[ 05 October 2005: Message edited by: The Wizard Of Socialism ]

[ 31 December 2005: Message edited by: Gold_n_blonde ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gold_n_blonde:
...Perhaps the workers should be supported in their fight for higher wages...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gold_n_blonde:
Perhaps the workers should be supported in their fight for higher wages, and the big corporate businesses...

---

The only remaining IGA in Regina is the Lakeshore one on Hillsdale. It is completely separate from the others... Not exactly sure why, but their prices are SUPER high.

Edit to add: and in addition to my last post, i don't want to see these workers FORCED back on the job, I want the talks to get underway, get something great wored out, THEN go back to work.

[ 06 October 2005: Message edited by: Kaitlin Stocks ]

The web site says little about the strike other than everyone was offended by the last company offer before the strike. The site is pretty much a waste of bandwidth when it comes to current information.

The SGEU site mentions:

quote:

---

RWDSU workers at Sobey's on Albert Street South in Regina began job action on September 12th. After 13 days on the picket line, both sides have agreed to use a conciliator in an attempt to reach an agreement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Erstwhile:
[...]

I'm with Robbie - I'd like to know where folks are getting the "union is dragging its feet" idea. I'm not saying that's not the case, but it would be pretty unusual.

---

No kidding. Give us a primary source, please. Both sides in labour disputes do this little thing called 'spin'.

Oh, and Wizard... what 'union unpleasantness' do you speak of? Or is that just an off-the-cuff, nonsensical statement based on your dislike of unions? Thanks for your contribution to the discussion

Edit: I just realized you might have been refering to crossing the picket line as being unpleasant. Fair enough. Still a useless post meant only to give a kick in the ribs...

[ 09 October 2005: Message edited by: Anarchonostic ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard Of Socialism:
When I was 21 I was beaten by two members of the RWDSU at the place I was employed. No charges were ever laid. When you've had to quit a job because you've got cracked ribs and can't stop coughing up blood, with the promise of more to come, maybe you'll be less likely judge the validity of the opinions of others...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anarchonostic:
I'm judging the validity of your opinions because (I'm going to get a tattoo) anecdotal experiences does not equal fact.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by chubbybear:
Gee, that's a little insensitive isn't it? If WS was so brutally assaulted, we can hardly blame him if he feels a little jaded, can we?

---

I'm sorry, I really shouldn't have said anything. I still don't agree with WS's justification, but I realize I have some similar opinions of my own I can deal with before casting stones. I'm just angry and sick of it, that's all. Apologies.

After getting fired, I went to work at a Unionized packing plant. The Union reps there helped me reactivate my comp claim and get some cash for the time that I had not been working. They also helped me get into a position at my new, union job that wouldn't aggravate my old injury. They did this even though I wasn't a member when I sustained the injury.

I recently learned that Sobey's allowed unionized workers to return to work during the strike, as well as hired on a bunch of scabs. I also learned that while the "loyal" workers who crossed the picket line and returned to work are still making $7.25/hour, while the scab workers they have brought in are making $10/hour. I think this is despicable. Not only are they punishing the workers still walking the picket by not negotiating anything in over two months, they are punishing those who felt there were no alternative to cross the line, for whatever reason, by paying them $2.75 less than a scab.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Wizard Of Socialism:
When I was 21 I was beaten by two members of the RWDSU at the place I was employed. No charges were ever laid. ...

---

Were you beaten up for a reason related to the RWDSU? Why weren't charges laid...was it lack of evidence? Was the union involved in hushing it up or something? Were these guys on the union executive or otherwise in a position of authority in the union?

Or were they just asshole psychos who happened to belong to the RWDSU?

I'm sorry to hear about your experience - truly - and I am not meaning to diminish what happened to you. I'm just wondering how that leads to a general dislike of the RWDSU or unions in general. Kind of like being mugged by a member of some ethnic group and assuming all members of that ethnic group are bastards.

WHAT REALLY TICKS ME OFF, IS THE 18 PEOPLE, WHO SEEM TO BE ENJOYING THIS STRIKE, (You know, the 3 shifts of 6 holding signs causing traffic accidents, etc), HAVE BEEN targeting the employees that are still working. Obviously these are employees that are having their livelyhoods threatened. Let's face it, when you are supporting a family, your paycheck is important.

