Liberals Were Just Dying to Share This Talking Point Last Night
The Crusty Commies Are a Joke
Barack Obama Doing This Behind the Scenes Confirms Again That Kamala Was a...
Lawn Gone Liberty: The Update
Deportation Dysphoria in the Press, and MSNBC Loses Its Star Statistician
Jeffrey Goldberg Congratulates Himself All Over PBS
Shut Down the Department of Education ASAP
Why National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Will Make Americans Safer
Self-Destructive Democracies
The President Who Set the Precedent Against a Third Term
Roadmap to Reform CDC -- Currently the Centers for Disaster and Confusion
Progressives Are Well Organized, Patriotic Americans Have to Do It Even Better
Supreme Court’s Getting Busy
Lawmakers Shouldn’t Let Bad Actors Get Away With Harming Children Online
Where Are the Left’s Protests Now?
Tipsheet

State Attorney General Sues Starbucks Over DEI Practices

AP Photo/Matt Slocum, File

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit against Starbucks Corporation on Tuesday accusing it of unlawful race and sex-based discrimination related to its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.

Advertisement

The lawsuit claims the company is violating federal and state discrimination laws by prioritizing diversity over merit. The legal action comes after President Donald Trump issued a flurry of executive orders targeting DEI in the public and private sectors.

Missouri contends that Starbucks’ policies promote systemic discrimination against white and male employees because it is making employment decisions based on race and sex instead of merit. It claims these practices have an adverse impact on the company’s customers by increasing costs and reducing the quality of service provided.

The attorney general refers to the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, stating that “Eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.” The state further argues that Starbucks’ DEI practices violate Title VII and the state’s Human Rights Act, which prohibit discrimination based on immutable characteristics.

From the complaint:

Starbucks ties compensation to racial and sex-based quotas, discriminates on the basis of race and sex in training and advancement opportunities, and discriminates on the basis of race and sex with respect to its board membership. All of this is unlawful.

The lawsuit further contends that “Making hiring decisions on non-merit considerations will skew the hiring pool towards people who are less qualified to perform their work, increasing costs for Missouri’s consumers.”

The plaintiffs did not offer any evidence or data showing that Starbucks’ employment practices have increased costs or resulted in a lower quality of service to consumers in this complaint.

Advertisement

Starbucks “has decided to require outright race and sex-based discrimination in hiring via quotas, segregate employees on unlawful bases, and single out preferred groups for additional training and employment benefits,” according to the complaint.

The company is being accused of allocating executive bonuses to those who meet racial and gender diversity quotas. “Starbucks tied ‘ten percent of the overall bonus payout calculation . . . to creating an inclusive environment where everyone belongs,’” the lawsuit alleges.

In September 2020, [Starbucks’] Compensation Committee approved the incorporation of additional targets into both [Starbucks’] short-term and long-term fiscal 2021 incentive plans (Annual Incentive Bonus Plan and LSP [Leadership Stock Plan]) for [its] U.S.-based senior leadership team members at the senior vice president level and above.

The company also instituted a “representation target” that allegedly “focuses on improvement in Black, Indigenous and LatinX representation at the manager level and above, with a 3-year target of improving Black, Indigenous and LatinX representation by more than 5% by 2023.”

The attorney general takes issue with the exclusive training, mentorship, and advancement opportunities allegedly provided to certain racial and gender groups while excluding others. The complaint refers to programs such as the Black Partner Network and Latinx Partner Network, which offer networking, development, and job benefits to racial minorities.

Advertisement

 “Minority employees are given a mentor in the senior leadership team at the company, one-on-one training, and mentorship sessions. But employees of other races were not,” the attorney general alleges.

The lawsuit further notes that Starbucks’ workforce was “8.1% black, 31.7% Hispanic, 5.6% Asian, 47.8% white, 0.6% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.5% Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander” as of September 28, 2024. The company’s workforce “was 70.9% women and 28.4% men.”

The lawsuit adds: “In other words, since 2020, Starbuck’s workface has become more female and less white.”

Bailey, in a press release, argued that he has “a responsibility to protect Missourians from a company that actively engages in systemic race and sex discrimination” and that “Racism has no place in Missouri.”

Starbucks issued a statement to KTVI saying, “We disagree with the attorney general and these allegations are inaccurate.”

The company insisted that it is “deeply committed to creating opportunity for every single one of our partners (employees)” and that “Our programs and benefits are open to everyone and lawful.”

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement