uncharted.ca

UFCW… Pledge This!!!
http://forums.uncharted.ca/viewtopic.php?p=21411&highlight=#21411

March 2011
http://forums.uncharted.ca/viewtopic.php?t=1648

UFCW Prepares for Betrayal of Supermarket Workers
http://forums.uncharted.ca/viewtopic.php?t=1749

Focusing only on a "Regional Fight" in So. Ca. with three (3) of the Largest Food Employer's within the U.S. and Canada is and continues to be a loosing proposition for the UFCW!

UFCW I.U. President Joe Hansen has been warned numerous times, by me, about the UFCW's inability to carry out and or extend Picket Lines throughout our various jurisdictions within the UFCW and the damage that does on behalf of our Members and or other Labor Unions.

UFCW I.U. President has also been warned numerous times, by myself, about the restrictive / prohibitive "Strike or Lockout" Contract language in "some" of our UFCW Contracts that hinders our ability as the UFCW, to maximize pressure on any Employer(s) who may be attempting to "screw" our members and or any other Labor Union(s)!

Note: I believe that it is extremely important that President Hansen, in a portion of his June 2, 2004 letter, stated the following:

“I did state that we are well aware of the adverse limitations the contract language you referenced places upon the UFCW.

At that time, I also advised you that each region director & collective bargaining representative was notified that every attempt should be made in bargaining to remove the contract language where it currently exists, and that no such language should be agreed to in the future.”

By way of just one of many examples, let us turn to the strike in 1995 here in Northern California and the subsequent early Contract re-opener in 1997 by the Leadership @ UFCW Local 588/8.

It is important to note that the members throughout No. Ca. literally "kicked the shit out of the Employer's" over the seven plus days during that strike.
( April 6th,7th,8th,9th,10th,11th,12th,13th,&14th 1995.)

It was during that strike / negotiations that the Leadership @ UFCW Local 588/8 once again made another "colossal blunder" by rolling over the contract.

Call it a coincidence,"alleged collusion" or "whatever", but one of the most devastating impacts for the UFCW resulting from the early Contract re-opener in 1997, was the contract Language the Leadership @ UFCW Local 588 / 8 perpetrated / negotiated @ that time with the Food Employer's.

************************************************
Specifically, I am referring to item #12(B.) in a portion of the following Memorandum of Agreement between former UFCW Local 588, Safeway, Inc. & Lucky Stores, Inc. dated July 24, 1997. (Page 7)

Amend Section 17.1 as follows:

During the life of the Agreement, the Union agrees not to engage in any stoppage of work.

Furthermore, the Union and its representatives, including store representatives, agree not to boycott, handbill, publicly disparage or engage in any adverse economic action against the Employer's stores covered by this Agreement.

This provision does not apply in any of the Employer's stores where the Union has not been recognized by the Employer as the employees' bargaining representative.

*************************************************
To this day I am absolutely baffled as to WHY the Leadership @ Local 558 and our UFCW I.U. saw fit to "mess with" and or "allow" the following long standing and effective Contract Language found @ Section 17. (Strike or Lockout) to be changed by the Leadership @ UFCW Local 588......

Section 17. Strike or Lockout

17.1 During the life of the Agreement, the Union agrees not to engage in any strike or stoppage of work.

17.2 During the life of this Agreement, the Employer agrees not to engage in any lockout.

17.3 Refusal of any employee covered by the terms of this Agreement to pass through any lawful primary picket line which has been sanctioned by the Central Labor Council of proper jurisdiction and /or the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union shall not constitute a violation of this Agreement.

**************************************************
Subsequently, in a letter to former UFCW I.U. President Douglas Dority dated August 12, 1997, the Leadership of the Bay Area Local Union's (excluding former UFCW Local 373r) along with the recommendation from our Regional Director, Sean Harrigan and Executive Vice-President Dave Barry requested that President Dority "demonstrate his leadership and exercise his authority under Article 23 of the International Constitution by disallowing any Northern California Local Union from ratifying this proposed agreement pending his review".

We were all "extremely concerned about the ramifications that the expanded "No Strike-No Lockout" provision will have upon our ability to effectively address the serious challenges that we face today and will encounter in the future, i.e. Albertson's and Safeway. This provision, if invoked, will virtually cripple our ability to act in concert with other UFCW local unions in addressing this threat to our membership".

***************************************************
For your information here is the applicable I.U. language.

Article 23(A) of the UFCW I.U. Constitution provides as follows:

The terms of proposed collective bargaining contracts or proposals for renewal or any modifications of existing contracts, whether proposed by the employer of the Local Union, shall be submitted to the International President, upon his or her request, for review prior to any membership action thereon.

