Quantcast

Starbucks Won’t Use Obamacare as Excuse to Cut or Lower Benefits for Its Workers

starbucks-schultzIn an announcement more companies should be making, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz publicly stated during a phone interview, “Other companies have announced that they won’t provide coverage for spouses; others are lobbying for the cut-off to be at 40 hours. But Starbucks will continue maintaining benefits for partners and won’t use the new law as excuse to cut benefits or lower benefits for its workers.”

The keyword in his comment that I like the most is “excuse,” because that’s exactly what these companies have used the Affordable Care Act as — an excuse.

An excuse to cut wages and benefits for their workers.  Because trust me, the executives of these companies that are screwing over their employees sure as heck aren’t taking a cut in pay or a reduction in benefits. In fact, I’m willing to bet they’ll make even more next year.


And while companies like Walmart, UPS and McDonald’s use the new health care law as an excuse to cut expenses to generate more revenue, companies like Starbucks will continue to provide better pay and benefits to their employees and will most assuredly still bring in massive profits.

Then there are the inevitable millions of Americans, mostly conservatives, that will see these cuts in benefits and hours as a sign that “Obamacare” is going to ruin business.  Which I always find to be pathetically amusing.

By all means, let’s blame the health care law which seeks to give access to health care for every American; not the greedy corporations making unheard of profits with CEO’s that have 8 figure salaries and ridiculous bonus packages.

It’s just funny to me how most Republicans seem incapable of ever just saying, “Man, enough is enough!  That’s just greed, pure and simple.”

Conservatives often quickly rush to judgement towards anyone who might rely on government assistance, many who work for companies like Walmart, UPS and McDonalds, yet never blame the companies for cutting their hours or not paying them enough to survive. If someone has a full-time job, and is barely cracking the poverty line (if they’re even above it), don’t blame them for needing help from the government.  Blame the company they’re working for and the greedy nature in which they run their business.


And while these businesses like Jimmy John’s claim they cannot “survive” the Affordable Care Act without screwing over their employees, it seems that companies like Starbucks have found a way.

That, or maybe these other CEO’s are just completely full of crap.

Perhaps these companies like Walmart, UPS and McDonald’s might need to hire new CEO’s — because it seems the ones they currently have can’t seem to figure out how to run a profitable business and act ethically towards their workers.

About Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is from the Dallas-Fort Worth area and has a degree in Political Science. He is a co-founder of Forward Progressives, and author of the popular Right Off A Cliff column. He is also the founder of the Right Off A Cliff facebook page, on which he routinely voices his opinions and stirs the pot for the Progressive movement. Follow Allen on Twitter as well, @Allen_Clifton.

  • Stephanie Albright

    TOTAL CRAP!!! My sister has worked for Starbucks for eight years. What they are doing is cutting hours back on the associates so that they don’t maintain enough hrs per fiscal quarter to keep their existing benefits. Once they fall under the minimum, they keep you there. They did this right after she came back after having her baby and asked for time to pump breast milk UNPAID while working. Her manager even doctored her hours. CAN YOU BELIEVE A COMPANY THIS BIG DOESN’T USE TIMECARDS OR THEIR REGISTERS TO CLOCK IN AND OUT SO THERE’S A RECORD OF WORKED HOURS??? They don’t. It’s entered into a book by your manager and you don’t have to sign it and you don’t get a copy.
    They can claim what they want for the press. My sister reported to corporate and they don’t give a sh**.

  • DaleC

    I love how people will dismiss out-of-hand some information solely becasue it came from a biased organization like Cato, but will swallow whole the information about ACA from the White House.

  • Guest

    Maybe I’m wrong, do companies have to supply health care for “part-time” employees? For spouses of part-time employees?? How many “full-time” employees are working at Starbucks??? It’s odd the number of big U.S. corporations currently laying-off employees simultaneously lobbying Washington for an immigration bill so they can hire “cheap foreign labor”. I wonder how many “part time” foreign laborers will get these jobs once they sneak S.744 through the cracks… & will they have health care supplied by the corporation?

  • simpleparrish

    Maybe I’m wrong, do companies have to supply health care for “part-time” employees? For spouses of part-time employees?? How many “full-time” employees are working at Starbucks??? It’s odd the number of big U.S. corporations currently laying-off employees simultaneously lobbying Washington for an immigration bill so they can hire “cheap foreign labor”. Am curious how many “part time” foreign laborers will get these jobs once they sneak S.744 through the cracks… & will they have health care supplied by the corporation?

Email