Earlier this year, they rammed a concessionary deal down the throats of their UFCW-represented Ontario employees.

quote:

---

Loblaws, Canada's largest supermarket chain with 40% of the market, sent out a letter to all of its health food suppliers informing them that they were no longer permitted to claim that their foods were "non-GM". Company executives argue there is just no way of knowing what is genuinely GM free.

You can already see the handiwork in the aisles of Canada's major supermarkets: hand-drawn black scribbles on boxes of organic breakfast cereal where the labels used to be. At first glance, Loblaws' decision doesn't seem to make market sense. Although roughly 70% of foods sold in Canada contain GM ingredients, more than 90% of Canadians tell pollsters they want labels telling them if their food's genetic make-up has been tampered with.

In North America, super-markets are part of a broader agricultural strategy to present labelling as simply too complicated. In part this is because chains like Loblaws are not only food retailers but manufacturers of their own private lines. Loblaws' line is called "President's Choice" or "Memories of..." Company chairman Galen Weston has warned that "there will be a cost associated" with labelling and if Loblaws sells some products that are labelled "GM-free" it weakens attempts to block GM labelling for the rest of its wares. [/QB]

---

I've never heard of CAW organized grocery stores before. Does anyone know if this is this is just in Newfoundland or if it's across Canada?

RWDSU and UFCW were both were large American-based Internationals, both with pretty much a "business-union" orientation. RWDSU had its base in department stores and UFCW had its base in grocery, but there was quite a bit of overlap and the two unions were frequently rivals. In 1993, however, the two unions kissed and made up and the American RWDSU merged into UFCW. Many of the Canadian locals rebelled, though, and struck out on their own as RW Canada. They partnered up with USWA for a while but in 1999 they switched to CAW, so they are now known as CAW-RW.

I'm pretty sure that's how the Dominion workers wound up in CAW. The Loblaws empire is split now between UFCW and CAW-RW, but I am pretty sure the larger majority is UFCW.

[ 19 November 2003: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Loblaws Locks out 1,600 Workers

quote:

---

The Toronto-based company said the offer contains signing bonuses, pay increases for existing employees and pension improvements.

However, it also said it needs more room to manoeuvre against lower-cost rivals.

"We're asking for flexibility so we can compete in a predominantly non-union retail environment," Loblaw spokesperson Geoff Wilson told Bloomberg News.

Wilson said a wage agreement would allow Loblaw to open warehouse-type stores in Newfoundland, similar to new stores in Ontario that carry more profitable non-food merchandise.

But CAW president Buzz Hargrove said too many retailers are using the threat of low-paying competitors to demand contract concessions.

"All the companies want to use Wal-Mart to set the lowest standards they can even where Wal-Mart isn't a problem," he said, noting Loblaw enjoys industry-leading profits and dominates up to half of the Newfoundland grocery market.

Loblaw's offer to its Newfoundland workers is "insulting," he said.

---

quote:

---

Some members of Loblaw's much larger Ontario workforce are watching the dispute with interest after their own union, the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, agreed to concessions at the new superstores without consulting them.

One unhappy union member, Ben Blasdell, is challenging the United Food deal at the Ontario Labour Relations Board, saying it should have been put to a general membership vote.

---

These superstores are a real beauty, aren't they? They gobble up land in the suburbs - promoting sprawl, cost municipal governments an arm and a leg in terms of servicing & traffic issues, and pay their workers peanuts.

It seems that the UFCW and the CAW have very different ideas about how to respond to the threat, too. CAW wants to fight the company, UFCW wants to represent the new stores (even if it means accepting lower wages for its workers, there). Unfortunately, UFCW neglected to consult their members about this strategy, first.

The whole GM foods thing clearview linked above is also creepy. I wonder if either of the unions have had any communication with the environmental activists over this. I would think that might be a productive alliance.

[ 19 November 2003: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Wal-Mart stirs up grocery industry

quote:

---

A labour dispute at 15 Loblaw Cos. Ltd. stores in Newfoundland highlights a trend that is transforming the North American grocery industry as retailers race to lower costs and compete with the mighty Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Last week, Loblaw locked out about 1,600 workers at its 15 Dominion stores after the employees staged rotating walkouts to protest the company's demand for wage and benefit concessions. Underlying the fight is Loblaw's view that it needs to rein in wage and benefit expenses in order to take on non-unionized, lower paying rivals — with much of the focus on Wal-Mart.

