As one of the most renowned and fastest expanding businesses in the world, Starbucks was founded in Seattle in 1971. Starbucks began the twenty-first century to enhance shareholder value, increasing margins by strengthening its presence in established markets and raising the quality of employee benefits and working conditions. Starbucks is dedicated to providing the creativity, execution, and superior customer service required to maintain its position as one of the most dependable consumer brands in the world. However, the corporation continues to have concerns about its equality strategy.
The difference between the benefits of corporate workers and store partners is not inequitable. The difference is straightforward due to the different responsibilities and requirements for these positions. It is common practice to create a hierarchical structure of the benefits system to develop a motivational approach among work teams and reward those employees who work harder and have higher positions. At the same time, it requires adequate parallel systems in the corporate and retail spheres. To ensure that decisions regarding benefit structure do not unintentionally lead to discriminatory outcomes, human resource professionals might be advised to obtain a broad overview of their employee base. Employees who may be disproportionately affected are covered by the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, or pregnancy discrimination statutes (Tikson, 2018). Male employees are entitled to paternity leave under the same terms and circumstances as female employees unless an employer restricts the availability of maternity leave to the period of disability.
As the company’s CEO, it is vital to state that Starbucks values its workers and is one of the few businesses in the retail industry to offer both full and part-time employees excellent benefits. Consequently, workers are among the most productive in the sector and maintain motivation. The equity theory of motivation supports this approach because it leads to a lower turnover rate. People are highly motivated when they feel that their employer treats them fairly regarding their benefits. It is valid for both corporate and retail partners.
Due to the various regulations that are in effect in each Starbucks location worldwide, the second argument I offer as the CEO is that the standards and policies of Starbucks may not always be applicable or provide a complete explanation. Human resource managers must be aware of societal issues that might impact operations under different laws because different countries have additional regulations. But at Starbucks, partners are involved in creating the best policies for them, and top management values every suggestion or thought. Starbucks even wants each employee to participate in developing and implementing plans so that they may all work together to achieve their objectives (Tikson, 2018). As a result, all staff members are aware of the policies and principles, and employees are free to express their viewpoints.
The demands of shareholders should be addressed by emphasizing the servant leadership philosophy that influenced the creation of Starbucks’ policy. This strategy focuses on supporting subordinates to ensure everyone is involved in the organization’s advances. Hence, creating an evaluated working position structure among corporate and retail workers would be practical. Such a method can generate more benefits for each job without underestimating the value of higher positions. Thus, as the company’s most valuable asset, the employees are its fundamental value. Starbucks has produced optimal working conditions for consumers and a rise in revenues due to its environment and culture of respect for its employees. At the same time, shareholders demands must be addressed without harmful consequences for the workers.
Reference
Tikson, S. D. S. (2018). Human Resource Policies and Work Culture: A Case of Starbucks. Jurnal Bisnis, Manajemen, Dan Informatika, 15(1), 1-12.