U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Janak Joshi
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) David Seligman
50%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Danielson
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%↓
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(D) Milat Kiros
90%
10%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(R) H. Scheppelman
(D) Alex Kelloff
70%
30%
10%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Jessica Killin
70%
30%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Shannon Bird
45%↓
30%
30%
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 26, 2009 07:12 PM UTC
57 Comments
It’s risky because there will be very little public sympathy for what’s going to be played as ‘low-skilled workers strike for early retirement benefits in the midst of worst economy since Great Depression’.
The unions are gaining support by the day and the middleclass is fed up with management who take and take from the workers while lining their pockets on the backs of workers and taxpayers.
But I don’t see you providing an ounce of proof to back that up. Believe me, I’d like it to be true. But at this point, unless you can prove it (as you just insisted David do his point) then you’re just stating your opinion and not fact, Sharon.
Here’s your proof. The Washington Post also had an article in 2007 about how the union is growing.
And here’s another one.
Thank you for taking the time to offer proof. Much obliged.
You sound like a Workers’ Party pamphlet. Not as good as this one, but close.
I’m white and I’ve been in management all my career and yes I have benefited from white privilege.
Keep telling the truth to power.
You will see that I rarely say anything that I haven’t either studied or researched. We all have opinions but it’s nice when one can back it up with facts.
doesn’t mean you don’t have it.
Looks like KS & SW got themselves into this mess. See letter posted at http://www.ufcw7.com below.
October 22, 2009
Dear King Soopers employees,
We are concerned regarding a letter Dave Savage sent to King Soopers employees today. Although he claims King Soopers is committed to achieving a “good agreement” for you, the corporation has presented nearly the identical offer since May. Employees have made meaningful moves through negotiations, but King Soopers is still unwilling to meet them half-way. Employees could have had a contract ratified in May – if they were willing to accept major concessions.
We hope that King Soopers and the other grocers are not underestimating the unity of the membership due to the recent union election and Channel 7 smear campaign. Quite frankly, that will be a failed approach. Regardless of differences due to the union election, the members are UNITED to receive a fair contract and current leadership will not deviate from that goal.
Savage said that King Soopers will be “forced” to lockout their employees if Safeway goes on strike. King Soopers could CHOOSE to not lockout their employees because they could negotiate their contract separately. In fact, if Safeway workers go on strike, King Soopers could profit millions if they CHOOSE to not lock their workers out.
Savage says he is concerned that a work stoppage would hurt its employees. However, he is less concerned the current offer hurts employees because it slashes pension benefits, there is no guarantee the current health care plan will be maintained and there are no significant wage increases for the majority of workers.
Savage attacks Progress Now Colorado for developing an interactive online map so consumers can find alternate non-union places to shop in the event of a strike. (See map at http://www.alwayshereforcolorado.com.) Savage fails to mention, that King Soopers, Safeway and Albertsons CHOSE to team up against their employees in these contract negotiations. Local 7 has repeatedly criticized these Fortune 50 out-of-state corporations for working together in an effort to receive concessions and filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board due to their activity. Employees would much rather negotiate these contracts individually with each employer. Although King Soopers CHOSE to team up with the other unionized grocers, consumers will still have many places they can conveniently shop if employees are locked out.
Savage concludes the letter by asking employees to tell the union you want to vote again. Since May, King Soopers employees have overwhelmingly voted to reject the latest offer and keep bargaining by over 90%. Ask King Soopers to listen to their employees and bargain a fair contract!
In solidarity,
Crisanta D. Duran
Associate General Counsel
It takes away the ability to cherrypick a chain at a time.
Good for the stores.
Come on, LB. The slide is tilted so far in the store’s side it should be illegal on some moral grounds. Blue collars workers vs. the best lawyers Kroger, et. al., can buy with coffers overflowing with increased profits due to the downturn. And they aren’t just saying, “We can’t squeeze another dime out of a thin profit margin,” they are out and out union busting. Well, to use a very legal conceptual term, fuck ’em.
And then they want to lock out workers at the other stores if one store gets struck? If they locked out all workers, well, OK, but they will allows scabs in? WTF?????
Where’s the Sherman Anti Trust Act when you need it? Oh, tromped on and unused thanks to the Republican administrations…..and I’m including Clinton as one, here.
