Home
Forums
The Soap Box
Supreme Court denies UFCW's Jonquiere closure claims...
Forums
The Soap Box
Supreme Court denies UFCW's Jonquiere closure claims...
Supreme Court denies UFCW's Jonquiere closure claims...
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
| The Third Element |
Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:08 pm
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 363 |
Quote: TORONTO -(Dow Jones)- Canada's top court has ruled in favor of Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s (WMT) Canadian unit regarding the closure of a unionized store in Quebec four years ago.
The Supreme Court of Canada, which heard the case back in January, voted 6-3 for Wal-Mart Canada. The store, located in the town of Jonquiere, made headlines in 2004 when it was unionized without a vote. But after nine contract-bargaining sessions, Wal- Mart decided to shut the store the following year, saying the store wasn't making money and the union's demands, which required hiring an additional 30 positions, would have kept it from ever being profitable. Canada Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Wal-Mart Canada Also: Walmart Wins Canada High Court Ruling on Union Suit Court rules against Wal-Mart workers _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2883 Location: the 'puter |
A "split decision" (oh for sure, 6 to 3 is that close eh) and on a "technicality" according to ufcw national's Wayne Hanley.
UFCW - the door opener. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:26 pm
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 363 |
LOL... I did not see that.
It is split decision, split in 2/3 to 1/3. Funny reading the differing "spins" through the media too. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| silverboy |
Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:46 pm
|
|
Joined: 13 Feb 2006 Posts: 50 Location: North America |
Well, who would need a sh*t union like UFCW anyway?
|
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:07 am
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2883 Location: the 'puter |
Yeah "funny" if it's not your money paying for ufcw stupid.
CLC's legal whiz bro_ken Georgetti says: Quote: OTTAWA – The president of the Canadian Labour Congress says that Supreme Court of Canada judgments involving a Wal-Mart store closure in Quebec are based on legal technicalities and that the ruling would likely not apply in the rest of Canada. To answer your question SB - retail employers. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:19 am
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 363 |
LOL... I actually laboured (forgive the pun) over the choice of that word - "funny".
As for the CLC's opinion... lock and load boys, you can try it somewhere else if you want, I'll watch. The CLC should petition to let the workers of Canada have Advance Cutting and Coring back, and maybe Wal-mart would spring this one back to them. ... or not. Have a great weekend people. _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:01 am
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2883 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: ...petition to let the workers of Canada have Advance Cutting and Coring back,... 
Interesting decision to say the least. Maybe we can have that judicial maroon assigned to cases where people are charged with stealing food to feed their family. I would say the benefits of having food far outweigh deleterious effects of not having food eh. Do you suppose by "complex historical context" the judge was referring to said industry's wheels of profitability. Whatever, all we need to know is that the ruling favoured business as usual. Getting it back would be bonus but I imagine it's neither here nor there for wal mart, especially now. And besides, if there's any body which disrespects individual rights more than ufcw (and the judge in the above case) it would have to be be wal mart. _________________ Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. - Salman Rushdie |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail :: www |
| The Third Element |
Posted: Mon Nov 30, 2009 5:57 pm
|
|
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 363 |
The deleterious effect was the fact that if one union or a non-union employee, tried to work another union's "turf" they had their cars vandalized, burned, shot etc and their life threatened.
This is why there is no dictate to decertifying a construction union in Quebec, it is illegal to work construction in Quebec and *not* belong to a union. Ergo: "no right to non-association". Opinions? _________________ No Beast so fierce knows but some small amount of pity, but I know none and so I am no beast. ~ Richard III |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
Home
Forums
The Soap Box
Supreme Court denies UFCW's Jonquiere closure claims...
Forums
The Soap Box
Supreme Court denies UFCW's Jonquiere closure claims...
|
Page 1 of 1
|
||