The issue has already reared its head in Ontario where Loblaw succeeded this summer in getting the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, which represents employees in that province, to agree to concessions at new, discount Real Canadian Superstores.

In Newfoundland, the Loblaw employees are represented by a different union, the Canadian Auto Workers, which refused to accept the company's wage and benefit proposals.

"This is simply about greed," CAW president Buzz Hargrove said in an interview, adding that Wal-Mart should not set labour standards for Canada. "We're not going to let the lowest common denominator dictate what's going to happen to our members."

---

quote:

---

Canada's Loblaw reaches tentative pact with union
Reuters, 12.02.03, 9:06 PM ET

TORONTO, Dec 2 (Reuters) - Loblaw Cos. Ltd. , Canada's largest grocery chain, reached a tentative agreement with its union, the Canadian Auto Workers union said on Tuesday.

The agreement comes two weeks after Loblaw said 15 of its Dominion stores in Newfoundland were locked out due to a "labor disruption."

So far the agreement has the support of union leaders, but it still needs to be ratified in balloting by some 1,600 Loblaw employees.

"There's a lot of emotion out there. I am not absolutely confident that this will be ratified," said Hemi Mitic, with the Canadian Auto Workers union.

"I am cautious of where it will go. There are deep-rooted labor problems."

At issue is Loblaw's demand for wage and benefit concessions, something it says is needed to compete with other big retailers such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (nyse: WMT - news - people) and Sobeys Inc. .

If the agreement is ratified, Mitic said Loblaw is set to make a major expansion in Newfoundland. But even though that means more jobs, it doesn't necessarily bode well with employees.

"A lot of part-time workers are paid very little. So more jobs at low wages is not what they're after," said Mitic.

Shares of Loblaw closed down 2 Canadian cents at C$61.38 on Tuesday on the Toronto Stock Exchange ahead of the announcement.

Copyright 2003, Reuters News Service

---

quote:

---

Dominion may pull out if deal rejected: CAW
WebPosted Dec 4 2003 08:22 AM NST

ST. JOHN'S — Unionized Dominion Store employees have been told the company could permanently close its outlets in the province if the labour-management dispute doesn't end.

Hemi Metic of the Canadian Auto Workers told workers Wednesday they should accept the proposed collective agreement because the company has hinted it may leave the province if the dispute continues.

"They may be bluffing," Metic said at a meeting of 600 workers in St. John's. "But in our opinion, we don't think the company is bluffing, and we're not prepared to take that chance."

***
The tentative agreement includes:

-a wage increase of $1 an hour over three years;
-the creation of 25 full-time positions;
-a voluntary retirement package; and
-a drug plan for some part-time workers.

---

Read the rest

It still looks to me like Loblaws are being hard-nosed bastards. The four points listed above are surely the high points of the deal. I suspect there are other less savory features no-one is talking about right now.

I think the threat's a bluff. But it's not my job on the line. Anyone else have thoughts?

[ 04 December 2003: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

I think the threat's a bluff. But it's not my job on the line. Anyone else have thoughts?

---

In negotiations when the employer is threatening to shut down you never really know whether its a bluff or not. You have to make your best judgement call.

The CAW leadership has decided that the threat is real and have made what they feel is the best deal they can get.

On the surface there appears to be some gains here...but any collective agreement is a fairly lengthy document and yes there may be some concessions on some other issues.

Do I think Loblaws is bluffing? I don't know, and I'd be inclinded to trust Mitic on that.

I've met Hemi Mitic before. I can't say I liked him on a personal level, but I got the sense that he speaks the truth as he knows it, and he's not afraid to tell people stuff they should know but not necessarily like.

[ 05 December 2003: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]

quote:

---

Dominion Stores labour dispute over
WebPosted Dec 5 2003 06:49 AM NST

ST. JOHN'S — Dominion Stores in the province are expected to reopen by the weekend.

Union representative Frank Taylor says 66 per cent of the 1,200 unionized employees who voted on a contract offer accepted the deal. The outcome was announced Thursday night.

