CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
50%↑
15%
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 22, 2009 04:18 PM UTC
104 Comments
Maybe they’ll even hire you as a scab.
That will get you out of your momma’s basement.
associates ability to feed and shelter their families?
Why won’t he give the KS Associates the freedom to control their own destiny?
Is getting the Intl o.k. to strike part of his scheme to retain control of the Local?
Why aren’t the Denver media outlets reporting any of this … and by that I mean the potential for labor disruptions at Kings and Safeway?
Why does COPols want you to rush out to King Soopers and Safeway to shop right now?
Why do UFCW members have such crappy pay and benefits today (according to some bloggers here at pols)? Ernie Duran was more interested in destroying Colorado then representing his forced dues paying members.
Now he’s headed for the showers.
…this ad like MANY others is the work of a paid political Hit-man named Rick Berman. It’s as astroturf an organization as it gets.
If I paid Berman $50 bucks, I’d bet he’d post an anti-Libertad website for me…
You can’t even deny the facts of the ads, so you attack some producer.
I attended negotiations. I think it is quite evident you did not attend negotiations, and your statements about the decision to walk out are based upon speculation rather than fact.
The winner of UFCW Local 7’s presidency also attended Tuesday’s negotiations, and she spoke in support of the workers standing strong against the company. Indeed, the workers made the decisions relating to a walkout by vote, and i didn’t see any dissent among the workers at negotiations from the course of action they chose.
The rejection of the last contract offer in formal vote meetings was overwhelming. Safeway workers formally rejected three nearly identical contract offers from the company over a negotiating period of six months. King Soopers workers rejected the contract offer twice, in two formal votes.
The companies made it clear at recent negotiations that their offer is final. Their offer includes significant concessions.
King Soopers and Safeway are both making record profits, yet they are using the economic downturn as an excuse to injure the workers’ livelihoods. Blaming union leadership for the workers’ decisions relating to the current situation ignores these facts.
Disclosure: i am on staff at UFCW, working for the grocery workers. I am not a spokesperson for the UFCW, and opinions expressed here are my own.
I hope all of the strikers get permanently replaced with people that actually appreciate having a job to go to. I want to see them go out in the real world and see what kind of pay they can get for stocking a shelf or mopping the floor or being a cashier. I bet they won’t be missed a bit as there are hundreds of people waiting to take their spot in a heartbeat.
How much job training and/or skill is required to work at a friggin grocery store?
When your bosses take every opportunity they can to show you how disposable you are. I think the fact that these stores are already advertising “Scabs for Hire” positions is reason enough to stop shopping at now. I know I’m done. Down with the man. Power to the People!!
You’ll still shop there. And when they take away their health care, vacation, maternity leave, and worker’s comp, and don’t give them a raise for 10 years, you’ll still shop there, because goddamnit, they should be grateful to have a job.
And when your boss come after your job and does the same thing, who ya gonna go cry to?
Give me a break. What garbage are you trying to throw out here?
“And when they make them work 7 days a week You’ll still shop there.”
There goes the liberal emotional talking points that you all know are fabricated garbage.
For one “they” can not make their employees work 7 days a week.
Two, if they did work 7 days a week they would have some nice paychecks from all of the overtime.
Three, I have zero sympathy for anyone that thinks they can bully their business owners into giving pay raises and benefit increases in times when every other non union line of business is giving pay cuts, hour cuts, benefit cuts, and laying millions of people off period.
I hope these crybabies go on strike because they won’t get much sympathy from the general public. We have suffered with pay cuts, hour cuts, benefit cuts, etc. I don’t see any sympathy from your beloved unions for our plight.
Grocery store workers have a union. This strike isn’t happening because the United Auto Workers feels sorry for them.
This sounds like you’re just jealous of them, which is a little sad.
How does such a small mind hold so much bitterness?
Uh, no. Even with my pay cut I still make more than any of them. I bet I make more or at least close to what their top managers make. Why would I be jealous?
I don’t need a union with their strong arm tactics to make a good living. Just hard work and strong work ethic.
And I didn’t need an expensive college either. Just elbow grease.
What is your story?
It wouldn’t be rational. It would be small, petty, and pathetic.
But you clearly are.
Just throw insults as that is much easier I guess.
Why would you be jealous? I did answer that: because you’re small and petty and full of resentment.
As for “What is your story?”
Fuck you, that’s my story. I’ve said enough about my job, but the reason I post anonymously is because petty fuckers have power over me and my job, and I don’t want to give them information that might sabotage that.
Why do anti-Union people always try to portray these corporate head honchos as weaklings who have to cave to every whim of unions? In fact, before workers began organizing the EXACT OPPOSITE was true.
We are all reaping the rewards of their work when we go to to our jobs which pay livable wages and give us time off.
The reason that “they” can not make their employees work 7 days a week? Unions.
But does that mean that they should forever and ever and ever be given tremendously lavish benefits, retrement packages, and high wages simply because they say so?
Uh no. Go out in the real world and try that shit and see where they end up.
The unions helped this country years and years ago. But they are like dinosaurs. There time has passed. Nobody cares except for “give the world away” liberals that is.
Health care and retirement. And you don’t think government should provide benefits. And people don’t make enough to purchase their own health care or save for retirement because they are not allowed to negotiate for wages.
What is your solution?
Small-minded selfish people don’t need no effin’ solutions!
I am doing just fine with no help from a union thug, no help from Nanny Government, but soon thanks to the Dems not letting us obtain medical coverage across state lines, I will be doing it with not much help from my employer. (My wife is moving 1100 miles away while I am waiting for my house to sell. She already has a job and is in fact working there now but will be coming home this weekend to put in her two week notice. Anyway, her new job does not have medical benefits so we will be forced to buy it on the market as she can not be on my plan. If the Dems didn’t fight the R’s on things like this, we might have more choices and not be looking at having forced government run healthcare pushed on us.)
In other words if the Dems weren’t so hard headed and wanting of a single payer system, things could be better for us all. There are other ways to cover people without running every single health insuance company and all of their employees out of a job. Not to mention, since my wife does medical billing for a living, running her out of a job too.
Man, i just got off subject didn’t I?
I disagree with you (as you know), but I appreciate the answer.
Here’s the problem with selling across state lines.
1. Did you know there is no national insurance regulator: while the Fed, OCC, SEC and every other federal regulator did a poor job regulating the banks, at least there was regulation. And before you start on “regulation is bad,” let me remind you that AIG was an insurance company first and the problems in CDS were completely unregulated and that almost every expert points to as a (the) key problem in the banking crisis.
2. Insurance regulators are of wildly different quality. In some states there is too much regulation in other almost none. If insurers were allowed to domicile wherever they liked there would be a race to the bottom much as there has been in the credit card market (MD, SD). Worse than not having insurance is paying for something, believing you are covered and finding out you are uncovered: I have seen too many examples of this to allow a state that I do not get to vote on its insurance regulation determining my coverage.
On a separate note: Your personal interest is valid. Your wife’s job depends on the bureaucracy of the fragmented health care industry. I can understand your personal economic stake in propagating a system that wastes money on billing. However, you can also understand why people who are not employed in that industry would consider that wasteful.
Last time I priced individual health insurance without an employer subsidy, it was about $1000 a month for a healthy individual. For a family it’s surely more. And that’s crappy coverage too.
There aren’t THAT many insurance companies, so how much cheaper do you think it would get? You don’t have to give personal details, but you sound like precisely the sort of person for whom the public option would be helpful. The public option would be cheaper than any private plan by at least 11-18%. That sounds like a good deal to me.
You’re not eligible for Medicare yet, but when you are, will you turn it down? If so, why? If not, why would you be opposed to a Medicare-like option, especially given what a hard time you admit to having finding insurance?
I have to pay for my coverage through my work, although my employer pays half, but then I have to pay full price for my wife on top of it as she will be out of state. No matter how you cut it I will be paying far more than if I lived with her with no employer offered policy, or even if we both took out a private policy ourselves. I now understand a little better why Kaiser can’t be offered across state lines but it isn’t right.
