Union representing StarbucksThe interim chief executive at coffee giant, baristas, is being targeted by the company. Howard SchultzHe claimed that his comments regarding an enhanced benefits program were illegal threats, and had a chilling effect on impending union vote votes.

Starbucks Workers United claims, in a filing filed with the National Labor Relations Board on April 22, that Starbucks through Schultz’s comments has violated The National Labor Relations Act. It asks for the agency to make a complaint.

Schultz last month told U.S. store leaders that the company was reviewing the coffee chain’s benefitsHowever, the law doesn’t allow for new legal benefits to be extended to store owners who have voted in unionization without separate negotiated agreements for employees. Schultz was a returning CEO when he made the following move: suspend the company’s share buyback program• To make investments in workers’ benefits

CNBC obtained a letter from Starbucks Workers United counsel to the NLRB. It claims Schultz’s remarks “threatening to withhold” the benefits had an “immediate, profound chilling effect” on the organizing campaign nationwide.

Workers can testify that Starbucks baristas saw the comments in media reports just before voting. Some pulled support at “last-minute” which cost a win for a local union.

In the letter, it claims comments that were made by district and store managers have been “parroted”, making them impractical or coercive.

Starbucks has defended Schultz’s comments, saying that it will need to respect the bargaining process in order to offer new benefits to unionized employees.

Howard isn’t allowed to make this decision. This is law. Stores that have voted for collective bargaining cannot receive any new benefits unilaterally. Howard continues to be focused on building the future Starbucks together with partners, side by side,” Reggie Borges (Supporter at Starbucks) stated in a statement to CNBC.

Starbucks Workers United filed over 80 claims against Starbucks for allegedly violating federal labour law. Most recently, the NLRB won a petition for injunctive relief. This will allow for immediate reinstatement for three Starbucks employees who were fired after attempting to organize.

Starbucks filed the first lawsuit against the union last month, alleging that it incited partners. broke federal labor law.

Starbucks Workers United claimed in a statement released to CNBC that benefits reviews are “just another desperate attempt by Starbucks partners to keep us from exercising our rights to have a Union and the right for collective bargaining.”

This is an extension to other threats Howard Schultz’s management has been making. Hopefully at some point Howard recognizes you cannot have a ‘progressive company’ and be the poster child for union busting,” the union said.

Over 200 cafés across the nation have already petitioned the NLRB for a vote to unite with Starbucks Workers United. More than 40 of them have voted in favour.

Starbucks believes that it is better to have a partnership than to form a union.