---

Well, it looks like two-thirds of the members thought the employer's threat was real, too.

I'm all for unionizing Walmart. But at the same time, when I look at the Loblaws superstore contracts that the UFCW has signed, I am not sure what unionized big-box store workers have to gain.

The big-box retail model depends significantly on cheap labour in the stores, sweatshop labour from the overseas suppliers, total disregard for the environment all the way along, and successfully foisting the social costs of their business onto the community wherever possible, so consumers never pay the true price of the product when they're at the checkout.

The CAW contract in Nfld. appears to wrested a few improvements out of Loblaws. But it's not a great deal. You can tell the union was rather embarassed about it by the way they handled it all the way up to ratification. I am certain that it does nothing to shut the door on Loblaws superstores, with their cheapo contracts, making their way out to the east coast should they prove successful in Ont.

I think we as social activists, and as unionists, should really be thinking about an alternative vision of how we make and buy stuff. I think the collective purchasing power of Canada's 4.2 million union members could be a powerful force in helping make such a vision come to pass, if we could mobilize those members to act.

So far, I really don't see any of the retail unions thinking this way. Instead, I see them getting smacked around by forces they perceive to be outside of their control, and just desperately trying to hang on to whatever they have already. And I think their grip is slipping.

[ 05 December 2003: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

I have also bumped up this thread: "No Right to Vote on Contract?" which deals with UFCW member Ben Blasdell's labor board complaint against his union for its part in the Loblaws superstore situation.

I think if we are going to talk about Walmart and its effect on the retail marketplace, it is also entirely appropriate, and necessary, to talk about what is going on at Loblaws right now.

Thoughts?

[ 16 December 2003: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

According to the UFCW Local 247 website, bargaining has broken down at Westfair Foods (owned by Loblaws) and the union will be conducting a strike vote.

quote:

---

As we previously mentioned, negotiations with the Company broke off late in the evening of April 15 when your Negotiating Committee unanimously decided to leave the table and go back to the membership for a strike mandate.

We urge all Superstore, Corporate Extra Foods, and Western Grocers members to attend these meetings and support your Committee with a strong vote.

---

Thoughts?

[ 17 April 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

[ 15 May 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Turf Warz.

quote:

---

Loblaws Maple Grove workers vote to stay with UFCW Canada

CAMBRIDGE, ONT. – Workers at a massive Loblaw Companies distribution warehouse in Cambridge, Ontario have voted to stay with UFCW Canada (United Food and Commercial Workers Canada).

UFCW Local 1000A members at the National Grocers Maple Grove distribution centre in Cambridge voted on Tuesday to keep their longstanding union and to reject a campaign by the Canadian Autoworkers Union to represent them.

The Ontario Labour Relations Board-conducted vote came as a result of an application by the CAW to displace UFCW Local 1000A as the bargaining agent for the more than 800 employees at the Maple Grove Distribution Centre – the largest in the National Grocers chain.

---

quote:

---

The human result from the closure is the loss of 14 full time and 30 part time jobs from the community. The workers have been offered severance packages or some could relocate to a store in Bracebridge. They cannot use their union bumping rights to secure work at the A&P store in the Parry Sound Mall, because a different union represents the workers there, Ms. Smitham said.

---

Retreat on Contracts in Canada Undermines Wal-Mart Organizing
by Nick Robinson

As the specter of Wal-Mart spreads across the North American labor movement, Canadian dissidents in United Food and Commercial Workers say that their union’s leadership has largely abandoned its tougher bargaining stance of previous years.

According to a former management consultant, an ex-UFCW official, and a current UFCW member and Loblaw employee, the troubling recent trend has been for a distant layer of UFCW bureaucrats to offer concessions in exchange for voluntary recognition agreements that mobilize members only on paper.

They also say UFCW negotiators made concessionary "backroom deals" with Loblaws, Canada’s largest and most heavily unionized grocery chain, in anticipation of Wal-Mart’s move into Canada.

Wal-Mart In Canada

On April 2, workers at the Jonquiere, Quebec Wal-Mart voted 74-65 against joining UFCW Local 503. The store would have been the world’s first unionized Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart had fired prounion temps and threatened to close the store had the vote succeeded.