I don’t like the single payer government option as I know it will lead to the elimination of all private insurance companies putting thousands of people out of work, and will lead to waiting lines, and overall higher prices. We can sugar coat it but they are already having to move the bills on the floor now around so that they are voted on seperately and not be considered part of Obamacare. He promised that any plan he endorses will not add one penny to the deficit. Anyone that thinks that will be the case in ten years needs to look back at the projected costs of Medicare back in the early 60’s and what they ended up actually being.
As far as Medicare goes, if I live long enough to be an old fart and for whatever reason could not afford my own insurance anymore, maybe then. I am of the same opinion as my dad (was). He was eligable for Medicare but kept Blue Cross/Blue Shield until he died. Even though he paid much of his life into that mess called Medicare, he never used it.
Here we go again. Isn’t this thread supposed to be about grocery unions?
Your Dad may have thought, and you may have thought, that he wasn’t on Medicare. But you can bet your last buck that Blue Cross/Blue Shield was turning around and billing Medicare for all of your Dad’s eligible expenses.
He was brain injured from a Harley wreck. He could not think.
He was in intensive care for several months before he ran his million dollar policy out. By then he was well enough to be sent home…….in a coma…..and my wife became his full time nurse. We paid for EVERYTHING ourselves. My wife also being a medical biller by profession, checked all of his billings. Nothing went to the black hole called socialized Medicare. Even though he had it coming and then some.
He died a year and a half after his bike wreck, never taking a dime from Medicare. But we enlisted him in SS since he also paid that his entire life only to receive less than a years worth of piddly payments at the age of roughly 63.
If Gecko’s dad was under the age of 65, his insurance policy from his private insurance company would pay out first. Then, his family could apply before he turns 65 for one of the Plans, A or B. (I think at age 62.)
From the look of Gecko’s comment below, his father was not old enough to qualify for full Medicare at the time of his accident and died before Medicare kicked in. The same thing happened to my dad. He died of kidney failure 3 years ago. He had turned 65 three months before he died and nearly all of his bills were through his insurance company, not Medicare. He had a million dollar policy and had used it up with my mom owing thousands by the time he died.
He had just reached the age where Medicare would start picking up the bulk of his bills and died before he ever had a chance to use it.
Really. I am sorry to read of your dad. Sucks having to deal with that at such a young age.
Anyway, back to the war, eh?
And thank you for your comment. It meant a lot to me. I’m so sorry for what you went through with your dad. I just don’t have the words to tell you how much I feel for you.
It’s a total fallacy to say that a government insurance option would destroy insurance companies. Why is it that FedEx and UPS can do just fine against the Postal Service, for just one example, but mammoth insurance companies would have no chance? It makes no sense – it’s a scare tactic from insurance companies that just don’t want to have competition on the marketplace.
Don’t get me wrong, I support a public option in health care.
But to compare FedEx and UPS with the Postal Service doesn’t work because FedEx and UPS don’t have to deliver residential mail six days a week all over the country.
You know better than that. You know that a “public option” will be just like Medicare, subsidized by the taxpayers. There is no way on God’s green earth that a private insurance company that must make a profit to pay its employees and stay in business can ever compete with a government entity that does not ever need to make a profit, and not if, but WHEN, it runs into the red like Medicare, funds are taken from us, the taxpayers to keep it running. It is so one sided it is ridiculous.
Any thoughts that a single payer system would be cost neutral is complete fantasy.
Obama knows this and so do all of you. You just won’t admit it.
A public option is explicitly paid for by the planholder. It must, by law, retain its own solvency based on its own premium fees.
The CBO, which Republicans have been citing every time they want to point to the expense of health care reform, has scored the public option as being completely budget neutral for plan operation, and revenue SAVING because over time having healthier, insured people will save taxpayer-subsidized government systems (Medicaid, Medicare, etc.) money.
And I pay for my own goddamned insurance, thank you.
That doesn’t mean that I’m happy with the lack of choices.
I want a public option. I don’t want the taxpayers to pay for it, I’ll pay for it my damned self if I choose to use it.
But with a public option, at least I’d have a choice. If the private sector can do better, let them. That’s good for me. If they can’t do better, then let their boards of directors re-evaluate what they’re paying their CEOs for doing jack shit.
