California Supermarket Strike Settled

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Well, that only took 5 months, but at what cost? I really sympathize with the striking workers on principle, but this whole situation has pushed shoppers away to alternative stores. Thanks to both sides in this stubborn grudge-match, the supermarket chains have lost another customer . . . and I still don't think they're equipped to handle competition from the likes of Costco (and eventually Wal-Mart when they rush the CA border with their supadupamega stores).

Supermarket strike settled
Deal ends strike of nearly five months by 60,000 grocery workers at about 900 California stores.

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Three major supermarket chains and the union representing some 60,000 striking and locked out grocery workers reached a tentative deal to end the nearly five-month labor dispute, representatives for both sides said.

The agreement, reached late Thursday, was expected to create a second tier of employees who would be paid less than their veteran counterparts.

The pact still needs to be ratified by members of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. A vote could come as early as Friday or Saturday. It was not immediately clear when unionized clerks would be back on the job.

The labor dispute centered largely on health care costs, with supermarket chains saying they could no longer afford to pay for the benefits without contributions from the workers in the face of competition from non-union megastores like Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

"Strikes and lockouts are always a battle of last resort. The dispute was long and difficult. Many workers lost their homes. Company shareholders lost hundreds of millions of dollars. Shoppers lost the reliable service of their local grocery clerks. Everyone suffered," AFL-CIO official Art Pulaski said in a statement.

At the Vons Pavilions store in the Los Angeles suburb of Long Beach, picketers were relieved at the news but cautious until they had seen specifics of the proposed contract.

"Thank God it's finally over," picket captain Ray Manel said, adding that he was "kind of afraid to see what they settled on."

Kris Henke-Tinoko, a working mother from nearby Anaheim, agreed that most workers were cautious and said none were ready to celebrate: "Its good that its over but if we didn't get anything worthwhile it's no good. I think it's still like we won't believe it until we go back to work"

15 days of intense talks
The settlement comes after 15 days of intense talks between officials for the three chains -- Kroger Co. (KR: Research, Estimates) , Albertson's Inc. (ABS: Research, Estimates) and Safeway Inc. (SWY: Research, Estimates) -- and union leaders, facilitated by a federal mediator.

Several industry executives and analysts said this week that the parties sought to reach a deal before the end of the week following persistent calls from major investors, including the largest U.S. public pension fund, The California Public Employee's Retirement System, or Calpers.

Analysts said the impasse, which lasted through the Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday seasons, is estimated to have cost more than $1 billion in lost sales. Its duration is likely to make it much harder for the three chains to win back customers who defected to rival stores like Whole Foods Market Inc. (WFMI: Research, Estimates) and Costco Wholesale Corp. (COST: Research, Estimates)

Almost 900 stores have been affected by the dispute since workers struck Safeway's Vons and Pavilions chains on Oct. 11, leading Kroger, which owns the Ralph's chain, and Albertson's to lock out their union employees in solidarity.

The grocers argue that rising health care is among expenses that make them less competitive with their non-union rivals such as Wal-Mart, which plans to build some 40 of its massive food-selling supercenters in California in the next four years.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
It'll be interesting to see the details of this agreement.

Are the workers going to still get free health insurance?
I wonder how much they lost because they decided not to work instead of just paying a portion of the premiums like the Employers were asking.

CkG
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
It'll be interesting to see the details of this agreement.

Are the workers going to still get free health insurance?
I wonder how much they lost because they decided not to work instead of just paying a portion of the premiums like the Employers were asking.

CkG

"The agreement, reached late Thursday, was expected to create a second tier of employees who would be paid less than their veteran counterparts. "

Pretty obvious, they sold out their future.


 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
It'll be interesting to see the details of this agreement.

Are the workers going to still get free health insurance?
I wonder how much they lost because they decided not to work instead of just paying a portion of the premiums like the Employers were asking.

CkG

"The agreement, reached late Thursday, was expected to create a second tier of employees who would be paid less than their veteran counterparts. "

Pretty obvious, they sold out their future.

Good thing they decided to not work for a couple months then- no?

CkG
 

josphII

Banned
Nov 24, 2001
1,490
0
0
the workers were hung out to dry by the union. i never did understand the leverage they thought they had considering its an unskilled position.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
OH wow look at the mean nasty corporation, making the Union worker pay *gasp* $60 a month for medical coverage!!!!!

If passed, current employees who now pay no health care premiums can expect to pay up to $60 per month for family coverage in the third year of the contract, according to a fact sheet distributed to union members. New hires would probably pay more.
I pay more than $60 a week for my family...
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: alchemize
OH wow look at the mean nasty corporation, making the Union worker pay *gasp* $60 a month for medical coverage!!!!!

If passed, current employees who now pay no health care premiums can expect to pay up to $60 per month for family coverage in the third year of the contract, according to a fact sheet distributed to union members. New hires would probably pay more.
I pay more than $60 a week for my family...

I pay over $60 per week for family coverage too.

