Starbucks employees in California and beyond want the company to cover the costs stemming from its new dress code.
Workers filed complaints with the California Labor Commissioner and joined in lawsuits in Illinois and Colorado, according to a CBS News report. They argue that the new dress code – requiring them to wear solid black shirts and khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms under their green aprons – created new costs, requiring employees to buy new clothes to comply or risk being sent home.
“I think it’s extremely tone deaf on the company’s part to expect their employees to completely redesign their wardrobe without any compensation,” Brooke Allen, a barista in Davis, told CBS. “A lot of us are already living paycheck to paycheck.”
The dispute highlights the difficult position that many employers put their workers in with uniform and dress code requirements, especially for those working hourly positions in the service industry. How the California Labor Commissioner and, likely, the courts come down on the question could impact a wide range of workers who have never poured a latte at a Starbucks.
At Justice Law Corporation, our California wage and hour attorneys help people ensure that they are fully paid for their work. We are seasoned lawyers who have dedicated our careers to fighting for working people in California and Washington. Our lawyers have a strong track record of success for the people that we represent.
Whether Starbucks has to reimburse employees for work clothes may ultimately depend on where the employees are located. Here’s what the law says in California.
The New Starbucks Dress Code
Starbucks rolled out the new dress code for workers at its coffee shops in April 2025. The company said at the time that its goal was to create a “more consistent coffeehouse experience” by highlighting the brand’s iconic green apron and simplifying outfit choices.
The policy included several new requirements. Employees are now required to wear:
- Solid black shirts (short or long-sleeved, collar optional) under their green aprons
- Khaki, black, or blue denim bottoms (no patterns or frayed hems)
- Waterproof footwear in subdued colors like black, gray, brown, and tan
The company also tightened its grooming and personal expression rules, such as limits on facial tattoos, piercings, and “theatrical makeup.”
The move sparked immediate pushback from employees and the union that represents many of them. Employees across locations went on strike in May, with more than 1,000 workers from 75 stores reportedly walking out.
“Starbucks has lost its way,” Paige Summers, who works as a supervisor at a store in Maryland, told CBS. “Instead of listening to baristas who make the Starbucks experience what it is, they are focused on all the wrong things, like implementing a restrictive new dress code.”
The company was not moved. Starbucks noted that the striking workers represented less than 1% of its workforce. It also noted that the company provided workers with two new shirts, free of charge, to help them comply with the dress code changes.
Required Reimbursement for Work-Related Expenses
California law generally requires employers to cover all necessary work-related expenses. This requirement, established in Section 2802 of the California Labor Code, has been broadly interpreted by courts. If the expense was incurred because of your job, and your employer knew or should have known about it, you are entitled to reimbursement.
Some of the most common examples of reimbursable expenses include:
- Gas and vehicle mileage
- Food and lodging for work-related travel
- Office supplies
- Specialty tools required for the job
- Costs of setting up a home office
Purely personal meals and commuting costs for traveling to and from work typically are not reimbursable. The same goes for continuing education expenses and those related to professional licenses, unless they are required as part of the job.
What About Work Clothes?
The Starbucks situation underscores how murky the reimbursement question can be for clothing and shoes.
California law requires employers to pick up the tab for work uniforms, such as distinctive clothing, logos, or colors that employees are expected to wear on the job. Employers also have to cover any costs for protective apparel, like safety vests, respirators, and other personal protective equipment.
Employers, however, do not have to pay for certain everyday clothes and shoes for workers. General apparel that can also be worn off-duty, such as regular work boots or street clothes, is likely not reimbursable, even if required for the job.
A California appeals court’s 2019 ruling in a case involving workers at BJ’s Restaurant looms large for Starbucks employees miffed by the new dress code. The court in that case ruled that BJ’s was not required to reimburse employees for the cost of slip-resistant shoes, even though the company required workers to wear the shoes on the job.
BJ’s required the shoes as part of its safety policy. The company instructed employees at its restaurants to wear black, slip-resistant, closed-toe shoes as part of its effort to reduce slip-and-fall accidents. BJ’s did not specify the brand or style of shoes to be worn. It also did not prohibit workers from wearing the shoes off the clock.
This ruling creates a significant hurdle for Starbucks workers seeking to recover costs related to the new dress code. It is worth noting, however, that California’s Supreme Court did not weigh in on the BJ’s case. And it will be interesting to see what the California Labor Commissioner has to say about the Starbucks complaints.
Our California Wage and Hour Attorneys Can Help
If you believe that your employer is unlawfully underpaying you or violating your rights on the job, you do not need to go it alone. A California wage and hour attorney at Justice Law Corporation can help you evaluate your claim and understand your rights and options.
Our office is conveniently located in Pasadena. Contact us at (818) 230-7502 to schedule a free consultation with a California wage and hour attorney.