You’re entitled to your opinion. I respect you when you express your opinion without calling people names. But I also encourage you to use the common sense you appear to have to evaluate when you’re being screwed by private insurance companies.
In my own experience, if you have private insurance and you’re still breathing, you’re being screwed.
Some people enjoy being screwed by strangers. Your mileage may vary.
You’ve got the fine working conditions you find yourself in BECAUSE of union workers who fought (and sometimes died) for these rights. Show some respect and gratefulness.
Also, it is the employers who want to be able to control health care benefits. They have known for a long time that this is a fine way to keep employees in line and obedient.
It takes two to tango. Corporate executives pursue improvements in health and retirement benefits rather than higher wages. This is a gamble that they will reduce today’s costs and maybe not have to pay tomorrow’s costs that these benefit packages represent. Bummer when the bill comes in. Oh, but corporations can file for bankruptcy and negate these contracts. Individual people, not so easy.
You wouldn’t be able to mount that hog and feel that sweet, greasy illusion of freedom if it weren’t for people standing up for what they deserve.
Or are you asking me to bet that your white privilege would trump any re-writing of union history in the US, thereby allowing you to inevitably purchase that undulating machine vibrating between your legs, giving you illusions of freedom.
Gecko doesn’t think that large corporations, like Walmart, the nation’s largest retailer, will seek to roll back all the gains made by unions over the years (that he presently enjoys).
Such as:
Benefits. Walmart keeps employees intentionally underemployed so that they don’t have to provide benefits.
Overtime. Walmat has paid fines recently amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars for the practice of having employees work off the clock. That’s right, they punch out, and then go right back to work. if they don’t, they’re fired.
As long as they can get away with this crap, they will. And they’ll get away with it as long as they’re not unionized.
The King Soopers/City Market employees are NOT on strike. They are being locked out by management.
If you think it’s ok for employeRS to organize to wring concessions out of their workers, why don’t you also support striving to be organized amon employeES?
Why are you denying them the right to work?
Why do right wingers intentionally disregard the truth when they go on the attack? Aren’t they capable of being embarrassed into some level of honest discourse when their attacks are so easily refuted?
The King Soopers workers have formally voted as a bargaining unit twice. Both times they rejected the contract offer from King Soopers by a very significant margin.
Unions do not have the ability, the power, nor the inclination to lock out their own members. It is corporations that lock out workers.
And even if you could, what have you proven? That you’re smarter than the village idiot?
And even if you could, what have you proven? That you’re smarter than the village idiot?
Last time the UFCW threatened a strike they backed down and accepted a previous offer.
Discontent over that was a major reason why the Duran’s got voted out so convincingly.
Any word on when the Department of Labor or the UFCW International will hear the “challenge” to the election filed by the Duran’s.
Best thing the members can hope for is that the Duran’s step down now and let the new guys try to work something out.
Thought they’d work something out.
He’d sell his own mother down the river.
n/t
Workers want to keep the package they have, that doesn’t seem to be hurting the chains’ bottom lines.
Owners want to take advantage of the recession to hack at the wages they’re paying to the workers.
Not much room for negotiation when those are the two positions.
that they are being offered nice raises and benfit increases but the union thugs want more.
Where? It sounds like you just made it up. Either link it or don’t write it.
I’m not a computer nerd so I have no clue how to link anything and I don’t have the paper with me but it was in the Gazette this morning.
I would link it if I knew how.
You’re just full of resentment against people who are smarter than you, or who have better working conditions, or are in any way more successful than you are.
1. Find the web page you want.
2. Look in the title bar for the URL, which is of the form http://www.blahblahblah.com
3. Select all that text by dragging your mouse over it, and while it’s selected, go in the Edit menu and click “Copy.”
4. In one of your crazy-ass posts, write “OK you liberal fucks who I hate so much, here is a link.”
5. Paste the text you copied by going to the Edit menu again.
Notice my silly example is automatically turned into a clicky-thingy by the Pols’ server when I submit this comment.
Just kidding.
.
I don’t know what they are.
But I don’t think he’s a jealous person.
.
I think we all get angry or frustrated at times, but most of us have some kind of underlying ideology which motivates us. I’ve never seen a Gecko comment that didn’t seem based on some kind of personal bitterness toward someone.
bitter towards wastefullness, laziness, sloppyness, and greedy people.
