Home
Forums
Your Union
Ontario Loblaw workers vote 97% for strike mandate
Forums
Your Union
Ontario Loblaw workers vote 97% for strike mandate
Ontario Loblaw workers vote 97% for strike mandate
| page: prev 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 next | |
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
| hawk |
Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:10 pm
|
|
Joined: 07 Mar 2010 Posts: 268 |
When I was with the UAW the leadership talked about "guided democracy".
That meant that the leadership had to led the "sheep" along the right path. Negotiations follow a set pattern like a play. In Act 1 they get the workers thinking about the huge gains that the greedy employer should give them. This is like when a worker buys a lottery ticket. In Act 2 you get the workers all upset in order to get a strike mandate. Then, after that vote the leadership doesn't need the workers anymore as they start to negotiate. In Act 3 they call a meeting for the vote and say this is all you will get if you strike till hell freezes over. So vote yes. Recognize this picture? |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| Rose Knows |
Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 5:21 pm
|
|
Joined: 16 Nov 2009 Posts: 240 |
I could not agree with you more on this point Laboryes.
It will take a lot for UFCW members to hit bottom and demand leadership accountabilty. It is like the membership have a disconnect between leadership accountabilty and effective contract negocations. This contract may be the turning point on this issue. The membership is faceing the perfect econmic storm if you belive as I do that we are on the cusp of hyperinflation in basic goods such as gas and food. The mood of the membership is fear and they are luckey to have a job and the leaderships attitude is scare the membership and they will take more of the same. We live in very interesting times and business as usual will not do at all. The time for effictive leadership is now and at all cost. anything less than this could mean total econimic destruction. I know these are strong words and they are ment to be. Anyone with a sence of history can see that we do indeed live in interesting times and would do well to watch the utube video called MELTUP and use this video as a road map to the future. Rose Knows UFCW Local 175/633 |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail |
| wm pasz |
Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:28 pm
|
|
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Posts: 1219 Location: Toronto |
We can dream and hope and hope and dream but the outcome of this is as predictable as a good snowfall in January. There isn't going to be any big showdown, last stand or members finally rising to take a stand.
Over 20 years, the Loblaws workforce has been thoroughly McJobbed. The majority of the members are already at rock bottom, don't plan to stay long and could care less about fighting some battle they're guaranteed to lose. I've been following the action. The 97% sounds like a resounding show of support for a strike but what you have to keep in mind is that the turnout for these votes is usually pretty low. The majority of members are the transient minimum wage earners who don't bother going to strike votes and don't get excited about strikes. If you look back over the past 20 years, you'll see that the UFCW always manages to get at resounding strike vote. Capitulation follows shortly thereafter. What's happening is that Loblaws is turning the final screw - not on the UFCW (the leaders are going to do just fine out of this) but on the remaining full-timers. The major concession that the company is looking for is the ability to convert conventional Loblaws, Zehrs and No Frills stores without offering buy-outs or buy-downs (you quit your full-time job, take some severance and come back to a min wage part-time job) currently required under the 3 collective agreements in the case of store conversions. This is a pretty blatant effort to rid the stores of the last vestiges of the old full-time workforce and its costs. Will Loblaws succeed? Absolutely. It's inevitable. Why? Because the vast majority of the membership is already at rock bottom. The min wage part-timers aren't going to walk out. What for? All that would do is sacrifice several days' pay for nothing. The part-timers don't care what happens if their store is converted. They're not entitled to the buyouts and buydowns anyway. They earned the minimum and will continue to earn the minimum if they're still there after the conversion. Many of them don't plan to keep their jobs for more than a few months anyway, so what might happen next year or the year after isn't a concern to them. This is the ultimate example of what happens when you get into two and three tier bargaining. You get these disparate communities within the membership who have no real affinity with each other. What will happen next? Here's my prediction: There will be more saber-rattling about a strike over the next few weeks. This will mostly be for the benefit of the minority that's about to get screwed. With the help of a government appointed mediator, there will be an 11th hour deal. It will be a slightly massaged version of what Loblaws is seeking but substantially it will contain the concessions they're looking for. The 3 local presidents, who by now are really experienced at selling rotten deals to bewildered members, will sell it as the best deal possible in