NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. SIREN RETAIL CORPORATION DBA STARBUCKS, No. 22-1969 (9th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
In February 2022, Workers United sought to represent 90 employees at a Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Seattle. Due to rising COVID-19 cases, the Regional Director ordered a mail-ballot election, which took place in April 2022. Starbucks refused to recognize and bargain with the union, arguing that the Regional Director should have ordered an in-person election. The Regional Director overruled Starbucks' objection and certified the election results. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that Starbucks' refusal to recognize and bargain with the union constituted unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act.
The NLRB's decision was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Starbucks argued that the court lacked jurisdiction over the enforcement application because the NLRB had severed the question of whether to adopt a compensatory remedy. The court rejected this argument, holding that the NLRB's order was final and reviewable under 29 U.S.C. § 160(e).
Starbucks also claimed that the Regional Director abused his discretion by ordering a mail-ballot election instead of an in-person one. The court rejected this argument as well, holding that the Regional Director had correctly applied the NLRB's own law in deciding to hold a mail-ballot election. The court affirmed the NLRB's finding that Starbucks had violated Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain. The court granted the NLRB's application for enforcement of its order directing Starbucks to recognize and bargain with the union.
Court Description: Labor Law. The panel granted the National Labor Relations Board’s application for enforcement of its order directing Starbucks Reserve Roastery in Seattle to “cease and desist from failing and refusing to recognize and bargain with the Union.” In February 2022, Workers United filed a petition seeking to represent 90 employees at the Seattle Roastery. Citing rising COVID-19 cases in the area, the Regional Director ordered a mail-ballot election, which took place in April 2022. Starbucks refused to recognize and bargain with the union, claiming that the Regional Director should have ordered an in-person election instead. The Regional Director overruled the objection and certified the results. The Board held that by refusing to recognize and bargain with the Union, Starbucks engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act.
The panel rejected Starbucks’s claim that the court lacked jurisdiction over the enforcement application because the Board severed the question of whether to adopt a compensatory remedy. The panel held that the Board’s order was final and reviewable under 29 U.S.C.
§ 160(e). Nothing in the order suggested that the severed issue would have any effect on the Board’s conclusion regarding the underlying charge, nor on the order to bargain.
The panel held that the Regional Director did not abuse his discretion when he faithfully applied Aspirus Keweenaw, 370 N.L.R.B. 45 (2020), and ordered a mail-ballot election. Accordingly, the panel held that the Board correctly applied its own law in determining that the Regional Director appropriately exercised its discretion to hold a mail-ballot election. The certification of the union’s representative was proper, and the Board correctly found that Starbucks violated Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.