You might google for Starbucks' employees reactions.
Here are a couple.
"Business Insider editor Aimee Groth recently described a three-week gig she had working as a Starbucks barista in Brooklyn last spring. While the work environment was far from a slave camp, it certainly was grueling. Starbucks baristas, Aimee reported, get only two 10-minute breaks in an 8-hour shift, along with another 30-minute break that is unpaid. They're also on their feet all day, wearing dorky hats and aprons, and rushing to serve demanding customers with exacting standards for their lattes and frappucinos.
Although being a barista is obviously not a "high-skill" job — you don't need a PhD or extensive training or accreditation to do it — it doesn't sound much less-skilled than a repetitive manufacturing job. And while everyone is quick to condemn manufacturing "sweatshops" in which workers toil all day for low pay, many sweatshops do have an advantage over Starbucks working conditions in that you get to sit down and that you don't have to interact with annoying customers.
And how much does Starbucks pay its baristas for this work? Aimee was paid $10 an hour.
￼That wage, she was told, was higher than her fellow entry-level baristas, so she was urged not to talk about it. It was also higher than entry-level wages at other Starbucks around the country.
Now, $10 an hour is certainly better than America's "minimum wage" of about $7 an hour. But it still amounts to an annual salary — just under $22,000 — that is below the poverty line.
And elsewhere in the country, apparently, Starbucks' baristas are paid significantly less than in Brooklyn, making Starbucks' front-line customer-serving employees officially poor."
From the UK:
"Starbucks is cutting paid lunch breaks, sick leave and maternity benefits for thousands of British workers, sparking fresh anger over its business practices.
On the day the House of Commons' public accounts committee branded the US coffee chain's tax avoidance practices "immoral", baristas arriving for work were told to sign revised employment terms, which include the removal of paid 30-minute lunch breaks and paid sick leave for the first day of illness. Some will also see pay increases frozen." -- The Guardian
Workers at Starbucks have a harder time making the hours necessary to get health insurance than workers at WalMart one analyst reported.
No multi-billion dollar company that pays minimum wage, or anything close to minimum wage is treating its workers fairly. None.
In any case, that does not answer my question: "If a company treats its workers poorly, should it still get the support of the GLBT community for work on GLBT issues?
Another way of saying it: "Is the GLBT struggle one for human rights or for gay rights?"