Rich Kids working. Well 'EXCUSE ME" Have you ever heard of responsibility! Get a job, earn a living?? Just because some parents are well off, doesn''t mean they don't promote good work ethics in their kids! Perhaps they are taking a lead from the owners of this store and their kids!..
Another LOAD of CRAP! According to the Trade Union Act, workers that have not participated in the strike, CAN NOT participate in the vote! Well slap me if I'm stupid... but let's see... they are employed by this store, but won't take strike action.... so they can't vote..... PERHAPS THE STRIKE VOTE WASN'T LEGAL TO BEGIN WITH!

The Union is NOT allowing them to participate in votes! Let's face it... the Union woudn't be able to continue this illegal strike, admitting they didn't have the participating votes!

I believe they didn't have the vote to strike to begin with.... IN FACT,they refused to have a vote count amidst all the voters,
Sounds way too fishy to me..

What I really can't figure out... This is a MOM & POPS Store. It is owned by 2 individuals that have put themselves into debt, ... Have mortgaged everything they owned...

They are not Millionairs.... They are not Corporate Big Wigs... They are Hard-Working & caring. They are You & Me!

This Union has abused this to the point or ridiculous! This Union has lied. This Union is taking the employee's money & doesn't give a crap!

I can't figure out half of what you are trying to say - please edit so it is more legible, and I for one, would respond to more of your points. I will comment on one point now.

This is not a well known or used section, but from what I have heard, the Union is going to utilize this.

I for one, believe that the Union should not be able to use these "off-the-beaten-track" tactics to sway the vote their way. I believe that all employees should be voting, whether participating in the strike action or not.

quote:

---

I'm just saying, why not pay them all the same - scab for scab, tooth for tooth, you know?

---

what do you think about RFID?....i hope the cashiers labour union doesn't try to block this technology to protect a few thousand check-out peoples jobs through-out Canada...

The people who benefit most from this form of technology are the big outfits -- Wal-Mart being the biggest benefitter. The manufacturers are in many cases questioning the ROI of going RFID, but if they want to maintain contracts with Wal-Mart, they don't have a choice.

at the very least i think RFID/GPS should be used to track big purchase items (within stores/buildings at the very least)...in this day and age it should be impossible to steal anything worth more then a few hundred dollars....every expensive device should be tagged...

People get paid 18 bucks an hour plus to put wine on shelves and ring through booze how much different is working in a grocery store. What about a pension plan for these folks similar to the largest employed group in Saskatchewan, Government workers.

I submit that a living wage should be tied to the comparable government job done by unionized labour. Our NDP government must legislate wage parody. This in itself will not be enough as many government employees complain that there wages are still to low, but it will be a start.

Sask Liquor Store = Grocery Stores
Sask Tel Stores = Radio Shack and Future Shop
SGI workers = Independent Brokers
Sask Power = All electricians
Sask Highways = Mechanics
Sask Energy = All Service station attendants
Sask Tel = Shaw Cable employee's

We will never get everybody to join a union , we must legislate.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NeoCommIntern:
Our NDP government must legislate wage parody.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NeoCommIntern:
Sask Tel = Shaw Cable employee's

---

Funny. Many Shaw Cable employees in the Vancouver area are unionised, and many earn just as much as TELUS employees doing the same type of work.

They were smart. They saw the benefits of unionisation at a different workplace and got on board. Instead of just bitching about other people's paycheques.

I don't know about other industries, but I know it's increasingly difficult to make a good wage in telecommunications, especially when you're just starting out. Talked to a feller the other day who worked for a brief time at an interconnect company before working with me at TELUS. Right out of school. They would call him into work on Saturday, he worked ten hours. Then, when his paycheque came, he asked why he wasn't paid enough. They told him that Saturday was considered unpaid training since he was helping out another tech on equipment he wasn't familiar with. Nice.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
So what happened to the strike vote that Sobey's employees were supposed to have?? Don't tell me that the Union forgot to send out the letters until it was too late, or just delayed them??!! Must have been a Postal error! (said with very much tongue in cheek!)
So exactly why is this Union afraid of this vote!
Well, I, for one believe that these employees are much smarter than this union! And that these employees will win despite the union!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kaitlin Stocks:
Yeah. I do the same same same work that Sasktel people do - Except more wide an array. I process High Speed forms, dispatch technicians, deal with mobility issues, deal with sales and questions, deal with troubleshooting and issues... BUT - The only two differences are, I know how to do my job, and the fact that I get paid 11 dollars an hour LESS than they do.

