Members for Democracy Archive

Ok i'll try to give you some background on the situation at Maplegrove. In the fall of 2000 the company "National Grocers"(NG)now "Loblaws Company East"(LCE)held meetings in the 3 effected warehouses - Kitchener (CAW), Chatham (Teamsters) and London (Teamsters) (Fortinos (UFCW 175) was added to the list shortly after to make it 4 warehouses)to tell the employees that they had bad news and good news. The bad news was your warehouse is closing the good news is we're building a new warehouse in Cambridge On. and everyone has a job if they want one (or take a 2 week/per year severence, 3weeks if you don't disrupt the business). They told us everyone is guaranteed a job but they didn't know who the Union would be or how the seniority issue would be addressed. Over the next 6 months the company would hold meetings to update us (more lies)but then finally stopped coming back when things started to get ugly!We were finally told that the UFCW 1000A had recognition and that they were holding a vote on March 25/2001 do decide if they would give the employees from the closing warehouses any seniority rights or have them re-apply for jobs at Maplegrove and start as a new hire. The vote was very close, 54% in favour of giving us limited seniority. They added an 8 page "letter of understanding" to the existing "Erin Mills Warehouse" (Globle) contract that outlined how the jobs would be posted and how seniority would work at Maplegrove. Here's how they rolled it out-

All jobs will be posted first to all full time employees in existing UFCW 1000A warehouses.

After the UFCW 1000A members were finished, (they took 122 jobs almost all mon-fri prime jobs - clerk, reachtruck, shipper-receivers)they sent the job bid sheets to the closing warehouses to bid on the remaining jobs (mostly working weekends on grocery assembly)

To be continued........ work time

One correction I should add - Fortinos is not UFCW 175 anymore! One year ago UFCW 175 called their Fortinos members for an emergency meeting and told them at the meeting that they were merging with UFCW 1000A. They told the members that they were holding a vote and that they would vote yes "or else" the company would close the warehouse and they would'nt get a job at Maplegrove. (I still can't figure this one out) anyone care to enlighten me?

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

The situation at Maplegrove sounds an awful lot like something that happened at Serca Foodservice a few years ago. A number of Ontario warehouses, represented by the CAW and Teamsters, were closed and a big facility opened in Mississauga. UFCW (RW Joint Northern Council) got voluntary rec and signed a 7.5 year deal. There are some OLRB decisions out about this case. If I recall correctly, the UFCW expanded the scope clause in it's Kitchener warehouse contract to capture the new Mississauga location. This sounds similar to the 8 page letter of understanding attached to the Erin Mills contract that DeMoN mentioned earlier. I also recall reading that the UFCW had approached the company about voluntary rec long before the new warehouse even opened. (I often wonder if that influenced the company in deciding which warehouses to close and, if so, what kind of a union would become involved in discussions of this kind - knowing that this would be the eventual outcome.)

It's scary how common this kind of deal-making seems to be. I'm hoping some of the workers at the Serca warehouse see this and tell us what's going on over there.

Re Secret Agent's post: OK machine heads from locals 175, 1000a and/or 206, is this what really happened, or what?

Hey slek, man... The new website looks good but you've got some broken links now.

I tried to follow the link to the Lloydminster Superstore ALRB decision and all I got was this:

quote:

---

This document has been moved or removed.

Please return to the Members for Democracy Home Page

---

All jobs will be posted first to all full time employees in existing UFCW 1000A warehouses.

After the UFCW 1000A members were finished, (they took 122 jobs almost all mon-fri prime jobs - clerk, reachtruck, shipper-receivers)they sent the job bid sheets to the closing warehouses to bid on the remaining jobs (mostly working weekends on grocery assembly

I am an interested warehouse worker in Vancouver working for Western Grocers. What was the comparison of the contracts between CAW, Teamsters, UFCW? Which is the better agreement? You mentioned that the UFCW gave their people first crack at the positions which sounds good to me, but what was the catch? Was something traded for it, or is the Lloyd minster contract that inferior?

Jack:

quote:

---

Hey slek, man... The new website looks good but you've got some broken links now.
I tried to follow the link to the Lloydminster Superstore ALRB decision and all I got was this:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document has been moved or removed.
Please return to the Members for Democracy Home Page

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

---

What link? Where?

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: slek ]

The links in remotes post above. I am having trouble too!

quote:

---

UFCW Local 1000a is headed by Kevin Corporon. You can read more about him in our series on the Swiss Chalet workers http://www.ufcw.net/articles/docs/the_swiss_chalet_workers.html.

---

[ 01-11-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

Fixed it!
http://www.ufcw.net/files/docs/ufcw_westfair_alrb_decision.doc

We had a few of directory mix-ups with the changeover... sorry folks

There's bound to be more.

A link hunting I shall go!

Bill Reno said:

quote:

---

"As consultants go, I ain't that expensive," he said.

---

Then he said:

quote:

---

"Even though the numbers are true, the issue is why this is news," he said.

---

I think the second statement may explain the first statement.

A so-called communications consultant can't figure out why a 65% pay increase is news!?

You can also get it at: http://www.ufcw1000a.org/maplegrove/

"WELCOME TO THE PLACE WHERE THE TRUTH CAN BE FOUND"?

Hey machine heads, the truth is out there...

I have to clear a few things up before the story continues. When UFCW 1000A voted on the letter of understanding they were given a copy of the letter and a letter from Paul Doyle, V.P. Labour Relations (LCE) that stated "National Grocers has committed to the union that there will not be any reduction in the overall number of full time jobs at the existing Local 1000A distribution centres as a result of the opening of the Maplegrove distribution centre".

The jobs that UFCW 1000A took were not because their jobs were displaced but were taken from the workers from the closing warehouses. The workers from Kitchener were lucky (Maplegrove is about a 7 minute drive from the old warehouse)but the workers from Chatham, London and Hamilton have to make a huge decision, all the UFCW 1000A members had to do is stay where they were (they still had jobs).

The 1000A members not only got first pick of jobs but they protected the jobs so that they could never be bumped from the jobs (without just cause)and they protected the members from job downgrades ("non" 1000A members get job downgrades first regardless of seniority)

The Union and the 1000A members are fond of asking the workers from the closing warehouses if they are enjoying the raise they got (Kitchener and Chatham hadn't had a new contract since 1995) when they came to maplegrove. The London warehouse (was Provigo before LCE bought them) members are taking a huge cut to make the move (I wonder if the 1000A will ask them if they like the money too)! If "non" 1000A members say they're not happy with the deal, the UFCW 1000A and their members tells us we should be happy that we still have a job and if we didn't like it we shouldn't have come (this coming from a bunch of pimple faced teens with a year or two seniority talking to workers with up to 35 years with the company)

Maplegrove opened August 16/2001 with produce from Fortino's being the first thing out the door. The first week of September saw Chatham close and all their dry grocery come to Maplegrove. October saw Kitchener start to send some of their grocery a few stores at a time. Kitchener is set to send the last stores to Maplegrove on January 20th/2002. Fortinoe's will send their dry grocery on February 23rd/2002 (they are keeping the warehouse open for about 1 1/2 years to do "delli and fresh meat" to take the load off the 1000A frozen warehouse). On March 9th/2002 London will close and send all their stores to Maplegrove. The rollout dates could change a bit but thats the plan as of this week.

The Teamsters representing Chatham and London have washed their hands of the whole matter but the "CAW" has been working quietly to help all the closing warehouses. The "CAW" will be taking this to the OLRB very soon now that they can concentrate on this (they just won the vote at Sobeys Toronto warehouse, vs UFCW)

That pretty much covers it all for now. All comments and suggestions are appreciated. L8r

P.S.
This past week some employees from the just closed Sudbury (Lively) warehouse showed up working in the produce department. After members (read ex-CAW) started asking questions and generaly raising a stink about bringing in people for fulltime jobs when there were P/T waiting to get full time work. The union started to do damage control by telling the membership that those jobs were given to the Subury workers before P/T were hired in August. Now this is the first time anyone from any of the warehouses ever heard about "Lively" closing or them being offered jobs at maplegrove. We have nothing against the company offering work to closing warehouses but there is laungage covering that in our contract and it wasn't followed. I guess the Kitchener guys (we have a bad rep. already for standing up for our rights) will have to press the issue because the union won't do shit for the P/T. Stay Tuned!

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

Thanks for the info and the links Richard. Some very interesting reading there and might explain the "non" interest on the part of the Teamsters in the plight of their members.

Another thing that should prove interesting is Sobeys sale of its SERCA division to SYSCO of Houston Texas. SERCA Sale to SYSCO

The UFCW extended it's Kitchener CA in return for being given voluntary recognition for the then yet-to-be-built Mississauga warehouse. That warehouse evenutally swallowed a few other SERCA operations represented by the Teamsters, an employees association and I believe CAW.

It was hotly contested by the other unions, and it sure seemed like a sweet deal for the UFCW. By the looks of it, the deal helped with the marketablility of the SERCA unit.

[ 01-12-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

Ah, spoken like a true UFCW troll. Friend you must realize that all unions don't operate the same as the UFCW, so don't try and figure out how the CAW would approach a problem. You'll only hurt your head.

DeMoN said something about a Toronto Sobeys warehouse going CAW. I checked and apparently, CAW wiped the floor with the UFCW and now CAW represents the full-time warehouse employees. However, the UFCW is now trying to get the part-timers to join the UFCW. Let's see how that fight rolls out. It may be close because the UFCW specializes in representing part-time workers.

It appears "Demon" that you have alot to say with very few facts. It would be nice to see you participate in a discussion group with real facts and not crap. Please do not waste our time. I guess that is why you picked the name "demon" very suiting by the way, shows the true "DEVIL and Deceit" that you represent.

Well, "I have an opinion," what are the facts? The only opinion you've demonstrated is that you disagree with the information that DeMoN set out.

The old, "Yo momma wears army boots" is a sad come back. Give us facts, "I have and opinion."

In your opinion what is going on with the voluntary recognition at your warehouse? Do you think the UFCW is better than CAW? If so, why? If not, why?

Read this Loblaws and UFCW and tell us what you think is right or wrong about it.

Give us an intelligent opinion.

[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

Like I said, read this UFCW and Loblaws and give us an answer.

Hey, and what about SERCA and the UFCW, similar deal as your warehouse. What's going on?

[ 01-14-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

Loblaws/National Grocers what's the difference?

Well weiser......you have shown your "intellect"....sorry buddy but your point goes no where!!! I have stated a position and you keep repeating the same thing......which by the way does not even come close to the point that I was making. Any other "real" takers out there. Weiser please do not waste my time with "non related" crap. Thanks.

Dear Mr. Provigo;

What is your point?? How long have you been around?? If you are as educated as your partners you would realize that media is the friend of the employer and "Anti Union"! Oh sorry I had a lapse of memory....and forgot where I was...yes at an "anti union" web site. That is right..... a place that spreads half truth. I am beginning to think that this is a site run by "CONRAD BLACK"! Am I wrong??

So what's not true about the newspaper article? If there is a partnering agreement that takes away peoples' right to strike, that's bad. If there is an agreement that the employees didn't know about, that is bad.

Are you saying there are no partnering agreements with any Loblaws Companies, Mr. I've got an opinion?

What about the secret contract UFCW Local 777 signed without its members knowing about it? (I saw it somewhere on this site). Is that good? Are you sure that the UFCW hasn't done a partnering agreement with National Grocers? Why did National Grocers choose the UFCW rather than the Teamsters or the Auto Workers? Is the UFCW easier to get along with? Or did they choose the UFCW because they wanted a union that would kick the shit out of them. Hey, maybe they are masochists, I don't know.