Fits many in our society today doesn’t it?
*ahem sure.
“Work Harder, Millions On Welfare Are Depending On You”
your posts are sloppy, you’re obviously feeling self-entitled, you can create an acct but you’re too lazy to figure out how to copy and paste, and because you’re American and of the mentality you have, you are wasteful. You’re projecting all of your self-disgust onto other people you can’t bother to identify as human beings who are trying to maintain their lives. It’s you who are wasteful, lazy, sloppy, and greedy. DUH, grampy! DUH.
Actually, despite being 180 degrees in most philosophical and political opinions, I have always found his posts to be well written. He uses spell check or is a great speller, his thoughts are coherent, allowing for the incoherency innate in far right “thinking.” And he never goes personal on the attacks. I can’t say as much for myself (although I do watch the spelling!)
I do hope he learns to link!
Gecko, the one oversight about your life that you make, as do so many self-proclaimed “I made it all by myself” people, is that you absolutely overlook the benefits you have received from those dreaded “socialist” laws over the years.
Start with your (presumably) public education. Public health laws for restaurants, and socialized municipal water, sewer, fire, and police departments. Your employer is required to carry workmen’s comp insurance. Quality of the gasoline that goes into your hogs (and I include your big pick ’em up in that) is regulated by the government.
You did not get to where you are all by yourself, dude. You ride on the shoulders of others.
You may disagree with him but caling him wasteful, grumpy, lazy and greedy is wrong.
If I had to bet, Gecko works harder than most of us on this site.
You may not agree with what he says but when you say what you said about him, those of us who know him better than you find your comments insulting and shallow.
He’s been on this site for years. And while we typically disagree with each other on just about everything, he’s usually far more coherent in his talking points than I am. I also happen to know from reading him over the years that he works his ass off.
And if our lives are judged by our computer skills, I am most definitely screwed.
and all I guess I care to say is that each of you have not been paying attention and in a superficial way, you’re all probably better for it.
but he’s ok in my book.
Honest men (and women), can have honest disagreements.
True, PR. It just seemed like all parties were trying to find some way to avoid a strike because they’ve been “negotiating” now for so many months. I was lulled by the seemingly endless process.
King Soopers locks out their union workers when Safeway workers go on strike? Sounds like collaboration to maintain a monopoly or something.
Oh, just some piece of paper that is allegedly still law……
…the unions picking off the chains one at a time with the same forced membership money.
You can’t compare the money of unions with the money of Kroger and Safeway. Is that what you are trying to do? compare unions with monopolies?
Unions political money is huge. More than $400 million in the last election, right?
Then, they could pass on some of their favored economic status to the workers. Actually, the word Sufimarie should have used is “oligopolies,” since by definition two or more companies in a single market cannot be “monopolies.”
The sad truth is WalMart — “pay ’em the minimum wage with too few hours for benefits, then work ’em off the clock — is cutting savagely into the earnings of Safeway and Kroger, which have at least tried to deal with their employees in a responsible manner.
I’ll stick with the union, but the villain of this piece is WalMart.
He vetoed HB1170, remember?
http://www.denverpost.com/opin…
It was because he was worried that it would unfairly give one side an advantage.
Well, it looks like it did give one side an advantage; the grocery chains have absolutely no incentive to do anything but lock out their workers now.
Thank goodness the negotiations are totally fair, and not one-sided. [/snark]
It seems a good idea to resolve the internecine issues first. How can you prepare for a strike when you don’t know who will be in charge?
If they lost fair and square the Duran’s should step aside and let the winners handle it from here.
.
Perhaps they want to accomplish one more victory for the folks they represented all those years before moving on.
.
If there is a challenge filed I would hope that the parent union would decide it quickly. If there is no real challenge I would hope the Durans would do the right thing and leave early so that the team elected by the membership can take over negotiations.
The big winner of course will be the non-union Whole Foods Chain.
Unless they expect Federal intervention in their favor. There are too many people out there who are looking for any work at all, who won’t care about crossing union lines as long as they can afford to feed and clothe their families.
