Backed by a union, workers have filed class-action lawsuits in two states, with more to potentially follow

Starbucks is facing legal challenges in three US states after workers initiated action over a new dress code, claiming that the coffee giant broke the law by not reimbursing them for new clothing required by the updated policy.

Backed by the union organising Starbucks staff, workers have filed class-action lawsuits in state courts in Illinois and Colorado. Additionally, complaints have been lodged with California’s Labour and Workforce Development Agency. Should the agency opt not to pursue penalties against Starbucks, the employees intend to launch a class-action lawsuit in California, according to the filings.

The new dress code, implemented on 12 May, mandates that all North American staff wear a plain black shirt, either short or long-sleeved, beneath their signature green aprons. These shirts must cover the midriff and armpits, with collars being optional. Starbucks did provide each employee with two complimentary T-shirts that meet the new specifications.

Employees must wear khaki, black or blue denim bottoms without patterns or frayed hems or solid black dresses that are not more than 4in above the knee. The dress code also requires workers to wear black, grey, dark blue, brown, tan or white shoes made from a waterproof material. Socks and hosiery must be “subdued”, the company said.

The dress code prohibits employees from having face tattoos or more than one facial piercing. Tongue piercings and “theatrical makeup” are also prohibited.

Starbucks said in April that the new dress code would make employees’ green aprons stand out and create a sense of familiarity for customers. It comes as the company is trying to reestablish a warmer, more welcoming experience in its stores.

Before the new dress code went into effect, Starbucks had a relatively lax policy. In 2016, it began allowing employees to wear patterned shirts in a wider variety of colours to give them more opportunities for self-expression.

The old dress code was also loosely enforced, according to the Colorado lawsuit. But under the new dress code, employees who don’t comply aren't allowed to start their shifts.

Brooke Allen, a full-time student who also works at a Starbucks in Davis, California, said she was told by a manager in July that the Crocs she was wearing didn't meet the new standards and she would have to wear different shoes if she wanted to work the following day. Allen had to go to three stores to find a compliant pair that cost her $60.09.

Allen has spent an additional $86.95 on clothes for work, including black shirts and jeans.

“I think it’s extremely tone deaf on the company’s part to expect their employees to completely redesign their wardrobe without any compensation,” Allen said. “A lot of us are already living paycheck to paycheck.”

Allen said she misses the old dress code, which allowed her to express herself with colourful shirts and three facial piercings.

“It looks sad now that everyone is wearing black,” she said.

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 unionised.

Multiple plaintiffs, like Allen, said they requested reimbursement from Starbucks to conform to the dress code but were denied. Gilbert Cruz, an employee in Aurora, Illinois, requested $10 for the cost of removing a nose piercing.

Worker-led lawsuits in state courts are a shift in tactics in the multi-year effort to unionise Starbucks’ stores.

Starbucks Workers United, the labour group that has unionised 640 of Starbucks’ 10,000 company-owned US stores, has filed hundreds of unfair labour practice charges against Starbucks with the National Labour Relations Board. The union filed a charge over the dress code in April.

But the board's ability to hear cases has been curtailed under president Donald Trump. Trump fired an NLRB member in the spring, leaving the board without the quorum it needs to decide cases.(Independent)