Starbucks Corp. has been accused of discriminating against white employees by allowing only minorities to participate in two training programmes, a group founded by a top adviser to former Republican President Donald Trump told a US civil rights committee on Tuesday.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Positive discrimination is a sensitive topic that creates division in many areas, and now Starbucks has become the latest target. Some believe that the under-representation of minorities requires such steps to balance out the inequality, but others believe that discrimination in any form is wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The group America First Legal (AFL) sent a letter<\/a> to the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) urging it to launch an investigation into Starbucks’ programmes that aim to increase diversity in the workplace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Former White House adviser Stephen Miller, known for his conservative views on immigration and other issues, founded the AFL last year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In a separate letter<\/a> addressed to Mellody Hobson, chair of Starbucks’ board of directors, AFL accuses Starbucks of breaching its fiduciary duty to shareholders by continuing to implement “racist” programmes introduced in 2020 and earlier this year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This means that white employees, particularly white men, are statistically underrepresented in the company’s workforce, and potentially the subjects of invidious discrimination<\/p>AFL, in a letter to EEOC<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n A Starbucks representative declined to comment on the matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EEOC investigations are usually triggered by complaints or charges filed by employees. The AFL urged the agency to issue a rare “Commissioner’s Charge” to investigate Starbucks’ training programmes without a complaint from employees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Federal law authorises any Commissioner to file a discrimination charge alleging that an employer violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), after which the charge is investigated by the appropriate EEOC field office. In addition, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Equal Pay Act (EPA) authorize EEOC field offices to initiate investigations of possible violations of those two statutes even without a charge from an aggrieved individual.<\/p>EEOC, on the procedures to combat employment discrimination<\/a><\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n A commissioner’s charge may be approved by only one of the five members of the EEOC. The agency currently has a Democratic chairman, but Republicans hold a 3-2 majority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n