If the union had been more of a partner in the past, maybe the stores wouldn’t be playing hardball. Actions have consequences.
The unions are no David. They own this President, and business is starting to notice.
The Colorado grocery strike is Obama’s fault?
Thanks, I needed that laugh. Really.
I didn’t say that. Not even close.
Labor realizes this President is going to do anything he can to grow their ranks, and it’s probably going to lead to much more of a hard line from business.
Couldn’t the UFCW have just told him to mediate the negotiations? In that respect, it really is Obama’s fault.
A “beer summit”
3.2, of course.
Because if that line of thinking were true, then the grocery chains’ ultimate goal would be to crush the union altogether. But that’s never going to happen, and taking a “hard line” against the union won’t change that.
But the union isn’t going to win a bloodbath right now. Not with this economy.
What’s stopping the chains from just canning the union workers and starting fresh with new workers, now that they’re out of contract?
n/t
That business and union bosses support the absence of Right-to-Work to continue their cycle of control over the worker and her ability to self determine her employment?
with Amendment 47.
But this whole “business is starting to take notice” thing is ridiculous. Management doesn’t like the unions, and the unions don’t like the management, that’s how the system operates. It’s adversarial by definition because the company has to answer to the shareholders, and the unions have to answer to the workers.
Obama’s position on labor has nothing to do with how unions and businesses deal with one another. I haven’t seen any sweeping changes in the NLRA being proposed. The NLRB is still the same entity it was under George W. Bush. If business wants to use Obama as an excuse to try to deflate the importance of unions, or lowball contracts even though they’re hauling in record profits (like Kroger and Safeway have been) then it will just make them look even more silly.
But saying that because Democrats are in charge that it puts businesses in a worse position, or whatever LB was trying to say, it’s absolute nonsense.
Brilliant. I couldn’t have said it more clearly.
And yes, because I’m such a FASICTOCOMMUNISOCIALISMO, I really, truly believe that profit is evil, and all workers should dance on the graves of the oppressive capitalist pigs.
Is that you?
🙂
the business & union boss solution was screw the workers and by the way lets orchastrate some ballot payoff solutions.
The trick is to work cooperatively to make the company as successful as possible, then negotiate over how much of the pie each gets. The screw the company, just give me more money approach, when practiced by both the union & management, gives you General Motors.
Haven’t the companies been thriving in the middle of the worst recession in 70 years precisely because they’ve had a good relationship with their workers? Without the union workers, I doubt that Kroger and Safeway would be doing as well as they’ve been doing.
But to deny that the very essence of what the entities of unions and companies exist to do are at odds with one another would be ignoring a central issue.
WHat’s your reasoning behind that? I’d say that in general, union workers are less productive and much more expensive than their non-union counterparts.
Regardless of whether or not my statement is true for all companies, or even for Kroger and Safeway, the facts are this:
1. Kroger and Safeway want their employees to take a cut in benefits, citing the recession as their main reason. Other workers in other sectors of the economy are taking cuts, why shouldn’t they, right?
2. Kroger and Safeway have posted profits despite the down economy because they seel some of the only things people still buy when they don’t have as much money as they used to.
3. The union wants to keep their current package, citing those earning reports as their reason.
4. Kroger and Safeway have never backed down from their position of wanting more cuts, and they’ve consolidated to lock out their employees of the other’s union(s) go on strike.
Speaking to a larger point, unions are a facet of any civilized society. Every first world country, and lots of third world countries, have unions. The right wing in this country have been trying to destroy labor unions in this country for over a century. Until we can get to a point where people recognize employees’ rights to organize themselves, there can’t really be an honest discussion about this issue.
The same guy who checks your groceries goes to the hardware store and the car dealership. The money that grocery workers make goes right back into the local economy.
As the President put it, it’s quite simple: when workers are prospering, they buy the products that make businesses prosper.
When workers have a stable jobs and a pension to look forward to (and spend), our economy does well. It’s that simple.
But there’s a natural progression of skill to salary that is blown off in the Labor world. Up is down.
I mean this with no malice – unskilled labor does not automatically engender early retirement benefits.
That’s a misnomer. It’s a reflection of the reality of 24/7 work cycle and the fact that many grocery workers start as teenagers. Also, they may work extra hours over the holidays and work less over summer breaks.
There are also a lot of grocery workers who pick shift work so they can raise their kids. For example, some workers are on the 5 am – 1 p.m. clock so they can pick their kids up after school and rotate parenting duties.
