Angie Nelson writes to STARBUCKS GOSSIP: I am curious about why people voluntarily leave Starbucks when they are supposed to be a Fortune 100 Best Companies to work for. I would be interested to see what type of response you get from people if you pose the question. I see lots of people called ex-barristas posting on your site. It seems like they must still have some hold to Starbucks or they wouldn't be using your site (especially such passionate posts). I am curious about: 1.) What are they doing to be a Fortune 100 company best to work for; and 2.) What are they not doing to have such a high turnover?
Isn't it the typical?
Low-pay + physically stressful work + little career advancement = high turnover?
I somehow doubt there'd be high turnover if Baristas made $60k annual.
Posted by: Mike Whalen | October 28, 2006 at 10:23 AM
The turnover is no where near as high as the rest of the "industry." I find that a lot of baristas in my area are either students who need a flexible schedule, or older people who do it for the health insurance. Typically, if they don't plan on making it a career, they just move on to "normal" corporate jobs.
Posted by: MGR | October 28, 2006 at 10:33 AM
I doubt that people would leave Starbucks, as the post above me stated, if the pay was higher. In the area that I live in, the minimum for a barista is currently $9.90. Shifts are running a whopping $11/hr. It is all based on cost of living and the minimum wages for Starbucks, and even the caps, are not meant to sustain a person very long. A single person could live on bare essentials on these wages, but a family cannot.
Posted by: John | October 28, 2006 at 10:34 AM
I disagree with the comment where there is little career advancement.
I have been with the company for a year now. I was a barista for my first 8 months, then I become a shift supervisor, and then the company offered me a promotion to assistant store manager after only being a supervisor for 4 months. On top of that, I have been told that I could be a store manager in 8 months based on my skills and loyalty to the company.
I even applied for a job at Starbucks corporate (when I was a shift supervisor and coffee master) and I made it to the finalist interview, but lost it to someone who had a specialized degree for the job we were up for.
Posted by: Howie Schultz | October 28, 2006 at 10:51 AM
The company as a whole is a top 100 company to work for, but as far as each individual store goes that could be another story. Perhaps they were just unhappy with the management at the store they were working at and couldn't transfer.
Posted by: bareesta | October 28, 2006 at 12:02 PM
It's important to remember that people don't quit the company, they quit people. Basically, partners leave the company because they feel somehow betrayed or do not believe in Starbucks anymore because of their store manager. The store manager represents Starbucks to them just like each partner with a green apron represents Starbucks to each customer. If the store manager is horrible, then the partner will leave. My own store has the unusual high turnover of 400%.
Posted by: Boston Starbucks Rebel | October 28, 2006 at 12:13 PM
I believe Angie is correct in asking both questions. Why is Starbucks a great place to work and why, ultimately, do people leave?
Every company pledges, with hand on heart, that "employees are their greatest asset". Few back it up with actions, especially at higher levels within the firm. I joined a high-volume store in Northern California last May and heard the spiel as part of training. I was pleasantly surprised and impressed that, top down, this company realizes the essential, day-in / day-out, market differentiation factor is the partner base.
The detailed training (~32 paid hours), encouragement to delight customers without asking permission and part-time benefits underscore this. I love interacting with people, being busy and getting positive feedback so I was happy.
Of course, as others have pointed out, the large number of locations and staff ensures somewhat uneven results. Not every barista, shift or manager cares or invests themselves at the same level. They couldn't. We're human and have bad days as well as different priorities and goals.
So, a company that actually cares and (usually) a group of co-workers that can jam together. Who would leave? Excluding those undergoing serious drama in their lives, of course.
Reality check. For those of you who have not worked at a Starbucks store, notice when it is busy how hard the staff are working. Mentally and physically. Especially notice when they are slammed. Three and four hour uninterrupted rushes are common on morning and weekend shifts. Yes, it is just making beverages and serving them with food items, but the intensity is comparable to highly compensated positions in other sectors.
Regardless of how busy the store is, doing a shift with an adequately-staffed team is a blast. When the wait times get high and customers turn their smiles upside down, it sucks. I think many people just wear out. A fair percentage don't make it thru training or the first month on the floor.