It was UFCW’s second Wal-Mart representation vote thus far. Union-friendly labor law (unions are recognized automatically after a majority of employees sign authorization cards) in Saskatchewan and Quebec has made those provinces major sites in the bid to organize Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart currently has 231 stores in Canada with a mix of grocery and general merchandise, with plans to open 20 more per year, in addition to five Sam’s Club wholesale stores.

Citing its patterns of concessionary bargaining with Loblaws, however, some current UFCW members doubt their leadership can bargain a good first contract after the recognition battle.

Givebacks At Loblaws

Hugh Finnamore, a former UFCW official now an associate of Members for Democracy (a website and discussion network for union democracy issues), participated in negotiations in 1988 between Loblaws and the UFCW International to create UFCW Local 777. The company then would not have to bargain with Locals 1518 and 2000. In exchange, Local 777 received voluntary recognition at all Loblaws’ new Real Canadian SuperStores (RCSS) in British Columbia-but with inferior wages and shop floor conditions for the 8-9,000 workers hired over the next decade.

Loblaws will also pay each local $450,000 over three years and promised not to ask for concessions in the next contract-as long as members were not allowed a ratification vote.

Shortly after these negotiations, management and union representatives visited a Wal-Mart in the United States to show UFCW the type of operation it planned to compete with. "RCSS is able to compete head on with Wal-Mart because it has a labor contract that allows it to easily compete with Wal-Mart’s staffing plan-including scheduling, wages and benefits," Finnamore wrote last year.

In late 2002, Loblaws approached three UFCW local leaders in Ontario and asked for greater flexibility and drastic wage and benefit cuts, citing its need to compete with Wal-Mart after it changes its Ontario stores to the RCSS format by 2008. Each of the three locals-175 at Fortino’s, 1977 at Zehr’s, and 1000a at Loblaws-represents thousands of Loblaws workers who would be affected by the switch to voluntary recognition.

Loblaws will also pay each local $450,000 over three years and promised not to ask for concessions in the next contract-as long as members were not allowed a ratification vote.

This agreement is a product of the close partnership that has developed between UFCW leaders (some of whom call themselves CEOs of their locals) and management, according to labor relations consultant and writer Wanda Pasz, who spent hundreds of hours in closed-door sessions with top union and company officials.

According to Pasz, in a 1998 conversation with Local 1000a president Kevin Corporon-an architect of the Loblaws deal-Corporon made a spirited defense of union autocracy. Union democracy in the UFCW wasn’t feasible because the union was too large, and the days of unions fighting employers were long gone, he said. Besides, the average member isn’t interested in union activism, but "just wants to have a job, make a good buck, and have lots of stuff," Corporon said.

Some outraged Local 1000a members have questioned the need for the deal, since Loblaws is the most profitable grocery chain in Ontario. Wal-Mart Supercenters will not enter the Canadian market until 2007.

Local 1000a member and Loblaws baker Ben Blasdell links the Loblaws concessions to UFCW’s difficulty in organizing Wal-Mart. "No Wal-Mart employee has a reason to sign a card. The only thing you’re getting is the right to pay dues. You earn almost minimum wage, get no benefits, have to work a long time to make any money-why would anyone do it?"

"If UFCW could get a contract at Wal-Mart, it would look like their Loblaws deals-dishonest and undemocratic," said Finnamore. In 2001, UFCW filed a lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction against Finnamore to prohibit him from publicly criticizing UFCW policy.

"Thirty years ago, the retail industry was fairly heavily unionized, with wages high enough to feed a family. It set a benchmark for labor contracts…UFCW’s concessions have lowered the bar for thousands of part-time and retail workers-in Canada and the United States," Finnamore said.

[ 15 May 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Loblaws is striking back. Here's how: Canada's largest grocer is launching superstores to outrun Wal-Mart, , MARINA STRAUSS writes.

quote:

---

On a series of recent shopping expeditions, Debbie Long picked up a turkey roasting pot, clothes for her kids, an array of low-cost bedroom furnishings, as well as cereal, milk and other grocery staples -- all at the same store.