Life's so fair.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anarchonostic:

What strike vote - can you give us some context? Did the union promise a strike vote and then just plain not have it?

---

well here it goes. Let me introduce myself as one of the employees walking the picket line right now.

I heard about this disscussion going on by word of mouth on the picket line the other day and thought I should check it out.

Im not here to call anyone out - not here to quote individuals and call you names - not here to cause shit.

Im simply joining in the conversation to try and help shed some light on the situation. get 'our side of the story' heard. Help answer questions

I started reading from the top and read each and every post. there is a lot of mis-information posted there, a lot of assumtions. As I read I was trying to cut and paste to a word document with the intention of answering those quotes but when i came out with 2 full pages I kind of changed my direction.

If you want real information, the correct information, feel free to stop by and talk to the picketers or phone the RWDSU office at 569-9311

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kaitlin Stocks:
Now, I'm not sure if this is being discussed elsewhere... But I was just wondering what everyone thinks of a month long strike at Sobey's South in Regina. I think its a big silly to be completely honest... I understand the need for higher wages etc... But I'm just not understanding why these people are still on strike.. Especially why their Union (RWSDU or something...) keeps putting off talks with the store.

Help!!

---

**Sorry I deleted the part that says who origionally posted this **

The changeover to Sobeys did not affect the owners or the staff inside the store . It was at that time of the year that our negotiations started to move along

[ 20 November 2005: Message edited by: Here to defend the union ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
Where did you get your information that the union is the one who keeps putting off talks? In my experience, usually the union is eager to go to the bargaining table and its management that drags its feet. Of course, I don't know about this particular situation. Maybe there's nothing to talk about (i.e. management is not making a reasonable offer)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
I am so PO'd! I have read all the crap about this strike, and can't believe the garbage.

WHAT REALLY TICKS ME OFF, IS THE 18 PEOPLE, WHO SEEM TO BE ENJOYING THIS STRIKE, (You know, the 3 shifts of 6 holding signs causing traffic accidents, etc), HAVE BEEN targeting the employees that are still working. Obviously these are employees that are having their livelyhoods threatened. Let's face it, when you are supporting a family, your paycheck is important.

Rich Kids working. Well 'EXCUSE ME" Have you ever heard of responsibility! Get a job, earn a living?? Just because some parents are well off, doesn''t mean they don't promote good work ethics in their kids! Perhaps they are taking a lead from the owners of this store and their kids!..
Another LOAD of CRAP! According to the Trade Union Act, workers that have not participated in the strike, CAN NOT participate in the vote! Well slap me if I'm stupid... but let's see... they are employed by this store, but won't take strike action.... so they can't vote..... PERHAPS THE STRIKE VOTE WASN'T LEGAL TO BEGIN WITH!

The Union is NOT allowing them to participate in votes! Let's face it... the Union woudn't be able to continue this illegal strike, admitting they didn't have the participating votes!

I believe they didn't have the vote to strike to begin with.... IN FACT,they refused to have a vote count amidst all the voters,
Sounds way too fishy to me..

What I really can't figure out... This is a MOM & POPS Store. It is owned by 2 individuals that have put themselves into debt, ... Have mortgaged everything they owned...

They are not Millionairs.... They are not Corporate Big Wigs... They are Hard-Working & caring. They are You & Me!

This Union has abused this to the point or ridiculous! This Union has lied. This Union is taking the employee's money & doesn't give a crap!

Let's be serious... Do you really think this Union is losing sleep when the members are not getting a paycheck?
Trust me, they won't be buying their member's family Christmas presents! But maybe you should talk to Wayne & Joan... there is no questions they would make sure your kids had presents under the tree.

---

1> show me PROOF that we have been the cause of a single accident sice we started walking Sept.11

2> there are several people walking that are the sole income to their family. i dont know of a single person that has crossed the line to continue to work is supporting a family.

3> there is legislation within the trade union act that prevents them from voting. Sorry I dont have that info infront of me but if you want i can find it for you

4> Do you honestly believe the Wayne Zook would allow this strike to continue if it was not legal?

5> the union has never told anyone they can not participate in the strike. The workers in the store right now have been told that they are welcome to join us at any point of the dispute. There have been some people that came out shortly after the strike began. there was one person that decided to go in and came back out again.