The workload in a busy store coupled with mid-$7/hr (just increased to mid-$8/hr) wages causes people to occasionally question the wisdom of continuing. Yes, the ~$2/hr tips rock and the part time benefits are unmatched elsewhere, but a few crazy shifts with a no-show partner takes a toll. Although the customer is king, there are still labor costs to keep in alignment with revenues.
Enough ramblings. No simple answers. The hours required for my day job (IT Manager) kept growing. I cut back on Starbucks' availability several times but inevitably covered some shifts and had way too many hours between the two jobs. I left Starbucks after four months when a key IT project implementation was delayed, partially because of my portion.
I would love to go back when things slow down, if they do. Meantime I loudly salute my former co-workers when I visit the store and supportively listen to their joys and complaints. A store is really a family with the attendant ups, downs, comfort and irritations. This family will always be fluid, with new arrivals and exits.
Posted by: Cliff | October 28, 2006 at 12:37 PM
I had to go to college.
Posted by: LeBarista | October 28, 2006 at 01:02 PM
I think Cliff made some fantastic points. The work load in a high volume store can grind you down after awhile.
One of the Roasting Plants are in my area, so we see a lot of partners from the plant come into the stores. Sometimes, for one reason or another, a roasting plant partner will transfer to a store thinking it would be easier. I've yet to meet one that wouldn't go back to the plant in a heartbeat after working in a store for several months.
Posted by: Z-PHANTOM | October 28, 2006 at 01:06 PM
I left Starbucks for a few reasons, and will try to keep it relatively short.
Prior to working at Starbucks for a little while (6 months), I worked for another Fortune 100 Best Places to Work company--which I worked for for two years. The benefits, starting hourly pay, opportunity for advancement, attitude of coworkers and customers, quality and speed of training, and management were by far superior at the other Fortune company--which was also a "specialty" retail company, working directly with the public.
I felt like Starbucks' training, frankly, was a joke. Noobs at the other Fortune company possess a greater knowledge base of products and product specifications than new Starbucks partners (shocking, I know).
I think, however, that I worked for a very crappy Starbucks store. The store has the largest turnover of employees and managers in its district. My coworkers behaved in manners that I consider highly unprofessional in ANY field: bitching about internal store activities openly to customers (things like disciplinary actions, etc.), badmouthing the SM (who did suck), etc. I knew of a few former partners of mine who transferred out of that store to other stores, who seemed much happier after the transfer process.
I do not feel that that particular store reflects my overall "Starbucks experience," which has returned to positives after "demoting" myself back to customer. A few current baristas post around here that I would've killed to have had as coworkers, so I do not view the company as staffed by passive-aggressive, unprofessional shitheads. I left Starbucks as an employee once I finished the "school" phase of my life, and am happily employed in another field.
Posted by: HopkinsBella | October 28, 2006 at 01:11 PM
What about management turnover?
Posted by: | October 28, 2006 at 01:25 PM
Why am I going to leave Starbucks? Got a few minutes?
It seems like a different company than the one I joined a few years ago. I'm tired of all the BS that goes into the day to day operations of store. I'm tired of having one person calling out ruining my entire day. The only reason that ruins the entire day is that missing one person puts the entire store at a huge disadvantage because I'm not allowed to schedule more that the absolute minimum. In the last year I've been threated with write ups and worse for not getting my Variance to Ideal down to 0, even though a 0 variance clearly does not leave the store adequetly staffed. And in the last 12 months I've gone over my labor % to sales exactly once and been flat to budget once. For the year, I came in at approximately 3% below budgeted labor, made sales by more than 100K and
beat controllable by nearly 5%.
On the other end, I'm being told by my DM that if I don't hire more people, I'll get written up. A year ago, he arbitrarilly made up a number of baristas that would make my store "fully staffed". I had two less that that number and many of my partners who had great availiblity and wanted to work more were only able to get 20 hours or less. When I mentioned that, he told me he didn't care. During the entire conversation, I'm thinking to myself, "If I have to cut labor, why do I have to hire more people?" Is it because benefits are getting to expensive? I'm not sure, but in companies that I've worked for in the past, hiring too many people is one way of denying health benefits.
