Magistrate Judge James Cho, a New York federal judge, has limited Starbucks’ discovery requests in an NLRB case involving union activity at the company’s Great Neck, Long Island store. The judge rejected most of Starbucks’ subpoenas seeking extensive information about Workers United’s union campaign, ruling that the company’s demands exceeded what is typical in National Labor Relations Board injunction cases.
The subpoenas were challenged by the NLRB, the union, and two of the subpoenaed workers, who are represented by Jessica Harris of Gladstein, Reif & Meginniss.
The judge restricted Starbucks’ access to communications to those specifically related to the Great Neck store and limited the timeframe to the period between the filing of the union petition in February 2022 and the union’s narrow loss in May 2022. While the company can obtain certain post-election communications about workers’ changing sentiments during the campaign period, the judge denied broader requests for pre-petition communications, non-Great Neck employee views, and unrelated media contacts.
This ruling contrasts with a more expansive discovery order granted in a similar Starbucks case in Buffalo last year, which allowed access to nationwide union communications. That Buffalo order is currently under appeal.
The underlying NLRB complaint alleges that Starbucks interfered with workers’ organizing efforts by using subpoenas to investigate union activities.