Fellner claims that Starbucks has challenges in the manner in which it is treating its employees (69). They are not supposed to join some unions and those who do so face severe punishment. In fact, the company went to the extent of even firing five employees in the United States thus leading to court battles. This is a clear indication that the company needs to shake up some of its policies concerning the employees and their rights because they major stakeholders. It should look into better ways of dealing with the pro-union employees and listen to their pleas in order to chart the way forward for the company. This issue is not limited to the US segment alone as the employees in Auckland participated in a strike organized by their union in order to seek better wages, secure working hours and the abolition of youth rates. Starbucks settled the disputes one year later in 2006 by increasing their wages, security of hours and offering better youth rates. In order to avert the possibility of future strikes, the company should develop a better communication channel through which the employees can air their grievances without necessarily reverting to strikes.
Gun laws have become more relaxed in the United States with more States adopting statutes that allow people to carry guns (Bussing-Burks 88). The problem is some gun owners have the tendency of carrying their guns while performing their daily activities like shopping. This has prompted many companies and stores to prohibit carrying guns in their premises as allowed in the local state laws. Starbucks has not done this thus allowing people to carry guns freely in their premises. This puts the company at odds with the community and other stakeholders because they hold the opinion that Starbucks should ban carrying guns in their stores. The company should reconsider its position on this issue because allowing people to walk with guns freely in their stores does not please all the stakeholders.
Not all the shareholders favor the position of the company on same sex marriage and the CEO of the company does not seem to care about their feelings. In fact, he openly told them that the company believes in diversity and that those who disagree with that position should sell off their shares in the company. This is not the way to talk to the shareholders because all of them have played a role in helping the company achieve its current position. The company should therefore enact policies that would ensure that the CEO addresses the shareholders with more respect and address their concerns without making them feel that they are easily dispensable as this may lead to loss of trust in the company.