I have a friend whose wife was able to cobble together a total of 20 hours last month working part time at 3 different nursing homes. She is on the replacement list at Kings Soopers and this strike would be the best thing that happened to their family in a long time. I’m sure that there are many, many more people looking for work who would jump at this opportunity than there are union workers walking off the job.
Some of us respect people who work hard to make a living.
I’m all for rewarding hard work. Other people are all for rewarding wealth. I think hard work is more important.
I won’t be shopping at Safeway, Kroger, or Albertson’s.
My message is simple: play nice or my money goes elsewhere.
But as we see here every day, many of us don’t, are not willing to be inconvenienced even if we say we do or don’t understand that in a race to the bottom, most of us are likely to wind up without enough to pay the lowest low prices when we wind up making lower and lower wages. And this is a very liberal leaning blog.
Don’t have a good feeling about the success of this strike, Ralphie. Still will never cross a picket line but don’t have much hope for the minority that feels the same having much impact this time.
….she wouldn’t be forced to be scabbing.
That’s certainly news to many, I’m sure. Why I’ll bet that no one in a union job has ever been laid off or had their place of employment close. And if it ever did happen, I’m sure the union would make sure that they would become employed as soon as possible. Yeah right!
No, it’s more like if the nursing homes, an essential service like the rest of health care and grocery stores, paid a full time staff well, she wouldn’t have to go seeking employment table scraps.
Union members in different industries are most certainly being “layed” (sp, “laid”)off, but not in essential services.
Honestly, when I was 18 and didn’t know any better, I worked as a scab at a factory. (I was hired by a temp agency over the summer and didn’t ask any questions.) After the first day of work, union members harassed me as I was driving away. All I could do was be pissed off at them. I thought I had it figured out. Later on my parents explained it to me.
Ultimately even scabs (whom I have nothing against, since they are as desperate as anyone else) will generally not be happy about fighting unions. Many of them want a good union job with benefits and protections against arbitrary firings, and in spite of their position want the union to be successful.
As many workers today have found, weekends are nice, health insurance is nice, and overtime is nice. Those things don’t exist because every job is unionized, they exist because enough jobs were unionized. Unions have improved things for everyone.
Only an utterly clueless douchebag moron would believe that he gets time and a half for a 50 hour week out of the goodness of his boss’ heart. Unions made that happen, and anyone who benefits from that has gotten where he’s gotten because of them. Yet somehow many of those people want to believe they did it all themselves.
This is a figure Thom Hartmann uses. I can’t cite the references, but you can never fault Thom on his research.
These beneficiaries include the non-union employees that get better wages because the employer has to compete with the union shop in town, the merchants getting more money being spent, etc.
As “the reserve army of the unemployed.”
Think of them as economic conscripts in the class wars.
Us bleeding heart liberals won’t cross a picket line. So the stores can get scab workers, but they won’t sell as much.
I am worried for the union too. The stores have been making record profits. I’d think they can hold out a long time while the union workers probably can’t.
The stores can hold out indefinitely and aren’t going to have any trouble finding temps to replace the workers, not in this economy.
Meanwhile, the union workers are going to starve. If I were a big corporation, I wouldn’t budge an inch. I’d wait the union out until it caved because chances are good that these folks won’t be able to hold out during an entrenched recession.
http://local7.weebly.com/
According to the newly elected UFCW 7 Officers the International union has not sanctioned a strike. What this means is that if the workers walk out they will not get strike benefits from the union. Richard Myers has had some really good posts and it would be interesting to know what the real story is.
I cannot comment about the specific situation of strike sanction for UFCW Local 7. That’s the sort of information that must come from a Local 7 spokesperson.
I will say, however, that someone could come away from that web site without a clear understanding how strike sanction works.
International unions may have different rules for when they grant strike sanction. Strike sanction can be awarded, but it can also be taken away. Strike sanction can be promised verbally, but it must also undergo a specific review at the international before it is formally granted in a letter.
Strike sanction for a large local could include reviewing the history of the negotiations, surveying multiple existing contracts and contract proposals made by the employer, and double-checking many voting results from different locations and dates. These procedures could affect the time it takes to extend formal strike sanction. (Again, i’m speaking generally, and not about any particular situation.)