You'd expect to find this range of merchandise in a Wal-Mart or Costco. But here's the thing: Ms. Long, a Toronto insurance broker on maternity leave, was shopping at a mid-town Loblaws.

"I find Loblaws is replacing Wal-Mart for me," says Ms. Long, 33. "I used to buy my toiletries at Wal-Mart. Now I buy them here."

"Here," needless to say, is not your conventional, neighbourhood Loblaws. It's a Loblaws Real Canadian Superstore -- a massive, 120,000-square-foot supermarket and general merchandise discounter at Don Mills and Eglinton.

And, in the fast-changing, fiercely competitive grocery market, it's a great deal more. It's the critical weapon in the Loblaw Cos. Ltd. campaign to build market share, defend its claim as Canada's supermarketer of choice, and beat back the gathering forces arrayed against it.

---

On what this development means for workers:

quote:

---

A clear motive for the superstore strategy is to lower prices; to do that, however, it must shave costs. Veteran retailing analyst Perry Caicco, a former Loblaw executive, estimates the company will peel away $250-million over the next three years through centralization, efficient product handling, more direct sourcing of cheap general merchandise from overseas and lower labour costs. [emphasis added]
***
Major issues loom on the labour front as well. Loblaw is locked in union contracts that provide for wage and benefit packages considerably richer than those of non-unionized Wal-Mart employees, [retail consultant Don] Watt notes.

Last year, Loblaw won important compromises from the United Food and Commercial Workers that allowed it to proceed with Real Canadian Superstores in Ontario. Under the agreement, UFCW superstore employees earn lower wages than workers in conventional Loblaw supermarkets.

"Getting concessions from the union is nice, but not having a union is better," Mr. Watt says. "That's not going to happen."

Michael Fraser, UFCW national director, says the lower pay for non-food employees was necessary; Loblaw was considering opening non-union superstores that could have wiped out any job security.

UFCW's counterstrategy is to try to unionize Wal-Mart. Improving its employees' pay would ensure that industry compensation isn't dragged down by the world's largest retailer, Mr. Fraser says.

But he says he wouldn't be surprised if Loblaw eventually converted more conventional stores to superstores, a move that would require further union adjustments. To that, he says, "there's definitely going to be resistance."

---

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

However...I have to laugh at one thing. If you think you're going to make $22 an hour at a retail/warehouse job without a union, you're dreaming.

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]

I don't know if you have been following the situation of your brothers and sisters at Westfair (owned by Loblaws) in British Columbia, but I've been meaning to post an update. Earlier on this thread, I noted that the union had been seeking a strike vote.

This message was posted on the UFCW Local 247 website last weekend:

quote:

---

Following two days of intense bargaining last weekend, a tentative settlement has been reached with Westfair Foods for all members at Real Canadian Superstore, Western Grocers, and Corporate Extra Foods. The Agreement, if ratified, would also cover the Company's new Pitt Meadows Warehouse. The Settlement was presented to the full Negotiating Committee who recommended it be taken back to the members for ratification.

The full Memorandum of Settlement will be posted on the website as soon as possible and copies will be mailed or e-mailed to members who request them. Additional copies will be made available at the meetings. Ratification meeting notices are being posted in the stores and a complete listing of the meetings will be posted on the website shortly.

We would encourage all members to come out and hear an explanation of the changes and cast their ballot.

---

The full memorandum of settlement is indeed now available online here: Westfair Memorandum of Settlement.

Information about the dates and locations of ratification meetings, for those in B.C. eligible to vote, are also on the UFCW Local 247 website at http://www.ufcw247.ca . Voting started on Tuesday (June 22) and will continue until early next week.

My understanding is that the negotiation committee voted 16-1 in favor of settlement. The lone dissenter, Mike Raymond, has posted a "Minority Report" detailing his position and urging a no vote here: http://www.westfairworker.com/ .

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

It sounds like there are a lot of problems, particularly with democracy and accountability in the union. I think the wonderful thing about the internet is it can put workers at one warehouse in Toronto in touch with workers at another warehouse in B.C., retail clerks in Newfoundland, meatpackers in Manitoba, etc. etc. I think if workers can figure out a way to build on that communication to change things, then you can find a way to make your "union" (and it could be, but doesn't necessarily have to be either the UFCW or CAW union) more effective for you.

