Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unions at it again

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Unions at it again



    So. Calif. grocery workers reject contract deal
    More than 90 percent of So. Calif. grocery workers vote to reject contract, authorize strike
    ap

    tweet21
    Email
    Print

    On Sunday August 21, 2011, 3:59 am EDT

    LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Thousands of Southern California grocery workers have voted overwhelmingly to reject a health care proposal from major supermarket chains and authorize their union leaders to call a strike, a spokesman said early Sunday.

    More than 90 percent of voters from the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 770, which has about 62,000 members, rejected the proposal from Vons, Ralphs and Albertsons stores.

    The rejection automatically authorizes union officials to call a strike after 72 hours

    Shimpock did not have precise numbers on how many voted, but said the turnout was "huge."

    The union will report the results to the dispute's federal mediator on Monday and that more talks would likely follow.

    "We're willing to come back to the table and stay there," Shimpock said. "Our goal here is not to go on strike, we don't want to go on strike, but unfortunately we've been pushed into a corner by these corporations."

    A four-month strike and lockout that began in 2003 cost Ralphs and other grocery chains an estimated $2 billion.

    Messages left for grocery store representatives were not immediately returned, but Ralphs Grocery Co. spokeswoman Kendra Doyel previously told The Associated Press that her chain is committed to staying at the table to negotiate, and the grocers' proposal was affordable and good for employees and their families.

    Union members have been working without a contract since March.

    Both sides announced last month that they had reached a tentative agreement on the employers' contributions to pension benefits, but health care costs have been a major sticking point.

    Ralphs currently pays more than 90 percent of employee health coverage costs, Doyel said. Workers hired before 2004 pay nothing for health insurance while those hired later pay either $7 a week for single coverage or $15 a week for family coverage.

    The companies' proposal would raise that to $9 a week for singles and $23 a week for families. That is much lower than the average cost of health care insurance in California, she said.
    I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

  • #2
    Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post
    Ralphs currently pays more than 90 percent of employee health coverage costs, Doyel said. Workers hired before 2004 pay nothing for health insurance while those hired later pay either $7 a week for single coverage or $15 a week for family coverage.

    The companies' proposal would raise that to $9 a week for singles and $23 a week for families. That is much lower than the average cost of health care insurance in California, she said.
    ...and this part right here is why every one of them that go on strike should lose their jobs. Most people I know would KILL for healthcare coverage that cheap. They don't deserve jobs is they're going to cry over that. Hello morons, cost go up, suck it up and enjoy your damn near free health insurance. If I was unemployed in SoCal, I would scab them in a heartbeat.
    "It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself."

    Comment


    • #3
      My tricare is almost triple that
      I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

      Comment


      • #4
        ...

        They're willing to stroke over $2 a week? I hope they all lose their jobs over it.

        Comment


        • #5
          CA's unemployment rate is about 12% right now - seems like there is no lack of people that have been out of work for awhile and would LOVE to take those jobs with the new health care costs. Union idiots don't know when they've got it good, but a trip to the unemployment line would sure show them.

          Comment


          • #6
            Isn't it kind of messed up that the workers have all the bargaining power? If an agreement can't be reached, shouldn't the company have some kind of recourse? Like maybe hiring a merc company to secure the safety of new workers? I don't think that's mean. You mess with a new employee on private property, you get a bullet. Go start your own company and run it the way you want if you don't like it.

            Comment


            • #7
              I'd refuse to renew ANY contracts and boot the unions out. If they have a problem with that, you shut the business for 2 days, put up a new name and rock on with non union people
              I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

              Comment


              • #8
                I always loved seeing companies fire everyone that went on strike...I hope it happens.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 8mpg View Post
                  I always loved seeing companies fire everyone that went on strike...I hope it happens.
                  This. How petty can you get? A whopping $9/$23 per week? How about no job, you selfish bastards.
                  "Self-government won't work without self-discipline." - Paul Harvey

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by GhostTX View Post
                    This. How petty can you get? A whopping $9/$23 per week? How about no job, you selfish bastards.
                    This

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X