Anti-Forced Labor Group Sues Starbucks, Claims Coffee Giant Knowingly Sources From Slave Labor
Labor advocacy group International Rights Advocates filed a lawsuit this week against Starbucks on behalf of eight individuals who were trafficked and forced to work on "Starbucks-controlled coffee plantations in Brazil." The complaint, brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks class certification for all trafficked laborers in Brazil and alleges that Starbucks knowingly benefitted from this slave labor, which took place on thousands of supplier plantations (John Doe I v. Starbucks Corporation, D.D.C. # 25-01261).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
IRAdvocates alleged that Starbucks aided and abetted violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), unjustly enriched itself on the backs of the laborers, engaged in negligent supervision of its suppliers and intentionally inflicted emotional distress on the laborers. "Plaintiffs bring these claims on behalf of themselves and the class of similarly situated workers harvesting coffee for Starbucks in Brazil," the brief said.
In response to the complaint, Starbucks released a statement denouncing the allegations. Michelle Burns, executive vice president for sustainability, said the claims "are without merit, and we plan to vigorously defend our company." She added that the "reporting mischaracterizes and misunderstands Starbucks coffee supply chain." Burns said Starbucks has "audited farms, assessed outcomes, and continuously enhanced our auditing standards and practices to be among the toughest in the industry."
The complaint said the laborers were forced to work on "Starbucks-supplying coffee plantations that are members of Cooxupé, a cooperative that is made up of member plantations and operates as a single entity that is a Tier 1 supplier to Starbucks." The advocacy group alleged that Starbucks aided Cooxupé's violations of the TVPRA by helping the cooperative "systematically" violate Brazilian laws prohibiting forced labor and trafficking.
IRAdvocates said it's bringing the suit in the U.S., since there's no law in Brazil that will allow the individuals to receive civil damages for their injuries against Starbucks.
The brief said Starbucks "routinely" sources coffee from cooperatives that include Brazilian firms that the company "knows or should have known have been found to be using trafficked workers forced to endure slavery-like conditions." IRAdvocates supplied documentation of the slave-like conditions for laborers in Brazil's coffee plantations, including a 2019 investigation from the Thomson Reuters Foundation. The Thomson Reuters Foundation investigators joined labor inspectors in Brazil as they raided two plantations in Brazil's Minas Gerais state, the largest source of coffee in Brazil.
Starbucks confirmed it sources coffee from Cooxupé, which is the world's largest coffee cooperative, accounting for 10% of coffee exports from Brazil. The complaint said many of Cooxupé's suppliers have been found to extensively rely on slave labor.
In its statement, Starbucks said it doesn't buy coffee from all farms within Cooxupé’s cooperative. The company said it only buys from "those who have been verified through" its supplier certification program.
The brief said Starbucks relies on a certification program, the Coffee and Farmer Equity (C.A.F.E.) program, to ensure its coffee is ethically sourced, but the scheme has certified Brazilian farms that were later "caught engaging in forced labor and committing other human rights violations." IRAdvocates alleged that Starbucks knowingly profits from the use of forced labor in its supply chains "despite having the industry control to effectively end such practices."