weeks. Dozens of stores temporarily shut down during the most profitable time of the year.

Starbucks, with that blank corporate poker face we all know so well, said it "did not materially affect the business." That might even be true on the quarterly balance sheet. But in terms of troop morale and brand reputation? That's a whole different story.

And speaking of reputation: the annual shareholder meeting is set for March 25. A group of investors led by the SOC Investment Group is already pushing shareholders to vote against the reelection of two directors — Jørgen Vig Knudstorp and Beth Ford — precisely because of their disastrous oversight of labor relations. Glass Lewis, one of the world's largest proxy advisory firms, recommended voting against Ford.

When even the folks who only care about dividends start questioning your labor governance, you know the shit has hit the fan.

The elephant in the room

The union represents only 6% of Starbucks' company-owned stores in the U.S. Six percent. That's practically nothing in terms of scale.

But here's the truth that Starbucks' board doesn't want to face: if those 6% land a decent contract, the other 94% are going to want the same thing. And then the cost isn't one contract — it's a structural transformation.

Starbucks is trying to pull off a turnaround of its American business. Last quarter, store traffic went up for the first time in two years. The company needs these baristas motivated, smiling at customers, making that pretty latte art for Instagram.

You know what doesn't motivate anyone? Making $15 an hour, with no job security, no protection, and the feeling that the company would rather close your store than negotiate a fair contract.

Starbucks pulls in $29 billion in annual revenue. Howard Schultz built an empire selling the idea that baristas are "partners." Damn, if they're real partners, treat them like partners. If they're not, at least have the honesty to drop the act.

Now tell me: how long before Starbucks figures out that silence isn't a strategy — it's fuel for the next strike?