6> its not a mom and pop store. It is a split between the Zook Family and the Sobeys company. You mention a mortgages. The family & kids has no problem getting new vehicles for themselves. They even purchased a cottage during the despute. Would they do these thigs if they were losing money in the company? And another point to add to this particular thought. How many people reading this own a car that has absolutely no financing owing on it or a house with NO mortgage. Financing and making loan payments are a part of everybodys life!

7> the members walking the line did recieve a donation from the union at Thanksgiving. I'll et you know in a few weeks what happens for Christmas. If you can ignore this dispute for just a moment I would like to say something. If you look at the employees in the store with families there are maybe 10 children total under the age of 12. Not once has Wayne or Joan Zook given any of these children a gift for christmas.

[ 21 November 2005: Message edited by: Here to defend the union ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
Sec 45 of the Trade Union Act states that employees that have not participated in the strike are going to be excluded from voting.

This is not a well known or used section, but from what I have heard, the Union is going to utilize this.

I for one, believe that the Union should not be able to use these "off-the-beaten-track" tactics to sway the vote their way. I believe that all employees should be voting, whether participating in the strike action or not.

I really think that the longer this strike goes on, the Union looks big, as the expense of the employees. The Union Name gets a lot of press, but does that really help the employees?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nam:
If you are referring to subsection (3) of Section 45, you need to read for comprehension. The subsection does not say those who aren't on the picket line can't vote - it says those employees who are involved in the strike can vote. "Involved" is a lot broader than "walking the line with a picket sign" so everyone involved does have the right to vote on the contract.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NeoCommIntern:
I think they should stay out until they get wage parody with the Saskatchewan Liquor Board.....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
So what happened to the strike vote that Sobey's employees were supposed to have?? Don't tell me that the Union forgot to send out the letters until it was too late, or just delayed them??!! Must have been a Postal error! (said with very much tongue in cheek!)
So exactly why is this Union afraid of this vote!
Well, I, for one believe that these employees are much smarter than this union! And that these employees will win despite the union!

---

What vote are you talking about? Before both sides being given notice by the Labor Board of a vote that will take place Nov.21 there was NEVER supposed to be a vote. Tell me where you heard this from?

[ 20 November 2005: Message edited by: Here to defend the union ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
Rumour has it that the Union promised the Labour board and management that there would be a vote last week. However, employees did not get a letter saying this. Maybe the Union voted on behalf of the employees...
You guys, I just feel bad for the majority of these employees. I think they are being taken advantage of by this union. I believe that this Union does not have their best interest at heart.

---

Many of us are with you. I am always amazed how quickly any labour dispute gets spun against the workers by trolls like "lakeles" who quickly disappear as soon as the workers win their struggle.

I'm also amazed how quickly people who claim to be "progressive" are always quick to buy the boss must be right mentality.

If more people organised their workplaces maybe some of the posters complaining about higher unionised wages and benefits might start seeing IMPROVEMENTS instead of wishing that their unionised counterparts be dragged down to their mcwage level.

Look at progressive countries like in Scandinavia with high rates of unionisation. We can achieve this if people stopped wishing ill on a fellow worker and actually started doing what these workers in Sobey's are doing; standing their ground and fighting for it!

On another issue I thought Saskatchewan had anti-scab legislation. I guess that assumption is wrong. I hope people force the so-called progressive government to start acting like one again.

It sounds to me that these workers are being screwed by an anti-union family that is paying less than the going rate for comparable stores in the city. Has there been any mediation attempts showing the other pay scales?

I'm surprised to hear that you're still with the RW. I didn't realise there were any RW workplaces left after the "mergers" with the Steelworkers, UFCW and CAW (some more successful than others).

Sobey's is one of the most anti-union employers in this country with a swath of destruction that started in the atlantic and is spreading across the country.

Hang in the HTDTU, please let us know if there's anything those of us who care about fellow workers struggles for justice can do to help.

you said a while back --
"...Let's be serious... Do you really think this Union is losing sleep when the members are not getting a paycheck?
Trust me, they won't be buying their member's family Christmas presents! But maybe you should talk to Wayne & Joan... there is no questions they would make sure your kids had presents under the tree.""

With Christmas just around the corner, can you tell me how I might go about getting these presents you speak of? Because Joan's last comment to the negotating committee was to the effect of - we'll see you in the spring.
if she had ANY amout of compasion for the families out there she would not say a thing like this during the christmas season or at ANY time of the year for that matter.

