USA 
United Kingdom
A coalition of investors, including several US public pension funds, is pressing shareholders at Starbucks to vote against the re-election of two directors, citing concerns over the company’s approach to labor relations.
The group has called for opposition to Jorgen Vig Knudstorp and Beth Ford at the company’s annual general meeting scheduled for March 25. In a letter to shareholders, the investors argue the board has mishandled engagement with Starbucks Workers United, the union representing some baristas, during extended negotiations toward a collective bargaining agreement.
Strike pressure and union demands
At the close of 2025, Starbucks experienced the longest strike in its history, involving more than 3,800 employees. Union demands include improved staffing levels, more predictable scheduling, and pay increases.
Investors warned that a failure to pursue constructive dialogue could threaten efforts by Chief Executive Brian Niccol to deliver a sustained turnaround at the business. The company is still engaged in protracted talks with the union as it seeks to resolve the dispute.
Signatories to the shareholder letter include the New York State Comptroller, the New York City Comptroller, Trillium, SOC Investment Group, Merseyside Pension Fund and the Shareholder Association for Research and Education. The investors have framed the vote as a referendum on board accountability in overseeing labor relations.
Governance and working conditions under scrutiny
The pressure follows earlier criticism in January, when the same investors objected to the removal of the board’s Environment, Partner and Community Impact committee. Starbucks said the committee’s responsibilities were redistributed among other board committees.
Starbucks has defended its employment practices, pointing to what it describes as favorable working conditions. The company states that average hourly pay stands at $30 and that benefits are available to employees who work an average of 20 hours per week.
Investor intervention in director elections over workforce issues remains relatively rare, but the Starbucks vote suggests institutional shareholders are prepared to escalate concerns where negotiations stall.
The outcome of the March 25 AGM could signal how far investors are willing to hold directors directly accountable for labor strategy, particularly as union activity continues within parts of the US service sector.