Your point about Walmart is also a good one. I think we keep hearing how the "Walmart threat" is the reason why Loblaws and other grocery companies want to cut back on worker benefits. And why the union is ready to agree. But the situation cuts too ways. If Walmart workers see Loblaws and Safeway and A&P are cutting wages or working conditions with a union, what is going to make them want to join that union if all they see is members moving backward?

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kuba:
Is Loblaws related to IGA which is now Sobey's?

---

Lowlaw's is connected to Westfair Foods. The latter owns/runs a whole battery of stores. But I don't know if Sobey's is connected.

Ain't capitalism grand!

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Now, they are no longer hiring contractors locally, they have laid off anybody who was there too long (ie. had benefits or whatever) are only employing students and even those aren't the ones that were there when they first took over. And not only did they fire people, they made up terrible rumours and spread them all over town. At least the one guy is taking them to court...... Oh and prices did go up.

I'm all for shopping locally -- but when a big chain offends my sensibilities so much - that's it I'm driving the 45 minutes to get my groceries and shopping at the compeititon for my daily stuff.

Alot of folks are talking about doing it too. I hope we can band together - run them out of town - and then get some equally evil I'm sure but not this bunch in to take over the store.

To answer the point more seriously, though, my understanding is that while a worker can sue an employer for "unfair dismissal" in Canada, the remedy available is payment in lieu of notice. I.e. because you are generally presumed employed "at will," you can be fired for any reason (with some specific exceptions), or no reason at all. If you are fired, however, you are generally entitled to two-weeks notice before your job is terminated, and if you don't get it, you are entitled to get paid for the two weeks anyway. The court can also award you additional weeks pay based on your length of service with the company and the other conditions of your discharge.

If the employer can prove that you were fired for a good reason, like stealing, you're not entitled to any money. If, however, they falsely accuse you of theft, you may be able to sue them for slander in addition to what you've got coming for the termination itself.

One thing you can't usually get through the courts, though, is your job back. The exception is if you are fired for an illegal reason, such as discrimination based on race, gender, etc.

On the other hand, if the employee is a member of a union, they can usually get their job back through the grievance process, plus backpay, where a non-union worker would only be entitled to severance. This is because the union and employer have usually agreed to protect workers from termination except with "just cause," and to refer disputes over such things to an impartial arbitrator.

That's actually one of the biggest benefits to having a union. If your acquaintance at the store is in fact in a union, you should talk to him to make sure he has filed a grievance. If the employees don't have a union right now, they might want to consider joining one. We've discussed the merits of a couple unions in retail on this thread already. If anyone is interested in discussing them in more depth, we could start a new thread for it. Not that long ago, we had a similar discussion about unions for call centres over here: Joining a union?

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

Hmm. I assume you're being facetious about the court "giving the worker the store" as judgement on his lawsuit.

---

quote:

---

Although I know its not a remedy under the law, I think the workers could probably do a better job.

---

Hey - that's what coops are for! That's an alternative to unionizing (although you can also have a store which is both coop and union, the best of both worlds in my view).

It takes a fair bit of capital to set up a coop, though. Unionizing an existing employer is often a more achievable option for workers, and one that can be fairly effective for a lot of issues. Fairly effective most of the time, at least.

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

What a re-fresh idea. But, of course, that won't happen here.

---

That does bring things nicely back to some central questions of this thread, though, which is: whether and how unions can be effective against some of the largest, most powerful big-box retailers today, which are determined to drive woring conditions down, regardless of whether we're talking about Loblaws, Sobeys or Walmart? Do we have any other options?

[ 24 June 2004: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

[ 25 June 2004: Message edited by: imposter6 ]

http://vancouver.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=bc_superstore20040702

quote:

---

Superstore workers sign deal
WebPosted Jul 2 2004 02:09 PM PDT


VANCOUVER - Workers at 24 Real Canadian Superstores in B.C. have ratified a new five-year contract.

The 9000 workers are members of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union.

By the end of the agreement, cashiers will be earning in excess of $24 an hour while butchers and bakers will get $26 an hour.

The agreement also covers three Extra Foods stores in B.C.