The only opinion you have spewed here is that you think the UFCW is a peachy union and that National Grocers thinks the UFCW is a peachy union.

I don't think this site is anti-union. I think it is pro-union. I do think it is ani-union-corruption though. I think this Internet site is against unions that abuse their power.

I think this Internet site is A-OK! And that is MY opinion!

quote:

---

Well this is Ironic. The C.A.W. and all it's cronies, meaning all of you who denounce the "UFCW 1000A" for it's efforts of protecting it's members and looking after those workers who were affected by closures.

---

So you are saying everyone who does not support, "denounces" as you put it, Local 1000A makes them CAW cronies? That's just plain silly!

quote:

---

What you all seem to forget is that the company "NG" is the one who decided to build a new Distribution Warehouse and close (5)five other Distribution Warehouses. Why is it such a bad thing that the "UFCW 1000A" negotiated in there agreement for automatic recognition for all new Distribution Warehouses?

---

Ahh..‘cause it robs the Power Source of their democratic right to the representation of their choice?

quote:

---

Is that not a good thing for bargaining power with such a large Company. I don't see anyone complaining when the "CAW" does the same thing within the Automotive sector.

---

Examples? Proof? Links?

quote:

---

It appears to me that the UFCW 1000A not only protected their members but they also helped out CAW members and Teamster members when their Union could not do it for them.

---

Did you get rose colored glasses from Santa or the machine?

quote:

---

Non 1000A members came to Maple Grove with full seniority and an increase pay far superior to what they were used to. IF this warehouse ended up under the "CAW" what a loss of income for the working people and families.

---

You came through unscathed right? You lucky bum!

quote:

---

Does anyone not think of the benefit of the "UFCW1000A" being the bargaining agent? My guess is of course not. Sorry I forgot we live in a cut throat society!! Here is a cut and paste from the UFCW 1000A web site to show the difference in wages between agreements.
UFCW Maplegrove $43,825
CAW Kitchener – Tier1 $39,624
CAW Kitchener – Tier 2 $30,888

---

Apparently some do think about the benefit of belonging to 1000A, apparently some people don't feel there is one, that's what we are discussing, try to keep up, then check your sources for bias.

quote:

---

That is quiet a deal for the CAW. Not only did they get a substantial pay increase they also maintained there full seniority.

---

Proof?.. examples?.. links?

quote:

---

Show me one time where the CAW has done this for other Union Members that have been affected the way these warehouse workers have been and show me where the CAW has honored their full seniority. Ok....so know you are thinking well they didn't get all their seniority. "YES THEY DID"!!!.

---

Actually, wasn't thinking that, but now that you mention it!

quote:

---

The only thing they did not get at the beginning was the first pick at the jobs and the one time job security for "down grades". UFCW 1000A members where compassionate to those workers who were affected by the "COMPANY" making a decision. UFCW 1000A members gave up a lot of rights for those affected workers.

---

Table scraps?

quote:

---

I will be back tomorrow to discuss the "RAID" which is in, itself a disgrace. The "CAW" runs a double standard with it's "DEMOCRACY BULL" when it comes to members having a free choice in deciding Unions. Stay Tuned. All Bull Shit replies need not type.......

---

You hide your own Easter eggs don't 'ya?

Do you work for the UFCW in a paid position <I have an opinion>? Your views concerning the media (being right wing anti union) sound very familiar to remarks I've heard before coming from UFCW representatives. They insisted the media was against them as well as the Labour Relations Boards of the various provinces. It was ironic these remarks were made in Saskatchewan, a very pro-union province, in fact the only province to ever ban the use of replacement workers during a strike (Pepsi in Saskatoon).

In all fairness, i'm sure the UFCW has done some good things over its history. However the last 15 years of backroom dealing and butchering CA's has destroyed any goodwill most workers had left for the union. So until the UFCW reverses the concessions and bad agreements they've made with the various highly profitable employers, i'm a non-believer. Getting back what they've given up is going to be so much harder now that we have situations like the Brandon Maple Leaf plant arising which is destroying any bargaining power that remained.

Hey, <I've got [a warped] opinion>, you might find the following site quite interesting: http://www.reapinc.org/Briefing%20Papers/Summary.htm

It's loaded with information on the UFCW. After you're finished, you can visit this site: http://www.caw.ca/flash.html

I know, it's not as tacky as the UFCW Locals 1000a, 1977 or 175 sites, but it has some valuable information on it anyway.

I have no connection whatsoever with the CAW, I'm a lot closer to the UFCW. And CAW isn't the best union in the world, but it's head and shoulders above the UFCW, And That's MY OPINION!

[ 01-15-2002: Message edited by: Richard ]

Hmmmmm.....

In 2000, Local 1000a got voluntary recognition for a big warehouse. They get a contract they say is very good and some workers get as much as $43,000 a year.

In 2000, Local 1000a signed a 6 year deal for Loblaws stores across Ontario. The Local had strong support for a strike (in the 90% range) but agreed to a deal that gives workers a 1% increase in each year.

Secret Agent is suspicious...alternative explanations please.

Sorry tattler, we edit posts where machine head sympathizers try to ID other forum posters. That's one of the very few rules we have around here.

Isn't it time you guys got over Finnamore? You're making a legend out of the guy and he's only one person. He was held in high esteem by many of your leaders at one time from what we can gather.

Now, could you answer Secret Agent's question which I read as: If the UFCW got such a great deal for Maplegrove, why was the deal they got at the Loblaw's stores so underwhelming?

The attack-dog strategy won't take you very far around here. You started defending your position about why you feel the UFCW did a good deal but quickly fell into what is called a "fallacious argument" by engaging in a personal attack. You will be far more effective in presenting your argument if you avoid this in future.

[ 01-15-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

I would hope that in the future The rule about outing contibutors to this site will apply to moderators and other MFD activists, (who have access to our IP addresses) some of whom in the past Have threatened to out people by Saying "I know who you are" or have pointed out that two different names are using the same IP address.These appear to be attempts to shut people up. Incidentally the person I identified Had been Identified months ago by someone else.

And then the infamous UFCW two-tier will appear!

Good examples of fallacious arguments, weiser. There is also another variety that I see being used by the biz-unionists a lot and that is called poisoning the well (i.e., "poisoning the well of discourse"). This occurs whenever the attacker argues in a way that leaves their opponent in a no-win situation. A good example of this is when the biz-unionists say things like:

"You're either with us or you're against us" or "You're criticizing our union therefore you are an anti-union web site".

There's another good example on that ufcw4maplegrove.com web site. On one of the pages, there's a rant against the CAW where language to this effect is used: "You're liars CAW guys. We're giving you this one last chance to prove that you're not liars." Well, we all know that it's difficult to to prove yourself innocent, so essentially the author is saying "you're liars and nothing you can say will change my mind about that".

So people, next time somebody pulls this sort of thing on you, don't stand there trying to argue your way out of it, just say "Excuse me, but you are poisoning the well of discourse. Please cut it out and defend your position in a way that is relevant to the argument I'm making."

[ 01-15-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

History Lesson

The UFCW warehouses used to have a probationary rate and three calendar months later you were at top rate.

In the stores, you started at $12.00 an hour and the hourly equivalent of 12 months later, you were at top rate.

Now, the UFCW had agreed to contracts that take a full-timer (of which there are now less than 10% in most stores) five years to reach the top rate. Part-timers can take 10 to 15 years to reach top rate. Oh, and do part-timers get benefits or a few cents per hour in leiu?

These five-year progressions are deals cooked between the UFCW and its partners. They are cheap deals that allow the employers to same millions of dollars every year.

The Unions have traded cash paid into "education" and "pension" funds for cheapo contracts. Who benefits most from the pension funds and education funds?

Sorry for the double post but you guys have been busy since I started writing the other post. Tattler, I for one didn't know about the voluntary rec deals with the CAW. If you look on this site you'll see I posted an open invitation to any supporter of the status quo anywhere in North America including Buz to defend things like Voluntary rec deals amoung other things. It's one thing to say hey, were gonna get them anyway, it's another to say "we won't strike if you give us the store/warehouse's etc"

I do agree with you that machine heads have been outed on this site and it appears to be a double standard. We should rethink that. Personally I'd like to know why a machine head won't post under their real name anyways. I'm not affraid or ashamed of my points of view why are they? Alias's are for members affraid of retaliation from the UFCW or their employer (to me one in the same)not for paid staff.

The wages for the moment appear to be better through the UFCW. Why? is a very good question. Is this just a lame attempt to court new members for market control only to sell these same people out in 2006? I hope not. And please see a previous post I wrote while you were posting yours. I for one actually don't know all the details of this situation. I can't learn anything with people attacking each other instead of debating the issues.

And by the way, your welcome to join me alone in a post room anytime to talk about my compass and that of the MFD. You can bring whatever attacks you want in that room, I'M GAME. Yes I know HJF personally but you've got some kind of balls to suggest to me his hand is up my a@@ and I'm nothing but a talking dummy. I'll log in tommorow, and I'll expect you'll have our own private room set up for us. Be a man and use your real name too, I like to know who I'm talking with.

This is to Demon, what is it like dealing with the CAW. Is the contract better than the UFCW one? CAW has a reputation of being pretty militant.

Troll, did I hear you say that the UFCW did business with Finnamore's consulting company up to 1999?

Without going through all the different posts, that seems to me to be well past the point when he stopped working for them as an employee (mid-1990's?).

How can they be saying all these bad things about him if they did business with him long after he stopped working for them?

If you have info you'd like to share about this: news@ufcw.net

Dear Scottie;

Thank you for your response. You see I do have my own opinion and my opinion does come with facts, In my previous posts I have sent out a challenge that has been unanswered, Why is this? Could it be because I have made a challenge where answers do not have real merit? Or could the answer be twisted with half truth and no one knows how to this time with out looking like a fool.

Here is a cut and past of the comments regarding "CONRAD BLACK"........
"What is your point?? How long have you been around?? If you are as educated as your partners you would realize that media is the friend of the employer and "Anti Union"! Oh sorry I had a lapse of memory....and forgot where I was...yes at an "anti union" web site. That is right..... a place that spreads half truth. I am beginning to think that this is a site run by "CONRAD BLACK"! Am I wrong??"

In reading this I fail to see where you the responders see that I have stated the this site is truly run by "CONRAD BLACK" you see, it is what people like you and your anti union supporters and cronies do in order to twist and deceive those who would like the "whole truth" and nothing but the "truth".

A site that discusses all the facts is truly a good site. However In viewing what members on this site post here only offer "twisted truth", "half the truth" and "twist the facts" to suit their needs. That to me is "disgusting" and "pitiful"

I have challenged this site and it's "posters" to show me where "UFCW 1000A" has done in justes to the working people at Maple Grove. Has there been an answer? So far the answer to my question is "NO"! Why is that" Could it be that what has happened at Maple Grove shows that UFCW 1000A has shown the true form of unionism to not only look after it's existing members but, look after working people from other Unions in protecting their rights as well.

Scottie your twisted words and muffled points do nothing but make my point clearer.

And to Weiser.......buddy I don't have time for your crap. If you have a real point or a comment backed by facts then please entertain me that way. Polluted comments go no where with me.

This is "My Opinion"

quote:

---

I would hope that in the future The rule about outing contibutors to this site will apply to moderators and other MFD activists,

---

quote:

---

I do agree with you that machine heads have been outed on this site and it appears to be a double standard.

