Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

doxydad

(1,363 posts)
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 08:26 AM Jun 2014

Why most employers aren’t like Starbucks and Costco

Being a coffee clerk may not be a dream job, but Starbucks (SBUX) has added some kick to its line positions with a new program that covers college tuition for employees who meet certain conditions. And Starbucks, like Costco (COST), Whole Foods (WFM) and a handful of other enlightened employers, offers starting pay well above minimum wage, along with other benefits it probably doesn’t have to.

Firms that offer employees above-market pay and perks usually contend it makes good business sense to treat workers well, since it boosts morale, discourages turnover and improves the company’s image. So why don’t more companies do it? The answer involves a combination of pragmatism, short-sightedness and sensitivity to Wall Street concerns.

Companies basically fall into two categories in terms of the pay and perks they offer their workers: Those that view their workforce as a cost and those that consider employees an investment. It won’t be surprising to hear the overwhelming majority of companies take the cost approach.

“The number of companies who treat employees as an investment is pretty slim,” says Lee Dyer, a professor at Cornell University’s ILR School. “When a company like Starbucks invests in its people, the reason it gets so much attention is because it’s such an anomaly.”

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/why-most-employers-aren-t-like-starbucks-and-costco-152636634.html

38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why most employers aren’t like Starbucks and Costco (Original Post) doxydad Jun 2014 OP
Of course we will begin paying for it tomorrow when the coffee is raised 20 cents yeoman6987 Jun 2014 #1
Starbucks is raising some of its coffee prices because of a drought in Brazil The Velveteen Ocelot Jun 2014 #4
It has very little to do with tuition assistance, like half a penny, and I am being generous here nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #22
starbucks employees dont get healthcare. mopinko Jun 2014 #2
Is this available at group insurance rates? Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #8
yes. and i guess it is a good plan. mopinko Jun 2014 #14
Most employees has to pay the cost of health insurance partially or whole. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #18
except that this is about starbucks mopinko Jun 2014 #27
The offering of group rate health insurance is what is meant, do they say this, no Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #28
lol. Just like everyone else in the working world yeoman6987 Jun 2014 #12
what are you talking about? i didnt say free. mopinko Jun 2014 #15
Ok. I took premium to mean one thing yeoman6987 Jun 2014 #17
The Voice They Hear,,,,,, support biz whose policies are closest to your own values,,,nt Cryptoad Jun 2014 #3
Starbucks fights against GMO labeling SHRED Jun 2014 #5
Whole Foods is against the labeling as well... Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2014 #9
Dr. Hobbit-stein, your Frankenfoods ... it's alive! It's ALIVE IT'S ALIVE IT'S ALIVE!!!! closeupready Jun 2014 #10
"science SUPPORTS GMOs" SHRED Jun 2014 #11
Educate yourself... Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2014 #20
vaccine in food? SHRED Jun 2014 #21
Actually it is not as clear cut as you want to present it nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #25
Back at ya SHRED Jun 2014 #29
So, I post an article from a science publication... Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2014 #33
You can "Boom" all you want SHRED Jun 2014 #35
No, I toe the science line. Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2014 #37
science supports monsanto wisechoice Jun 2014 #30
Agent Orange was known to be harmful all the way back in the 1940s when it was invented... Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2014 #34
Starbucks "covers college tuition" only for junior- and senior-level course loads, and only if you Brickbat Jun 2014 #6
Some companies in the past have competed with union jobs and gave their employees like Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #7
I was less impressed by Starbucks after reading this renate Jun 2014 #13
Costco on the other hand likes to tell you about their great wages and then... bayareaboy Jun 2014 #16
Did you and a few of your friends go to the county board meeting nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #23
Sorry I just drove up here less than 2years ago. bayareaboy Jun 2014 #36
Ah you are having the same problems nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #38
Starbucks Workers Can Get Paid College Tuition. DhhD Jun 2014 #19
I support worker owned businesses SHRED Jun 2014 #24
The company I have spent 30 years at went from one side to the other a few years ago liberal N proud Jun 2014 #26
It's just a coincidence that these companies are Cha Jun 2014 #31
Yes, it quite possibly is a coincidence. Consider... Demo_Chris Jun 2014 #32
 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
1. Of course we will begin paying for it tomorrow when the coffee is raised 20 cents
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 09:13 AM
Jun 2014

Which I don't mind, but the media is only screaming this but not adding that the money is going towards tuition assistance for their employees.....No they are screaming....."Starbucks is raising coffee 20 cents starting Tuesday....isn't that awful?"

