Wow. Moving someone to another location and then suddenly firing them for "communication standards?" Unless there's some highly compelling evidence to indicate otherwise, it's pretty clear cut what happened here. I guess they calculate it's better to pay a fine for a wrongful dismissal than to have a supervisor that is sympathetic to workers.
Want to fix this? It'll take a) jail time, and b) asset seizure.
Corporate structure deliberate distributes responsibility for things like this such that:
It's very hard to find one person to blame, let alone prove malfeasance.
If by some chance you do find a smoking gun, the fine for doing so is usually less than the profit of the transgression
If, eg, Howard Schultz and his direct-reports faced fines and/or jail time directly, and those fines were orders of magnitude the harms of the action, then you'd see some of this stop.
In this region of Canada, at least, the maximum penalty for wrongful dismissal is ... Standard severance.
Source: a dear friend launched a successful human-rights complaint against a very deep-pocketed employer who blatantly violated clear medical orders and then fired him when he objected. Like, 100% dead-to-rights on a claim with no normal upper limit. Except here it maxes out at a pittance.
Let each person rise and fall according the merits of their work and quality of their duties. No person is entitled to anything. Even respect has to be earned and prove why anyone should treat someone with dignity and honour.
Let each person business rise and fall according the merits of their work and quality of their duties. No person business is entitled to anything. Even respect has to be earned.
If employers can merge and negotiate collectively, so can workers. And if you're unswayed by that argument, remember that their right to free association lets them negotiate collectively regardless of what you think about it.