Starbucks employees in California, along with those in Illinois and Colorado, have initiated legal action against the company over its updated dress code policy, which took effect on May 12, 2025. The core allegation is that the policy imposes unreimbursed financial burdens on workers for required attire and related items, violating state labor laws that mandate reimbursement for necessary job-related expenses.

While full class-action lawsuits have been filed in Illinois and Colorado, California workers have so far filed formal complaints with the state’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA). If the LWDA declines to pursue penalties, the California employees plan to file a class-action lawsuit here as well. The actions are backed by Starbucks Workers United, the union organizing efforts at the chain.

Starbucks announced the policy update in April 2025 as part of its “Back to Starbucks” initiative, aiming to “simplify” the dress code for a “more consistent coffeehouse experience” and clearer guidance for employees (whom the company calls “partners”). Key requirements include:

– – Solid black short- or long-sleeved crewneck, collared, or button-up shirts worn under the signature green apron. – – Khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms (e.g., pants or skirts), or black dresses meeting specific fit criteria.
– – Closed-toe, non-slip shoes (no Crocs or similar casual footwear). – – Removal of visible facial piercings (e.g., one plaintiff sought $10 reimbursement for removing a nose piercing).

The previous dress code, in place since 2016, was more flexible, allowing patterned shirts in various colors and looser enforcement. Under the new rules, non-compliant employees cannot start their shifts and may face disciplinary action, including verbal warnings, write-ups, or termination.

Starbucks provided two free branded black t-shirts to employees ahead of the rollout but has not reimbursed other costs, such as pants, shoes, or piercing removal.

The change sparked backlash, including a strike involving over 1,000 workers at 75 U.S. stores in May 2025, and has been criticized by Starbucks Workers United (a union representing employees at about 640 of the company’s 10,000 U.S. stores) for not being subject to collective bargaining, despite ongoing unionization efforts since 2021 with no contracts yet finalized.

On September 18, 2025, California Starbucks workers filed formal complaints with the state’s Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), alleging violations of California Labor Code Section 2802, which mandates employer reimbursement for necessary work-related expenses. If the LWDA does not pursue penalties against Starbucks, the workers plan to escalate to a class-action lawsuit on behalf of all affected California employees, regardless of union status.

The complainant in this case is Brooke Allen, a barista in Davis, California, who spent $60.09 on compliant waterproof shoes after her Crocs were deemed unacceptable, plus $86.95 on black shirts and jeans to meet the standards. Allen requested reimbursement but was denied, and she has voiced frustration over the financial strain on low-wage workers (many earning around minimum wage and living paycheck to paycheck), as well as the loss of personal expression allowed under the old policy. The complaints seek back pay for unreimbursed costs, penalties, and attorney fees.

The company has not directly addressed the filings but issued a statement emphasizing the policy’s benefits: lower employee turnover (at record lows, half the industry average) and more desired shifts for workers. It reiterated that “partners received two shirts at no cost” and highlighted broader benefits like average $30/hour in pay and perks (free college, healthcare, paid leave). Starbucks frames the change as customer- and employee-friendly, without acknowledging reimbursement demands.

Starbucks Face Class Actions Over Costs of New Dress Code