---

There is no hard and fast rule, however if you're a union exec/rep/emp/what-have-you and you come here with the express purpose of stirring some shit up you will be identified and embarrassed accordingly.

If you're a union exec/rep/emp/what-have-you and you come here with the express purpose of chatting, debating, sharing news, opinions etc. etc. without acting like a jackass, it's likely I'll never even look at your IP address.

Only the trolls get such attention from me.
I like to call it "accountability".

Maple Grove Dilemma!
As an effected party, I have been researching and following the Loblaw's Maple Grove situation since day one. All posted stories are 100% correct. Loblaw's companies were looking at purchasing a building in Georgetown to house there fresh meat, frozen and such lines. A collective agreement arose from it with no membership and yes no building. That is how Maple Grove came to be. The company gave 1000a voluntary recognition and first dibs of all prime positions before that of any of the closing branches. The only other union showing any interest in the rights of the workers is tyhe CAW. The teamsters had membership rights in London and Chatham, CAW in Kithener and at first Local 175 of the UFCW in Fortinos in Hamilton. The CAW is a democratic union that is a firm believer in its members rights, and the right to vote and have a say into which union they want representing them.
In further research, I have obtained a copy of the collective agreement at Maple Grove. It is a company written agreement. It has to be due to the fact there was no membership to ratify it. There are five plus clauses stating, " The union AGrees...," How to you file a grievance on a clause that states the union agrees???? The money is excellent but money doesn't buy you protection. Company has unlimited rights, changing your vacation time, moving you from shift to shift, changing stat days etc. The top two clauses in my opinion are 6.01a and 19.01. 6.01a states the union is to aid the company in reprimanding their employees. 19.01 states that as a union guy if I see someone stealing or damaging propert and I don't report them, I am subject to reprimand. Rat Rat Rat. Go figure. There is far to much to mention. I'll be back with even more facts.
Enjoy your day

For management, these kinds of clauses provide a great way to getrid of workers they don't like and to control the number of workers who will ever to those top rates.

The erosion of protection from arbitrary treatment in the workplace by the kinds of clauses that uniondude and weiser are pointing out are really disturbing. One of the most important benefits of being a union member is protection from arbitrary demotion or firing. Without that, what's the point of paying union dues?

quote:

---

Dear Scottie

---

My name is Scott, or if you'd prefer than by all means address me as Mr. Mcpherson. Scottie is not nor has it ever been my name and I don't want you to address me as such. I trust you have the maturity to understand this and honour my request.

As for your constant accusations about this site being run by Conrad Black, are all your so called facts as accurate? Tell me, what precisely is on this site that leads you to believe this?

All we have done is provide you with the opportunity to express your point of view and afforded your oppenents that same opportunity. So I'm at a loss as to why your so insistant on attacking the MFD rather than outlining your position regarding the Maple Grove situation.

For me I find this to be the benchmark in your overall credability and that of the UFCW local 1000a. By telling people this site is run by Conrad Black, or even hinting he has some kind of influence here your lying. My experience with liers is that you can't trust anything they have say. If your supporters can't trust you to tell the truth about something as simple as this why should any of us believe those members are better off staying in the UFCW?

I know you think you've made some profound points here, I'll remind you of the company you keep on this site. There arn't many green horns here, we've seen it all and if you want people to address your points than you'll have to back them up with cold hard facts. You've passed most of your opinions off as facts and most us see right through it. Seperate yourself from the issue and you'll see I'm right. Aside from the wages you haven't provide proof of anything and there is a great deal more to a contract with an employer, and in particular with choosing your union than wages.

If a ball player hits a home run to win the game does that make him more valuable then the guy who made 3 great defensive plays and went 4for4 at the plate. Perhaps. What if that players only hit came from the HR and prior to that he'd made 2 errors?

Just because the UFCW got a good wage for you and your co-workers doesn't mean they are the better choice. You have to look at the big picture. What union has the overall better batting average? who has the better track record at the OLRB? who has the better education system for training shop stewards and informing members? Who provides better service for grievances? What union has the more progressive constitution and bylaws? which union makes leadership or staff job more accessible to average union members? which unions leaders are more accountable to the members? and why? which union has more section 12(duty to faily represent) grievance's filed against them at the OLRB by their own members? You wouldn't buy a car without getting the opinions of current car owners would you? why would you choose a union without asking current members if they are happy and why? Most important of all, who does the employer want to deal with? and why?

If I was going to pick a union to represent me wages would be important, but that's only one point of many. In the end what ever union can win the most points will win my vote. Focus your arguments to that end or go someplace else.

Union Dude wrote:

The CAW is a democratic union that is a firm believer in its members rights, and the right to vote and have a say into which union they want representing them.

What a load of "CRAP"... "Dmeocratic Union My Ass!!"

Tell me this is democratic!!!! read on....

The Auto union's "Double Standard"
CAW punishes its own members for doing what it asks SEIU members to do
It's a textbook case of hypocrisy by the CAW. Really, it's sort of unbelievable.
Less than one year ago, two CAW local union officers in Stoney Creek, Ontario were indefinitely suspended from office by CAW President Buzz Hargrove for doing exactly what Ken Brown and others did to the SEIU. The case ended up at the Ontario Labour Relations Board. It's now a matter of public record. (OLRB Reports &#8211; 1509-99-U). Here's the essential facts:

· In early May, 1999, two members of the Executive of CAW Local 525 filed an application for termination of CAW's bargaining rights at Bartek Ingredients in Stoney Creek. A large number of their fellow employees supported the application and a representation vote was ordered.

· Just prior to the representation vote, the President of Local 525 called membership meetings to argue against the decertification and suspended the two officials. The decertification vote narrowly failed.

· On June 8, 1999, Buzz Hargrove informed the defendants by letter that they were "indefinitely suspended..." because:

"It is clear from the documents provided and the information from the local union, that you have been involved with trying to decertify the national union in your workplace. This is a violation of Article 11, Section 5 of the CAW Constitution."

· Hargrove then quoted from the CAW Constitution:
"Section 5 (a) No member is eligible for any position in the union is s/he is trying to decertify the National Union or is helping a group or union that wants to replace CAW-Canada as the recognized bargaining agent."

· The officials appealed this suspension to the Ontario Labour Relations Board and the CAW fought back, defending its action. The Auto union said that this case was exactly the same as an earlier Ontario court case in which a union official had tried to merge his local with another union [Just as Brown & Co. tried to merge their locals with the CAW].

· Lawyers for the CAW quoted the judge who had ordered the injunction against that particular merger:
"It seems to me to be fundamentally unfair for the defendant to continue in [his union's] employment, to have accepted remuneration from it, and at the same time to have used its facilities and records to destroy it. I agree with counsel for the plaintiffs that to act in this manner is contrary to the constitution of the union."

· In other words, the Auto union says that its union officials should not be allowed to do precisely what it conspired to do with SEIU officials. If there was ever a case of hypocrisy, this was it.

· Another, similar case was cited by the CAW in which the B.C. labour board ruled:
"A union has the right and obligation to protect its own existence. Such a union has the right to resist a raid. The union would have the right to discipline, suspend, or otherwise deal with members of its executive who may be acting contrary to the interests of the union."

· In the end, the Ontario Labour Board agreed with the CAW in the Stoney Creek case. In its decision, the Board said:
"Article 26 of the [CAW] constitution requires local union officers to pledge &#8216;to bear true allegiance to the union'. Clearly that pledge was breached when the [defendants] brought legal proceedings to put an end to the union in the workplace...Had the [defendants] respected their obligations under the union constitution they would have resigned their offices within the union prior to initiating the decertification application. That would have been their proper course of action." [Emphasis added because the CAW did not ask Brown & Co. to resign their positions before attempting to decertify the SEIU.]

So "uniondude" give us some more of your facts......bahumbug.....hopefully you will do better next time.

This is not "an opinion it is a fact.....:"

Well I'd actually like to thank Mr./Ms. "Opinion" for the beginnings of a coherent argument!

You've given us a few examples of where the UFCW has actually done some *good*, and it's been a while since we've heard that. I think people on this site need to hear it. This union reform is an unpleasant job to say the least, and it tends to make us grumpy. Thanks for showing us the UFCW isn't all bad. Good UFCW things you've said:

1. Start rates are higher at Maple Grove then they were in Kitchener.

2. The UFCW negotiated a better severance package for Barn workers than the CAW did. (BTW we've actually had some discussion about this on another board. If you'd like to tell us more over here I'd appreciate it: A&amp;P/Barn Fruit Market closings)

In addition to these two examples of UFCW good work, you've also given us an example of a CAW *bad*, namely, the whole hypocritical SEIU raid. And hey, I agree with you. The CAW plays some of the same dirty games as the rest of the union movement. That's why I personally don't trust them much further than the UFCW, or any of the other CLC unions for that matter.

Still, the problem with arguing by example is that your opponent can just respond with a counter-example:

1. Demon tells us that the CAW has negotiated an grocery warehouse contract with A&P in Toronto that puts even your Maple Grove agreement to shame.

2. While the CAW has done some naughty things with Ken Brown, the UFCW has cut some downright *nasty* deals with Loblaws, CARA foods, and a dirty little rat union called CURRE. Please read The Swiss Chalet workers' story. I would like to hear your opinion about that. I'd also like to know what you think about the UFCW Local 777 story, or your opinion on the voluntary wreck in Lloydminster.

But even more important, I'd like to know your opinion on the UFCW's culture. The UFCW has gotten a lot cozier with the employers over the years, certainly much more so than a union like the CAW. How do you feel about this "business union-partnership" approach. Is it helping the worker on the shop floor? Or is it just turning our leaders into rich real estate moguls.

I'm looking forward to more of your opinions.

[ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: globalize_this ]

Demon, thanks for the compliment. However I fear my post has been lost on everyone. Why does everyone insist on showing what's wrong with the other union instead of focusing on what's right with the union they want? Yes the CAW isn't perfect, I just don't see how that makes the UFCW a better choice given the long list of dirty tricks they've pulled over the years.

Point and counter point, attack and defend and all the while nobody learns anything. Sleky I think we should take the bull by the horns here. All this school yard "my unions better than yours" is wearing thin don't ya think? We should set up a post where specific questions are asked and answered to give these workers a clear understanding of their choice. Personally, I couldn't care less what union they choose just as long as they get the opportunity to make an informed choice.

I'm thinking we need a brain storming session to compile a list of specific questions.

quote:

---

-how many section 12 complaints against each union
- wages for the latest warehouse negotiated
- senority rights
-pension funds/records
-accountability to the membership
-bargaining records etc etc etc

---

We should chart them so people can compare the two like a consumer report instead of this endless finger pointing that's not getting us anywhere. Don't you agree? Gee wiz.

Okay, here's a positive, CAW doesn't sign "Partnering" agreements. (Neither do 99% of Canadian unions).

Scott, you're not talking brainstorming, you're talking months of research. Pointing out dirt is good. The difference may be corruption vs. heavy-handed control. Neither is good, but corruption is worse.

