The policy says that that the shift supervisors are to split up the tips with the baristas. However, California law says that the supervisors are not entitled to tips from the tip pool. Starbucks has rebutted this claim by saying that their supervisors are not managers, but the court did not agree with this. Starbucks says that the ruling by the court is not fair and that there is no common sense or reason behind it.Starbucks says they do not believe that they should have to pay money back to their baristas and has therefore refused to pay back any of the money. Howard Schultz, the CEO of Starbucks, says that the ruling would take away the right for shift supervisors to receive tips that they worked for through the course of their shift. Starbucks has told its employees that they believe the ruling to be unfair. In a recording, Schultz says that Starbucks would never condone any type of behavior that would result in money being taken from their people.
However, the coffee giant does plan to appeal the court ruling that was made in San Diego Superior Court. There have also been two other lawsuits filed in Massachusetts and Minnesota that the company says they will defend themselves against.
The lawsuit filed in San Diego was filed in 2004 and was awarded class-action status in 2006. Judge Patricia Cowett ordered Starbucks to pay back the lost tips to their baristas, including interest. A hearing has been scheduled for May 1 that will discuss how the money is to be distributed.
Starbucks stands by their claim that supervisors are not managers and are deserving of the tips in the tip jar. They say that customers cannot distinguish between a barista and a supervisor when they tip.
In the meantime, Judge Cowett ordered an injunction that prevents supervisors from sharing in any future tips. However, Valerie O'Nel, a spokeswoman for Starbucks says that the company will not comply with the injunction during the appeals process.
By Ginger Gillenwater
