Starbucks faces a lawsuit alleging deception, labor, and human rights violations!
A consumer advocacy group has filed a lawsuit against Starbucks, accusing the coffee giant of misleading customers about the ethical sourcing of its coffee and tea products.
Starbucks, an American multinational chain of coffeehouses and roasteries headquartered in Seattle, has seen billions of dollars worth of losses due to global Palestine solidarity boycotts.
Read more: Bethlehem Cry: Queen Rania Exposes the Harsh Reality in the Palestine-occupied Territories
Starbucks sued its union after “Solidatry with Palestine”:
This started with the company’s October lawsuit against the Workers United union, which represents thousands of baristas at roughly 360 US locations, for the union’s social media post that was pro-Palestinian.
The company claimed the post “reflected” the union’s “support for violence perpetrated by Hamas”. Protesters, however, viewed the company’s action as pro-Israel.
Other American companies including McDonald’s, Burger King, KFC, Pizza Hut, and Papa John’s as well as brands such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Wix, Puma, and Zara that have pro-Israeli stances or have financial ties with Israel and investments there, also came under fire and faced boycott calls.
Starbucks Getting Sued by the NCL:
The National Consumers League (NCL) claims that Starbucks sources coffee beans and tea leaves from farms and cooperatives that have committed severe human rights and labor abuses, including child labor, forced labor, sexual harassment, and assault.
Read more: Macklemore Expresses His Solidarity with A “Free Palestine”
The lawsuit, filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia on Wednesday, cites media reports of several cases of exploitation and violence on farms that supply Starbucks in Brazil and Kenya; among the incidents cited in the lawsuit was a 2022 case in which police rescued 17 workers that includes three teenagers, from a coffee farm in Brazil where they were made to work outdoors without protective equipment and lift 130-pound sacks of coffee, reports AP.
The lawsuit also references a BBC story from 2023 that detailed the severe labor conditions and widespread sexual abuse on the James Finlay tea farm in Kenya. Starbucks used to purchase tea from James Finlay, but the company announced on Wednesday that it no longer does so.
Allegations have been made that certain farms in Guatemala accredited by Starbucks have employed child labor. Also, a Kenyan plantation enterprise that provides tea to Starbucks has been charged with “rampant sexual abuse,” allegedly including supervisors pressuring women to engage in sexual relations as a condition of employment.
The NCL argues that Starbucks’ packaging, which states that the company is “committed to 100% ethical coffee sourcing”, is false and deceptive, and violates the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act.
“Starbucks’ failure to adopt meaningful reforms to its coffee and tea sourcing practices in the face of these critiques and documented labor abuses on its source farms is entirely inconsistent with a reasonable consumer’s understanding of what it means to be ‘committed to 100% ethical’ sourcing,” the NCL said in its court filing.
The NCL is seeking an injunction to stop Starbucks from engaging in deceptive advertising, and to require the company to run a corrective ad campaign. The NCL is also asking for damages and attorneys’ fees.
Read more: Most Awarded and Noteworthy Palestinian Films of 2023
“100% ethical coffee sourcing”:
The company said it works with 400,000 farmers in more than 30 countries. Starbucks issued statements saying that the company was “deeply concerned,” and that it would “thoroughly investigate” claims of labor violations, “take immediate action” to suspend purchases, or “ensure corrective action” occurred.
In conclusion, the NCL’s lawsuit against Starbucks challenges the company’s claim of being “committed to 100% ethical coffee sourcing”. The NCL alleges that Starbucks sources its products from farms that violate human rights and labor standards and that the company’s packaging and advertising are deceptive and misleading.
The lawsuit seeks to hold Starbucks accountable for its sourcing practices and to inform consumers of the true conditions behind their coffee and tea purchases. This case raises important questions about the ethics and transparency of global supply chains, and the responsibility of corporations and consumers to ensure moral, fair, and sustainable production.
Do you think Starbucks would be able to get away from the accusations?