On another note - their 'barganing style' is quite childish! They say they want a day of negotiations yet they have no desire to talk once that day comes. they make no effort to move forward and try to bring the sides closer. Its almost like they find humor giving a proposal that is worse than their last offer. "negotiating" means working toward a common middle.

All of which are lost.

So as I said to begin with, I do not believe this strike is in the best interest of anyone.

What scares me about this union is what I have seen happen in the past ie the hotel in (I believe) Weyburn. Who wins there? Didn't they just end up boarding up the doors? What about the Imperial 400 in Saskatoon. How many years were they on strike?

I believe the problem is the union.

quote:

---

For Immediate Release December 15, 2005

SFL Calls for Sobeys’ Boycott

Today the Saskatchewan Federation of Labour Executive Council endorsed a boycott of Sobeys stores in Regina and Saskatoon. Members of Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union Local 454 have been on strike since September 11th, 2005 at the South Albert Street Sobeys in Regina.

Sobeys is refusing to provide competitive rates of pay to its employees and in fact, pays workers in its non-unionized stores higher hourly wages.

“We are asking consumers not to shop at Sobeys until this dispute is settled,” said SFL President Larry Hubich.

“At this time of year it is especially important to support workers who are struggling to make ends meet after months without a pay cheque. We urge trade unionists and the communities of Regina and Saskatoon to support this boycott”, added Hubich.

The franchise owners of South Albert Street Sobeys have been found guilty of numerous unfair labour practices by the Saskatchewan Labour Relations Board. The Company has been promoting or encouraging decertification every year since it was first organized in 1999 and in Saskatoon the UFCW has lost their store through similar interference.

“You have to question what future there is for young workers in Saskatchewan when they are confronted with unfair working conditions, intimidation and lack of respect in the workplace”, said Hubich, “this is why these workers are braving the freezing weather fighting for dignity.”

---

[ 18 December 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

And in response to lakeles.
If the company was concerned about losing these 3 months of sales they would have used a better style of bargaining. When they were given strike notice they could have made an offer. When they realized that we were NOT bluffing with stike notice and walked out they coulad have made an offer. If they REALLY wanted to settle this they would not have walked away just the other week with the comment of "See you in the Spring". They have had almost an entire YEAR to make an offer we would be willing to accept but more importantly they have had TWELVE MONTHS and have not yet actually negotiated. The union gies and offer and all they say is NO they give no insight as to where we could go or where they are willing to work towards. they just turtle up and walk away.

The most frusterating part about this is the fact they tell their replacement worker that the Union was the ones to walk away from the table. And back in November they were telling people that this would be cleard up and the picket line gone by Nov11 Where they got that idea without even having a decent offer on the table is far beyond me.

As far as the students are concerned they are MUCH happier walking because they can have their schedule made so it doesnt conflict with their class times. This is something the company wants to take away from these kids. The company expects these kids, students, to put the interests of Sobeys ahead of their education.

If this Sobeys location is a "mom and Pops corner store" as it was called in the past by a previous poster do you think the Zook Family could afford to walk away and leave it sit empty and continue the dispute?

What a load of garbage. Wouldn't a much more accurate statement be; "The students are happy because they are making more money for their 2 hrs on the picket line per day then they were working."

I'm really glad to see that your hard earned money, that you had to pay in Union dues each month is going to help students. I'm sure they also appreciate you donating to their social fund.

You know, I was doing a little more digging into this Union, and I really still think I am right.
They don't care about the employees. For another example, McDonalds Consolidated in Saskatoon goes on strike.... they end up shutting down. McDonalds Consolidated in Regina goes on strike... they end up closing up shop there too. So exactly how did this help their striking employees?

I believe they are taking your money, (and in a quick calculation, I think its ALOT OF MONEY,) and do not have your best interests at heart.
I believe you would be much better off handling your own destiny!

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
For employees, it is the start of school and afterschool programs for their kids, thanksgiving and Christmas. For the store, it is 3 of their biggest sale months.

All of which are lost.

---

The store's lost its three biggest sales months? Funny, that parking lot looks awfully full each and every day I drive by.

Which doesn't bode well for the strikers, mind. But this whole "pity the poor store" line doesn't fly. The store's doors are open, and consumers are crossing the picket line as if there weren't a strike at all.

quote:

---

You know, I was doing a little more digging into this Union, and I really still think I am right.

---

It would be appreciated if you'd provide some backup to that statement.