CkG
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
$60/month =$720 a year, yeah its like taking only a mere 3% pay cut

guess if they want fair wages and health benefits they should just work for costco

obviously the workers lost out in this battle, but u gotta wondering what the execs were thinking, they lost a billion in sales, stock prices have been depressed, and profits fell 50%. a nationwide strike woulda put them all outta business. however u can bet the execs are handing themselves bonuses for "resolving the strike promptly". and next years profit results will look like they jumped 200% compared to this year.

so yeah, buy before the earnings, sell on the news.
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
i wonder how many of that 60k workers actually found new jobs, based on the dwindling number of protestors outside my albertsons last week, i'd say 50k of them did.

also, when they were on strike, did they file for unemployment benefits? if so, then the next weeks unemployment claims will drop dramatically, and shrub's poll ratings will SURGE

(shudders)
would hate for shrub to have enuff popularity to pass another round of tax cuts for his precious billionaire's club.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yep, they got screwed. That's because the companies acted in concert, rather than competitively. Probably illegal, but it'd take ten years to prove it in court. Two tier wage groups are always a hose job- higher paid employees being targeted for elimination, and newer lower paid employees being resentful of the wage disparity, which the management puts off on the Union...

The Safeway employees who went on strike definitely were not eligible for unemployment, while the Kroger and Albertson employees may have been- they were locked out. Depends on California law.. It won't even make a ripple in the national unemployment stats....
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: Ornery
"...they sold out their future."

Click me >

Yep, the guy is now permanently classified into a low tier pay group. He will never have the opportunity to move up to say Asst Magr or ever Manage a store.

You are so obviously are a part of and proud of America's New India type Caste system.

 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
If it wasn't for their wondrous union, each worker could negotiate their own pay, based on performence. Damn, that sure would suck...
rolleye.gif
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Without a union you are generally paid the least amount possible related to market forces.

With a union you are generally paid the fairest amount possible due to related market forces in conjuction with usually fair negotiations between two parties who usually know all the details.

Usually that is.

 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
"Without a union you are generally paid the least amount possible related to market forces."

As a consumer, you generally pay the least amount possible related to market forces.
 

zantac

Senior member
Jun 15, 2003
226
0
0
Originally posted by: Ornery
If it wasn't for their wondrous union, each worker could negotiate their own pay, based on performence.

Read: If it wasn't for the wondrous union, they'd all be making minimum wage with legal minimum benefits.

Originally posted by: Ornery
Damn, that sure would suck...
rolleye.gif

Indeed it would. Damn Labor Unions
rolleye.gif
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Ornery
If it wasn't for their wondrous union, each worker could negotiate their own pay, based on performence. Damn, that sure would suck...
rolleye.gif

If Execs weren't corrupt there wouldn't be a need for unions. Try reading History.

Try keeping up with history. The Unions have become the corruption they once sought to eliminate.
Oops - If you can't beat them - become them?:confused:

CkG
 

Ornery

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
20,022
17
81
"...they'd all be making minimum wage with legal minimum benefits..."

The scabs didn't have to work for minimum wage. I wonder why?

Nobody around here works for minimum wage, even flipping burgers. I wonder why?

I've ALWAYS negotiated a fair wage with my employers, without benefit of the extortion tactics of a union. Unfvckingbelievable, eh?
 

zantac

Senior member
Jun 15, 2003
226
0
0
Originally posted by: Ornery
"...they'd all be making minimum wage with legal minimum benefits..."

The scabs didn't have to work for minimum wage. I wonder why?

Nobody around here works for minimum wage, even flipping burgers. I wonder why?

Maybe because your state's Minimum Wage is so low? Here in CA (the state where the strikes took place), the Burger Flippers make minimum wage. As do the majority of the entry level positions (in any of those areas of employment) that I have seen. However, the grocery stores around here sure as hell do not ;).

I was talking to a kid taking grocery carts inside a few weeks ago; I asked him about their wages because I grew curious as I heard the grocery bagger make a remark about how they were switching her hours to the night shift. This was a High School kid roughly 17 years of age and he tells me he is making $10/hr bagging groceries and pushing grocery carts part-time. I wonder why!
 

ReiAyanami

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2002
4,466
0
0
of course they're gonna have to pay the SCABS higher wages at first. u have to draw a huge applicant pool or else shutdown completely. if they tried to pay scabs minimum wages, they would have filed bankruptcy months ago. so shop costco.
 
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: Ornery
"...they sold out their future."

Click me >

Yep, the guy is now permanently classified into a low tier pay group. He will never have the opportunity to move up to say Asst Magr or ever Manage a store.

You are so obviously are a part of and proud of America's New India type Caste system.

Why won't he ever have the opportunity to move up?
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
It'll be interesting to see the details of this agreement.

Are the workers going to still get free health insurance?
I wonder how much they lost because they decided not to work instead of just paying a portion of the premiums like the Employers were asking.

CkG

"The agreement, reached late Thursday, was expected to create a second tier of employees who would be paid less than their veteran counterparts. "

Pretty obvious, they sold out their future.

Yes, they lost out their great future of being bag boys.
 

Nitemare

Lifer
Feb 8, 2001
35,461
4
81
Originally posted by: zantac
Originally posted by: Ornery
If it wasn't for their wondrous union, each worker could negotiate their own pay, based on performence.

Read: If it wasn't for the wondrous union, they'd all be making minimum wage with legal minimum benefits.

Originally posted by: Ornery
Damn, that sure would suck...
rolleye.gif

Indeed it would. Damn Labor Unions
rolleye.gif

For Christ's sake, they bag groceries. This is for high schoolers and college students that need food and beer money. This is not a career.