 |
|
|
|||||
Starbucks workers took legal action against the company on Wednesday over its newly imposed dress code. The workers accused Starbucks of refusing to reimburse employees for expenses related to its new dress code, thereby breaking the law. The workers, backed by the union, filed class-action lawsuits in Illinois and Colorado, and filed complaints with California’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency in a push for the agency to penalize the coffee chain. According to the lawsuits, Colorado state law prohibits employers from imposing expenses on workers without the workers’ consent. Meanwhile, several plaintiffs say they asked their employer to reimburse them for funds they spent on new clothing, but their requests were denied. Starbucks announced the changes to the company uniform earlier this year as part of its “Back to Starbucks” initiative. It said starting in May, workers would be required to wear solid black shirts under their aprons, and khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms. At the time, Starbucks said it would give each employee two free T-shirts. While the uniform has remained largely the same over the years, in 2016, the company loosened its dress code to allow for different shirt colors, as well as brightly colored hair, and hats. Some employees said the changes lifted morale and allowed for greater freedom of expression on the job. This year, that freedom of expression was rolled back. By updating our dress code, we can deliver a more consistent coffeehouse experience that will also bring simpler and clearer guidance to our partners, which means they can focus on what matters most, crafting great beverages and fostering connections with customers, the company said in an April 14 statement. However, the union has expressed anger that changes to the dress code are “restrictive” and happened without input from the baristas it affects. Likewise, workers feel there are other more important issues Starbucks should be focused on. In a September statement, Strategic Organizing Center Research Director Joan Moriarty said that a new union survey found huge issues with understaffing in Starbucks stores, with nine out of 10 respondents saying it’s a concern. “The results of our survey demonstrate how Brian Niccols plan for Starbucks isnt coming close to getting the company back on track for its workers and customers, Moriarty said. Moriarty added, Starbucks baristas and shift supervisors told us loud and clear that theyre still struggling with understaffing, erratic scheduling, and an unsustainable pace of work. Its long past time for Starbucks to listen to its workers, return to the bargaining table, and get to work on a real comeback strategy for Starbucks. For the past three years, the union has been pushing for a contract that includes higher wages, guaranteed hours, and better staffing. Jasmine Leli, a Starbucks barista and union bargaining delegate, said in a previous statement, Instead of addressing the most pressing issues baristas have been raising for years, Starbucks is prioritizing a limiting dress code that wont improve the companys operation. Leli added, Theyre forcing baristas to pay for new clothes when were struggling as it is on Starbucks wages and without guaranteed hours. At the time, a Starbucks spokesperson told Fast Company that the union would be better served if it put the same effort into coming back to the table to finalize a reasonable contract” than attacking the dress code.
Category:
E-Commerce
The U.S. may soon scrap the penal import tariff on Indian goods and also cut the reciprocal tariff to 10-15% from the existing 25%, India’s Chief Economist Adviser V. Anantha Nageswaran said on Thursday. “My personal confidence is that in the next couple of months, if not earlier, we will see a resolution to at least to the extra penal tariff of 25%,” Nageswaran said at an event in Kolkata. “It may also be the case that reciprocal tariff of 25% may also come down to levels, which we were earlier anticipating somewhere between 10% and 15%.” India and the U.S. held “positive” and “forward-looking” trade discussions on Tuesday, New Delhi said, raising hopes for a breakthrough after President Donald Trump imposed punitive tariffs on the South Asian nation for buying Russian oil. Trump slapped a punitive 25% levy on India from August 27, doubling overall tariffs to 50%, as part of Washington’s efforts to step up pressure on Moscow over its invasion of Ukraine. Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said they spoke by phone on Tuesday with the U.S. president saying he thanked Modi for his help in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine. Neither gave any detail of any agreement on Ukraine, but the call appeared to be a sign of further thawing of U.S.-Indian tensions, which blew up in recent months raising questions about the future relationship between the partners, which share concerns about China. Trump also struck a more conciliatory tone in statements last week and expressed optimism that they could finalise a trade deal. Indian stocks extended gains after Nageswaran’s comments on easing trade tensions, with the benchmark Nifty 50 hitting one-week highs and notching it’s highest close since July 9. Swati Bhat, Reuters
Category:
E-Commerce