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,281 posts)
4. Starbucks is raising some of its coffee prices because of a drought in Brazil
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:19 AM
Jun 2014

not because it's paying its employees more. But I'm sure the conservative media will blame labor costs.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
22. It has very little to do with tuition assistance, like half a penny, and I am being generous here
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 11:59 AM
Jun 2014

and all to do with a shortage of Arabica beans. I expect to see coffee go through the roof, not just Starbucks, and it is because of climate change and the incredible drought in coffee raising regions, in Brazil and other areas of central and south america

mopinko

(69,812 posts)
27. except that this is about starbucks
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:25 PM
Jun 2014

and people think they pay for their employee healthcare, at least in part, and they pay zero. that would be the point.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
28. The offering of group rate health insurance is what is meant, do they say this, no
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 07:50 PM
Jun 2014

but the offering is good, many employers did not even offer this before ACA.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
12. lol. Just like everyone else in the working world
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 11:00 AM
Jun 2014

What are you talking about? Nobody gets actual FREE healthcare for working. Most pay a premium that is taken from the paycheck monthly or bi-weekly however they are paid.

mopinko

(69,812 posts)
15. what are you talking about? i didnt say free.
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 11:17 AM
Jun 2014

some people dont even have access to a group plan, some get partial payments, some get it as part of their compensation, without a copay.

starbucks offers a group plan that employees buy into and pay 100%.

 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
9. Whole Foods is against the labeling as well...
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:41 AM
Jun 2014

And so am I for that matter. GMO labeling is NOT a progressive ideal. It's an anti-science ideal.

Seeing as the science SUPPORTS GMOs, I'll go with the science.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
25. Actually it is not as clear cut as you want to present it
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 12:07 PM
Jun 2014

and whether they increase allergies or not is far from clear.

 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
33. So, I post an article from a science publication...
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 08:19 AM
Jun 2014

You respond with an article from an anti-gmo blog.

Oh, and here's a bit of info on your Seralini study:

"In November 2013, Elsevier, the publishing company for Food and Chemical Toxicology, the journal that published the 2012 paper, announced that the journal was retracting the paper, after the authors refused to withdraw it.[6][85] The editors of the journal concluded that, after an in-depth look at the raw data of the study, no definitive conclusions can be reached regarding the role of either NK603 or glyphosate in overall mortality or tumor rates, given the known high incidence of tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats and the small sample size. Normal variance could not be excluded as the cause of the results.[6][86] Séralini and his supporters strongly objected to the retraction,[85][87][88] and Séralini himself threatened to sue Food and Chemical Toxicology.[89] In January 2014, an online petition calling for the Séralini study be reinstated was posted by a group of Séralini's supporters from the Bioscience Resource Project.[90]"

As John Stewart would say, "BOOM!"

 

SHRED

(28,136 posts)
35. You can "Boom" all you want
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 09:47 AM
Jun 2014

The fact remains you toe the corporate line by denying those of us who choose not to ingest GMO's the ability to to make a choice via labeling.

 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
37. No, I toe the science line.
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 11:29 AM
Jun 2014

You toe the woo line.

Everything you eat has been genetically modified. Some of it took a few years of selective breeding and mutations, some of it went much quicker in a lab.

For some reason, we tend to consider humans outside of nature. But we're a part of nature. If a beaver builds a dam, it's considered natural. If a human splices genes it's considered unnatural.


You can chose not to ingest GMOs. Have fun. Waste your money. But don't try and convince people of things with debunked scientific papers and calls of defending corporations. That's what the anti-vaxxer and anti-climate change crowd do.

wisechoice

(180 posts)
30. science supports monsanto
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 04:20 AM
Jun 2014

Monsanto produces its own science. Monsanto science said agent orange does not cause cancer.

. Should we be skeptical of Monsanto gmos this time?
 

Dr Hobbitstein

(6,568 posts)
34. Agent Orange was known to be harmful all the way back in the 1940s when it was invented...
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 08:23 AM
Jun 2014

By both Dow and Monsanto, for the federal government.

The extent of it's harmfulness wasn't realized until the mid 60s.

Science has come a LONG way since then.

Also, Monsanto =/= GMO. There are MANY companies that produce GMO food. You just have a need for a bogeyman.

What's your opinion on the Golden Rice Project?

Brickbat

(19,339 posts)
6. Starbucks "covers college tuition" only for junior- and senior-level course loads, and only if you
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:28 AM
Jun 2014

take your courses through the remote campus of Arizona State University, and only through reimbursement once you've finished. It's old policy was $1,000 a year. Basically it's a huge scale-back, except for a very few people who are able to take advantage of it.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
7. Some companies in the past have competed with union jobs and gave their employees like
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 10:29 AM
Jun 2014

Compensation. It is good to hear Costco and Starbucks does this.

renate

(13,776 posts)
13. I was less impressed by Starbucks after reading this
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 11:09 AM
Jun 2014

(Bolding is mine)

Looks like they're doing a Walmart in terms of getting other people to pay for their workers' benefits.