After all, I did some digging on RWDSU and I think you're wrong.*

* No actual digging on RWDSU was done by me. God bless the Internet, land of unsubstantiated allegations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by rdwsu:
i cant belive all them lazy over paid workers can walk for 4 hours a day if you want safeway wages GO WORK THERE. for an uneducated job you strikers get paid well i dont wanna pay $20 for a loaf of bread you say sobeys is a million doller company look how much you union makes hosing ya eh. are you to afaid that you dont earn your raise ???

---

i cant belive you lazy trolling posters can post a full paragraph and not use any punctation or propr speling if you want to write betr GO TO SCHOOL. for an uninformed slob you posters have too much time on your hand you say the issues is wasted on peopl lik u well look how much your school made off you and you still can't reason gud are you afraid that you arent smart enuff?

[ 03 January 2006: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
[QB]Boycott Sobeys! (pdf)
[QB]

---

Hmm, we might be on the same e-mailing list. I printed that announcement a few weeks ago and posted it at work.

Like you I don't believe much on the internet, unless of course it has to do with Britney Spears! My substantiation came when I called someone I know that used to work there.

On a bit of a side note, there was an article in the Star Phoenix a week or so before x-mas about the population of Saskatchewan, and how it had declined. Well, I wonder why the Sask Federation of Labour or unions like RWDSUU never comment on these facts. Perhaps they shoulder alot of the blame.... (Just something to think about).

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
What a load of garbage. Wouldn't a much more accurate statement be; "The students are happy because they are making more money for their 2 hrs on the picket line per day then they were working."

---

You don't know what you are talking about. First of all, where do you get the ideat that strike pay is greater than what the workers would receive if they were actually working?

Secondly, labour disputes are hardest on the workers themselves. They know this going into negotiations, and if they feel there is no other way to reach a settlement, they will go on strike and take the risks associated with it to try and fight for a fair deal. Not to be neglected is the position that the union negotiators find themselves in during a strike. They are simultaneously under pressure from their workers to reach a decent settlement ASAP and at the same time under pressure from the employer to back off on some demands.

Are unions always right during a labour dispute? No, they aren't. However, during a labour dispute, time is on the side of the employer, because the employer can basically keep the workers out of work long enought that they will accept any settlement just to end the strike (basibally starving them into submission).

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
On a bit of a side note, there was an article in the Star Phoenix a week or so before x-mas about the population of Saskatchewan, and how it had declined. Well, I wonder why the Sask Federation of Labour or unions like RWDSUU never comment on these facts. Perhaps they shoulder alot of the blame.... (Just something to think about).

---

And what substantial evidence could you offer that unions, and the SFL are responsible for population loss?

Another thought for comment .... when it is -27 degrees, how come employees can't be forced, by employers to work outside for longer than an hour, but the Union can make them picket for 2 hours... Someone should phone occupational health & safety!

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
To rdwsu - Well Said.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rdwsu:
The company you work for owes you nothing except the hourly pay you agreed on when you were hired, anything more then that is a bonus, if you are ever unhappy with your job you have the choice to get a new one don't you?

---

Collective bargaining's all about contracts, Junior. At the end of the day it's all about living up to contractual agreements. So, actually, yeah, they do owe you more than your hourly rate, if your contract provides for it, and strikes and lockouts are an inevitable part of the bargaining process. Don't like it? Work to change the Trade Union Act.

Never mind their obligations under the Occupational Health & Safety Act, Labour Standards Act, and similar statutes. Improvements to which have been fought for and won, at least in part, by unions since they were first instituted.

But then I'm sure you know all about the law and about being in a union, right?

Wait, wait, I'll type your response for you. Save you the time.

quote:

---

no i dont know abot the law ive never read teh labour standrds act or the occpational safety act and as for the trad union act it has teh word union in it so i think its a bad thing no ive never been in a union and i dont know anythin about collective bargining but its just common sense!

---

And by the way, it's "RWDSU".

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
Hey, I'll continue playing this game of baseless assumptions by adding one of my own.

---

No, no, it's the Zeta Rays! People in saskatchewan are fleeing overexposure to Zeta Rays due to the infiltration of our government by our soon-to-be alien overlords!

(Good post generally, btw, Aristotleded24.)

Anyway, it's always interesting to hear the anti-union voices these days. In the 1950's these shrill whiners would have been decrying the very existence of unions, but now they take the tack that "unions used to be good but now are bad, so get rid of 'em". Same goal, different rhetoric. What's funny is they think they're being so very clever - that their arguments aren't entirely transparent, hackneyed or predictable.

