Posted on 02/09/2005 1:24:57 PM PST by SmithL
NEW YORK, (AP) --
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. said Wednesday it will close a Canadian store whose workers are on the verge of becoming the first ever to win a union contract from the world's biggest retailer.
Wal-Mart said it was shuttering the store in Jonquiere, Quebec, in response to unreasonable demands from union negotiators, that would make it impossible for the store to sustain its business. The United Food and Commercial Workers of Canada last week asked Quebec labor officials to appoint a mediator, saying that negotiations had reached an impasse.
"We were hoping it wouldn't come to this," said Andrew Pelletier, a spokesman for Wal-Mart Canada. "Despite nine days of meetings over three months, we've been unable to reach an agreement with the union that in our view will allow the store to operate efficiently and profitably."
Pelletier said the store will close in May. The retailer had first discussed closing the Jonquiere store last October, saying that the store was losing money.
The store in Jonquiere, about 100 miles north of Quebec City, became the first unionized Wal-Mart store in North America last September, after the bargaining unit was certified by provincial labor officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
LOL...How come the union leaders make full wage when you're on strike pay...
How is it that the local IBEW officials always had a job while I didn't as an full paid member in my local...
dont the major railroads get government subsidies to keep afloat???
...Some of us out here work for a living....
My experience with Teamsters is that they spend as much time trying to figure out ways not to work as they actually do working..
Teamsters are generally not comitted to quality and their work product is not up to snuff in todays quality insistant market.
When I worked for Michelin Tire Corp. in the 70's, they were very anti-union. One of the California warehouses in the bay are unionized. They closed it, moved about thirty miles, built another one and would not hire any of the previous employees.
Yes. Well, the last figures I saw praising railroads pointed to an X-fold increase in tonnage over the last 50 years or so (forget the exact number) along with a six-fold decrease in jobs (I do remember that one).
That’s something you might want to keep in mind because it’s not a formula for continued success – not for a union member.
Also, I’d be somewhat reluctant to hitch my wagon to the Teamster mule because they’ve got the same problem – continuing (and sustained) membership decline. I suspect they won’t exist in their current form 15 or 20 years for now. Not unless they take a much more conciliatory position.
I can actually imagine a couple of scenarios that could take them out within the next five years, depending.
And, you should take a moment to thank God that you aren't involved with the Central States pension mess. Unless you are, of course, at which point you have my condolences.
No. My money is in real estate.
I understand balance. I also understand that many organization, including but by no means limited to unions, feel a need to self perpetuate even after the goals have been achieved. That's one of the primary problems with unions, even after balance has been achieved they frequently keep pushing, they find new battle grounds to fight over and use extortionistic practices to win these battles for no good reason. Just look at the recent labor troubles in MLB, one of the points of contention was advertising budget, since when is the ammount of money a company spends on advertising any of the union's business?!
And as for abuse by management sorry I'm not buying it. For a union to be created they need to sell the employees an idea of abuse by management, but that doesn't mean such abuse actually needs to exist. I'm watching it right now where my wife works, the union is slowly infiltrating that place and there's nothing wrong with it. Policy there treats employees like gold, they have one of the best benefits packages in the city, excellent re-train and swap position programs, and once you pass the probation period it's nearly impossible to get fired without doing something that'll land you in jail first. And yet the union is getting it's claws into the place, and doing all the terrible things pointless unions do like getting rid of merrit based raises and putting in a lame step and ladder system that's going to force employees to seek tons of additional training for the sole purpose of not falling off the right side of the grid and losing their job.
70 years ago unions were a good idea, these days most of them stink and are actually bad for employees and employers.
I am sure the union bosses know what that is, but they don't care since they continue to draw a paycheck even when the workers are on strike, and when (and if) they go back to work, the union will just take more off the top.
The workers in the grocery store strike in CA "won" concessions that would take 10 years to repay the pay they lost during the strike. Got any bets on if they wind up on strike again before their last strike pays for itself?
== WASHINGTON - President Bush will propose ending federal subsidies for Amtrak's operating expenses for 2006, congressional aides said yesterday, stirring protests from lawmakers representing the railroad's heavily traveled Northeast corridor.
Bush proposed $900 million for the current budget year, and Congress ended up providing nearly $1.2 billion. In Congress, where Amtrak has wide support, it is considered unlikely that lawmakers would agree to eliminate the operating aid.
==
Also, do some research on the Railroad Retirement Act which is also fleecing taxpayers. There are too many handouts and isn't worth my time or FR bandwidth to argue with you.
"70 years ago unions were a good idea, these days most of them stink and are actually bad for employees and employers"
i can not defend the greed that goes along with large old unions but there is no reason a union can't exist in a capitalist machine, like wal-mart is doing, if they don't like it they can move. if the people don't like being unemployed and no place to shop they can keep their mouths shut.
Amtrak operates on all of the major Rail Carriers physical plant. Why don't you research and find out how much rail Amtrak owns on their own. Amtrak owns their rolling stock and that about sums it up. On freight RRs when Amtrak comes through operations come to a halt, all other trains in sidings to accomodate them. I would immagine that most of the major carriers would not miss them.
No it's only where the organizers can SELL the image of abuse that they take off. I'm seeing a union take hold where there is no abuse of any kind, I can see with my own eyes that unions can be established without abuse. The funniest part of this union is their big rally cry their using to get people signed up is the first phase of the step system, every employee hates it and they're really made about it, what nobody bothers to ask is why this system was put there in the first place... the freaking UNION complained that there was income disparity and they needed to do something. The union CAUSED the very "abuse" which is increasing their membership.
I understand the balance fully, that's why I say most unions stink, because most unions have destroyed the balance, they hold all the cards, can shut companies down at will, and will send their people out on strike for no good reason. I was around for the Phelps Dodge strike down here, when PD opened the books to the union guys, told them to construct the best offer the company could afford, the union guys analyzed the books determined PD couldn't afford anything they were willing to put to a vote and went on strike. There's no balance in that situation, and all the abuse is from the union.
How WalMart is handling it is how you have to handle the unions. If they can't operate the store profitably it's going to get closed eventually anyway, they're just cutting to the final chapter and skipping the years of declining profitability.
"people should realize that a union CAN NOT exist without abuse of management."
Well, yeah, that's truly why they exist. Couldn't have said it better myself. People should also realize the result of unionized teachers.
Unions certainly helped make workplace safety an important and recognized issue once upon a time. With numerous federal agencies now covering that territory, there's little viable reason left for them, outside of artificially inflating prices and wages (and it's extremely rare for that to be a positive act).
If you follow this link, you won't know the end of the story. But I can tell you. 50% of union workers were replaced. Now we have an open shop.
And we are profitable.
This ex-Teamster smuck is delighted to be so unwanted.
Actually, this situation is precisely that of "The Fountainhead", in which the newspaper owner:
* fires a columnist because he went against editorial policy
* is subjected to a "sympathy strike" by a large number of employees
* is ordered by the court to hire him back.
So..
* he hires him back, has him report for work at exactly 9:00am, and then
* closes the newspaper at exactly 9:01am, throwing everyone out of a job.
Does the term "Phyrric victory" come to mind??
They are completely losing their grip, no negotiating strength whatsoever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.