The remaining late-night talk show writers have their work cut out for them in coming up with material suitable for Thursday nights episode. And every other episode in the foreseeable future. Now that ABC has yanked Jimmy Kimmel Live! off the air, following a conservative pressure campaign over a recent monologue, its unclear what Seth Meyers, Jimmy Fallon and the hosts of The Daily Show can even say about the incident without crossing an undefined line of offense. On Monday night, Kimmel kicked off his show with a monologue touching on the latest developments in the reaction to Charlie Kirks assassination. We hit some new lows over the weekend, the host said, with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it. Kimmel went on to lampoon Trump for his seeming lack of grief over Kirk, airing a widely circulated clip from last Friday, in which the president quickly pivoted from a reporters question about Kirk to happily hyping up renovations at the White House. The reaction was quiet, until suddenly it wasnt. Anyone not paying close enough attention to right-wing influencers over the following 36 hours might not have even noticed. There certainly wasnt the kind of instant widespread backlash that led to ABC canceling Roseanne in 2017 roughly eight hours after the shows creator and star tweeted an arguably racist remark about former Obama advisor Valerie Jarrett. Primarily pushing the backlash was Benny Johnson, a right-wing influencer and podcaster who was a personal friend and peer of Kirks. Johnson zeroed in on the part of Kimmels monologue that could be construed as a formal declaration of the alleged shooter being confirmed as a MAGA activistan inaccurate representation of events. Something demonstrably evil happened on Jimmy Kimmels show, Johnson said at the top of his Wednesday episodean episode entitled Jimmy Kimmel LIES About Charlie Kirk Killer, Blames Charlie For His Murder!? Disney Must Fire Kimmel. Later on the show, Johnson had an unlikely guest for a video podcast: Trumps hand-picked chair of the Federal Communications Commission, Brendan Carr. The FCC chair weighed in on Kimmels segment, which at that point had seemingly not yet become controversial outside of the conservative media ecosystem. Carr described Kimmels comments as part of a concerted effort to try to lie to the American people about the nature of one of the most significant newsworthy public interest acts that weve seen in a long time. Carr went on to describe FCC broadcasting license-holders as having an obligation to operate in the public interest. Lest there be any confusion that he was suggesting ABC had defaulted on this obligation by airing Kimmels Monday night monologue, Carr added: I mean, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or theres going to be additional work for the FCC ahead. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1968359685045838041/video/1 Kimmel had indeed made a mistake. Like many other public figures on both sides, hed commented on a still-unfolding situation with details that could be easily contradicted pending further information. The hosts remark about alleged shooter Tyler Robinson being one of their own came after a moment where it seemed as if Robinson was part of the far-right groyper movement. Although some ambiguity remains, evidence now points to the shooter acting against Kirks hatred, which many have interpreted as suggesting a left-leaning motivation. No definitive answers have yet been determined to fully explain the shooters actions. A clarification on Kimmels part was reasonable to expect, following the backlash, and he reportedly planned on delivering one Wednesday night. He never got the chance, however. Following Carrs appearance on Johnsons show, which the host quickly hyped to his nearly four million followers on X, Nexstar, which runs 32 ABC affiliates and happens to be awaiting FCC approval for a $6.2 billion merger, signaled it would not broadcast Kimmels show for the foreseeable future. (Carr subsequently thanked Nexstar for doing the right thing in a tweet.) ABC responded soon after, announcing Kimmels show was on an indefinite hiatus, without explaining the decision. ABCs move eerily echoed CBS parting ways with vocal Trump critic Stephen Colbert back in Julyat a time when the company was awaiting FCC approval for a merger. It also fulfilled a prophecy from Trump at that moment: I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next. More recently, Kimmels indefinite suspension follows a wave of firings that has hit journalists, cable news pundits, professors, and many others whose comments about Kirk were deemed offensive in certain circles. Kimmels sidelining, however, is by far the most high-profile, and may have a chilling effect on what people feel comfortable saying on TV going forward. The ongoing, wide-ranging blowback should be reminiscent of the censorial post-9/11 atmosphere, for Aericans old enough to remember it. Bill Mahers Politically Incorrect (also an ABC show) was cancelled in June 2002 following the hosts controversial comments about 9/11 terrorists not being cowards. (Mahers replacement? Ironically, it was Jimmy Kimmel.) The following year, when the U.S. officially invaded Iraq, Dixie Chicks singer Natalie Maines told a London audience she was ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas, a statement that led to death threats, radio boycotts, demonstrations of bulldozers running over Dixie Chicks CDs, and the effective end of the superstar groups career. Several prominent voices have already called out Kimmels indefinite suspension as a similar threat to free speech, including Governor JB Pritzker, the Writers Guild of America, and comedian Wanda Sykes, who had been scheduled to appear on Kimmels show Wednesday night. (He didnt end the Ukraine War or solve Gaza within his first week, Sykes said of President Trump in an Instagram reel. But he did end freedom of speech within his first year. As for Trump and his allies, they are celebrating the outcome. Fox News host Sean Hannity called Kimmels sidelining long overdue, which is difficult to reconcile with the idea that Kimmels primary offense was his inaccurate comment from Monday night. Johnson went a step further and took credit for the firing, quote-tweeting a 2017 Kirk tweet expressing distaste for Kimmel, adding: We did it for you, Charlie. More ominous was the next line in Johnsons tweet: And were just getting started
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||