Contract comparisons.
Maple Grove Ufcw 1000a vs Kitchener's CAW

There is no comparison. Why?? The Kitchener contract was shoved down our throats 6 years ago by National Grocers no different than that of Erin Mills (1000a), Ottawa(Teamsters), Chatham(Teamsters) and Peterborough( Retail Wholesale). Kitchener is and was a different union than that of the CAW. Retail Wholesale merged with the CAW in November of 99 through a democratic vote of all delegates representing all locals. I was there. It was unaimous. I really don't want to go on and talk international unions due to the fact that the UFCW can't cut it. Out of 862 or so locals under the UFCW banner, only approximately 68 attend the convention. Out of the 68, only a select few attend. The basis for the convention is to vote on salary increases for the executive. What would you vote if you were one of those executives attending the convention? Salary levels of UFCW executives are a direct relationship to the number of its members and the dues collected with no services or representation. Easy to figure out. Buzz Hargrove's salary is 118,000 per year under the terms of a collective agreement. It can't increase. All staff reps and national representatives are covered by a collective agreement. All salaries are that of conventional agendas decided by the members. Thre members call the shots. That's the only acceptable structure. Have to go, getting a little heated over contract comparison's between the UFCW and the Kitchener contract. Not comparing appples to apples. tomorrow's edition, Maple Grove's contract in detail. Money is everything!!! Stay posted.

Thanks for reading

I think that directing questions at "I have an opinion" are going to fall on deaf ears. The questions fall "outside of the box" or scope of his understanding. If he reads any the articles that we put links to, it will put doubt in his mind about his beliefs (in the UFCW), so he will NOT read the articles, but continue to spout propaganda about things "inside the box". Apparently instead of teaching the union stewards at Maplegrove how to deal with problems on the floor and how to administer the collective agreement (5 stewards, 5 different answers) they are spending all their time teaching them how respond to questions on the CAW - UFCW issues (by feeding members dis-information).
From what I can see "i have an opinion" will never comment on questions "outside of the box", unless he gets someone (from the Machine) to build him a bigger "box" (comfort zone) or ghost write an answer for him to cut and paste.

Sorry "i have an opinion" but even though you're finaly putting some ammo in your guns you're still way off the target.

Reload and try again!

[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

Mr. Slek, (just had to give it to me didn't ya? ) this is what I was thinking;

what union offers the best wage? CAW UFCW
11-18 8-21
how many section 12 against 7 7

the numbers are made up so everyone just take a pill. That's what I was thinking, a chart but if it's not doable than it can't be done, oh well.

C'mon has given us some valuable information that calls into question the UFCW's commitment to total honesty if I read his post right. Mr Opinion and other UFCW supporters have been making hay comparing the UFCW Maple Grove CBA to the Kitchner CBA yet we now learn that the CBA in Kitchner was negotiated by Retail Wholesale not the CAW. The CAW only assumed that contract with the merger in '99. I did get that right didn't I?

If that is the case than what local 1000a and their minions have said hasn't been totaly honest has it? To quote Mr. Opinion on this very thread.

quote:

---

A site that discusses all the facts is truly a good site. However In viewing what members on this site post here only offer "twisted truth", "half the truth" and "twist the facts" to suit their needs. That to me is "disgusting" and "pitiful"

---

It seems Mr. Opinion you have some explaining to do. The UFCW would know if the CAW negotiated that contract or not yet everyone from their camp including you have pointed to it as a symbol of their ineptitude at the bargaining table. Is that not twisting the truth to suit your needs? This site is all about facts Mr. Opinion and it seems both the UFCW and yourself have not been totally forthcoming. If in fact they have not been totally honest about this than what else are you not coming clean about? I think the members of that warehouse need to find out.

I have to say you people make me sick.......to "c'mon" nice try buddy on your attack at the P/T language. The fact is other than the vast number of UFCW members to CAW members in the distribution warehouses the language is very much similar. Another fact is in the Kitchener warehouse the amount of full time opportunities is slim to none, However in the UFCW represented warehouses the full time opportunity is "Far Greater".Nice Try though....

Next;

Where did you get your fact that P/T have to pick 100% standard. You are way off the mark on that. No where in the C/A does it state that and no where is that any part of the criteria. And may I remind you the UFCW has the most progressive grievance in the Industry on engineered standards; To say the least has tried to help the CAW for all working people.....who by the way has refused.........as a consequence has cost your members jobs while saving ours..... read on.......

The C/A was only shoved down your throat because you the CAW have no bargaining power ie "lack of membership" and "lack of distribution knowledge" with the fact that you are not experienced in the Retail Distribution Sector. Shall I remind you of the fact that CAW's knowledge and lack of interest to take care of the real working people.........You sold out the members of your Union and agreed to allow a company to treat them like robots and, when they did not perform agreed that, that was ok.......here is the facts........ "Yes I repeated myself".UFCW was faced with the same scenario as the CAW but our senior members did not cave and allow for a 2 tier system, and at the end of the day ended up with a better contract.

By failing to challenge Sobey's ELS standards, CAW gave the company the right to fire those who "can't keep up". Older workers are most affected.
CAW lack of knowledge about Engineered Labour Standards has led to a recent Arbitration decision that could well end up causing much more pain and suffering to warehouse workers across Canada.
The case involved a food distribution warehouse operated by Sobey's in Moncton. One year ago, the company established an "Engineered Labour Standards Performance Monitoring Policy". The policy says:
"Job performance will be assessed on a weekly basis, from Sunday to Saturday. The expected performance level is 100% of the standard and discipline will result when performance is below 95%."
Employees who do not maintain a weekly average of 95% are hit with progressive discipline. The first time they fall below 95% results in "verbal counseling" and retraining. Four more instances of just below 95% and you're fired. Out the door. "Sorry, old timer. You're just a little too slow. Have a nice rest of your life. What's left of it."
In response, the CAW put in a policy grievance against the disciplinary part of the Sobey's policy. That was
good. But they did not challenge the reasonableness of the standards themselves. That was bad. That failure to challenge how fast workers were required to work led to the loss of the grievance, and a permanent headache (as well as back and shoulder aches) for the Sobey's workers.
The September 14, 2001 award from Arbitrator Gregory I. North actually thanks the CAW for not challenging the company's standards.
"At the outset, I would acknowledge my appreciation to the Union for accepting throughout these proceedings that the Employer's policy with respect to Engineered Labour Standards is not unreasonable or subject to challenge, except for those provisions dealing with discipline. That concession has made the analysis of the issues in this case much more straightforward."
Later, in dismissing the grievance, North writes:
"Given that the [CAW] has stated in its submission that the standards themselves are not being challenged, it follows that the standards must be deemed to be fair, reasonable and achievable for the average worker working at an average pace."
What does this tragic loss mean? It means the company now has the right to fire workers who can only reach 94% of the standard during five weekly periods. To add insult to injury, the company gets to raise the standards whenever it wants. So if they want to get rid of older workers, all they have to do is raise the standards until the more senior people keel over from exhaustion or quit because they can't take the pain.

This to me with and yes "I have an opinion" is the CAW...........

Next;

Tom Collins as a result of the "merger" represents the retail division of the "CAW".......he "TOM" has been named as buzzes right hand man again just incase c'mon reads improperly......heads up the retail division of the CAW. What does this mean? It means that he will be apart of the negotiation committee for any retail division, and, the workers will once again get screwed........you can give it a new name but the inside is still the same.

Canadian "Auto" workers belong in the "Auto" industry.........United "Food" and Commercial....belongs in the "FOOD" industry..........

"I have an opinion" and I have facts........

Dear mr. Opinion
Please get back on your medication, you're becoming completely incoherent. I had to read most of that last post a few times to try and figure out what you were saying.

Lets see you said,

quote:

---

Another fact is in the Kitchener warehouse the amount of full time opportunities is slim to none

---

Well I think that some sort of revelation considering the Kitchener warehouse is closing this Saterday,19/2002.

you also said,

quote:

---

UFCW was faced with the same scenario as the CAW but our senior members did not cave and allow for a 2 tier system, and at the end of the day ended up with a better contract.

---

A) The Kitchener contract was signed by the Steelworkers(RW) union in 1995, the CAW came into the picture in 1999 (is that too hard to understand)

B)Kitchener F/T got 2 tier pay and what amounts to a pay freeze, the P/T went from $11.75 top rate to $8 start wage. The UFCW 1000a F/T took a $5/H pay cut from $22/H and P/T went from $16 top rate down to $8.50/H start.

You said,

quote:

---

This to me with and yes "I have an opinion" is the CAW...........

---

Well this one is undecipherable!

You also said,

quote:

---

Tom Collins as a result of the "merger" represents the retail division of the "CAW".......

---

Past tense on that one buddy, get up to date! There no longer is a "Retail Division".

You're making this much too easy and you're losing the little credibility you had!

Reload and try again.......

[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

You'll notice that <Opinion> had to be yanked until his handlers could put together some refutable half-truths. Anybody who knows anything knows that RW was a food union and their contracts were inherited by the CAW and UFCW. Within any union you will find a best and a worst agreement. The big question that <opinion> can't and won't answer is why is the UFCW so favoured by Sobeys and Loblaws? Why did SERCA choose the UFCW for the union that would represent it's Mississauga warehouse? Why did NG choose the UFCW for the union that would represent its Maplegrove warehouse?

It was saide earlier, you don't get nothing for nothing. An employer doesn't do a voluntary "wreck" and expect nothing in return. In the BC Superstores the expectation was being allowed to squeeze at least a 25% advantage over the competition.

In the Provigo case, it was agreeing to never shut down the whole operation. I believe Local 1518 has done a similar deal in BC. They have agreed to let only one half of any bargaining unit strike and bargain. The other half lives with the results.

Tell us your "opinion" on that type of stuff, Mr. Opinion.

quote:

---

The UFCW retail food agreements used to look pretty good too. They still do, but not for part timers

---

%75 part-time to %25 full-time, that is the 1518 agreements' target. Some stores are supposed to be 50/50. You'd be hard pressed to find those. Part-timers make up appr. %75 of the Power Source trying to make a living under the 1518 agreement.

I honestly don't know how UFCW officials can stand themselves when they take home six figure saleries while more than 75% of the membership work part time and live below the poverty line. That's what I find disgusting. Yet for them that's still not enough. Trips to Florida and Hawaii, new cars,huge severance packages upon retirement with cars and in some case's even house's. $1000 clothing allowances per year, all the gas their vehicles can guzzle, meals etc etc etc.

Even then for some that's still not enough. UFCW officials have been caught embezzling union funds, misusing the union plane, fraud, taking employer bribes, election fraud, and the mighty list of shame goes on and on. Yet the best they can do is have a fool like Mr. Opinion come on this site and point his finger at some things the CAW has done that quite frankly pail in comparison. Why would anyone want to support these guys?

The receptionist who answers phones at the UFCW union hall earns more than any of the warehouse workers at Maple Grove who have to pick orders at a certain pace or they're out the door. I think the loss leader idea from weiser is right on the money here. There's something fishy about this deal at Maple Grove, I can't put my finger on it yet but I'll figure it out and given my experience with the UFCW I wouldn't put that money in the bank just yet. Not as long as they can still wield thier infamous "letter of understanding".

Business is about the bottom line and what's best for it. Comapanies give voluntary rec deals to the lowest bidder 98% of the time. To not understand this is to either be completely stupid and totally lacking in understanding of the market economy, or completely blinded by your beliefs in unionism.

I watched the movie JFK last night and I'm amazed with the magic bullet theory. How can people actually buy this load of crap? The Z. film shows his head went back and to the left,impossable for a shot coming from the rear yet the American people accepted the Warren comission findings and to this day accept files being locked away until 2038. Why?

Because they're told it's anti American to question the government. Just like we're told it's anti union to expose corruption in unions or question the leaders of unions. There's a line in that movie that rings true for me,

quote:

---

A Patriot must always be ready to defend his country against it's government

---

It's not anit union to question or expose corruption in our unions, it's anti union to keep quite about it just like it's anti American to accept the Warren comisions findings. That quote is the smartest peice of true wisdom I've ever heard. What our unions and our governments do for us should NEVER be good enough. We should never stop questioning them and we should never accept what they tell us at face value. For those who do they do so because they are either fools, or they a part of the corruption and deceit.

i have another...
how do i force 1000a machine wanna be Brian Ried to give me a copy of 1000a by-laws
besides going through him how else can i obtain a copy

quote:

---

how do i force 1000a machine wanna be Brian Ried to give me a copy of 1000a by-laws?