Such review shall be for the purposes of determining whether the aforementioned terms conform to the applicable established policies, practices, and objectives of the International Union relating to wages, hours, and other working conditions, either on the locality involved or nationally, and enabling the International Union to discharge its obligations in the event such proposed terms are found to be injurious to the best interests of the membership of other Local Unions or the International Union.

If the International President exercises his or her authority under this paragraph, terms of proposed collective bargaining contracts or proposals for renewal or any modifications of existing contracts shall not be submitted to the membership for its action pending completion of review or following any disapproval by the International President.

Any membership action on the aforementioned terms of proposals pending completion of review or following any disapproval by the International President shall void and without effect.

International President Joseph T. Hansen:
http://www.ufcw.org/about_ufcw/ufcw_leadership/president.cfm

International Secretary-Treasurer Anthony M. Perrone:
http://www.ufcw.org/about_ufcw/ufcw_leadership/sec_treas.cfm

Executive Vice President William T. McDonough:
http://www.ufcw.org/about_ufcw/ufcw_leadership/mcdonough.cfm

Executive Vice President Patrick J. O’Neil:
http://www.ufcw.org/about_ufcw/ufcw_leadership/patoneill.cfm

Executive Vice President Wayne E. Hanley:
http://www.ufcw.org/about_ufcw/ufcw_leadership/hanley.cfm

Until such time that changes are immediately implemented within and throughout the UFCW, including loosing the pathetic and embarrassing “Paper Tiger” reputation, we will continue to be ineffective and will be unable to sustain / prevent our Employer’s constant and systematic “gutting” of our Members (Actives/ Retirees) Contract Language and Benefits!!.

Work Stoppages and Conflict with Corporations

2003 California grocery strike Main article:

Southern California Supermarket strike of 2003-2004
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_California_Supermarket_strike_of_2003-2004

On October 11, 2003, the UFCW declared a strike on Vons (owned by Safeway Inc.), in Southern California, because of company-proposed changes to the new labor contract. These changes included cuts in health care and pension benefits, and the creation of a two-tier system in which new workers would be paid on a different schedule than existing workers. The day following the strike, Albertsons and Ralphs, owned by Kroger, locked out their Southern California employees.

The strike ended on February 26, 2004 when the UFCW and affected companies reached an agreement on a new contract. Union employees voted to end the strike, and many employees cited financial difficulties as a reason for ratifying the agreement. The new labor contract included concessions granted by the chains relating to current employee benefits and wages, and concessions granted by the union relating to creating two tiers of employees and cutting benefits overall.

The new labor contract included concessions granted by the chains relating to current employee benefits and wages, and concessions granted by the union relating to creating two tiers of employees and cutting benefits overall.

John what kind sell-out, idiot, dip shit, corporate bitch would ever allow a “no strike-no lock” clause in a collective bargaining agreement in the first place? Obviously not a real unionist.

Specifically, I am referring to item #12(B.) in a portion of the Memorandum of Agreement between former UFCW Local 588, Safeway, Inc. & Lucky Stores, Inc. dated July 24, 1997. (Page 7)

Amend Section 17.1 as follows:

During the life of the Agreement, the Union agrees not to engage in any stoppage of work.

Furthermore, the Union and its representatives, including store representatives, agree not to boycott, handbill, publicly disparage or engage in any adverse economic action against the Employer's stores covered by this Agreement.

This provision does not apply in any of the Employer's stores where the Union has not been recognized by the Employer as the employees' bargaining representative.

“I did state that we are well aware of the adverse limitations the contract language you referenced places upon the UFCW.

At that time, I also advised you that each region director & collective bargaining representative was notified that every attempt should be made in bargaining to remove the contract language where it currently exists, and that no such language should be agreed to in the future.”

Sept. 9, 2011 Negotiations Update 6:30pm

Management Wage Proposal: A bad offer for everyone. Everyone, that is, except management.

Here it is:

Pay cuts for clerk helpers

No raises first two years

15 cents in 3rd year for only some employees.

Most employees get no additional wage increase!

Bonuses and third year raise totaling 1%.

Cuts in hours

Health care proposal: The employers admit that their proposed contribution is not sufficient to fund your benefits for the term of the contract, meaning more cuts to your benefits or a bankrupt health fund.

MEANWHILE:

Ralphs, VONS, Albertsons profits: $3 billion in 2010.

