In the latest developments regarding the union strike against Starbucks, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleged in a complaint that Starbucks is unlawfully withholding benefits from employees in unionized or unionizing stores. It alleges that its interim CEO Howard Schultz threatened employees during a May 3 earnings call and told them several times it would be “futile” to side with the union. NLRB general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo alleged that Schultz's comments threatened unionized workers, and she asked the company's top official to read employees their union rights and send them apology letters for illegally withholding raises from union workers.

In a Law360 article titled, "NLRB's Schultz Complaint Reflects Remedies Push, Attys Say," Traditional Labor Law Practice Co-Chair Amy Moor Gaylord in Chicago explained that the NLRB's recent complaint is part of a strategy to use strong remedies to make an example out of a brand name company that opposes union activity.

Law360 wrote, "'These remedies used to be reserved, if they were used at all, for repeat offenders or for where there were multiple allegations, multiple terminations in the context of union organizing, kind of the more egregious violations,' Gaylord said. 'They're just using them willy-nilly in every single settlement agreement.'

Gaylord said the complaint involving Schultz reflects Abruzzo's strategy to have high-ranking officials accused of unfair labor practices directly held accountable through remedies.

'[In] my personal opinion, she wants to shame the CEO of Starbucks,' Gaylord said."