Kind of like the corporate shills that trot out regarding global warming. Originally global warming didn't exist, according to the shills. Now it definitely exists, but is not caused by human activity, also according to the shills. Funny how the same facts can lead to such different conclusions within a year or two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
Not at all. In fact, I wish I wrote it.

---

Perhaps if you smashed your "Shift" key and drove a railroad spike through your forehead you, too, could write like that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lakeles:
I also think that this union will suck the life out of these employees.

---

Given that you've failed to give anything beyond allegations in this thread, you'll pardon me if I don't give what you "think" much credence.

[ 06 January 2006: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]

And why, in general, are pro-business, conservative posters so angry, so hysterical and so inarticulate?

I am reminded of two sayings - one a bumper sticker in the 1980s in Cleveland : "Proudly Serving My Corporate Masters." The other a quote from Nazi Labour Minister Robert Ley: "Only the employer can decide."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Américain Égalitaire:
Someone remind me again that this is a progressive board.

---

[ 07 January 2006: Message edited by: RealityBites ]

Both sides are doing the right thing for their own interests. At the end of the day, you have to weigh the pros and cons about what a strike is going to accomplish.

I have questions!

If the strike was for the greater benefit of its members, why are there scabs...and why aren't there more employees walking the picket lines? I would think that if the goals of the strike were for the greater good of the employees at Sobeys, there would be far more strikers on the lines. I also believe that if the public in general agreed with what the union was shooting for, they'd be more active in boycotting the store. Are the proposed agreements available for the public at large to read? Would publishing these proposed agreements be detremental to one side or the other?

What does having a new car got to do with employee rights? Or a new cottage? Do Wayne and Joan not have the right to enjoy the fruits of their labours?

Being jealous of the fruits of another person's hard work is not, in my opinion, a justification for wanting more from said employer. Working hard, demonstrating to an employer the value of one's efforts, being a reliable source of valuable service are. I agree that employers have a responsibility to ensure certain things to their staff: safe working conditions, etc. Employers however do not have a responsibility to ensure the quality of living outside of the workplace is equal to or greater than their own.

You can have your cake and eat it to. But it requires a willingness to achieve compromise. I believe that the store would do this unless they had reasonable cause not to. Has the question of profit-sharing ever been considered? To my knowledge, this would seem to be a good idea for both the employer and the employee, no? Is it not feasable, or practical?

What do the strikers stand to loose by returning to work? Are the conditions that deplorable? Are the employers that tyranical? And why is it that, to the best of my knowledge, the other two Sobeys aren't unionized?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ThavenMaven:
What does having a new car got to do with employee rights? Or a new cottage? Do Wayne and Joan not have the right to enjoy the fruits of their labours?

Being jealous of the fruits of another person's hard work is not, in my opinion, a justification for wanting more from said employer. Working hard, demonstrating to an employer the value of one's efforts, being a reliable source of valuable service are. I agree that employers have a responsibility to ensure certain things to their staff: safe working conditions, etc. Employers however do not have a responsibility to ensure the quality of living outside of the workplace is equal to or greater than their own.

---

It would seem to me that a store owner is, in large measure, reaping the fruits of the labour of the employees. Basically, if you're working for someone else, you are giving up that part of your life so that person can make a profit, and you have a right to have a voice in determining what is fair compensation.

And that demostrating value to an employer is a subjective call to be made by the employer. In some cases, employers reward honset hard work in their workplaces, in other cases employers play games that the employees must play to get ahead. (Ever read Dilbert or watched Office Space?) Any non-unionised employee is at the mercy of his or her employer. Unionisation allows employees to do such things as accept or reject offers from their employer, wheras in non-union environments, accepting or rejecting the employers terms can mean the difference between having a job or not.

quote:

---

I agree that employers have a responsibility to ensure certain things to their staff: safe working conditions, etc. Employers however do not have a responsibility to ensure the quality of living outside of the workplace is equal to or greater than their own.

---

I believe that the distribution of property, and thus wealth, in this society, is based on nothing more than power.

That is: there is no other principle which justifies the wealth of some, and the poverty of others.

So, I agree with the Italian strikers from the 1970's who, when asked what they were striking for said: "Que voliamos? Voliamos tutto."

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:
Any non-unionised employee is at the mercy of his or her employer.