the circumstances (the Wal-Mart spectre will be floated around and there will be the usual talk about "changing markets" and so forth). The wages won't be any higher but watch for increased contributions to the various UFCW training and communication funds. The majority will vote in favour and it will be a wrap. What's really interesting about the UFCW locals' ratification votes is that they're held under somewhat different conditions than the strike votes. The latter are usually held at a limited number of locations over a brief period of time (Local 1977's strike votes were held on July 5, 6 and 7th at a few locations from 7-10 pm - so, starting and just following the long weekend and at a time that isn't going to work for a lot of people. So, most likely only the diehards will come out for those. Ratification votes on the other hand are held at more convenient times and locations so more members come out - including the part-timers who are more likely to vote for the deal, no matter how bad it might be (because it's no worse than what they've got now and they're not staying long anyway). But not to worry. Kevin, Scott and Shawn are going to be OK. They know exactly how this is going to shake out and they're OK with it I'm sure. Getting rid of the full-timers works in their favour. Don't forget - to the UFCW 2 part-timers bring in more $$$ than one full-timer and 3 part-timers bring in way more than 1 full-timer. Let's see if the farce plays out as I expect. _________________ Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: www |
| John Briley |
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:25 am
|
|
Joined: 21 Nov 2007 Posts: 616 |
Here is another excerpt taken from the UFCW Canada Website:
Quebec Loblaw - Banner Contract Talks Heating Up http://www.ufcw.ca/Default.aspx?SectionId=af80f8cf-ddd2-4b12-9f41-641ea94d4fa4&LanguageId=1&ItemId=a3399e39-820e-42a6-9b26-4d58ae06782f Quote: With 30,000 Ontario Loblaw-banner workers already in a strike position after members delivered an overwhelming 97% strike mandate there, next door in Quebec members at 11 Maxi and Provigo stores in and around the Montreal area have also voted in favour of a strike. Eight of those stores are presently in mediation overseen by the Ministry of Labour. If things do not improve, 19 more stores are expected to join this movement by the end of the year.
|
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| wm pasz |
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:58 pm
|
|
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Posts: 1219 Location: Toronto |
Oh thanks for bringing up the Maxi and Provigo stores. Here's some interesting fine print about the UFCW's strike leverage at those places.
Several years ago we dug up an fascinating secret agreement (called a "Partnering Agreement") between the UFCW and these chains - in which the UFCW agrees that that contract expiry dates at unionized stores will be staggered such that "not more than one store in any region or sector is vulnerable to strike action at any time." Given this agreement, it doesn't really matter how many workers want to strike, what their issues are or how obstinate the company is being at negotiations. Not more than one location can be out at the same time. While a multi-location strike can have dire implications for a company in the retail business, a strike at one out of a dozen is a drop in the bucket. The collective strength of the workers is reduced to something close to zero. These guys have made a science out of sell-outs. _________________ Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X Last edited by wm pasz on Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:11 pm; edited 1 time in total |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: www |
| silverboy |
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:02 pm
|
|
Joined: 13 Feb 2006 Posts: 50 Location: North America |
Quote: I still would like to know, if at all possible, how many Members out of the 30,000 Members from UFCW Locals #1977,#1000A,#175 & #633 actually attended their Strike Vote Meetings at over 50 locations to cast their Vote.
How Many Members Voted Yes To Strike ________ Total How Many Members Voted No To Strike ________ Total Once we get those numbers, then we can get a better understanding as to the significance of the infamous 97% Strike Vote! Where I voted we had 52 people cast ballots by the time I left and 51 yes for strike. Later more people came, around 70 I guess voted, that is less then half of eligible. |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| the doc |
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:23 pm
|
|
Joined: 27 Sep 2006 Posts: 121 |
Silverboy, it does not make any difference how many voted. The union does not care, and they will not tell you or the company how many voted for strike. They would have red faces. Don't kid yourself the company knows roughly how many voted and how meaningful the vote is. Your concern if you work for one of those companies is that a small few who voted for the strike have given the union the power to just say you are now on the picket line and there is nothing you can do about it. Lets say as an example out of 30,000 employees a total of 1000 voted for strike, 29,000 people are going out on the picket lines who didnot vote for or against. That is the problem, those votes should be cast by secret ballot given out at each store to all the employees, not just a few who decided to go to the meeting.
