Subscribe Sign in

Business

Starbucks baristas reel from surges in health insurance costs: ‘I’m considering a second job’

3 min read Rewritten in plain language

StarbucksUS UnionsUS NewsFood and Drink IndustryUS Work and Careers

Show what we removed Rules applied: A1 A7 D2 D3×2 D4 F2×2 all 30 rules
  • Several workers say they’re opting to go without health coverage due to premium costs soaring this year
  • The survey of more than 130 Starbucks workers in both unionized and non-unionized stores, shared exclusively with the Guardian, found baristas are experiencing hikes in costs for their health insurance coverage starting 1 October.
  • Since then, more than 700 Starbucks stores have won union elections, with the union representing over 12,000 workers at the company.
  • Kaye-Lani Story, who has been a barista in Edina, Minnesota, for nine years, said she took herself and her son to the doctor this month as their health insurance is set to lapse on 1 October.
  • Starbucks Workers United has filed an unfair labor practice charge after the company did not respond to a request for information on health insurance coverage changes regarding what prompted the fee hikes and how Starbucks’s contribution to the healthcare costs were affected.

5 sentences from our version of the report, chosen to cover it. Nothing here is written; every line is in the article below. How

Kaye-Lani Story Minnesota, for nine years, said she took herself and her son to the doctor this month as their health insurance is set to lapse on 1 October.

Headline check

The one thing this headline claims is not in the report.

  • The headline puts “‘I’m considering a second job’” in quotation marks. Nobody says those words anywhere in the report.

Figures, names and quoted words in the headline, looked for in the report itself — not in the summary above. How this is checked

Read the full reportHide the full report3 min

Several workers say they’re opting to go without health coverage due to premium costs soaring this year

Starbucks workers say their health insurance premiums have soared this year, in some cases more than doubling, according to a recent survey conducted by Starbucks Workers United.

The survey of more than 130 Starbucks workers in both unionized and non-unionized stores, shared exclusively with the Guardian, found baristas are experiencing hikes in costs for their health insurance coverage starting 1 October.

Some workers reported their premium costs per paycheck nearly doubling, even as they struggle to afford other basic necessities andare scheduled to work enough hours to be eligible for the benefits.

The changes come as Starbucks Workers United launched a boycott last month against the company demanding a union contract, what would be the first since stores started to unionize in December 2021. Since then, more than 700 Starbucks stores have won union elections, with the union representing over 12,000 workers at the company.

Several workers said they are opting to go without health insurance coverage due to the costs and the price hikes are forcing them to worry about whether they need to find an additional job.

Kaye-Lani Story, who has been a barista in Edina, Minnesota, for nine years, said she took herself and her son to the doctor this month as their health insurance is set to lapse on 1 October. Her health insurance premiums were set to go from $130 a week to $170 a week, a 30% increase.

“That is another $40 each week that I am not going to have in my income, if I choose to go with it, and that’s just not something that financially I can afford,” she said. “I have to drop my insurance because the company will not cover those costs when it’s clear that they’re definitely making enough.”

In the past, Kaye-Lani was qualified to receive Minnesota’s state health insurance, but switched to the company’s health insurance plan when she made too much income to qualify.

“I make too much to qualify for coverage through the state. I don’t make enough to keep my medical coverage through work, and so at this point, I just have to drop it completely,” she added. “During the winter, the heating bill goes up. During the summer, the electric bill goes up from the AC. There are just all these wavering things throughout the year that I have to pull from to be able to apply to expenses just to be able to keep a roof over my head and food on the table and whatnot, and then this happens, and it’s too much.”

Cory Wagner has relied on Starbucks’s health insurance for five of the seven years he’s worked as a barista at Starbucks in Woods Cross, Utah, outside Salt Lake City.

“This is the first year that [premiums] nearly doubled,” Wagner said. “My insurance rates are going up to a point where I am now having to consider getting a second job, potentially leaving the company.”

Wagner relies on a heart medication to be able to work and noted the health insurance premium cost increases have made the out of pocket cost of his medication unaffordable. His health insurance premium cost went from $70 per biweekly paycheck to $122 per paycheck this year.

“Now I’m kind of left at a point where I am choosing between paying for this medication and paying for my utility bills, paying for my groceries, paying for the gas that I need to get to work,” he said. “The company has the money to keep our insurance premiums the same. They have the money to help the partners that are actively making them money.”

Starbucks Workers United has filed an unfair labor practice charge after the company did not respond to a request for information on health insurance coverage changes regarding what prompted the fee hikes and how Starbucks’s contribution to the healthcare costs were affected.

A Starbucks spokesperson did not comment on the unfair labor practice charge but said in an email “like employers across the country, we continue to face rising healthcare costs while remaining committed to providing quality, affordable healthcare coverage for full and part-time partners at Starbucks, beginning at just 20 hours per week.”

You are reading our version, not theirs. This is The Guardian Australia (Business)'s report with its verdicts and loaded words taken out. Plain description stays, and so do adjectives that carry a fact, such as "former" or "federal". The reporting, the facts and the quotations are theirs — quotations are never edited — and the indicators beside it measure this version. Hover or tap Adjectives to see every one left in the text.

How this outlet filed it, and how we rewrote it

No other newsroom we read has filed on this event, so there is nothing to compare it with yet.

Outlet Niral ScoreAdjectivesSourcingSentimentHappiness
The Guardian Australia (Business)as they published this story 8.2 7 79 -0.3 51.7
Mundane Readneutralized from The Guardian Australia (Business) 7.6 6 79 -0.3 51.7

Sign in to react.

Comments

Nothing here yet.

Sign in to comment.

Questions

Readers can ask a question about this story here. Questions and answers are for subscribers. Sign in to read them.

Comments are read before they appear where anything in them needs a person to look. Nothing posted here is ever deleted; a comment taken down keeps its text and the reason, so the decision can be looked at again. How this works