At the same time, I'm told that my wait times are too long (they are) and my snapshots reveal that keeping the condiment bar, floors, and bathroom clean has been an issue. It is clear to every manager I've had in the store that the store (which is situated next to one of the biggest subway stations in NYC) needs both an extra person (4-5 hours) in the morning rush and an extra person in the afternoon. Yet we cannot do so. So I get in trouble for having too much labor and I get in trouble for not having fast enough service. It just doesn't add up.
Let me stress that this is not a simple deployment issue. We're not always perfect, but we're very good. Because of the layout of the store couple with the proximity to the train station, we need that extra person. The train stops and the store goes from empty to 15+ people in line in a matter of a few seconds. ALS averages customer counts over a 15 minute period, so the few minutes of dead time hurt us by making the computer think that we only need 5 or 6 people when we really need 7.
My DM gets enraged when he comes in and the line is out the door and the condiment bar is messy and the paper order hasn't been put away yet. When I try to explain the competing factors, he says something to the effect of "Just get it done." Great coaching.
I've enjoyed a lot of my time at Starbucks. I've met some awesome people and I'm greatful for the opportunity...I just feel that Howard's original vision has been co-opted by the penny pinchers. Any company that is willing to push people making $9 bucks an hour that hard (while dealing with addicts waiting for their fix, mind you) is not for me any longer. I don't need this shit anymore...I'm going back to school. I will say that Starbucks helped me find what it is and what it is not that I want to do in life...clearly it's not work retail anymore.
Posted by: sbuxmanager | October 28, 2006 at 04:15 PM
As you can see.....it's a complex issue.
I think it depends. Some of us, me included, are here for benefits during a transitional point in our lives. I have an end point, about a year down the road, so I'm not going anywhere until I get there. But when I do, I will leave skid marks.
I've been with Starbuck's for three years now and I can say that different people work there for different reasons. What they are and how their life changes along the way determines how long they will stay.
Why will I leave? Because while the store I am in now (my third) has a really great client base and great partners, I've worked in really really bad situations. The job is demanding and it turns on the attitudes of partners and customers. Just read the comments on this site -- would you want to work so hard and have to face some of these crabby, self-entitled people day in and day out?
I'm in school and when that's done, so am I. But I won't work a minute more than I have to.
Barista to the Stars
Posted by: Barista to the Stars | October 28, 2006 at 05:14 PM
Could it be they just don't want to work there for the rest of their lives? Some people go to college, you know.
Posted by: Rick | October 28, 2006 at 05:49 PM
Having worked in an office environment for the better part of my employed life, I was laid off in February. I picked Starbucks for the benefits and flexible hours. That having been said with all internal conflicts and situations aside, which incidentally you will find no matter what industry or work environment you find yourself in, I find that most of the public is lacking in the basic human fundamentals of courtesy, respect and politeness. Making $9.50/hr and listening to people over and over again, day in and day out say, "Gimme this and gimme that" or "I want, I want, I want" gets to be taxing over time. They have no consideration for the fact that we are serving them. They just want what they want when they want it and we have to give it to them. However, just because we are in the service industry doesn't mean we haven't earned the right to be treated like people as opposed to servants. Customers have certain expectations of Starbucks employees. Well, quite frankly, I have certain expectations of Starbucks customers and to be honest, a lot of people who come through fall way short of those expectations. No "thank you's" or "Please". I would imagine that in most retail work environments, turnover is growing in direct proportion to how entitled American society feels. That belief of entitlement contributes to the decline in courtesy extended to those of us in the service industry. That's my .02.
Posted by: AMJ | October 28, 2006 at 06:25 PM
I hired in as a SM and absolutely loved working for the company. I had some life issues that became too great of a barrier for me to contine working at Starbucks and I returned to the information technology world full time. My experience with Starbucks is unmatched...and I still tell as many people as I can the benefits and the amazement of working for a company that really cares about its partners. Time worked is time paid. But Cliff is right, nothing beats rockin' out a full cafe with a team of partners interested in signing off on a job well done. I take the experience I had with Starbucks and use many of the tools in my current job working information technology security for the government. Funny side note, I was in my home store (not the ones I worked as a SM) the other day when a new partner asked for my numbers. Ha. I guess it shows.