|
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| unionnow |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:16 am
|
|
Joined: 05 Feb 2006 Posts: 658 Location: Gettin the Hell out of retail |
Quote: What's happening is that Loblaws is turning the final screw - not on the UFCW (the leaders are going to do just fine out of this) but on the remaining full-timers. The major concession that the company is looking for is the ability to convert conventional Loblaws, Zehrs and No Frills stores without offering buy-outs or buy-downs (you quit your full-time job, take some severance and come back to a min wage part-time job) currently required under the 3 collective agreements in the case of store conversions.
This is a pretty blatant effort to rid the stores of the last vestiges of the old full-time workforce and its costs. Will Loblaws succeed? Absolutely. It's inevitable. Why? Because the vast majority of the membership is already at rock bottom. The min wage part-timers aren't going to walk out. What for? All that would do is sacrifice several days' pay for nothing. Thanks for the reporting and drilling down a little on the details. California members should watch these events carefully. Our conditions mirror Canada's in many ways. Our CEO's are watching them and dreaming of what can be. Some questions have come up over this article: Ontario Loblaw workers approve strike mandate amid stalled contract talks 25% wage reductions!!! Really? ...increase waiting times for benefits eligibility... Is that for H/W? I thought you had National Health Care or is that for Pensions or is it both H/W and Pensions? Reduce full-time jobs Not much to say there, Its coming. What are our options in Nor Cal? None. If we see the companies coming together (they have been divided for the last few contracts Raley's and Save Mart v. Safeway)then I would say we are in for big big trouble. Safeway will not attempt this on their own if Raley's and Save Mart sign first. Thats the big ace in the hole for the UFCW and it worked well giving Raley's and Save Mart superior contracts over Safeway (it was ofered to them but they declined to take it)yet trouble is brewing in La La Land. Raley's is said to be in big trouble followed closely by Save Mart. They are both privately help so details are sparse. Safeway hopes to capitalize on their weaknesses and hoped for demise yet the UFCW (notice how Microsoft spell check corrects UFCW as FUCK) needs all of them to stay afloat. Hence the master struggle for world domination stage 415. Save Mart and Raley's are more vulnerable to the 800 pound gorilla than Safeway is at this time. Its in their interest to work together this contract with the pension fund difficulties and the ever expanding none union competition. All I can say is watch and Plan because the companies are watching and planning. _________________ “The burden against Damascus. ‘Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap. (Isaiah 17:1-2) |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: e-mail |
| SharynS |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:29 am
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2883 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: ...a small few who voted for the strike have given the union [ufcw] the power to just say you are now on the picket line Any strike(s) it has initiated, and the mostly rhetorical support the strike may get from across labour as whole, have all the ear markings of token. Small numbers of members taking on big employers, location by location type disputes. Dispute experiences and outcomes - which ufcw takes great pride in broadcasting, all cruel reminders to the rest of the membership(s). Which if nothing else work wonders to more or less keep them in check. Apart from the hardship members face during a dispute, they certainly haven't amounted to a significant anything for the membership nor worked to soften employers that I'm aware of (the best little retail contracts in the whole wide world notwithstanding of course). However old school the manipulation may be, ufcw (and the labour process) got it going on! _________________ 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 doc |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:38 pm
|
|
Joined: 27 Sep 2006 Posts: 121 |
SharynS you know not of what you speak. I was with the UFCW in 1993/94 when they took us out on strike mid Nov.. It was the coldest winter in years, and we were out for 3 months. We were on strike against A&P in Ont., and it was no fun. Did we gain anything in those 3 months NO. We lost $1.75 per hr. pay, plus some benefits and came back to a two tiered wage scale, and a lot of people f/t lost their jobs. We also were "allowed" by the employer to vote on getting into the CCWIPP pension plan WOW was that a great move. So don't ever say they won't, or can't because it was a costly strike to all the employees. I remember it to this day and I will tell all out there who will listem DON'T VOTE STRIKE, instead force all to go into binding arbitration. You will probably see the union crap their drawers and the company as well.
