Starbucks workers in Illinois, Colorado, and California filed lawsuits, claiming the coffee chain violated state labor laws when it changed its dress code without reimbursing employees for the required new clothing. The lawsuits argue that Starbucks mandated solid black shirts, specific bottoms, waterproof footwear in muted tones, and imposed limits on facial piercings and body art. Employees say Starbucks gave only two free compliant shirts, but many had to spend extra money to adhere to the new rules.
What the New Rules Require and What Workers Say
The updated policy, which began on May 12, 2025, requires Starbucks partners to wear a solid black shirt with sleeves under their green apron. Shirts must cover the midriff and armpits. Workers must wear khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms without patterns or frayed hems, or solid black dresses that are not more than four inches above the knee. Shoes must be waterproof and in muted colors. The policy also limits facial piercings, forbidding more than one, bans face tattoos, tongue piercings, and theatrical makeup. Employees report having to buy new clothes and shoes that meet those standards, often spending their own money.
Legal Claims: Failure to Reimburse and State Labor Law Violations
Workers backed by the union Starbucks Workers United filed class-action lawsuits in state courts, arguing that Starbucks must reimburse the cost of uniforms or attire that primarily benefits the employer. In addition, some state laws (such as in Colorado) prohibit employers from imposing expenses on workers without written consent. Plaintiffs say that Starbucks failed to respond adequately to reimbursement requests, leaving many out of pocket. Brooke Allen of California said she had to visit multiple stores to find compliant shoes that cost her over $60, after her Crocs were deemed unacceptable.
Starbucks’ Defense and Corporate Response
Starbucks has defended its policy change by saying it simplified the dress code to give employees clearer guidance and to ensure the client’s green apron stands out. The company provided two free shirts to each worker to help with the transition. However, Starbucks says it did not budget to cover the full cost of all compliance items, particularly those beyond the free shirts. Some workers say that isn’t nearly enough. They say the cost burden, especially for those working multiple shifts, adds up.
Wider Context: Labor Tensions and Union Activity
This lawsuit comes amid ongoing labor unrest at Starbucks over dress code changes. Earlier this year, thousands of workers staged strikes at over 100 stores to protest the same policy. They argued that Starbucks implemented the changes without negotiating with the union. Workers said the policy feels more concerned with image than with their comfort, economic realities, or self-expression. Union representatives see the lawsuit as part of a broader campaign for worker rights and fair treatment.
What This Means Moving Forward
If courts side with the employees, Starbucks might need to reimburse many workers for the cost of updated uniforms and possibly change aspects of the policy. Also, this case could set a precedent for other employers considering similar dress code changes. Workers could demand clear rules, reimbursement, and inclusion when policies affect their appearance or expenses. Meanwhile, the customers and observers will likely monitor how the lawsuit affects store operations, staff morale, and how Starbucks balances branding with fairness.
Bonus Read: Wall Street Hits Record Highs as Tesla Stock Surges
https://shorturl.fm/s2QRR