Who Killed The Living Wage? An Insider’s View of the Grocery Strike


By Hillary Kaye

On February 26, 86 percent of the 55,000 workers of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union voted to ratify a contract with the three grocery giants Safeway (Vons and Pavilions), Kroger (Ralphs), and Albertsons.


The strike, which lasted five months, began last October when negotiations failed with Safeway. Their competitors Kroger and Albertsons immediately responded by locking out their unionized employees.
The contract dispute was over two central issues, lowered health care benefits and the corporation’s attempt to institute a two-tier system. A new person hired would be subject to a lower wage and benefit scale than those already there. This provision would open the door to increased profits by getting rid of older, better paid employees.

The strike was pivotal, because what was at stake was the future of the living wage for workers. As real wages continue to decline for workers and the middle class continues to disappear, it seems especially important to try to evaluate the strike and its results. To do so I plan to do a series of interviews with some of the participants. This first interview is with Neicer, a veteran Ralphs employee who was very active in the strike.

BEFORE THE STRIKE

Beachhead: What did you think of the preparations for the strike?

Neicer: I felt the union was not prepared.

Beachhead: What sort of input did you and the others have in the decision to strike?

Neicer: Just our vote. Details of their take aways were conveyed during the voters meeting. Personally I felt the two-tier system was out of the question.

Beachhead: How long did you think the strike would last?

Neicer: I believed the strike would not happen, and
when the strike began I thought “Two weeks, max.”

Beachhead: Did the union express any view on how long it would last?

Neicer: No.

Beachhead: Did the union discuss strategy with the workers?

Neicer: It instructed members how to maintain effective picketing positions to restrict truck deliveries. Most members did not welcome aggressive picketing during the rallies. They basically wanted to keep peace with the customers, since management was threatening members with consequences they would face when returning to work.

Beachhead: What was your thinking about the strike at the time pre-strike?

Neicer: I thought we would give them a run for the money! The companies could not survive without us during the holidays, the most profitable time of the year and they would not jeopardize sales due to a labor dispute.

DURING THE STRIKE

Beachhead: What was your role in the strike?

Neicer: I was active in the strike, and did everything I could to support our union.

Beachhead: What was your sense of how the strike was going?

Neicer: There was no balance of power. The management prolonged negotiations only to offer the same contract with switched wording. It was a slap in the face.They had the upper hand and were armed to sidestep every old fashioned move.

Beachhead: Was there feedback from the union as to how it was going?

Neicer: Details were never discussed, only instructions as to how to keep members strong on the picket line, and news of upcoming visits from influential people at rallies or events.

Beachhead: What support did workers get from other unions?

Neicer: We obtained quite a lot of support from other unions, the first union up to bat was the Teachers Association, a group of 78-80 teachers who marched, chanted and scolded customers for crossing the lines. The iron workers Local 433 and 416, communication workers, IBEW, RIW, and the IUE made numerous contributions. The Teamsters gave their support by honoring picket lines and eventually went out on their “silver bullet” plan, refusing to drive their trucks in attempt to shut down the Vons distribution center. The International Longshoreman Local 13 shut down the port for 24 hours, held a Christmas toy drive for the members and families our Locals 770, 324 and 1442 and a few others, as well as contributing over $100,000 to the members who lost health care benefits due to the employers refusing to make their final contribution.

Beachhead: What was the community support?

Neicer: Local businesses adopted stores; others provided food and water for the members, as well as donations to purchase daily essentials. Fortunately we connected with the Harry Bridges Institute in San Pedro. HBI is community funded to aid families in need. UFCW members were accepted, depending on their needs for mortgage, rent, utilities, and payments of medical bills. We also received referrals for local food banks located in numerous cities throughout Los Angeles and Orange County, as well as organizations offering help to accommodate members in many ways. The Toberman House in San Pedro helped hundreds of families. All this assistance mind you, was extended to local 1442 members, who’s to say what the other locals received.

