Posts tagged Article II of the Constitution
Federal Appeals Court Hears Arguments in Starbucks Baristas’ First-In-The-Nation Suit Challenging Constitutionality of NLRB
May 16, 2025 // Cortes and Karam’s case, originally filed in 2023, was the first in the nation to advance the argument that NLRB board members’ removal protections – which insulate members of the federal labor board from accountability to the President except on very rare occasions – violate separation of powers doctrines in Article II of the Constitution. Since Foundation attorneys filed the baristas’ case, the Trump Administration advanced the same arguments to remove Biden NLRB Member Gwynne Wilcox from the Board, which is now the subject of ongoing litigation.
Starbucks Employee’s Constitutional Challenge to Labor Board Structure Fully Briefed at DC Circuit Court of Appeals
February 25, 2025 // On April 28, 2023, Cortes submitted a petition, supported by a majority of her colleagues, asking the NLRB to hold a decertification election at her Buffalo-area “Del-Chip” Starbucks store to remove Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) union officials’ bargaining powers over workers. However, NLRB Region 3 rejected Cortes’ petition, citing unfair labor practice accusations made by SBWU union officials against the Starbucks Corporation. Notably, there was no established link between these allegations and the employees’ decertification request. Similarly, Karam filed a decertification petition seeking a vote to remove the union at his Buffalo-area Starbucks store. Like Cortes’ petition, NLRB officials refuse to allow the vote to take place, citing claims made by SBWU officials. As a result the workers remain trapped under union “representation” they oppose.
Amazon becomes latest company to argue US labor board is unconstitutional
February 20, 2024 // Amazon has become the latest company to argue that the structure of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) violates the U.S. Constitution, following the lead of SpaceX and Trader Joe’s. The e-commerce giant claimed in a recent filing that the labor board’s case, which accuses the company of illegally retaliating against unionizing workers, should be dismissed because the board itself is unconstitutional. Amazon argued that the NLRB’s structure “violates the separation of powers” because administrative law judges and board members are largely insulated from presidential oversight and removal, “impeding the executive power” provided in Article II of the Constitution.
Texas Starbucks Employee Challenges Federal Labor Board Structure as Unconstitutional in New Federal Lawsuit
January 24, 2024 // Busler submitted his union decertification petition on November 16, 2023. The petition contained signatures from enough of his coworkers to trigger a vote to remove the union under NLRB rules. However, the NLRB Regional Director still blocked the vote based on unfair labor practice charges SBWU union officials filed against Starbucks, despite there being no proven connection between those allegations and Busler’s decertification petition. The NLRB’s refusal to hold a union decertification vote means that Busler and his coworkers are still trapped under the “representation” of the SBWU union, despite numerous reports of SBWU agents’ combative and abrasive behavior at the store. In other filings in the NLRB case, Busler and his colleagues reported that SBWU officials ordered a divisive strike in which “[union] supporters outside the store were loud, boisterous, and were screaming at customers” and “would sometimes yell at other employees or tell partners that if they did not support Workers United they would be personally ostracized by other partners.” “Moreover, I believe the other employees who signed my decertification petition did not do so because they were coerced or duped by anything Starbucks allegedly did wrong, but because the Union was a divisive force in our store and has now ignored our location for several months,” Busler stated in an NLRB filing.