[EliRivers]

makes unions unnecessary at Starbucks

Genuine question. When corporate spokespeople say this, and when people hear it, does everyone involved think it's bullshit for appearances, for a kind of collective playacting? Or is there a genuine mindset behind this that truly, honestly thinks that unions couldn't help Starbucks workers; that there's nothing they could do to make things better for Starbucks workers? Or is it stating they're unnecessary because it's not necessary for employees to have a better life; is it a kind of clinical, harsh Chicago school style assessment of the situation?