---

quote:

---

After all this is Canada. A free country. Anyone can be what ever they want to be.As rich as they want to be, and as happy as they want to be. Everything else is nothing more than excuses not to change oneself in order to achieve goals.[/QB]

---

Ooh! Can I get a pony?

You are right, though, that Canada is supposed to be a free country.

In a free country, workers should be:

1. Free to join the union of their choosing

2. Free to bargain collectively, as well as individually, over their wages and working conditions

3. Free to withdraw their labor, collectively, in order to negotiate better wages and working conditions with their employer.

Labour rights are human rights!

[ 08 January 2006: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

As far as being labelled a "shrill whiner," though, I am sorry to say that's free speech and you will just have to put up with it.

[ 08 January 2006: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]

But those who "choose not to work in unionized environments" seem to wish to have the benefits secured by unions, whether directly or indirectly.

They want a free ride.

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
I do believe that collective bargaining is an inherently democratic form of setting wages and working conditions. In light of the power imbalances inherent in the employer-employee relationship, I think workplaces need all the democracy they can get. However, I am open to other forms of democratic representation that may also be devised by workers. Workers should certainly have a right to work where they like, and devise the forms of representation which best suit them. Co-ops, for example, can be a perfectly reasonable alternative.

As far as being labelled a "shrill whiner," though, I am sorry to say that's free speech and you will just have to put up with it.

---

But what about the right to individually negotiate your own terms with your employer? Isn't it inherently democratic to allow people to make their own best choices?

quote:

---

But what about the right to individually negotiate your own terms with your employer? Isn't it inherently democratic to allow people to make their own best choices?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Yes, I think Robbie Dee should not have used the word "shrill".

---

I don't think he did. I was referring to an earlier poster.

quote:

---

But those who "choose not to work in unionized environments" seem to wish to have the benefits secured by unions, whether directly or indirectly.

---

No, I don't actually. I don't want the benefit of collective bargaining. I don't want a set pay scale. I don't want to lose the right to individually negotiate.

I acknowledge that unions have made great improvements to working life. It's impossible not to benefit from those. But we benefit from all kinds of past endeavours. I'm thankful we don't have to deal with smallpox anymore. But do I continue to owe something to medicine?

quote:

---

Of course, many of them are hoping to ingratiate themselves with The Boss, so as to perhaps eventually become Assistant Manager/Potato Chips, and then be able to feel Entirely Vindicated.

---

quote:

---

But what about the right to individually negotiate your own terms with your employer?

---

In the real world, "negotiating your own terms" with an employer means accepting the employer's terms, unless you are talking about Dad or the Maple Leafs.

quote:

---

The Zook family has the right to earn a living aswell. The scab labourers and the employees that choose not to strike,also have the right to earn a living. They are not hurting anyone by doing so. As you stated, of which you are correct, people have the right to withdraw thier labour and the right to bargain collectively. But they do not have the right to force someone into an agreement. In short, in this case, the Zook family made an offer, the offer was rejected and some employees exercised thier right to withdraw thier labour. Which is fine. They now are free to exercise thier right to obtain new employement. However,by striking and trying to boycott they are infringing on the rights of the store owners.

---

The scab laborers are directly hurting the workers who remain on the line, by undercutting their negotiating position. Yet the scabs will reap all the benefits if the union wins anyway, because they too will get the higher wages.

quote:

---

Originally posted by robbie_dee:
Individual negotiation with your employer isn't negotiation at all. It's more like the employer tells what he will give, and you take it. You have no real leverage as an individual lined up against the employer's much stronger economic power. But hey, suit yourself. You have the right to make foolish choices, too.

---

quote:

---

I'm thankful we don't have to deal with smallpox anymore. But do I continue to owe something to medicine?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
In the real world, "negotiating your own terms" with an employer means accepting the employer's terms, unless you are talking about Dad or the Maple Leafs.

When capitalists pool their capital to create stronger entities, workers have to pool their strength. "Bargaining as an individual" is basically begging.

---

Hey, I live in the real world and I don't beg. I say what money it will take to keep me on the job and I receive it.

ETA: Equivalent jobs in the public sector list a substantially lower wage. So how is collective bargaining benefitting those union members? Unfortunately, it's punishing the best workers and rewarding the worst.

[ 08 January 2006: Message edited by: Blink ]

[EDIT - added link to continuation thread].

[ 21 March 2006: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]