Now it is official. Wal-Mart has indeed harassed and intimidated workers. The Quebec Labour Relations Board ordered the Bentonville-based retail giant to stop intimidating and harassing employees, who have been organising their colleagues in a Wal-Mart store in Ste-Foy.
Uni-affiliated UFCW, as well as UNI Commerce, have of course always known that harassment and intimidation form part of Wal-Mart's union busting tactics. The handbook for managers, teaching them union-busting, is also ample proof of this.
But now it is a public ruling of a government authority that tells the company to put an end to its illegal behaviour against its own workers. The company must now post the Labour Relations Board decision in its Ste-Foy store, in a prominent way, for at least 30 days.
Perhaps ironically, the decision by the Quebec authorities is published subsequently with harassed and intimidated Wal-Mart Tire and Lube workers in Colorado having given up their attempt to join UFCW. They were clearly afraid that they would become victims of the Wal-Mart way of handli9ng labour relations, that is to see their workplace close down if they join a union and ask for a collective agreement.
"We've just gotten a breath of fresh air in the campaign to unionize Wal-Mart people," said Marie-Josée Lemieux, president of the UFCW Jonquière local in Quebec in today's Globe and Mail. According to the newspaper, the company had threatened the workers with bad performance evaluations and disciplinary measures. It is easy to understand what management was hinting at.
One year ago, there was a similar labour board decision singling out Wal-Mart for intimidating its workers in a store in Brossard, near Montreal.
The Globe and Mail report on a survey where 75 per cent of Canadians believed that the recently announced closing of the St Hyacinthe store was due to the unionisation of its workers. Wal-Mart has tried to excuse it with poor profitability, but once again the public was much smarter than the Bentonville managers thought.
Almost half of those surveyed said that they will cut down their shopping at Wal-Mart, or stop shopping completely, the Globe and Mail reports.
- We hope that Wal-Mart will one day realize that people have the right to join a union, said Louis Bolduc of UFCW, Canada to the CBC News.
A recently exposed settlement between Wal-Mart and the Department of Labor (DOL) provides a sweetheart deal for child labor violations by the world’s largest and richest corporation—and one of the biggest political campaign donors in the country.
The deal, agreed to in early January, requires Wal-Mart to pay a nominal federal fine of $135,540 for child labor violations in which 85 minors operated hazardous equipment at stores in Connecticut, New Hampshire and Arkansas. But the deal gets even sweeter for Wal-Mart because the DOL agreed to give the company 15 days’ notice before conducting any further investigation of company violations.
Sign the petition to end the use of children in hazardous jobs at Wal-Mart: http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/childlabor/u8sdx32v7bji73
Wal-Mart had the minors operating cardboard balers and chainsaws—among other dangerous equipment—which are the most dangerous pieces of machinery in the retail industry. Maiming, amputations, and death are not uncommon occurrences for workers who operate balers.
A former Labor Department investigator, Karen Dulaney Smith, said in a Washington Post story that in the past, the DOL rarely notified companies in advance of an investigation.
The 15-day advance notice of DOL inspections rewards Wal-Mart, while other companies with no history of child labor violations are subject to unannounced inspections.
Both the Connecticut attorney general and U.S. Representative George Miller have called for an investigation of Wal-Mart's settlement.
Sign the petition to end the use of children in hazardous jobs at Wal-Mart: http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/childlabor/u8sdx32v7bji73
Amending the settlement could immediately end Wal-Mart's use of children for hazardous jobs. An amended settlement requiring Wal-Mart to use distinctive employee badges for underage workers that could readily identify them as being prohibited from hazardous assignments along with unannounced DOL inspections would rapidly end Wal-Mart's use of child labor in dangerous jobs.
Sign the petition to end the use of children in hazardous jobs at Wal-Mart: http://www.unionvoice.org/campaign/childlabor/u8sdx32v7bji73
Wal-Mart may be the world’s largest corporation and biggest White House political contributor, but that gives the company no right to sweetheart deals and arrangements that put children at risk..
Speak up. Together we have the power to stop Wal-Mart.
Join the UFCW and the Child Labor Coalition to end the use of children in hazardous jobs at Wal-Mart. Call on Department of Labor Secretary Elaine Chao and Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott to amend the settlement to protect children.
NEW CASTLE, Pa., Feb. 11 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Wal-Mart forced workers to wait four and a half years for an election in their Tire & Lube Express Department of the Wal-Mart Supercenter in New Castle, Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, Wal-Mart's high turnover rate pushed out the union supporters who began organizing with the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 880 in June, 2000, because they felt Wal-Mart ignored their complaints about safety hazards.
Then, two days ago, Wal-Mart announced plans to shutter its store in Jonquiere, Quebec, rather than face the decision of the Quebec Labor Ministry that would have initiated a process to establish a fair and impartial wage and benefit settlement between Wal-Mart and its workers. Today under the appearance of opportunity, the workers failed to gain a voice on the job -- because Wal-Mart had already silenced their voice.