Many unions have strike funds available from the local, and also through the international. If workers were on strike without strike sanction from their international, that could mean that one source of funding (from the international) might be cut off. A more significant fund for their strike might be fully available.
Union locals don’t often strike without strike sanction obtained from their international. It happened a couple of years ago when a very large New York City transportation union Local struck without support from their International. I imagine they had built up their own significant resources, and didn’t feel that they needed strike sanction.
For any specific information about the strike sanction situation in the grocery workers’ struggle, i refer interested parties to the UFCW 7 Local:
http://ufcw7.org/
I will offer this one opinion, because i’d like to avoid any misunderstanding that might result from grocery workers going from this discussion to that other website. I personally do not believe there is any chance that Colorado grocery workers will find themselves on strike in this current struggle without strike sanction.
Disclosure: i am on staff at UFCW, working for the grocery workers. I am not a spokesperson for the UFCW, and opinions expressed here are my own.
suggested 7-11 as a place for me to do my grocery shopping….are they nuts?
I’ll stick to my original plan of shopping at Super Target and Costco.
Apparently the answer to the are they nuts question is yes. What an incredibly stupid suggestion.
For workers who actually went to negotiations on October 20th, or who have been part of the process, know what’s up with the International authorization to strike. Ernie was there and explained that prior to the last round of votes, he told the International he didn’t want to vote the final offer unless there was authorization to actually go on strike. The International, in writing, informed him that the members would have authorization as long as the requirements in the International Constitution were met to go on strike. As soon as the votes were done, all of the necessary paperwork was turned into the International. At negotiations, Kevin Williamson, with the International, agreed that all of the paperwork was turned in and that they would give a final answer in a day or two.
Based on what the International said in the beginning, there is no reason why the International shouldn’t give final sanction now. The only reason Kevin said that it hadn’t already been granted is because “it is a process.”
For members that didn’t know this, they should really go to negotiations and get involved with the union. I sure hope the recent union election is not affecting the International’s decision. Perhaps, the Corporations would like to finish bargaining this contract after January 1st, since the incoming folks are clearly not qualified to settle it. God bless them, but most of them do not have high school degrees and have never been responsible for bargaining a contract in their entire life. If I were in the corporation’s shoes, that is what I would be encouraging. And that is probably why they came to the table without a new offer at all.
There are some that will continue to criticize the Durans – regardless of what they do. But in reality, they are trying to do everything they can to get a fair contract for workers. Further, the new Pres barely won – it was a 7% (Cordoba) -6% (Duran) vote. Since then, the membership has been up in arms about what has happened. Thousands have reported they didn’t receive ballots, etc.
Ernie’s daughter sent out an email yesterday, encouraging unity. I also received a text message today that had a similar message. The letter is posted at http://www.ufcw7.com and it is in response to Savage’s threatening letter about lockouts.
has rejected the Durans.
The Durans should step aside and let people who have the faith of the rank and file negotiate the future of the rank and file.
The Durans are history. All that remains to be argued about is how much damage they can do.
I won’t take sides in a factional dispute. However, some of this is silliness.
A union is governed by a constitution and by-laws. The by-laws set requirements such as term of office, date of election, date of transition.
Arguing that a union should violate its own constitution or by-laws is like suggesting that the organization should open itself up to enforcement actions or lawsuits.
Hi all;
I’m back. I’m not going to read 96 comments so maybe this has been answered but…
Why is King Soopers blaming the union for the lockout? It’s King Soopers stopping the employees from coming to work – the employees are more than willing to show up.
I read the above letter as King Soopers saying I have a gun pointed at your head and if you don’t give me what I want you are forcing me to pull the trigger. Normally we don’t blame the victim for the actions of the robber.
I think it is simple blame-shifting, so that people like Libertad will draw erroneous conclusions, and stir the pot with ill-informed remarks such as:
http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…
King Soopers doesn’t care if you buy today vs tomorrow – just that the purchase was made there. I’m holding off my weekly shopping till Sunday so I can go to Target if there is a lockout this weekend.
there’s nothing wrong with shopping at King Sooper’s, which is, after all, a union shop.