Several media outlets have recently published stories expressing pessimism about the prospects for the fledgling union movement at Starbucks, Amazon, Trader Joe’s, and other high-profile companies. There’s no doubt that these corporations are intent on crushing workers’ efforts to form unions, as seen by recent defeats for pro-union workers at Amazon in Albany, Trader Joe’s in Brooklyn, and Home Depot in Philadelphia. But the situation is not as pessimistic as some commentators believe — particularly when it comes to the union drive at Starbucks, even though the company has engaged in one of the most unlawful anti-union campaigns in recent memory.

New York Times journalist Noam Scheiber, who has published several outstanding stories on the organizing wave, correctly points out the high stakes at Starbucks: if Starbucks succeeds in crushing its pro-union workers, it could become the model for other anti-union corporations. Geico and Trader Joe’s are already using Starbucks as a cautionary tale in their anti-union propaganda, pointing out that Starbucks has (unlawfully) denied wage and benefit increases to workers in organizing stores and that workers have yet to gain a contract almost a year after the first vote to unionize.

Thus, the entire labor movement and the Biden administration — not just the general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Jennifer Abruzzo, who, despite the best of intentions, has failed to make the law functional — needs to ensure that Starbucks doesn’t get away with its unlawful campaign. But Scheiber sees only two potential outcomes: Starbucks Workers United wins a good contract, which would inspire further organizing, or the union “gets nothing,” which would “discourage other workers from unionizing at Starbucks and beyond.”