Posted by: PATRICK_FORMER_SM | October 28, 2006 at 06:33 PM
"mid-$7/hr and just increased to mid-$8/hr wages"
Did those hired at $7.xx get increased to 8.xx when the minimum wage for the store was increased?
Posted by: | October 28, 2006 at 06:36 PM
AMJ wrote :"Customers have certain expectations of Starbucks employees. Well, quite frankly, I have certain expectations of Starbucks customers and to be honest, a lot of people who come through fall way short of those expectations. No "thank you's" or "Please"."
Good observation and comment, is this a regional thing like East Coast vs. MidWest?
Posted by: RjD | October 28, 2006 at 07:08 PM
A change in managment can cause some people to leave the store. We've had a bit of a fallout after our SM and ASM were both moved to other stores in less then a month.
Posted by: 416barista | October 28, 2006 at 07:35 PM
I've been at Starbucks for 8 months, and I work in Pasadena,CA....we were only making $7.65 an hour (until the recent pay increase) which is nothing for the Los Angeles area. There is no way to live on that....even with the raise it's still only $8.64 an hour. I personally am only at Starbucks until I finish school...I hate working any type of retail.
Posted by: Tiffany | October 28, 2006 at 08:02 PM
a few adds:
it would take a great deal to make me leave, since i totally dig what i do. i've had some great bosses and some crap ones.
the crap ones (as SBUXMANAGER tells) make my life really hard, and make me want to succeed less. the good ones make me want to soar.
i think most people leave because it's a great stepping stone or waiting place while you wait for 'what you really want to do' ("real jobs" or in the field you went to school for).
but you'd be surprised at how many come back...i've rehired no less than 8 people this past year. they just couldn't stay away.
the pay isn't great. it's great for service industry and like work, but living on it is hard at times, especially when you see the profits that the company is making. (although we do get profit sharing in two ways: stock options and (for SM) bonus based on performance).
i think bad bosses and low pay are the biggest reasons people leave.
(but like i said: the best ones always come back!)
((aside: SBUXMANAGER - 2 things, 1- if you're inline on your PnL but not on your WLR then there is a possibility that your ALS is off, and you can either call SSC to get it fixed or tell your DM to back off; and 2- don't hesitate to take your concerns higher. if you need 7 people, use the 7. you're the boss of your store, not the DM. i'd love to see a DM write someone up for not getting their varience to 0, but still being under budget for labour... go to PR or call Business code of conduct and report them... don't quit because of an asshat.. get the asshat to quit instead! or at least get them in trouble!))
Posted by: | October 28, 2006 at 08:14 PM
i worked for starbucks for nearly 2 years. i started as a barista at 7 dollars an hour, with about 25 hours a week. my manager was decent, but the assistant manager was crazy! i worked through the christmas holidays, and the asm truly ruined my holiday. completely. how do you tell a line of 30 people (not including our drive through) that we just ran out of milk, vanilla syrup, and white mocha, just because our asm didnt order any. seriously. not just didn't forecast what the growth trend would be, but didnt get around to ordering it.
we had a management change after christmas, and the asm left with the manager. i became asm in the spring, and after not only completely disillusioned with the political game my manager played, but having my dm go batsh*t crazy, i stepped down. sure, the money was good, but when you hate everything you do every day of your life, is it really worth it?
so the old manager left, and the crazy asm...? well, they're now the store manager at the one i just left. incidentally, they're facing an entire store walkout if they don't shape up, since the baristas are fed up.
i can understand why, since as soon as the store gets busy and needs a floater to help get everything moving smoothly, the manager walks out and goes on a thirty. i understand wanting to get breaks out in a timely fashion, but since when do managers have immunity to the clock? last time i checked, a thirty was thirty minutes long, not an HOUR AND A HALF!
i sincerely enjoyed my job, and i loved the people i worked with. sure doing 45% frappuccinos in the summer wasn't the best part of life, but the customers were generally pretty awesome. it was management that made me quit. it appears that the only way to get to management in our district is to be completely incompetent, and know how to brownnose the DM, with no regard for skill or ability.