Initially, Starbucks said that workers would be able to offset the costs through an upfront scholarship it was providing with Arizona State, but declined to say exactly how much of the cost it was shouldering. The chain estimated that the scholarship would average about $6,500 over two years to cover tuition of about $20,000.

Following the announcement, however, Arizona State University president Michael Crow told The Chronicle of Higher Education that Starbucks is not contributing any money toward the scholarship. Instead, Arizona State will essentially charge workers less than the sticker price for online tuition. Much of the remainder would likely be covered by federal aid since most Starbucks workers don't earn a lot of money.

Workers would pay whatever costs remained out of pocket for the first two years, and Starbucks would bear no costs.

Starbucks had previously declined to say how much it was contributing to the scholarship. But in a subsequent email Wednesday evening, Starbucks said that the scholarship is being "funded by ASU."


http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Starbucks-admits-its-not-contributing-to-hyped-scholarships-263837031.html?mobile=y

bayareaboy

(793 posts)
16. Costco on the other hand likes to tell you about their great wages and then...
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 11:18 AM
Jun 2014

talk out the other side of their mouth.

Go in and buy your TP and towels, both Georgia Pacific, owned by the Koch Family.

Or perhaps up here in Auburn Ca. If you come quick, You can see a senior center, a children's theater, and a gym and a senior first group, that provides lunches, trips out for medical, and shopping and so on. They won't be there long, probably late autumn. They are all on land that was given to the Placer County by the Army after WW2. seems as though a land developer set up this with Costco and the County don't care what what happens if they can get a big box store instead of seniors and children services.

A few months ago I sent two emails to Costco regarding the problem as I have described and got back no messages from them. My assumption is that Costco does a little word-mining with folks and when Auburn Ca came up, they didn't want to hear any more.

So then I decided to put my costco card thru my paper shredder.
 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
23. Did you and a few of your friends go to the county board meeting
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 12:02 PM
Jun 2014

and talk to them? By the way, this started oh at least five years ago when a local land planning group got together.

bayareaboy

(793 posts)
36. Sorry I just drove up here less than 2years ago.
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 10:44 AM
Jun 2014

Althought there has been opposition to this little power grab by developers and a county that doesn't mind screwing up things as long as no one touches their areas.

The only thing that has come up is maybe Costco will give 500,000 to the senior center to help relocate. But no money for Seniors First and no funds to the childrens theater.

Placer County is by and large controlled by the western part of the county which seems to be for the most part much different than the folks who live the rural areas.
 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
38. Ah you are having the same problems
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 12:05 PM
Jun 2014

that san diego has. Four of the Supers represent the urban core... so they really do not care much about the rural areas, or at least that is how the rural residents feel. Some of it is valid, some of it is not. When you look at county internals you realize that something else happened in urban core that was opposed by residents as well.

The lone Super who represents the rural areas has a tough fight.

I did not want to sound too snarky but it is rare something like this had not the ball rolling at least five years ago.

One thing that at times embarrass them and make them back off is... make the story go to national media. It is not easy, but that at times gets them to go... maybe we should not, and this is becoming a PR disaster.

Now, here is why I suspect they partly did it. Rural areas have few jobs. So the math is cruel, You will have more good quality jobs from Costco than you do currently from the senior center. If we had a similar piece of math in I don't know, Ramona, I think Cosco would win over a senior center as well. (In an ideal world both should be able to coexist)

liberal N proud

(60,302 posts)
26. The company I have spent 30 years at went from one side to the other a few years ago
Mon Jun 23, 2014, 12:42 PM
Jun 2014

We once had signs in all our facilities boasting that "People are our most important asset"

When they removed those signs, they began the process of cutting benefits one by one and pay raises were no longer guaranteed annually.

At one time, the company put money in a Stock Option plan where they double matched up to 12% of your paycheck. At first they reduced the offering to a simple 1 for 1 match, then the reduced the limit to 3% of your pay check that they would match. Then after dropping the match last year, last Friday, we got a notice from the Investment company that manages our retirement plan that our company would no longer contribute and we would no longer be allowed to contribute and that what we had in the fund would need to be moved elsewhere. The company didn't even have the guts to tell us about this change themselves and let the investment company do it.

They have frozen our retirement accounts and eliminated education assistance, took a week of vacation away and cut life insurance and Long Term Disability insurance.

I have seen what it was like to work for a Starbucks or Costco and seen the other side all without leaving the company I work for.

 

Demo_Chris

(6,234 posts)
32. Yes, it quite possibly is a coincidence. Consider...
Wed Jun 25, 2014, 05:02 AM
Jun 2014

What do you think about when you are deciding where to go for your coffee? How often have you said, "It's got to be Starbucks because their 'expert' baristas make all the difference!" Has anyone EVER said that? Is their success due to the quality of their baristas, the quality of their coffee, or due to aggressive expansion and the good fortune of being identified as a cool and hip brand back in the 90's?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why most employers aren’t...