Starbucks Makes Surprising Admission About Mail-in Ballots

Townhall further reported:

Apparently, Starbucks has discovered that mail-in ballots are susceptible to fraud and misconduct — according to a letter the coffee giant sent to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), via CNBC:

The Seattle-based coffee giant wrote in a letter to the chairman and general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board on Monday that the labor board’s officials acted inappropriately during an election in the Kansas City area and has likely acted similarly in other elections. Starbucks cited a career NLRB professional who approached the company as a whistleblower.

According to Starbucks, NLRB officials allegedly coordinated with union agents to arrange for in-person voting at the labor board’s offices during mail-in ballot elections. The company also alleges that Workers United agents were given confidential, real-time information about specific vote counts so the union could target employees who hadn’t voted yet. NLRB officials and Workers United then allegedly coordinated to cover up this activity, the company said.

Starbucks’ letter details email correspondence that allegedly occurred between union representatives and labor board officials. The company said it was informed of the emails’ contents by the whistleblower.

However, what’s good for Starbucks is apparently not what Starbucks thinks is good for the rest of America’s voters. In a predictably ironic twist, Starbucks was one of many corporate entities that signed onto a statement opposing election integrity laws in Georgia and other states being pursued by Republican legislators and governors. 

So Starbucks opposes legislation that would put restrictions on the ability of fraud-prone voting methods, but wants to enact restrictions on fraud-prone voting methods for its own employees who are decided whether to join unions. 

So far, 220 Starbucks locations have voted to unionize, with more than 30 stores set to vote in union elections in the coming days, according to CNBC. 

The company announced last month it planned to close 16 stores for safety reasons, but employees at least one of those stores questioned whether it’s designed to counter unionization.