---

I'd be surprised if they would give Brian a copy. UFCW locals are notorious for keeping Local Union By-laws and the International Constitution locked up. Here's a copy of the International Constitution:UFCW Constitution

They guard this stuff so tightly that they threatened to sue a Local 777 member who put the Constitution on his web site.

He's also published the Local 777 By-laws, which would be similar to 1000a's. All UFCW locals seem to be in the process of restricting the ability of members to run for office. I think Local 832 was the latest. Anyway here's Local 777's: 777 By-laws

If Brian won't cough up the By-laws, write a "registered" letter to Kevin Corporon asking for copies to be sent to all dues payers at Maplegrove.

Does anyone have a copy of the Zehrs local 1000A contract signed in 2000?

If you can't get a copy of the Zehr's agreement through somebody on this site, you can look at and get copies of any current collective agreement in Ontario at the Office of Collective Bargaining Information, Ontario Ministry of Labour. Their office is at 400 University Ave. (at Dundas St. W.) in Toronto. You can also call them at 416-326-1260 if you want to be sure they have what you're looking for before you make the trip downtown.

[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

quote:

---

How about sending MFD a copy?

---

MFD contacts

[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

Oh, and if you want a copy of that memorandum signed by Tom Collins, Kevin Corporon and the local 175 rep on Feb 22/2000, i'll get a copy and scan it for you. All you need to do is give me an e-mail address to send it to.

Maybe it can be scanned into a PDF file and posted for a couple of weeks, so people can print it off.

Anyone who wants to email me stuff, send to remote@ufcw.net

I asked for a copy (of the memorandum) today but nobody had one, i'll have to get my copy back and scan that one (not in very good shape) when I get it i'll e-mail it to "remote".

Paying overtime to give your partner a chance to propagandize your employees may not seem too bright--in fact it may seem financially imprudent. However, NG is anything but financially imprudent. They always expect a return on their dollar. Maybe they look at the overtime as an investment. The only question is, out of whose pockets will the dividends come?

I have an opinion
This is your first warning. Continued posting in this manner will get you banned.
Got it?
If you've got a problem with this take it to email. slek@ufcw.net

[ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: slek ]

To(o) opinion(ated)
why don't you find yourself a ufcw friendly site...if you can find one
I was told(by a supervisor) that there was a meeting today on day shift at 1:40, but for some reason it was cancelled...maybe the machine heads had to get their stories straight.
I wonder what gets Brian Reid out of bed and at Maplegrove by 6:30am like he was today

Speaking of standards...no f/t in Kitchener NG were ever fired for not making the required 95%...but at Maplegrove supervisors are threatening disipline already...each week..how many ufcw members have been fired for not meeting the ESL?...I heard of a few people...just ask guys from Erin Mills, Freemont & Pinebush rd

Sorry guys, but the meeting (with Kevin Corporon or was that Corporate) ended up just being a Rah! Rah! aren't we doing a great job at beating ELS (engineered Labour Standards). Can't say as I see any improvements at all. Actually it's worse than it was at Kitchener (much) with a bunch of the supervisors trying to be the tough guy and scare everyone into making the standards. I guess they want to climb the corporate ladder on the backs of the assemblers at Maplegrove.

quote:

---

Haven't unions who had employers pay out money to their employees to attend that union's meetings been declaired "employer dominated" and been removed as the bargaining agent? isn't that to protect workers from scams that try to get workers to believe they have fair representation when in fact all they really have is employer control via the union? I thought I heard of case's like that.

---

I have to agree with you on this one! This is cutting it very close to contravening the OLRB act. They stuck to the agenda and didn't get into propagada mode though. It does go to show how closely the company and the UFCW are working though (nice and cozy).

On another note I was having an argument with one of the stewards last night about the UFCW not doing a damn thing to improve things at Maplegrove since it opened, his response was "if we were'nt so busy fighting to keep the CAW out of here we could get things done" (as always members come last if at all!)

Richard, they also feel that the CAW should be spending all their resources on the Ford workers and not waste there time and effort at Maplegrove.

Hey Remote, you have mail

Well that's really it isn't it? Good old UFCW making excuse's. Who cares what union you want to represent you, your common goal is a better work environment isn't it? Shouldn't all of you be working towards that end? If the boss is hounding a guy do you mean to tell me if he supports the "other" union your going to pretend you didn't see it and leave him to the wolves? Come on, your still brothers arn't you?

There were people at Save-On I absolutely hated, but I fought every bit as hard for them as I did for my best freinds because fighting for your coworkers is the sameas fighting for yourself. This union thing is strickly "in house" and a union worth belonging to would never loose sight of that. Brothers, there is alwaysplenty of time to fight the employer over injustices in the workplace.

Being that I am new hear I would like to thank all those who post here for helping educate me a little more. However, I must admit ,there was quite a large amount of venom spewed forth which confused facts and left me less informed. I am currently employed at, "the grove", and am subjected to a whirlwind of rantings, politics, jealousness, and more......

Ask me anything.

undecided grove worker,
Are you part-time or full time? And what exactly are you confused about? I have talked to numerous part-timers who have been told by UFCW supporters that they will make $8.00 /hr if CAW gets in. (part-time rate in Kitchener). And I have also seen it first hand, from a steward no less. I was second tier full time in Kitchener, so I find it intersting that they dont come to me and say I'll be making $13.00/hr again if CAW gets in. I'm sure they know I wouldn't suck up the bs. It's obviously a scare tactic aimed directly at young part-timers who don't know any better.

I think the answer to Remotes question about the agreement between the union is both yes and no. It probobly cannot be enforced at the labour board. The only thing they would likely (or could) consider is the employees wishes, but there could very possibly be a legitimate action in civil court should the CAW decide to apply for certifacation for Maplegrove or any other unit contemplated by the deal.
Remotes other musing about employees having the right to join whatever union they want is true, but only if the union they want to join agrees to organize them. A union is not required to accept all who approach them and do reject inquires for various reasons, such as: lack of experience in the type of workplace, geographic location, size of bargaining unit, etc.

Responding to "answer" and "Remote": In the minds of those who make these pacts running the business overrides the wishes or rights of workers. It's a business decision, not a philisophical decision.

It is rare that any union would turn their nose up at any group of employees unless, of course, they are employed in the construction industry. There are few, if any, truly craft-based unions in existence anymore. Teamsters and Steelworkers have casinos and the Communications Engergy and Paperworkers union has candy makers.

About the only time you will see a union turn down a group of employees is if there is a no-raid or "partnering" agreement or if the cost of serviceing out weighs the cost of servicing.

[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

Unfortunately there is no justification that can be argued. Remote is absolutely right when he/she says that deals like these turn members into commodities to be bought and sold.

Mergers aren't bottom-up affairs. They are business decisions made by union managers. With a merger, except for a new membership card, nothing significant changes for the members. They don't get a cushy job or extra pensions. They keep paying their dues. The machine heads get pumped up pensions and other perks to walk their "assets" over to the new union.

Here's a prime example: UFCW/Textile Merger

The members didn't get a dime spent on them, but the machine heads got a couple of million spread among them and many of them got to keep their jobs with the new union.

Perhaps you should consider saying to hell with all of the dirty, scheming CLC business-unions. Instead, take matters into your own hands.

Someone independent like the Wobblies might be able to help you out. Check out this site:
Retail and General Distribution Workers IU Local 660

Industrial Workers of the World U.S.A.: www.iww.org

Industrial Workers of the World Canada: www.iww.ca

Contact the IWW Retail and Distribution Workers:

Mail: 5215 Ballard Ave NW, Seattle, WA 98107
Phone: 206-706-6250
E-mail: iu660@bari.iww.org

Contact the IWW Toronto General Membership Branch:

Adam Tworkowski, Branch Secretary
Mail: P.O. Box 108, Station P Toronto, ON M5S 2S8
Phone: (416) 654-1778
Email: toronto.gmb@iww.ca

[ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: globalize_this ]

Oh I think you're right that the deal was hatched before the merger. You may want to ask the CAW where they stand on it. It's possible the leadership didn't know about it. (I know that sounds really unbelievable but you'd be surprised at how selective union honchos can be in what they communicate to each other).

If they don't want to take up your cause, hey, go check out other unions (including the IWW). I wouldn't wait for them to come to you. It's your worklife, check out who else is out there and what they have to offer.

Check again - Collins signed the deal on behalf of "RW/CAW Division". By February 2000, the RW had already merged with the CAW. I suspect it must have pissed off the USWA who were quite pissed with him for leaving them at the time.

In any event, given the timing and the CAW's presence at Maplegrove, my guess would be that won't let it get in the way.

ALSO there is a CAW member showing people a copy of the contract that CAW got for A & P. If you people the company will open the contract and give us more you are out of your minds.
LCE just spent a fortune on Maple grove and if you think they are about to give us more you are just as messed up as Tom Collins

quote:

---

Originally posted by scotty-lester:
You say that the UFCW treat people that came from non-ufcw people are treated like second class people....... [QUOTE]

I don't think any has said that, what was said was that Kitchner staff only got to choose leftover jobs.

[QUOTE]Our members protected OUR MEMBERS
What the Hell did you guys do when you voted a 2 teir system in? well you screwed all the junior people.[QUOTE]

Multi tier collective agreements are the UFCW's trade mark. Nobody does them more often than the UFCW so lets not have the kettle call the pot black ok.

[QUOTE]If you people dont have respect of your officals how do you think your union will do in maple grove? [QUOTE]

Do you really mean "respect" or are you really suggesting blind faith with no accountability? T.C.'s motives are in question here as I understand it, and what's wrong with questioning his motives or actions?

[QUOTE]Oh by the way how do you guys are enjoying the raise,the better vacations and the better benifits??

---

Step back for a second.......can you see it?.....do you realize just how childish that last statment is?

To start with their contract at kitchner was negotiated by the Steelworkers in 1995 while Maple Grove is brand new yet you still bragg about a $3-4K increase? That type of increase doesn't even keep up with inflation over the last 7 years. This is also why I strongly oppose long tern CBA's. Furthermore, as I understand it the Kitchner people went from full time to part time at Maple Grove which suggest an overall pay "decrease".

Lastly, why the overall hostility? these people just want the best representation they can get for everyone. It's not going to effect your senority. Is that what the UFCW told you? The only thing that will change is what union your certified in so just vote your conscience and live at let live. For Pete's sake your still brothers, you'll still be union and both unions are charter members of the CLC. What's the problem?

Yes "scotty-lester .... please do tell us. I am an employee at Maple Grove who has been told over and over by UFCW supporters... in person and by news letters mailed to my home.. that the CAW cannot negotiate a good contract in the food industry. Now i see a contract negotiated by CAW that appears well above the Maple Grove contract. Tell me why I should vote UFCW.

I smell FEAR.