It’s called the Golden Rule of 80 (not early retirement). When your age and your years of experience add up to 80, you can start collecting a pension. For example, if you start at age 20 and have 30 years of experience, you can start drawing your pension at age 50.
The reality is, a lot of workers keep working once they pass the eligibility. It’s also a reflection of the fact that working at a grocery store involves more physical labor than sitting behind a desk all day.
Also realize that a pension is a reason grocery workers pass up more lucrative jobs for the stability of employment in a store. Most grocery workers make $10 – $12 an hour. Top scale for a Journeyman meat cutter – which is skilled labor – tops out at around $18 an hour. Starting checkers make minimum wage.
I’m speechless.
that’ll win ’em over. It’s always a good tactic to say “THEY DID IT FIRST!!!”
“Significant wage increases” makes it sound like the unions are seeking some huge increase in their pay. If the report of $0.35/hr. is correct, then that barely qualifies as a living wage increase, especially when spread across the span of the contract (or previous contract, depending on how these things are figured…).
Duran’s letter strikes, I think, the right tone aside from my point above. When the strike is on, my wife and I will be shopping elsewhere. I might even join in solidarity with a sign if I can free up some time (assuming that’s welcome).
They won’t give them .35 an hour after reporting, what was it, 12% profit increase?
and both Kroger and Safeway are expected to meet their dividend targets for 2009. They’re making plenty of money since one of the ways people economize in a recession is by grocery shopping more and eating out less.
They’re paying bonuses to management, and nobody’s proposing cuts to executive pensions or compensation. They have the money to give a fair deal to their workers, they’re just using the economy as an excuse to cut wages and benefits and hoping nobody will notice.
shock doctrine tactics. They are profiting off of fear. This means that the incentive for peace and prosperity is diminishing. Aren’t you glad to be lied to and manipulated by the middleman that stands between you and your family’s food?
Imagine the tactics bosses would use with “Card Check”
Both are represented by the same goofy union. It’s not an action against the workers, but the union. Again – a taste of their own medicine.
if a lawyer’s client is found guilty then all his other clients should be found guilty because they have the same representation.
Not a perfect metaphor, but it serves.
The union is representing the workers at Safeway, that is wholely unrelated to the future negotiation the union will engage with King Soopers in the future.
Locking workers out anti competitive and wrong.
Because (hopefully) the lawyer isn’t orchestrating damage to the State.
representing to different clients.
It’s a metaphor and is never intended to be a perfect fit.
If one lawyer trolled the populace to put people up to filing frivolous lawsuits.
We have class actions for that.
Besides, I’m still trying to figure out “damage to the State?”
It’s Danny’s imperfect metaphor, not mine.
🙂
Even as a private businessman, if you work for someone without a contract, you open yourself up to being screwed.
The UFCW’s National Office has not authorized a strike. In 2005 the National Office refused to support UFCW Local 7’s request to go on strike and it looks like they are doing so again. Normally strike authorization from the International comes quickly and it has been over two weeks now. I doubt if the International wants to spend resources on a strike being handled by union officials who will be out of office in two months.
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_1…
It could along strike. The Post sertainly tilts right.
There wouldn’t be a need to go to “non-union” stores if the unionized chains wouldn’t in solidarity lock-out their employees using shock doctrine tactics. They reported huge profits and now they’re hijacking the fear of the slow economy to try to strong-arm workers.
Fuck those stores. I hope they lose tons of money in this dispute. I’m going to see what I can do about organizing neighborhood carpools to Sunflower in NW Denver. How do we know where picketers will be demonstrating? Is there a site for that? I’ll bring them refreshments and holler at scabs.
that the concern of most workers in the strike isn’t the strength of the union; but rather making a workable wage with decent benefits. Picking just one of the “non-union” stores on that list, Costco is non-union specifically because it treats its employees so well that there’s never been significant interest in unionizing. While a few union executives might lose some sleep over Costco getting more of Safeway’s business, the people who are actually out there striking sure won’t!
Is the International going to authorize a strike by Local? If they are when are they going to do so?
Has the International scheduled a hearing on the challenge to the election filed by the slate of candidates headed by Ernest and Crisanta Duran who lost in a landslide?
My guess is that there will be no strike because the International union is not suicidal.