The Supreme Court appeared Tuesday to be leaning in favor of coffee chain Starbucks in a union-related lawsuit against the National Labor Relations Board that could affect all types of business owners.
“During oral arguments, the majority of the Supreme Court appeared sympathetic to Starbucks, which argued that the government should have to meet a higher legal bar when it asks courts to intervene during labor investigations, according to National Public Radio.
In February 2022, a Memphis, TN, Starbucks fired seven employees in alleged retaliation for union-organizing activities. The organizers had allowed television news crews into the cafe after hours to talk about the unionization campaign, and the company said that the firing was over the employees conducting any type of activity inside the cafe after hours was prohibited and not the unionization activity, per se.
A lower court sided with NLRB in issuing a temporary injunction against the Seattle-based company and ordered the cafe to rehire the workers in August 2022. A circuit court later upheld the district court’s ruling. Now, Starbucks is challenging that decision, maintaining that the NLRB overstepped its authority.
“The case could make it harder to quickly halt labor practices challenged as unfair under federal law while the NLRB resolves complaints,” Reuters reported.
The NLRB can issue injunctions against a company when it has reason to believe that unfair labor practices have occurred, but Starbucks maintains that the board approved the injunction on the grounds of a two-factor test, whereas district courts are required to apply a four-factor test.
“Preliminary injunctions are extraordinary and drastic remedies,” Lisa Blatt, an attorney representing Starbucks, said Tuesday during oral arguments.
“Here, the Board seeks a coercive injunction backed by contempt sanctions, and the Board seeks the very same injunctive relief that it would get if it won the case. Such relief is highly inappropriate absent a clear showing under all four factors. The government justifies deference because the Board, not trial courts, ultimately decide the merits at the back end,” said Blatt, of Williams & Connolly, according to court records.
“What Starbucks wants is just a level playing field, the normal injunctive factors that agencies and private parties should get,” Blatt added.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is expected by the end of June.