"Wal-Mart struck the final blow against these New Castle workers by showing them and the whole world to what lengths it will go to deny their employees a voice on the job. It's not surprising that the Tire & Lube Express workers would turn away from union representation after Wal-Mart's actions in Canada," said Joe Hansen, UFCW International President.
"Wal-Mart is the richest corporation in the world, yet cowers in fear of a unified workforce. It is reprehensible that this giant corporation would drag out a union election process for nearly five years, drive union supporters out and strike fear into the hearts of workers who simply asked for the opportunity to participate in a democratic process at work," continued Hansen.
The UFCW has launched a campaign to mobilize workers and community members to send a strong message to hold Wal-Mart accountable for its anti-worker actions. To get involved with the UFCW campaign and to sign on to the electronic petition, visit http://www.ufcw.org
Take action now and sign the petition to Wal-Mart's CEO!
The world’s largest corporation is choosing to destroy the livelihoods of nearly 200 working families rather than accept a fair and impartial agreement defining workers wages and benefits.
Wal-Mart announced, yesterday, it was shutting down the store where workers had unionized six months earlier to have a voice on the job. Workers at the Jonquiere, Quebec store had been in negotiations with Wal-Mart the last several months, attempting to reach a fair agreement on wages and benefits. The company pulled the plug on the store when the workers appealed to the Quebec Labor Ministry to initiate a process that would establish a wage and benefit settlement
An Associated Press story put it this way: As Union [Workers] Near Win, Wal-Mart Closes Store (February 10, 2005).
The message from the world’s largest and wealthiest corporation to consumers, communities and workers worldwide is clear: Wal-Mart would rather close stores, eliminate worker’s jobs and make the entire community suffer, rather than reach an agreement with workers for fair wages and benefits.
We need your help today. Please sign our petition to Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott. Tell Mr. Scott to respect workers. Wal-Mart can’t shut down stores because it doesn’t want workers to be paid fairly.
This is not just a fight for Wal-Mart workers. With Wal-Mart’s unprecedented size and growth--$280 billion in revenues last year—we realize we are fighting for everyone. But we cannot win this fight alone.
Wal-Mart is too big, the company has more than $9 billion in profits and the management is hell bent on world-domination. But, we have a secret weapon. We have something their billions of dollars cannot buy. We have the people.
Together, we have the power to stop the largest, greediest corporation in the world. We are their consumers and we can make a difference. Sign our petition today and tell Wal-Mart to open its doors to fairness.
The battle over Wal-Mart is a struggle for the kind of society we want to live in. Entire towns shut when Wal-Mart moves in. Mom and pop stores disappear. Health care costs are skyrocketing because Wal-Mart shifts its costs to communities and taxpayers. And Wal-Mart pressure forces manufactures to ship jobs overseas.
You can stop Wal-Mart.
Click here to take action now and sign the petition to Wal-Mart's CEO!
LOVELAND, Colo. (PAI)--The United Food and Commercial Workers will get another shot at breaking through Wal-Mart’s anti-union blockade in the U.S., when 20 workers in its two auto service departments in the Loveland, Colo., supercenter vote on representation by the union’s Local 7.
In a Jan. 28 decision, National Labor Relations Board Denver regional director B. Allan Benson said the vote should go ahead even if Wal-Mart challenges his ruling. No date was set for the balloting, but Wal-Mart has until Feb. 11 to file such a challenge with the full NLRB in Washington
Benson’s decision comes just after a provincial labor relations board official in the Canadian province of British Columbia ruled on whether UFCW Local 1518 gathered enough cards for a vote to be recognized as bargaining representative for 70 Tire and Lube Express workers at seven Wal-Marts there.
Unlike in the U.S., the B.C. election must be held within 10 days of the ruling. But the Colorado ruling also covers auto service workers, as well as the tire and lube workers.
Benson said Local 7, after a short organizing drive at Loveland, got a signed majority of cards in December. Wal-Mart tried to stop it by arguing UFCW should have to organize among all 480 workers at the supercenter, but Benson turned that down.
"Employees in the auto center are greatly dependent upon one another for continued operation of the center itself and for their individual livelihoods," Benson said, citing a 1982 NLRB ruling, never challenged, on union units at Sears Auto Centers.
"Indeed, unlike the obvious interdependency of the auto center employees, the record reveals the absence of any close relationship between the work of the requested employees and any other group of employees in the retail store," Benson added.
Unlike the other case where UFCW won a Wal-Mart vote in the U.S., the company may have difficulty stopping unionization by shutting the Colorado operation. In Texas, Wal-Mart responded to UFCW’s success at unionizing 12 meatcutters at a supercenter by closing all of its on-site meatcutting nationwide.
But Benson wrote the Loveland Wal-Mart’s auto service department, like at least four others involved in prior NLRB rulings, is open for long hours six days a week.