Posted by: a disillusioned ex-employee | October 28, 2006 at 08:15 PM
If a Store is allowed 425 labor hrs per week, how many employees can the store hire till it's considered fully staffed?
Is there a formula?
Posted by: NonStop hiring | October 28, 2006 at 08:16 PM
(that was me - sorry)
Posted by: nickname | October 28, 2006 at 08:16 PM
(@8:14..too busy to get in under my own comment)
Posted by: nickname | October 28, 2006 at 08:17 PM
sorry - forgot to say -
when the manager is on the floor as the floater, that's when the issue with the clock becomes a real issue. what they do on their admin time is their business. what they do on the floor screws over the rest of the store.
Posted by: a disillusioned ex-employee | October 28, 2006 at 08:18 PM
stores don't automatically get 425 hours a week...
the basic formula is: i partner for ever coverage hour opened.
but that's not all inclusive, but it's a guideline.
you should have enough so that if someone calls in sick you have at least 2 options instore to cover it - minimum.
Posted by: bob | October 28, 2006 at 08:20 PM
sorry: ONE partner for EVERY coverage hour opened
Posted by: bob | October 28, 2006 at 08:21 PM
As an almost 7 yr partner,(SM), I'd have to say that things are alot different now than Holiday of 1999. Customers were nicer and not so demanding. The culture of the company was a big concern to alot of people. Now we are growing so fast that we barely have time to do a coffee tasting let alone make sure the new partners know how to do register, or bar. We are slamming partners through so fast the culture piece is being left in the dust and not talked about nearly as much as it used to be or should be. Growing big and staying small is a great philosophy, but a very challenging one. We are hiring and promoting partners who are not ready to be in the roles they are in. Our standards have gotten lower and the expectation is lower than before. I was told by an ex-DM to promote to partners who wanted to be shifts to fill spots. I did not and will not do that, because that is not setting up anyone for success. Its more stressful than it used to be, DT stores are not as "third place" as old cafe stores, again cutomers are more demanding than before, and not as friendly either. These are not necessarily why people may leave, but I know they are concerns for sure. Starbucks rocks, its great, I just wish DM's and RDO's etc could have a week or two in our life and see what really goes on.
Posted by: SbuxSM | October 28, 2006 at 09:10 PM
Oh yeah, I don't mean when they are in training either. After the training is done and they are used to their postions.
Posted by: sbuxsm | October 28, 2006 at 09:24 PM
i love my job. i dont plan on leaving for awhile.
but if i had to leave i think it would be because of my manager and my ASM, they take full advantage of the baristas and they dont even care. they take the same days off and they work the same hours everyday. its really annoying when your a closer and you have to come in extra early just to try and find one of them.
but other than the management, i make 8.40 an hour and ive been working there almost a year, and ive been told that when i am 18 i can become a shift. and maybe move up when i am ready.
Posted by: barista_keri | October 28, 2006 at 10:49 PM
First, does anybody have a translation for the above message. That being said, from my original post. People have not quit Starbucls, they have quit people who work at Starbucks, mostly because of horrible management.
It is my gravest concern that Starbucks is losing its heart. We are no longer committed to providing a great cup of coffee with the human connection.
Starbucks needs to take a moment and truly reflect with its going and how to sustain the traditions which have kept it alive.
It is as if most of the good baristas have forever left Middle Earth and only a few have remained at Imladris and Lothlórien, in their final attempt to protect the ways of Starbucks.
However, the Dark Lord and his forces move against us and we too may have to flee across the Great Sea to Valinor, never to return.
But we hope for a HERO to arise...
Posted by: Boston Starbucks Rebel | October 29, 2006 at 12:08 AM
100% because I am sick of dealing with whiny ass customers who have been molded into anal-retentive babies through Starbucks "Just say yes" policy.
