Starbucks New Dress Code Isn't Percolating With Workers

Starbucks workers in three states took legal action against the coffee giant on Wednesday, saying it violated the law when it changed its dress code but refused to reimburse employees who had to buy new clothes. The employees, who are backed by the union organizing Starbucks' workers, filed class-action lawsuits in state court in Illinois and Colorado, reports the AP. Workers also filed complaints with California's Labor and Workforce Development Agency. If the agency decides not to seek penalties against Starbucks, the workers intend to file a class-action lawsuit in California.

Starbucks said it simplified its dress code to deliver a more consistent experience to customers and give its employees clearer guidance: "As part of this change, and to ensure [our] partners were prepared, [employees] received two shirts at no cost." Starbucks' new dress code requires workers in North America to wear:

• A black shirt with short or long sleeves under green aprons. Shirts may or may not have collars, but must cover the midriff and armpits.
• Khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms without patterns or frayed hems, or solid black dresses that aren't more than 4 inches above the knee.
• Black, gray, dark blue, brown, tan, or white shoes made from a waterproof material. Socks and hosiery must be "subdued."
• No face tattoos or more than one facial piercing. Tongue piercings and "theatrical makeup" are prohibited.

"I think it's extremely tone deaf on the company's part to expect their employees to completely redesign their wardrobe without any compensation," says Brooke Allen, a full-time student who works at a Starbucks in Davis, California, who says she spent about $147 out of her pocket to meet the new standards. "A lot of us are already living paycheck to paycheck."

story continues below

The lawsuits and complaints filed Wednesday allege that Starbucks' dress code violates state laws that require companies to reimburse workers for expenses that primarily benefit the employer. Colorado law also prohibits employers from imposing expenses on workers without their written consent, according to that lawsuit. The plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of all Starbucks workers in those states, whether or not their stores are unionized. Multiple plaintiffs, like Allen, said they requested reimbursement from Starbucks to conform to the dress code but were denied.