---

Link: Loblaws/RCSS employees vote on "early contract renewal." (From UFCW Local 1000A)

quote:

---

During January and early February 2005 there will be a secret-ballot vote of the members of UFCW Locals 1000A, 1977 and 175 and 633 who work at Loblaws, Zehrs or Fortinos.

The vote will be on whether or not to begin early contract renewal negotiations with this employer.

This vote is part of the outcome of mediation at the Ontario Labour Relations Board between Zehrs and UFCW Local 1977.

The current collective agreements expire in the summer of 2006. The employer has proposed negotiating renewal agreement by June 2005, one year early. The local unions have accepted this proposal, with the following conditions:

- The members of all locals must separately approve going to the bargaining table early. If the members of one local vote against doing this, all are deemed to have voted against it.

- If the members approve early negotiations and a Memorandum of Settlement is reached, the members of all locals must separately vote to ratify the settlement. If the members of one local vote to turn it down, all locals are deemed to have turned it down.

-If the settlement is turned down, the current collective agreements remain in force until they expire in the summer of 2006.

-There will be no strike or lockout if agreement cannot be reached in early negotiations. The current collective agreements remain in force until the summer of 2006, and negotiations will take their normal course at that time. The right to strike or lock out remains, in accordance with Ontario labour law.

---

The presidents of UFCW Locals 1000A, 1977 and 175 have signed a joint Declaration of Solidarity.

A number of UFCW members at Loblaws have expressed reservations about this "early renewal" on a union democracy web board.

[ 16 January 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
$24 an hour for cashiers and $26 for skilled butchers and bakers is an excellent wage. So at first glance this sounds like a very good contract. On the other hand, what the article doesn't tell you is that these are the top rates. Given the turnover, I'd be interested in knowing how many workers actually reach these levels.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
That's a pretty asinine and trollish comment. How much do you deserve to earn, Gir?

---

Well let's see... when I worked stock, I did more work than the cashiers did and at times they cannot imagine (start at 2330, work until 0430 at least). I made 8.25/h. Rumor had it that the lead hand made 17 or 18, and the supervisor about 20.

(A) begin organizing against the employer in order to win a more reasonable wage;

(B) bitch and moan against those fellow employees who are already making a reasonable wage.

Gir chooses (B).

I think the other thing I would point out is that how much a person "deserves" is rather subjective. If Gir wanted to share with us his current occupation and compensation, I could happily offer informed or uninformed commentary on whether my impressions of his job duties merited whatever his employer saw fit to pay him for fulfilling those duties.

This could make an interesting thread, if Gir really wants to play ball. (In fairness, we could also do it on the ethics of wages in general, rather than picking on Gir).

I'd prefer to do it on a different thread than this one, though. I'd like to keep this one more focused on Loblaws corporate practices, unions and community groups organizing in response and that kind of thing.

[ 16 January 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Oh yes, the Ontario Teachers Union pension plan owns $36.8 million dollars worth of Loblaws. They also own $168 million worth in Sobeys. Seems they should have some pull in negotiations.

That follows the trend of their labor friendly investments such as $77.5 million in Talisman, Nearly 1/2 billion dollars in Maple Leaf foods and $35.3million in Pfizer, $354 million in Westjet Airlines (very anti union) and so on.

Solidarity forever eh?

Seriously a Cashier making 24/hr, many Teachers (complete with degree and the responsibility for watching over X many students) don't make that! If that UFCW was able to gain that for their workers than I'm impressed. And it's very important for Unions counter this race to the bottom. But I'm not going to claim that the Cashiers and Meat Cutters of Superstore are poor off because of that contract. Especially without seeing the entire contract.

Now I realize the very important fact that those rates are Top rates, but with Top rates like that what do they start out at? Can it be that bad???

"The Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan is an independent corporation responsible for investing the fund’s assets and administering the pensions of Ontario’s 155,000 elementary and secondary school teachers and 97,000 retired teachers.
The Ontario government and the Ontario Teachers' Federation, the plan's co-sponsors, are responsible for benefit and contribution levels.

The plan had net assets of $79 billion at June 30, 2004 and a long-term rate of return of 11.1% per year since 1990."

This statement is great too.

web page

Link: Cash for Concessions

[ 30 January 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

Updates are always welcome.