Posted by: | October 29, 2006 at 12:20 AM
Amen to Beantown Rebel ... the "just say yes" policy is molding the customers into these "God" like creatures who assume we will give them everything for free. All they have to do is pout and they will get the world they feel.
Posted by: Another Latte Slinger | October 29, 2006 at 01:52 AM
Me: Hi there! How are you this morning?
Customer: Medium coffee, no room.
I don't think I can make it any simpler than this.
Posted by: OMG Barista Boi | October 29, 2006 at 02:28 AM
i think to some extent starbucks went from being a great company to work for to being a company that had the reputation as a great company to work for and new how to maintain the reputation while eroding the true reasons why it was a great company to work for. i left mostly because they wanted me to leave. i had 8 years in and made alot of money for a store manager in my market. there was very limited opportunity for upward movemnet without relocation. i feel very strongly that as the company grew and many of the people who had grown with and grown the company moved on they were replaced by externals who espoused starbucks values as something from a script and never really got them or believed in them for real. my chain of command used to be visionaries all the way to the top and it became bean-counting beaurocrats who came from other retail corporations who want to run starbucks like the "ordinary" corporations they came from. legendary service became an afterthought to speed of service or even worse something that came from "converations and connections". maintaining the brand gave way to leveraging the brand and rolling out crappy drink after crappy drink and selling tons of them because of the brand. managers became expected to make sure to have certain percentages of their lowest paid employees on the floor at all times regardless of how it effected the quality of service, store morale, and experienced higher paid partners. managers were no longer hired for quality but for their willingness to be completely micromanaged and put corporate gamemanship and politics in front of quality store operations. the company was not always this way, at least not in my region. i don't know whether they didn't want me around anymore because i was on the high end of the pay-scale (if they expect me to manage my staff that way why wouldn't they manage me that way?) or because my faith in the company was so shaken and my passion diminished to the point where i was a liability. i am now somebody who was once very proud of all i had done to help build a companies presence in a market and all the people who i had touched and been toched by to someone who is basically ashamed of it. this is not the starbucks i was trying to help build.
Posted by: jabanga | October 29, 2006 at 02:29 AM
Re OMG Barista's comments above (228 am)
Those are the people who need Starbucks.....You have to deal with an idiot like that from across the counter. I was married to one of them.
Some people feel it is OK to shut the world out until the caffiene kicks in.
I only had to deal with one, as "America's largest drug dealer" you see a whole parade of them.
Sorry
Posted by: Elena | October 29, 2006 at 02:40 AM
We had a bad manager. Had he not left, I would have transferred.
He had more time in the company than the DM and played her (and us) very well for about six months.
I could have, and should have, gone to DM. I did not because I knew, and customers knew, he was leaving long before he told his DM he was even thinking about it. So I figured I could just hang in there until he left. He took 8 months to leave. It was becoming a drag to go into work.
He used to be, according to higher seniority partners, a great boss. He turned into the boss who gives a different answer depending upon whom was asking.
He turned into a jerk.
I should have told the DM months before he gave notice.
Next time I will.
Posted by: imabarista | October 29, 2006 at 04:17 AM
read somewhere in training materials that 2/3 of people who leave do so because of incomplete training and lack of communication about job expectations.
In other words they are not being told properly what to do and how to do it, and then they are not being told what is required of them porpoerly on a daily basis.
So- communicaiton. In addition I'll second the many folks who have comments about management not always being the best - and it filters down, oh yes it does.... an entire store can change in character. Also, being in a high volume market, I have yet to meet a manager who imbues the culture of the company. There's a few who try, and I heard about one who really did it right - but he's a DM now. guess I should be happy about that.
Lots of numbers crunchers. Were they created by the pressures from above, or did they start out that way - I don't know. Vast majority of folks leaving from my stores in the last 2-3 years is due to management team (including Shift supervisors) not treating them with dignity and respect. which is ridiculous if you look at our mission statement and guiding principles. theses were people who should have been hired years ago, but because they 'performed' under a very narrow set of specifications, they were kept on.
rude and inconsiderate priviliged customers don't bother me. I kill them with kindness, which makes them look like fools to everyone around them. works like a charm. peer pressure, especially from strangers you have to see on a regular basis and who you know are talking about you... heh. I feel sorry for them sometimes, but as long as they turn it around, I forgive them. the truly un pleasant ones end up going to another store where the baristas are willing to be as much drones as them.