That page is drippin' in sweat.

weiser, now you see what were up against at "MapleGrave" (no thats not a typo). Lots of double/talk from the union and their goons on the floor. On the one hand they say that it's a bad time for negotiate (for the CAW) but it's always a good time for the UFCW. They also say that the CAW can never get a good contract(because the company is too powerfull) and will take pay cuts and impliment 2 teir pay at Maplegrove, but the UFCW can get them a great contract. The list goes on and on about things the UFCW can do that the CAW (or any other union for that matter) can't do for the Maplegrove workers.
I think the workers are starting to see the UFCW for what they really are after handing out the A&P(CAW) collective agreement for all to see. I can't wait to hear the answers the UFCW gives the membership when they start questioning the union stewards about how much of what they say is true (or not).
Scotty-Lester, why don't you toss the "book of lies" and read what it says on the back of your "Members in Action" card, I Quote " Respond to rumours with facts". It's time you started to take that to heart isn't it? The one I like the best is this one, Quote "Provide an example of Union Solidarity by putting the interests of the bargaining unit as a whole ahead of personal interests" Oh come on now! this whole Maplegrove issue is about a select few (the original 1000a members) putting their personal interest ahead of the bargaining unit as a whole. Scotty-Lester and the rest of your goons should take your "Members in Action" cards off if you have no intension living by whats written on them. Don't just "Talk the Talk" you have to "Walk the Walk" too!

hey siggy, the card is similar to a "ski Pass" or a "Bus Pass" that you clip on your coat. They union was giving touques, T-shirts, buttons and these "Members in Action" cards to anyone who signs a union card for the UFCW. Ok, now picture someone wearing all that at work...... you getting the picture yet, LOL!
Hey if you want i'll scan the one I found and send it to you.

Who's the guy in the costume?

Oh, I get it, it's the 1000a supporter.

Would you catch Corporon wearing a touque, T-shirt (oops, don't come that large) and covered in cards and buttons?

I had a chance to look on the inside of one of the UFCW touques and discovered some kind of cream on the inside, I send it out and had it analyzed. It turns out that the cream was some sort of secret (government) "Brainwashing cream" that the UFCW uses on unsuspecting members. Now this is "TOP SECRET" so don't let it out , ok.

The root cause of this evil is Loblaws ("low blows" who have created this union controversy to divide the work force while Maple Grove (aka "Maple Grave" is in its "start-up" period. Issues like employee training, engineered work standards, product alignment, upgrades and downgrades, overtime, recycling have all been pushed to the side to deal with the union issue. I can't help thinking Loblaws orchestrated all of this.

None of this would have happened if (i) the company had allowed true dovetailing of seniority on "Day One" or (ii) the company would have allowed the CAW to represent the employees at Maple Grove. Anyone who defends the UFCW is defending these unethical business practices: forcing employees to work without proper training, allowing employees to be disciplined for not attaining work standards, willfully intending to injure employees by forcing them to attain unreasonable work standards, allowing employees to work in an unsafe work environment where the product alignment is abysmal and assemblers are forced to lift heavy product above their shoulders and over their heads, ignoring seniority rights regarding upgrades, downgrades and overtime in the workplace by allowing the company to "re-write" the rules whenever they see fit, zero recycling of wet waste from produce which could be composted and zero recycling of cardboard. At the moment, I am embarrassed to be working for Loblaws and I am ashamed to be a UFCW member.

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Please Kill Me ]

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: Please Kill Me ]

P.K.M. I have to say I find your login disturbing. There is not a job, company or a machine worthy of that kind of passion.

quote:

---

lets get to the vote

---

Hey Maplegrove .. when does the representation vote to take place?

Has 1000a been able to say definitively that they have no side deals or agreements with NG that would affect Maplegrove employees' effectiveness at bargaining?

I know the "Partnering Agreement" the UFCW signed with Loblaws (Provigo) severely impacted any clout they had at the bargaining table. I know that UFCW Local 777 already had a four-year extention signed and sealed six months into the first agreement. The UFCW members didn't know about those deals. Has 1000a been able to guarantee that no deals like this:

quote:

---

9. The final agreement concerning these arrangements was incorporated into a written document described as a "Partnering Agreement", which was signed by representatives of Provigo and the UFCW on August 15, 1997. That agreement contains the following provisions which are important in the present case:

In consideration of the commitments contained herein the following is agreed to:

1. When new Provigo stores open or are to be opened, Provigo agrees that it will voluntarily enter into a voluntary recognition agreement with the Partner Union. Such agreement will recognize the Union as the exclusive bargaining agent for employees of Provigo at that store and street address in a bargaining unit that will be an "all employee" bargaining unit save and except:

(i) Loeb or Provigo - one Director, one Assistant Director, six Department Managers, office employees, one inventory controller and management trainees;

(ii) Maxi stores - one Director, one Assistant Director, six Department Managers, office employees, one inventory controller and management trainees;

(iii) Maxi & Co. stores - one Director, two Assistant Directors, nine Department Managers, office employees, two inventory controllers and management trainees;

(iv) New banners - consistent with the above.

2. The term "new Provigo stores" as used in this Agreement means stores which are not in existence as of the date hereof but which will be newly constructed and opened for business after the date of this Agreement.

3. In the case of existing Provigo stores that are not presently certified or accredited and for non Provigo stores that will be acquired by Provigo in the future and that are not certified or accredited, the decision of whether or not to join a Union and have it represent them as their bargaining agent is strictly up to the employees of those stores. Provigo undertakes to communicate the message of free choice to employees and management and to inform the management teams of such stores of Provigo's position on this issue. In the event that any of these stores is faced with a Union organizing campaign or application for certification or accreditation by the Partner Union, Provigo undertakes that a clear message of free choice will be communicated to the employees of that store stating, without any ambiguity, that employees are free to join the Union if they wish.

If the Partner Union becomes accredited, the parties will negotiate and enter into a first Collective Agreement based upon the principles agreed to in this Partnering Agreement.

4. (i)The parties hereto agree that there is to be only one certification and accreditation and one Collective Agreement per sitelfacility and that the recognition clause shall refer to that site/facility by name and street address.

(ii) The parties also agree that the expiry dates must be staggered so that not more than, one store in any region or sector is vulnerable to strike action at any time.

(iii) The Union agrees that each of Provigo's stores is a separate Employer from any other related or associated stores, whether carried on by or through more than one corporation, individual, firm, syndicate. association or franchise, or any combination thereof, under common control or direction, and the Union agrees that it will not, at any time, make an application to the Ontario Labour Relations Board pursuant to Section 1(4) of the Ontario Labour Relations Act, as amended from time to time, nor will it seek to combine the bargaining unit of one store with any other bargaining unit of Provigo.

10. Prior to the signing of this agreement, the UFCW and Provigo had begun negotiations for standard or model collective agreements for each of the Maxi & Co., Maxi and Loeb stores to be opened. These agreements were finalized by November 1997. Blanks were left in each of these collective agreements for implementation dates, wages, employee benefits and other provisions which were to be separately negotiated for each new store after it opened.

---

or this:Secret Contract exist?

Ask for a written statement or ask that all signed documents between the employer and the union be revealed before any vote. Ask for a signed agreement that anything not produced before the vote is null and void.

No one should be bound by a deal they knew nothing about.

quote:

---

Exactly! and that's pretty disturbing. If a company, job or machine can evoke such passion, it would have to be a pretty messed up environment!

---

siggy, you have no idea what we're going through over here in "Maple Grave". It just gets worse as time goes on. I was very disturbed today and yesterday to have workers come to me and ask if I had heard some of the rumours they've heard. These workers said they heard about P/T employees being told that if they voted for or supported the CAW and the UFCW won the recognition vote, that they would never get F/T at Maplegrove. I think i'll have to have a chat with senior management tomorrow to get this nipped in the bud! There are lot of other things being said but this crosses the line and is harassment. If I find out who started this you can bet he'll be fired! This is just the tip of the iceburg, I talked to a few of my friends and a superviser that is sympathetic to our cause tonight and the shit that they told me they've heard would curl your hair. The depths that some people will go to, just to get a vote never ceases to amase me. I think i'll have another glass of wine and contemplate tomorrow......

[ 01-27-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by DeMoN:I think i'll have to have a chat with senior management tomorrow to get this nipped in the bud! [/QB]

---

Good luck DeMoN. It wouldn't surprise me if senior management started this rumour. The major cost of doing business is labour, and we all know the company supports 1000A. You might have better luck going to "Inhuman Resources", but I doubt it. They all know who signs their pay cheque. It is really sad when the only option open to employees is going to the labour board, but what else can you do? Power to the people! Members for democracy!

quote:

---

These workers said they heard about P/T employees being told that if they voted for or supported the CAW and the UFCW won the recognition vote, that they would never get F/T at Maplegrove.

---

Hey I thought 1000a was the model of true unionism and brotherhood, this sounds like childish vendictiveness. Rather than taking this to management take this to the members. Nothing more clearly illustrates why they should choose the CAW than this "rumour" regardless if management started it or the UFCW supporters. I wouldn't want a union who will only support me if I support them, what the hell is that?

UFCW; We are a very democratic union and to prove that if you know what's good for you you'll vote that we are a very democratic union or you won't have a job in our plant".

There really isn't much of a choice here at all is there?

I think the UFCW is a little too gutless to accept that sort of challenge. They thrive on hiding the truth and using scare tactics on the uninformed for member support. They wouldn't stand a chance in a head to head debate with the CAW. Its a great idea, and I think if it were to happen, the CAW would win the vote by a land slide. And I believe for that reason the UFCW would never agree to such a thing.

I think a debate would be great. They could have a independent moderator well versed in labour law, so that she or he could question the stances taken by either side from a legal perspective. Unfortunately finding a lawyer that hasn't worked for either a George Weston company, the CAW or the UFCW is pretty hard to do.

I still challenge the UFCW to put in writing that there are no signed "deals," other than the CA that has been circulated, with the empoyer, or if there are, to put them on the table so all workers can see them.

I doubt the UFCW would ever go for the debate idea. As far as they're concerned, they've already won the workplace through voluntary recognition.

We've discussed at length the reasons why vol. rec. may be unethical, but the fact is, the UFCW still does it all the time and thinks of vol. rec. as just another "organizing" tool.

The burden is on the CAW to prove its support by getting at least 40% of the bargaining unit to sign cards. The CAW could always challenge the UFCW to a debate, but I doubt that the UFCW would take them up on the offer unless the CAW got the 40% first. Still, it would probably make for good leaflet material.

Of course, one other problem is that the CAW may not want a debate either. As we've already seen from the "no-raiding pact," the UFCW probably has some dirt that the CAW doesn't really want the members to hear about. I still think your best bet is to go with an independent union, be it an affiliate of the IWW, the UE, or something else entirely.

But whatever you decide, I wish you the best of luck in your struggle.

Dirt and what else? If you'll recall on another thread there was mention that good old UFCW Canadian Director Mike Fraser (Uncle Cliff's nephew) was credited as the unlikely middleman who brought the CAW and SEIU back to fraternal bliss.

I'm sure it took a lot more than, "Shame on you two! Now stop this fighting--right now! If you kids don't stop this, immediately, there'll be no desert for a week! DO YOU BOTH UNDERSTAND?"

Scotty Lester:

Has a vote been scheduled? When?

Will the unions hold a debate before the vote, like what was suggested above? When?

[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: globalize_this ]

DeMoN good of you to admit The CAW can't win the vote, needing more time is always a sign of a campaign going badly

"Lark" when the campaign "starts", you'll know it.

siggy, you have to remember that the Kitchener, Fortinos and London warehouses are still open and Scheduled to move into Maplegrove over the next 2-6 weeks. I think it would make sense to wait till they are in the warehouse before starting anything....

[ 01-29-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

I think having the vote later is better. That way there is more time for workers to discuss and debate the issues, get information and make up their minds.