|
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| silverboy |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 3:27 pm
|
|
Joined: 13 Feb 2006 Posts: 50 Location: North America |
the doc wrote: Silverboy, it does not make any difference how many voted. The union does not care, and they will not tell you or the company how many voted for strike. They would have red faces. Don't kid yourself the company knows roughly how many voted and how meaningful the vote is. Your concern if you work for one of those companies is that a small few who voted for the strike have given the union the power to just say you are now on the picket line and there is nothing you can do about it. Lets say as an example out of 30,000 employees a total of 1000 voted for strike, 29,000 people are going out on the picket lines who did not vote for or against. That is the problem, those votes should be cast by secret ballot given out at each store to all the employees, not just a few who decided to go to the meeting. That did not happen anywhere and will not happen at all. These meetings are the center piece of all unions. The system is built on members laziness. |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| wm pasz |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:48 pm
|
|
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Posts: 1219 Location: Toronto |
silverboy - The system is built on the ability of employers and unions to control the members. It's not about laziness. Yes, the members will eventually stop beating their heads against the wall - that's to be expected and is actually a sign that they're still using their brains. Why beat your head against a wall to fight a system that holds all the cards? You could, in Canada, conceivably have a 100% strike vote with the majority of members voting. The union would be no more obliged to actually go on strike than if a small minority voted in favour. The bargaining committee would still be able to make a deal and haul it back for ratification as many times as needed to get a yes vote (I believe that's what happened in the case of the 1994 Miracle Mart strike and a few other UFCW strikes where members weren't willing to swallow a bad deal, at least not initially). Or, as Loblaws workers will recall, you can avoid having to ratify a lousy deal altogether by engaging in mid-term negotiations - and the OLRB has ruled that it's perfectly OK.
Rather than hoping that UFCW leaders might finally do the right thing (which they won't), members might want to publicize their spineless antics of the past two decades. That might at least shame them into doing the right thing although that's a stretch as these guys have shown time and again that they are beyond shame. _________________ Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: www |
| wm pasz |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:55 pm
|
|
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Posts: 1219 Location: Toronto |
I thought I'd point out in response to doc's post that interest arbitration would be of little value in this situation. Even if the employer and union were willing to go there (I doubt that either would), all they would have to do is signal to the arbitrator (quietly through their lawyers) what kind of deal they wanted and he or she would be happy to oblige them.
_________________ Time is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. Truth is on the side of the oppressed today, it's against the oppressor. You don't need anything else. - Malcolm X |
| Back to top | profile :: pm :: www |
| Oldman1 |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 9:10 pm
|
|
Joined: 21 Jul 2010 Posts: 1 Location: Canada |
I have heard voter turnout was less than 30%, which would fit, given the makeup of stores it was the full timers, and long serving part timers who showed up. No doubt they will have acheived nothing more than validating their unions criminal mishandling of things, and perhaps lubricated this screwing with a few extra $$ in cash payouts. All will mutter about market, economy, Walmart, and go back to acting like the serious labour heroes they are...FORE!!!
1000a..angry |
| Back to top | profile :: pm |
| SharynS |
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:10 pm
|
|
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 2883 Location: the 'puter |
Quote: So don't ever say they won't, or can't... I doubt too many from that era have forgotten the A&P debacle. I'm sure it was brought up at each and every strike vote for years after. And let's not leave out ufcw's Southern California debacle. That strike took four and a half months for the employer to wipe the floor with ufcw, except it was the members who had to suck it up. The good old days are gone (what there were of them) and we're easily well into ufcw's spineless antics era IMO. They'll huff and they'll puff and then it's over. It is the ufcw way. I will have to get my ass in gear and post the 1518 retail CBA watchlist language. LSS; the language is every employer_looking_to_gut_a_labour_contract's dream come true. And I'll wager coming to a section near you. Remind me eh. _________________ 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 |
Home
Forums
Your Union
Ontario Loblaw workers vote 97% for strike mandate
Forums
Your Union
Ontario Loblaw workers vote 97% for strike mandate
|
Page 2 of 8
page: prev 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 next |
||