Ralphs, VONS, Albertsons payouts to Wall Street: $500 million in 2010.

WHAT THIS MEANS:

Management wants you to believe they are doing you a favor. They are not. They can afford fair raises and adequate funding for health care. it would be a small fraction of their billions in profits.

Instead, they are taking food out of you and your family’s mouth so they can pay more to Wall Street investment firms and bigger bonuses to executives.

UFCW Local 770's website:
http://www.ufcw770.org/node/270

UFCW 8-Golden State Negotiations Update

72 Hour Notice Served; SoCal Unions End Contract Extension

Updated On: Sep 15, 2011 (21:36:00)

72 Hour Notice Served;

SoCal Unions End Contract Extension

Contract negotiations with the major supermarket companies have stalled, and the seven UFCW Unions of Southern California have responded by informing management that the temporary extension of the old Master Food Agreement will end in 72 hours.

This action clears the way for a possible strike.

Ending the contract extension does not mean grocery workers will walk out in 72 hours, but it removes the final barrier to a strike. After the contract extension is no longer in effect, a strike can be called at any time.

A strike could be our only option if the companies insist on refusing to pay their fair share of health care contributions.

Management’s current health care proposals still do not sufficiently fund your health care throughout the term of the new contract and could entirely eliminate health care access for 62,000 grocery workers across Southern California.

Stonewalling tactics

Our negotiations are now in their eighth month. Following our overwhelming vote in August to reject the companies’ latest proposals, we returned to the bargaining table ready to compromise and make a deal that keeps the companies profitable but protects the jobs of the workers.

Instead, we got more of the same stonewalling from management, which appears to be more concerned about hoarding billions in profits than reaching a fair deal for the employees who work hard to make those profits possible.

We just want management to share a little of those billions with their workers so they can pay their rents and take their kids to the doctor without having to choose between the two. At this point, grocery workers would be without health care after 18-20 months if management has their way.

We don’t want to strike, but if management won’t negotiate in good faith, we will have no choice.

We’re ready to stand up to preserve good jobs.

Strike preparations

We will continue to communicate with you via phone messages, our Union’s website, www.ufcw8.org, and our Negotiations Hotline, (888) 834-4488 (888-8EIGHT-, ext. 257.

Whether in the negotiations room or on the picket line, we will prove to management that Solidarity Works!

This action clears the way for a possible strike.

Ending the contract extension does not mean grocery workers will walk out in 72 hours, but it removes the final barrier to a strike. After the contract extension is no longer in effect, a strike can be called at any time.

A strike could be our only option if the companies insist on refusing to pay their fair share of health care contributions.

We don’t want to strike, but if management won’t negotiate in good faith, we will have no choice.

72 hour notice FAQs

72 HOUR NOTICE GIVEN:

WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

What is the 72 hour notice?

Before we can go on strike, the contract has to be terminated. We are legally required to notify the Employers, 72 hours before we intend to cancel the contract. This is what all 7 Locals did.

Does that mean that we have stopped negotiations?

No. Very often, it is only within the last 72 hours before a contract expires that a settlement is reached. That is our intention and hope here. We will remain at the table, during and, if need be, after the 72 hours has expired.

Why did we give the Employers notice now?

After our last strike vote, the employers finally committed to non-stop negotiations. And for consecutive days, we have negotiated late until the night. However, negotiations without results are pointless. Their last offer still has no wage increases for the majority of the workers. They are still refusing to fund our medical insurance, such that it will go bankrupt before the contract expires. They have refused to compromise.

Do we automatically go on strike in 72 hours?

No. We may only strike one chain. We may not strike exactly after 72 hours has passed. DO NOT GO OUT ON STRIKE UNLESS AND UNTIL AN AUTHORIZED UFCW 770 REPRESENTATIVE TELLS YOU.

What is a LOCKOUT and how would that affect us?

Even if your chain has not been targeted for a strike, your employer may choose to lock you out of your work. If this happens, you have no choice – it is your employer’s choice. You will be unable to work there until the lockout is ended, or the strike is settled.

How can I find out if a settlement is reached before the 72 hours?

We certainly hope that one will be reached, and we will stay at the negotiating table to do so.

Check our website www.ufcw770.org
24-hour Live Negotiations Hotlines:

(213) 286-1177

(888) 710-1401

(805) 322-0017

Recorded Contract Message

(888) 508-9805

Text "FOOD" to 68398 to receive text updates

How can I find out if a settlement is reached before the 72 hours?

We certainly hope that one will be reached, and we will stay at the negotiating table to do so.