It's obvious the more time pass's them more support shifts to the CAW. Deprograming all the disinformation the UFCW has fed workers at that plant will take time. Patience is far more than just a virtue, it's vital to success in situations like this. The CAW doesn't need to wait until August, but it's wise to use as much of that time as they need to not just win the vote, but smash the UFCW. All good things come to those who wait. The UFCW is going to learn the hard way you reap what you sew. I can't wait.

I like the idea of reposting of all jobs at
Maplegrove! I am not the only unselfish long
time 1000a member who will help and try to
pass this motion! We collectively will bring
JUSTICE TO MAPLEGROVE one way or another!

Thanks brother DeMoN! I anxiously await meeting with my fellow goats.I mean that in a
respectable way!The sheep are the ones that
need to hear the TRUTH! I think this meeting is long over-due!As a 15yr ufcw member I am
absolutley graetful to have new EDUCATED bros.Roger S. CHEF and a whole bunch of you
guys (I don`t know your names) have to collectively combat this commie of a biz-
union.The ufcw damage to the working mans
standard of living has to be brought to the
forefront.We all know the collapse of Erin Mills barg.comm. in 94 affected all future
leverage of our smaller whouses. The mis-
information from 1000a is appalling.And
damned I stay quiet and watch! If we was all
sheep we would all still be in shackles.
A message to all 1000a supporters DONT MISTAKE NICENESS FOR WEAKNESS us CAW supporters have not even barely started
our collective exploitation of this bloody
disgrace of a union.UFCW education definately
lacks the education coming out of an ALL-CANADIAN union in the CAW.The proof will
be apparent JUSTICE AT MAPLEGROVE JUSTICE
THROUGH SINCERITY Johnny E

Well isn't this whole web site interesting.....You call this site "MFD [members for democracy]" a site that boasts it's self as a group of people of interest to disclose real truth. I myself have lost a lot of respect for this site since I have posted my first comments. Why do you ask?.....well it appears this is not a site of true democracy but a site with it's sole purpose of defaming the "UFCW" as a whole. IF I AM WRONG PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME ON WERE YOU HAVE DONE THE SAME TO OTHER UNIONS........This site should call it's self A SELF SERVING "I HATE THE UFCW" web site. I have posted many articles about the CAW and it's own flaws. What have you so called "MFD" members done? Well you have twisted and manipulated everything to try and confuse the real issue in order to try and slam the "UFCW".....The real question is wether the "UFCW" or the "CAW" has done what is needed to look after the best interest of "WORKING PEOPLE" as a whole while at the same time dealing with an unfortunate situation of a "COMPANY" who made the decision to "CLOSE WAREHOUSES".....and a UNION trying to make the best out of a bad situation to help those affected workers.

May I remind those readers that the same situation has just arrived with the A&P warehouse closer. The same union and the same company [A&P and CAW] ...but yet the CAW would not let their own members come into their warehouse with full seniority. They [CAW] with knowledge from the company [ meaning knowledge of future warehouse closings] negotiated a clause that would allow affect "CLOSING WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEES".....an opportunity to come to the warehouse with back dated employee seniority to January 2000. [The CAW sold out their own members]...Thus meaning that the existing members would not be affected and the other "CAW" members would lose their seniority and potential rates of increased

If this is a true Members For Democracy site like you boast......then there should be truly two sides of the story with facts not just opinions. So to the "WEB MASTER" I challenge you to find real facts for you members and "CUT" the crap.

Once again I will state for the record this is not a "MEMBERS FOR DEMOCRACY SITE" rather it is a site of how to
discredit the UFCW with out real remarks about CAW............that is my opinon!!!!

Hey, "I've got an uninformed opinion" if you'll check through the threads, you will see where the UFCW has received credit for good work, and you'll see where they've been lambasted for crappy behaviour.

You'll see the Teamsters take their lumps, the CAW get chastised, and the UA spanked big time. You'll see the CSN and AUPE put on pedestals, and you'll see the CLC raked over the coals.

Any moron could see that this site deals with a spectrum of issues and a variety of unions.

Ric my man, get on with your life and take an anger managment course. There's more to life than getting a job with the union.

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by <"I have an opinion">:
......we know who you are and in time will expose you................that is "MY OPINION"

---

You're not making sense, pal. Who gives a damn who DeMoN is. If it's a sunny day and DeMoN says, "hey everybody, it's sunny today," do we say, "oh, DeMoN is a nasty man, therefore, it's not sunny."

Fact is fact. A fact is a valid from a bad guy as it is from a good guy. Facts are merely facts. Their validity has nothing to do with the personality or any trait of the person who delivers the fact.

You can't refute the facts, so you attack the man. That's not logic; it's fallacy.

Sorry to upset you my child..."WEISER" it is just my opinion. Seems you get upset when my opinion is full of facts and not anti UFCW propaganda. I apologize to the fact that i am not in the same time zone of the 1800's like your self. Please forgive me for accepting that i am living in the year 2002. I will in future try an stoop to your level next time. Again please accept this as a formal apology............."I have an opinion"

quote:

---

If this is a true Members For Democracy site like you boast......then there should be truly two sides of the story....

---

I present to you, "I have an opinion", the opportunity to put "your opinion" online.
http://www.ufcw.net/submit/

quote:

---

Designed to give workers a voice, MFD welcomes and encourages Union members to write thoughtful and accurate articles for publishing online. In the interests of balanced reporting, MFD also invites, and will "endeavor" to publish, factual submissions on the subject matter of MFD reports from authorized Union representatives.

---

Are you up to the task IHAO? Or are you going to continue to spew your useless and annoying vitriol? I, for one, am getting tired of your crap.

Keep it up and you'll lose your ability to share what little you do know.

EDIT: ubb

[ 01-30-2002: Message edited by: slek ]

United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 19: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms

RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN CANADA.
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.

Perhaps our friend, IHAO, could tell us because I can't find it anywhere, where in these two very important sources is there an exemption for thought, opinon, information or expression about UFCW Local 1000a? I have looked high and low but can't find it? Is there a special exemption somewhere? Did the authors of the Canadian Charter or the Universal Declaration intend to include the words "except when you're criticizing Kevin Corporon and UFCW Local 1000a" but forgot?

[ 01-31-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remote viewer:

FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

((c) freedom of peaceful assembly

---

Well .... at least the UFCW is making sure I have that fundamental freedom.

quote:

---

Originally posted by <"I have an opinion">:
May I remind those readers that the same situation has just arrived with the A&P warehouse closer.

---

There is a totally different situation at A&P than the one at Maplegrove. A&P was an existing warehouse with an existing collective agreement that covered the membership in that building. Maplegrove was a new,empty building with no existing employees and "no" collective agreement that was ratified by Maplegrove employees (hence the need for a Representation Vote).
Next time compare "apples to apples" people might take you seriously if you do.

quote:

---

Originally posted by <"I have an opinion">:
To "DEMON" we all know who you are................your little conniving posts have not fooled anyone......we know who you are and in time will expose you................that is "MY OPINION"

---

I've been using this "Internet Alias" for the past ten years, but if it will make you feel "empowered" to "expose" me, feel free to do so (I have nothing to hide).

[ 01-31-2002: Message edited by: DeMoN ]

Can anybody from the CAW come forward and
explain this Rat accusation against John-
CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson????

Scotty Lester I would like to know your history in the company example as in myself
p\t march87-june87 erin mills dairy
f\t june87-june99 erin mills produce
june99-july01 pinebush gm\bond
july01-current maplegrove perishable

I have never been disciplined but i have
seen lots of others treated like shit.
To my amazement I can not beleive they
can honestly defend and support the UFCW
In most debates members felt no solidarity
with UFCW1000a. Scotty our options before were slim to none. Today we have an opportuinity to change that and that will
come soon to a vote. You get educated and
understand that ufcw is way way more negative
than the CAW being from St.Thomas I thought
you would be a little wiser than those spineless T.O. people I call sheep

Demon; How committed is the CAW to your cause [retorical question] That no raid agreement keeps sticking in my craw. I would recomend that while you actively proceed with the CAW certification vote you also prepair to form your own union as well. I wouldn't want to see you at the midnight hour with a CAW that say's "hey, the CLC say's that no raid agreement is just that and we can't proceed. You'll have to stay in the UFCW." Don't wait until the last min to scramble for cover. If the vote goes UFCW I worry about your employment future. The UFCW seems to have this big coincidence of reformers or people trying to bring in other unions being fired by the employer. Strange isn't it? I suggest you cover yourself just in case.

Thanks for the concern Scott but I think the CAW is in this till the very end. The "no Raid" agreement the UFCW and RW/CAW signed will have no affect on the outcome at Maplegrove. Both parties have already broken the aggrement since it was signed. The CAW took Coke-a-cola Bottling and Minute Maid, and the UFCW took a warehouse from the CAW, so any arguments have already seen their day in court. I'll try to get more details for you next week and post them for all to see.

Scott the workers at Maplegrove were subjected to anti-CAW literature. So the CAW
supporters are being REACTIONARY!!!Just before we go any further most SHEEP were created by company and it is my experience
with the UFCW(fifteen years) that they like
to have lots of SHEEP.With the Mgrove union
contact letters they sound off and create more sheep the company must be loving this!!! When the CAW gets into MAPLEGROVE it will be
time to turn sheep into goats!! I for one thru education and experience know the CAW
is far better at representing the workers best interests. I sure hope we can bargain for an education fund so all members at MGROVE can understand TRUE UNIONISM at its
best.Scott have you ever read Buzz Hargroves
-Labour Of Love-?? Again even the most vicous
of ufcw supportees will be trangressed into
full CAW REPRESENTATION I can promise that.
I could see in the future that eventually
all union men will want to drive the CAW bus.

Hey guys I need some help putting a fact sheet together. What I need are all the CAW and UFCW contracts that have a 2 tier pay.

Got to run, going out for a birthday breakfast mine!

Thanks for all the help

Happy birthday to you,
Happy Birthday to you,
Happy Birthday dear DeMoN.
Happy Birthday to you!
And many more!!

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

Happy bday bro D!! Talking to the workers at the Zehrs gro. store in St.Thomas they
have a three tier thats right THREE-TIER pay
scale thru the UFCW negotiators!!!! A senior
employee told me with the first contract offer the bargaining comm. did NOT recommend
acceptance a short while later the commitee
brought back the same initial offer and the
ZEHRS BARGAINING COMMITEE told their members
to accept thye same deal!! I'll tell y'all
that alot of people are watching and routing
for a CAW RESCUE not as loyal UFCW'S put it
as a RAID!!! Spent the aft. with some senior
Erin Mills men and they say the UFCW is as
SPINELESS AS EVER Again thank goodness the
CAW is there for US.

Happy birthday DeMoN.

Don't forget the Swiss Chalet Ontario agreement. It has a 3 tier scale.

And the Overwaitea/Save-on Foods in British Columbia has a two tier, acquired in '97.

The Manitoba Safeway agreement '98-2001 is two tier.

To allow for company "restructuring" , they have bought_out_hours.
The bought_hours are divied 80% for trainees and 20% for regular.
The wage scale for trainees is much lower than the regular wage scale = two-tier.

edit = Hi Sam! Welcome aboard!

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

I have the times for the meetings this week with the CAW.

Tuesday Feb.5th 2002 - 12 noon- 6:00 p.m.
Wednesday Feb.6th 2002 - 3:00 p.m.- 9:00 p.m.
Thursday feb.7th 2002 - 12 noon- 6:00 p.m.

