Starbucks turns to Chile's top court over union dispute

Starbucks Coffee filed an unconstitutionality challenge before Chile's Constitutional Court to overturn a ruling from the First Labor Court of Santiago. The lower court ordered the company to reinstate dismissed barista and union delegate Antonio Páez, while also paying owed wages and benefits.

The dispute began after Páez formally registered his candidacy for union leadership on 8 August 2026. Starbucks dismissed him two days later, citing company needs. The union, where Páez previously served as president and currently serves as delegate, filed legal action on 19 August 2026 alleging anti-union practices. The union stated the dismissal aimed to block Páez from gaining three years of labor immunity, pointing to a similar dismissal on 24 January 2012 after which Starbucks was also forced to reinstate him.

The labor court ruled in favor of Páez on 28 August 2026. Starbucks attempted to appeal the order, but Article 292 of Chile's Labor Code explicitly bars any appeals against reinstatement orders tied to alleged anti-union practices.

Represented by attorney Arturo Fermandois, Starbucks argued before the Constitutional Court that the ban on appeals leaves the company without a defense and violates its right to due process. On 10 September 2026, the Constitutional Court initially declared the petition inadmissible, giving Starbucks three days to provide a certificate from the Santiago Court of Appeals confirming the case was pending. Starbucks provided the document, and the court will now evaluate the merits of the case.