Starbucks corporate legal department must be pretty busy these days. Carly Simon is suing Starbucks for "fraudulent business practices" while Starbucks is suing a former executive for accepting a job with Dunkin' Donuts. According to the specialty coffee company, Paul Twohig, former Starbucks senior vice president for the Southeast Region, violated an 18-month non-compete agreement when he accepted a position with the donut chain.
Twohig left Starbucks on March 2, 2009 and joined Dunkin' Donuts on October 5, 2009 as its new brand operation officer. In August, Twohig contacted Starbucks requesting release from the non-compete agreement so he could work for Dunkin', but Starbucks refused. During an online search last week, Starbucks discovered that Twohig did indeed take the job.
This isn't the first time Twohig left the coffee giant to pursue a job opportunity with a bakery/cafe that served coffee and espresso beverages. Twohig left Starbucks back in 2002 and went to work for Panera Bread Co. Was he not under a non-compete agreement then? Or did Starbucks not view Panera as competition? Either way, Twohig returned to Starbucks two years later in November 2004 and according to Starbucks, signed an agreement at that time.
So here's an interesting question - does Starbucks get to choose which former employees adhere to the non-compete agreement? What about baristas? They sign the agreement also. Or how about other corporate executives? Paul Twohig is not the first Starbucks executive to be courted by Dunkin' Donuts.
Christine Deputy joined Dunkin' in August 2009 as its Senior Vice President, Human Resources. Up until the beginning of 2009, she was Starbucks vice president, Partner Resources, Asia Pacific Region. She spent more than 10 years with Starbucks responsible for global staffing, talent management and field human resources. Why does the Starbucks non-compete agreement apply to Twohig but not Deputy? Rumor has it she may have even recruited Twohig for Dunkin' herself. As a former Starbucks human resources executive, wouldn't she have known better?
In its lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Seattle, Starbucks is asking the court to prohibit Twohig from disclosing to Dunkin’ sensitive Starbucks information and to order him to return severance pay and other remuneration provided when he left the company and also pay the coffee company for other damages and attorneys’ fees.
For current Starbucks News, subscribe to email updates and...