[ 05 February 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

I have a question regarding the transportation department

quote:

---

LSL/RCSS MEMBERSHIP APPROVE EARLY NEGOTIATIONS

Workers in Loblaws and The Real Canadian Superstores, at membership meetings in London, Ottawa, Trenton and Toronto have voted in favour of entering into early negotiations with their employer.

The breakdown of the results of the votes are as follows:

Division In Favour Opposed
London 63% 37%
Ottawa 86% 14%
Trenton 92% 8%
Toronto 66% 34%

Seventy one (71) per cent of all ballots cast, were in favour of early negotiations.

---

More info:

www.ufcw1000a.org

www.ufcwloblawtalks2005.ca

[ 21 February 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

No only Erin Mills was up

Let me explain why Maplegrove in Cambridge voted UFCW. First: Cambridge is has former CAW members, teamsters members and UFCW members in it. Not a happy place to work. They know if they were to go CAW then they are on there own come this contract in OCT. This could be good or bad. CAW from the closed Kitchener plant and Teamsters from the old Chatum plant were offered jobs at the new Maplegrove plant when it opened and their's closed. UFCW voted to let them keep their senority now under UFCW, but UFCW members from the 3 Mississauga and other Cambridge plant would have first crack at the best jobs and easiest positions.

The negiotating team got their brothers and sisters a good deal with the chance at better jobs and you have a problem with that?

Therefore you have a UFCW member who is 21 yrs old with 3 years senority doing janitor Mon-Fri days and a CAW Kitchener guy who's 51 with 23 years senority picking orders Fri, Sat, Sun, Mon, and Tues, with Wed and Thurs off.

That is not true, just about every kitchener employess holds a posted position.

There is a lot of tension there! The only reason it passed is because of the part-timer and UFCW vote and that's it.

Do not forget the the tier 2 guys from kitchener who were only making 14 an hour with 5-10 ten years in, while their tier one brothers made 19, now they all make over 22 an hour.

All former CAW and Teamsters members are not allowed to transfer out of Maplegrove to any other branch including the new Ajax, Ont branch due to open in 2006 and employ 900 people which will be UFCW.

Again untrue.

If CAW took over Maplegrove all jobs would be reposted by senority and no one there would be allowed to transfer out including UFCW members still there! Loblaws created this mess and will do anything not to have to deal with CAW again. The Ottawa branch is CAW and will be closing when there contract is up.

(go to www.bugmenot.com for an anonymous login and password to the Toronto Star website)

quote:

---

Canada's largest supermarket chain is closing six warehouses in Ontario and Quebec at a cost of 1,400 jobs over the next three years.

Loblaw Cos. Ltd. announced the closings late yesterday, saying they were part of a previously disclosed plan to cut costs in the distribution system.

Loblaw, which operates Loblaws, No Frills, Real Canadian Superstores and Zehr's, said some of the warehouses will be closed "within months."

The last to close, and also the largest, is in Mississauga's Erin Mills community, Loblaw spokesperson Geoff Wilson said. The warehouse and associated trucking centre will close sometime in 2007 at a cost of 800 jobs, he said. The warehouses are not being replaced, he added.

The company has recently opened several newer, state of the art facilities and now has "excess capacity," Wilson said. The newer warehouses are in Cambridge and Pickering and another one is planned for Ajax.

***

The move is "good news" for Loblaw investors and not that much of a surprise, said analyst David Brodie of Research Capital Corp. Loblaw has been building and opening newer, state of the art facilities and is now ready to close the older, smaller ones, he said.

***

The hourly employees in the warehouses that are closing are all unionized. The United Food and Commercial Workers union represents the workers in Mississauga and Cambridge, while the Canadian Auto Workers represent those in Peterborough.

---

[ 30 March 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

[ 02 April 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

I think when the contract is brought back to us it will be something that we will be happy with.

As to what happen with walmart, that is something all Canadians will have to ask themselves do they want to see our way of life so degraded to put money in the pockets of the richest people in America?

quote:

---

Marketing experts expect the [computerized] carts will foster customer loyalty. And they predict the self checkouts will outnumber flesh and blood cashiers by the next decade.

---