starbucks.jpgWho the heck’s running your local Starbucks?

There’s been a battle over tips at Starbucks locations, and it’s exposed an odd phenomenon. There are no real supervisors at the high-priced latte chain.

A class-action suit was brought on behalf of thousands of Starbucks baristas in 2004, and the issue was that shift supervisors were taking a portion of the baristas tips and they didn’t deserve it. A court in San Diego found in favor of the baristas last year, but yesterday an appeals court overturned the ruling.

This from the Los Angeles Times:

An appeals court reversed the ruling Tuesday, saying that the original decision was improperly based and that supervisors at the nation’s largest coffeehouse chain “essentially perform the same job as baristas.”

First off, if they’re doing the same job as the baristas why aren’t the baristas paid as much as the so-called supervisors. Secondly, supervisors at Starbucks stores make about $3 more an hour than the baristas and they’re eligible for overtime. Doesn’t sound like a supervisor to me.

The supervisors do, however, have some more responsibility at the shops, making sure things run smoothly and directing the baristas. But, they can’t discipline or fire workers so seriously folks, how much power to make things run smoothly do they really have?

Hence my decision to call them fake supervisors.

In most cases, employers create fake supervisor positions so they don’t have to pay overtime. That’s not the case with Starbucks, but one could argue that they’re not paying their fake supervisors quite enough to make up for the extra work they do. Clearly they need money if they’re skimming the tips from lower wage workers.

Why not just pay everyone the extra $3 an hour, divvy up all the tips and call it a day?

Wake up and smell the coffee people!

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]