Posted by: nycbearista | October 29, 2006 at 04:41 AM
I agree with the above comment about communication. So far I have been through about eight store managers over my years with Starbucks. Of them, five were terminated while I was there due to my sabatoge of the store and career. HAHAHAHAHA. Since I live in Boston now, I do even better of getting store managers fired even though I do not work directly with them. Anyway, one of the few managers who I worked with communicated with all the partners on staff wonderfully. She was blunt and direct. She stated the expectation and how to meet it. Plain and simple! And if a partner did not meet she indicated so in a prompt and direct manner without any nonsense or sugar. Thanks, I miss you alot.
Posted by: Boston Starbucks Rebel | October 29, 2006 at 04:53 AM
Jabanga,
Well said. My boss tells me he's trying to use his star skills when he raking me over the coals and telling me I'm doing a horrible job. I think he truly believes that no matter how mean and terrible he is to me and other partners, he thinks that if he throws in something about star skills, he's ok. Starbucks leaders no longer understand that saying that you're using star skills and ACTUALLY using star skills are two different things.
Posted by: sbuxmanager | October 29, 2006 at 06:53 AM
How many people out there in a store that makes over 20k a week feel like als is giving then enough labor to do everything? ie, legendary, wait times, snapshots, etc
How many think the 0 varience to ideal is do-able every week?
Posted by: | October 29, 2006 at 07:37 AM
I have been at Starbucks over 5 years, and I really fell like although we are told to stay small as we grow big - I feel like we do not have the extra time to be connecting with each other and customers like I did when I was hired.
I feel like we are run ragged all day long and it takes from the fun of the job - which it was very fun when I got fired on. I barely have time to do a french press with customers, or talk to partners -its go go go all day, and then we still do not make our labor to zero.
Its hard to preach work environment and community connection when its all about pushing promotions and running like crazy. I understand the retail world - but I always thought this was a different kind of company.
Posted by: barrite | October 29, 2006 at 07:43 AM
I was told last week that turnover is 80% for the company.
Posted by: | October 29, 2006 at 07:59 AM
Jabanga, you hit the nail on the head by realizing the difference between being a great company to work for, and having the reputation of being a great company to work for. Well said.
Posted by: HopkinsBella | October 29, 2006 at 08:11 AM
I agree with the above post.
Posted by: | October 29, 2006 at 09:09 AM
The reason I left was after 15 years, I was burned out. Change was good for me. I couldn't get myself to the next level. Probably equal fault on my behalf and the company. However , I left and three months later , I was making 25,000 dollars more a year and a better work enviornment. Starbucks is tough on the body and mind. To do it right means committment, I had it, but lost it. I am happier now and my SBUX stock bought me a house. So win win
Posted by: Kelly | October 29, 2006 at 09:32 AM
Retail: clerks (barsitas) average turnover six weeks, managers average turnover six months
Its is typical of retail in general that turnover is high.
Most barsitas are parttime becuase they are investing their time in other ventures. Some see STBX as career choices, and it can be. Managers tend to advavance in a way that moves them from one retail outlet to another, ie advance in position and salary if I move to another store. Its not the best way put that appears to be industry standards.
Posted by: Summer | October 29, 2006 at 10:02 AM
"If you work in a store that makes $20k/week..."
Thought that was the minimum for a store? ie: $1Million per year = $20k/week.
wow.. 6weeks for a barista turnover? The store i work in is fully staffed, and no barista/shift has quit in 4 months.
on the other hand, we've been thru 3 managers and 2 asst mgrs in that time. Go figure...
Posted by: Committed employee | October 29, 2006 at 11:05 AM
Committed,
True its just how HR figures staffing, the six week. six month thing..averages.
Posted by: Summer | October 29, 2006 at 12:42 PM