AFTER THE STRIKE

Beachhead: Did you vote to ratify or not?

Neicer: Not!!!!

Beachhead: Why not?

Neicer: It was unacceptable. I was willing to pay my share in health care costs, but the two tier system would begin the erosion of power at the bargaining table. I was fighting for all the single mothers who were paid benefits, and could work part time, go to college and still spend time with their children. This contract would eliminate that ability.

Beachhead: What do you think about the outcome of the strike when returning to work?

Neicer: Ridden hard, and put away wet! The employers have a plan in motion that does not include existing employees. Members are now realizing what type of contract they voted for.

Beachhead: What do you think about the out come now that some months have elapsed?

Neicer: Every promotion is under the new contract. The new hires take precedence in prime scheduling with a guarantee of 30 hours a week, whereas existing members hours are cut to accommodate the new part time employees with a minimum of 24hrs a week. Many members have left the company while others have taken early retirement with a freeze on promotions. The stores losing full time members borrow part time members from other stores, who are commuting up to 25-30 miles away from home, while new hires continue to work in their private little Idaho.

Beachhead: What has happened to workers on the job?

Neicer: Members refusing to train newbies are quickly transferred to other locations. Those turning down promotions under the new contract are transferred as well. New employees are flooding the stores, most of them are not trained at all in their general job duties, grooming standards, courteous customer service or even security. This cheap labor assisting in stocking, facing, price changes, and clean ups has no training or ability to perform these jobs efficiently.

Beachhead: What is the feeling between management and workers?

Neicer: Management’s main goal seems to be focused on new hires, and continues to create an environment so the existing members feel uncomfortable. The store managers will state how important we are in the success of the company, but their actions play a different tune. The employers are implementing changes to accommodate the new contract, and store managers are following through with the unlawful threats made during the strike to employees, yet they claim it’s for the good of the company.

Beachhead: What have the workers that you have spoken to said to you?

Neicer: Members from all three companies complain mainly of the lousy scheduling, how the new hires are given the prime shifts, and how most new hires are quickly promoted while the existing members with up to 15 years vested are passed up.

Beachhead: What happened to the scabs? Were some of them hired on with the new contracts?

Neicer: All replacement workers were fired, then a third of them were rehired under the new contract.

Beachhead: What is the feeling between old and new workers?

Neicer: Very difficult at first. Most store managers warned employees that any misconduct physical or verbal would not be tolerated, but I was not prepared to receive negative comments from the terminated workers returning to shop at our store. With the tables somewhat turned, they seem to have experienced resentment towards us as well.

Beachhead: How many new workers are there?

Neicer: About 20 percent of employees are new. The second week, most of the new hires and a few existing courtesy clerks began cashier training. It used to take years to reach that position.

Beachhead: How did people who have devoted years of their lives to these markets feel?

Neicer: Working for an employer who cares only of his profits, and the treatment exhibited to members during the strike and afterward does not convey a warm fuzzy feeling. Given the threats made by a store manager to certain members, I believe most members feel as I do, that it’s just a matter of time before we’re replaced or fired.

Beachhead: How do the workers feel about the union now?

Neicer: The few members I’ve spoken with seem to blame the union for the outcome of the strike. But when members are approached on ways to make politics work and preserve our union jobs or to prepare for the next contract, they have no desire to participate or even extend support to the very unions that helped us through our struggles.The union did what it had to do in order to protect the interest of its members. We did not lose this fight – we ran out of money!!!

In short, I feel the union members collective will is not as strong as it could be.

Beachhead: What would you have liked to have seen the union do differently?

Neicer: To have established outside resources following the employer’s patterns. Track every move made by these mega conglomerates, as well as other companies in grocery retail, to analyze and prepare several strategies for attack. Calculate the amount of money needed to strike. Enforce militant picketing from day one. Publicize the union’s position and corporation’s intent. And call in all troops for aid.

Posted: Thu - July 1, 2004 at 07:25 PM          


©