Starbucks’ New CEO: From ‘Messiah’ to Controversy Over 1,000-Mile Commute

Last week, Starbucks welcomed its new CEO, Brian Niccol, previously of Chipotle fame, with hope and optimism. The announcement triggered a remarkable surge in Starbucks’ stock, witnessing a 25% increase—the highest spike in the company’s history. Niccol, known for revitalizing struggling brands like Taco Bell and Chipotle, is set to begin his new role on September 9.

However, this positive start has quickly been clouded by public concern regarding certain perks in Niccol’s contract. The terms allow him to work remotely from Newport Beach, California, and commute to Starbucks’ Seattle headquarters via a private jet.

The company’s offer letter states that Niccol isn’t required to relocate to Seattle, but must commute as needed for his responsibilities. Notably, the document mentions that he would have access to company aircraft for “business-related travel,” including trips between his residence and headquarters.

Starbucks clarified that, in accordance with hybrid work policies, Niccol is expected to work at the Seattle office at least three days each week. Unfortunately, this clarification did little to quell public outrage. By Thursday, media outlets like The New York Times and the BBC began reporting critically on his considerable commute, turning it into a focal point of controversy.

The backlash intensified as consumers perceived the arrangement as hypocritical, particularly given the company’s recent sustainability pledges. Many expressed outrage over Niccol’s suspected reliance on private jets, which are known to be disproportionately more harmful to the environment than other forms of travel. A 2021 European report highlighted that private jets can be 14 times more polluting per passenger than commercial flights, and 50 times more so than trains.

Social media commentary reflected a growing discontent. One user pointedly remarked on the irony of Niccol traveling by private jet while customers are encouraged to use environmentally friendly options like paper straws. Another quipped that consumers would need to compensate for the CEO’s significant carbon footprint by using even more reusable cups and paper straws.

Users continued to criticize Starbucks, labeling the company’s branding as “performative hypocrites.” Comments flooded in questioning the authenticity of Starbucks’ environmental commitments, especially when juxtaposed with such extravagant perks for its CEO.

In response to the criticism, Starbucks maintained its support for Niccol, citing his extensive experience and successful track record in the industry. A spokesperson emphasized confidence in his ability to drive the company and its brand toward long-term value for all stakeholders.

While the public outrage may die down in the coming days, industry experts suggest that the impact on Starbucks’ workforce could linger. Ben Alalouff, chief strategy officer at Live & Breathe, expressed concern that corporate employees might feel resentment over perceived inequities, especially when they face a mandatory return to the office while Niccol enjoys the luxury of occasional private jet commutes.

Workers who have far to travel may face difficult decisions, such as relocating for compliance with office mandates or seeking employment elsewhere. The juxtaposition of these circumstances against Niccol’s unique privilege could foster lingering discontent among employees.

Alalouff noted that while this controversy may fade from the public eye, the internal implications for the Starbucks team could be more challenging. Many employees may find it frustrating if funds are allocated to a private jet rather than bolstering benefits, bonuses, or overall workforce investment.

Looking to the future, Alalouff suspects that Starbucks’ brand will likely withstand this storm, as the issue appears minor compared to broader challenges facing society. Consumers are unlikely to alter their coffee habits based on the company’s executive commuting practices.

He acknowledged that while attracting transformative talent is essential, Niccol’s arrangement might be perceived as excessive. Notably, research indicates that as few as 7% of CEOs have returned to full-time office work, prompting questions about the consistency of corporate policies.

This perceived double standard may not go unnoticed by employees, some of whom are responding to stringent return-to-office requirements with resignation letters or minimal effort at work. Moving forward, Starbucks will need to navigate the next several months carefully to ensure it maintains a favorable image and earns trust from both employees and consumers.

Failure to make a significant impact soon could further taint perceptions of Niccol’s controversial commuting arrangements.

Source: Fortune.com