By PAUL KRUGMAN
few weeks ago I tried to explain the logic of Bush-style Social Security privatization: it is, in effect, as if your financial adviser told you that you wouldn't have enough money when you retire - but you shouldn't save more. Instead, you should borrow a lot of money, buy stocks and hope for capital gains.
Before President Bush's big speech, a background briefing by a "senior administration official" made it clear that the plan calls for exactly the "borrow, speculate and hope" strategy I described - not just for the system as a whole, but for each individual.
Here's the money quote: "In return for the opportunity to get the benefits from the personal account, the person forgoes a certain amount of benefits from the traditional system. Now, the way that election is structured, the person comes out ahead if their personal account exceeds a 3 percent rate of return" - after inflation - "which is the rate of return that the trust fund bonds receive. So, basically, the net effect on an individual's benefits would be zero if his personal account earned a 3 percent rate of return."
Translation: If you put part of your payroll taxes into a personal account, your future benefits will be reduced by an amount equivalent to the amount you would have had to repay if you had borrowed the money at a real interest rate of 3 percent.
Peter Orszag of the Brookings Institution got it exactly right: "It's not a nest egg. It's a loan."
For years, privatizers - including Mr. Bush - have claimed that people would do better with private accounts than with traditional Social Security even if they played it safe and invested in U.S. government bonds (which yield 3 percent after inflation).
But the official at the briefing made it clear that his boss was fibbing: if you invested your private account in government bonds, you would face benefit cuts equal in value to your investment, so you would be no better off than under the current system.
The only way to get ahead would be to invest in risky assets like stocks, and hope for higher yields. But if the investment went wrong and you earned less than 3 percent after inflation, your benefit cuts would leave you poorer than if you had never opened that private account.
So people are expected to take a loan from the government and use it to buy stocks, and if that turns out to have been a mistake - well, too bad.
Experts usually tell people to plan for their retirement by investing in a mix of stocks and bonds. They disapprove strongly of speculation on margin: borrowing to buy stocks. Yet Mr. Bush wants tens of millions of Americans to do exactly that.
Meanwhile, what does any of this have to do with the ostensible purpose of the whole thing: saving Social Security?
Here's the senior official again: "In a long-term sense, the personal accounts would have a net neutral effect on the fiscal situation of Social Security." The government would have to borrow huge sums up front to create the personal accounts - $4.5 trillion in the first two decades - but it would supposedly make up for all that borrowing with offsetting cuts in account holders' benefits many decades later.
Color me skeptical: will retirees with private accounts that performed badly really be forced to repay their loans in full? Even if they are, private accounts will at best have a "net neutral effect" - that is, they will do nothing to improve Social Security's finances. Mr. Bush says the system faces a crisis; what does he propose to do about it?
The answer, presumably, is that his plan will also involve major benefit cuts over and above those associated with private accounts. And it's true that you can improve Social Security's finances with privatization, as long as you also slash benefits - just as you can kill a flock of sheep with witchcraft, provided you also feed them arsenic. (Thanks, M. Voltaire.)
Do you believe that we should replace America's most successful government program with a system in which workers engage in speculation that no financial adviser would recommend? Do you believe that we should do this even though it will do nothing to improve the program's finances? If so, George Bush has a deal for you.
Scholars examine effect on society
By STEVEN GREENHOUSE
NEW YORK TIMES
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. - We already know that Wal-Mart is the biggest retailer. (If it were an independent nation, it would be China's eighth-largest trading partner.) We also know that it is maniacal about low prices. (Some economists say it has single-handedly cut inflation by 1 percent in recent years, saving consumers billions of dollars annually.) We know that its labor practices have come under attack. (It charges its workers so much for health insurance that about one-third of them do not have it.)
But the more than 250 sociologists, anthropologists, historians and other scholars who gathered at the University of California-Santa Barbara on Monday for a conference on Wal-Mart came looking for more than the company's vital statistics. Like archaeologists who pick over artifacts to understand an ancient society, the scholars were examining Wal-Mart for insights into the very nature of American capitalist culture. As Susan Strasser, a history professor at the University of Delaware, said, "Wal-Mart has come to represent something that's even bigger than it is."
Indeed, with $256 billion in annual sales and 20 million shoppers visiting its stores each day, Wal-Mart has greater reach and influence than any retailer in history. "In each historical epoch a prototypical enterprise seems to embody a new and innovative set of economic structures and social relationships," said Nelson Lichtenstein, a history professor at UCSB and the organizer of the conference. "These template businesses are emulated because they have put in place, indeed perfected for their era, the most efficient and profitable relationship between the technology of production, the organization of work and the new shape of the market."
In the 19th century, he said, the standard-setting company was the Pennsylvania Railroad; in the mid-20th century, it was General Motors; and in the late 20th century, it was Microsoft. Today's prototypical company, he declared in opening the conference, is Wal-Mart, which, he said, rezones American cities, sets wage standards and even conducts diplomacy with other nations.
"In short, the company's management legislates for the rest of us key components of American social and industrial policy," Lichtenstein said.