Starbucks is getting some criticism - IMO well-deserved - for the fine print on its public pledge to reimburse employees for travel expenses related to having to go out-of-state to get an abortion:
'Some forced birth with your venti latte?': Starbucks boasts it will provide reimbursement for workers to get abortions—unless they are a union shop
Turns out that this may only apply to non-unionized stores:
Also, they're only extending the offer to workers on Starbucks' health benefits plan, which most of their part-time staff are not on.
I think this sort of behaviour just underscores how important it is not to tie health coverage - including access to abortion - to employment, since companies are tempted to dangle it like a carrot to achieve their own ends.
Thoughts?
'Some forced birth with your venti latte?': Starbucks boasts it will provide reimbursement for workers to get abortions—unless they are a union shop
Turns out that this may only apply to non-unionized stores:
However, the company said it could not “make promises or guarantees about any benefits” for unionized stores, angering labor advocates and Twitter users.
Also, they're only extending the offer to workers on Starbucks' health benefits plan, which most of their part-time staff are not on.
I think this sort of behaviour just underscores how important it is not to tie health coverage - including access to abortion - to employment, since companies are tempted to dangle it like a carrot to achieve their own ends.
Thoughts?