CAW Cambridge Office
887 Lang Drive Unit 11
519-653-2871

Hwy 401 to Hwy 24/Hespeler Rd. South
Take 24/Hespeler Rd. South to Lang Drive
Turn right at Lang Drive and the CAW office is on the right hand side.

I urge ALL Maplegrove employees to come and hear what the CAW has to say so we can all make an informed decision regarding our future. I have Tuesday and Wednesday off so I hope to spend a bit of time at the meetings and get a chance to put names to some of the faces I see at work.

Thanks for the info on 2 tier pay, keep it coming so I have lots of ammo

Oh, and thanks to all the well wishers on my Birthday. I got my wish.... Nudge-Nudge, Wink-Wink!

People who are afraid make me laugh

The UFCW crew is scraping the bottom of the old barrel with their stupid reasons to keep the CAW out.

It seems pretty quiet from the Ufcw supporters!! I guess they figure all has been
said!! Scotty it would not be turning your back on your union to check out our alternatives!! You owe it to yourself to come and get some questions answered at the CAW
meetings for all affected Mgrove employees!!
Maybe you could bring questions from workers
who are close to you!!! No matter what happens in the future I am glad that you are
MY BROTHER!! And for sure we all deserve
improvements in OUR WORKPLACE!!!

UFCW also represents A&P Dominion workers (I believe they're local 175). Perhaps it would be instructive to get and post copies of both collective agreements and compare. It would be interesting to see how the two unions stack up against each other in terms of wage rates, benefits, job security, FT/PT and the length of the agreement.

Theoretically since they're both bargaining against the same employer in the same province (Ontario), one would expect the two unions to have similar contracts. Maybe the CAW workers would get a few dollars more since most of their members are in Toronto and have a higher cost of living.

But lets see, shall we? Anyone out there have copies of either agreement?

There has been a war waged between the supporting "UFCW vs. CAW"employees at Maplegrove Distribution Center. Why is this? Well the fact is the CAW has engaged in a campaign of raiding another bonafide Bargaining Unit of the UFCW. The workers at Maplegrove "all" work together and have a Collective Agreement negotiated by the UFCW. This has resulted and continues to result in the division of "Working People".

What does this mean?

It means that at the end of the day the "Workers" will be the ones that lose. Why? The answer is very clear. As a cartoon I seen awhile ago stated "UNITED WE BARGAIN / DIVIDED WE BEG" This cartoon is very true especially in this situation at Maple Grove.

The employer is very aware of what is happening at Maple Grove and are watching very closely as to what is happening there.

The only "LOSERS" in this "WAR" will be the employees as a result of this division. Unions have always been a fight about the "CORPORATE/GOVERNMENT" world and it's attacks on working people. All is lost on what Labour is all about here at Maplegrove.

I can and have attacked the CAW on it's practices and ethics just as much as you the posters have done to the UFCW. Where does this lead. Well it leads to division which "CORPORATE AND GOVERNMENT" thrive on to "DIVIDE AND CONQUER" the labour movement.

One cannot blame the UFCW for negotiating in 1998 a recognition clause in their agreement for any "NEW" distribution centers. Why would they do that? The same reason why "ALL" unions negotiate recognition clauses including "CAW". It is designed to protect the "Working People". If one even suggests that this is not a good thing has to believe that "UNIONS" should not exist. Which "In my Opinion" is "CARZY". Organizing Laws in Ontario are unbelievable and workers are no longer protected against employer intimidation and termination. Recognition clauses are a way for workers to gain the protection of a Union with out the "DRASTIC" emotional challenge to become Unionized. Even "JOHN ARMOND" who is the CAW Organizer and the CAW could deny this fact.

The fact is all us Workers at Maplegrove have the protection of a Union and the "UFCW" has in fact done all it could possibly do to protect the "WORKING" people. Let us not forget that we the members of the "UFCW" had a vote and, it was our "VOTE" that protected the affected workers from the "Closing" [that the company decided to do] to those distribution centers. It was "US" who make up the "UFCW" along with our "LEADERSHIP" that helped out all the working people. It was us the members who directed the "LEADERSHIP" on what "WE" the members were prepared to give up in order for the "OTHER" union members to come with their "FULL SENIORITY".

I ask this question....where was your union in protecting "YOU" their members?? Why did they not negotiate a "Recognition Clause" to protect your rights. They did for other members re: "Coca-Cola" to name one as there are many others. This is a continuously growing company, one can not use the argument they didn't know.

To this end I suggest. Cut the division it is only hurting "us the working people" for years to come. NG is winning the war not "US".

THIS IS "In My Opinion"

Thank you "IHAO" for simply stating an opinion. That's a good thing.

Unfortunatly your opinion is based on the worn old platform biz unions use to justify everything from corruption to imprisoning workers. "Don't say anything, do anything or rock the boat because the employer will take advantage of us."

It's my opinion that if you rock the boat, the sailors develop fine sea legs. To expose and root out corruption keeps a union healthy and strong, so it can take on even the strongest of employers. By speaking loudly and acting forcefully, employers take workers' demands seriously and they treat their workers with respect.

FCW needs U more than U need FCW. It's time to rock the boat!

[ 02-06-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

"Everyone's Entitled to MY Opinion"

Why????? Because I worked in Kitchener for the full extent of the contract and am now a full fledged UFCW supporter, for the good of the people.

It is evident that corruption is rampant in BOTH unions and as long as we have a leader who is not under outside contract, for their own business interests, the people will succeed. This can only be done under an over-educated person that is now in place in Maplegrove.

The only way to quell the waves and begin the true fight, which is against the company, is for those people to come together and unite and express their TRUE feelings through media. I call on all those who haven't expressed AN OPINION to use your democratic right and speak the TRUTH.

Proud to be union.. EETMP

It is because of my appreciation of the different personalities involved and the first hand knowledge of the corruption, that I side with the UFCW. The best bargaining position and a union which stands up for the rights of the worker is best for the people. The longer this file is a "hot topic", the more people will learn.

I am open to questions regarding any and all issues because education is my goal and that is why "Everyone is Entitled to MY Opinion".

Look out 1000a, I think I hear 1000b starting up.

How would one even begin that process?

What are the pros/cons of starting up your own local "(1000b)" within the structure of 1000a, is it possible? what is the likelihood of UFCW ever allowing this to happen? How would we gain support of the workers without feeling the pressure of the "UFCW machine heads" even more than we do now?

"They must give the majority what they want or the other option is eagerly waiting at the door. don't ask demand remind them who they work for. Don't take no for an answer."

What happened at Local 1518 when the majority decided to tell the UFCW what it wanted and reminded the leaders of who they work for? Siggy? Scott? Maybe this would be a good time to tell that story. Just so nobody is real disappointed in the end.

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Shadow ]

Shame on me, I should be more specific. I made it sound like there was only one example. Pick whichever example of democracy in action you want. The great election would be a perfect example of what happens when the members tell the big boys how they'd like things to be.

I've been reading Shadow and quite frankly I think I'd be wasting my time. United we stand

Where was that kind of thinking when the UFCW filed it's lawsuit agianst a part time worker at superstore? Where was that kind of thinking when the UFCW turned a blind eye when Superstore management [owned by the same parent company as Maple Grove] searched Williams personal locker for union reform litature and told him if he was ever seen talking to other employees about union reform or passing out union reform material on company property he'd be fired?

United we stand....Do any of you know what that means? I'd say it means united against a common enemy on the field of battle. It doesn't mean during piece time we all snuggle up by the fire and kiss. MG has an existing contract, unless your all a bunch of company rats trying to get each other fired I don't see how a debate over what union you want to bargain your next contract is going to weaken you.

United we stand

Like most people I have 4 fingers and a thumb on each hand. The fact that they are seperate from each other allows me to perform many different kinds of neccessary funtions from day to day that allow me to succeed and survive.

However, despite the fact that by themselves they can be fairly harmless, when I feel threatened those same fingers and thumb close together and form a fist which is far from harmless.

United we stand

Sure I could walk around all day with my hands clenched in a fist and always be ready for a fight. But if I did that how much do you think I'd get done? You can't do much with two closed fists. Just like you don't achieve much if a group agrees with each other just to avoid looking like their not ready for a fight somebody else. "Only fools seek the council of agreement" The UFCW is weak and corrupt because nobody is willing to shine a light on the evil doers and question their conduct. Debate doesn't make you weaker, and infighting won't either unless you try and seek an aliance with the employer. Kind of like a "partnering agreement" if you will.

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: Scott Mcpherson ]

OK you C.A.W supporter's I have a very importain question for you.
Why the hell when we all agree that this the tension at Maple grove is getting out of hand Why John Aman and his leader Tom Collins does not get to the labour board and submit the application?
1) C.A.W does not have 40% of the cards?
(they might)
2) They know they can't win at Maple Grove?
( I dought it because most of them have been brained washed)
3) They like the B.S at the Wharehouse
( Most likely )

I urge you "Auto Workers" to get off your ass and get this vote over with ( If you can) it is a very unconforable work place in which nobody at this point can fix.........
Once the Union that gets the most votes wins lets get together as 1
DeMon I think its time you signed one of my cards......

"<EETMP>"

quote:

---

"Everyone is Entitled to MY Opinion"

---

Wrong! You are entitled "to" an opinion, it's our option to listen to it. Only someone with a "HUGE" ego would write something like that.

Since there is only "one" employee from Kitchener that openly supports the UFCW I know exactly who you are and what you stand for.

quote:

---

It is because of my appreciation of the different personalities involved and the first hand knowledge of the corruption, that I side with the UFCW.

---

I guess knowing all about corruption (first hand) is the reason you chose the union you would be most comfortable with.

quote:

---

The best bargaining position and a union which stands up for the rights of the worker is best for the people.

---

What would you know or care about the "Rights of the Worker" all you have know "self interest".

quote:

---

It is evident that corruption is rampant in BOTH unions

---

Put up! or shut up!

quote:

---

as long as we have a leader who is not under outside contract, for their own business interests, the people will succeed. This can only be done under an over-educated person that is now in place in Maplegrove.

---

"Delusions of Grandeur"
God help us all if you think that you're the next "Messiah" for Maple grove. I can't imagine a worse scenario than that!

quote:

---

I call on all those who haven't expressed AN OPINION to use your democratic right and speak the TRUTH.

---

I hope you enjoyed that little bit of truth!

O.K Weiser......
I belong to 1000a, Could you please tell me what local you are talking about and i will look in to it.

Anyone wishing to return unwanted mail to the UFCW 1000A here is their address:

UFCW Local 1000a
61 International Blvd Suite 204
Etobicoke ON M9W 6K4

And remember, Bob's Your Uncle!

Next Article
AUDHome--> Union Democracy Review--> Articles

From the February/March 2001 issue of UDR
In Canada: Auto Workers and Carpenters defy U.S. internationals

In July, the Canadian Auto Workers union was suspended from the Canadian Labor Congress in a dispute over congress rules which, like the AFL-CIO no-raiding pact, forbid one affiliated union from taking members from another. In defiance of the congress, the Canadian Auto Workers welcomed into its ranks 30,000 members of eight Ontario locals of the Service Employees International Union. According to Buzz Hargrove, CAW president, 11,000 of the SEIU members voted to disaffiliate in workplace balloting; and 95% of the votes supported the CAW in a government collective bargaining election.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

I belive they are non-union to this day. What's your point?

Toyota keeps unions out; they don't invite unions in. It's sort of an old fashioned concept that the UFCW glee club might not understand.

Toyota doesn't do the "partnering" thing, neither does CAW.

"Scott_ufcw_Lester"

I see your blowing smoke out of your ass again to hide the real issues. That infomation is old news and doesn't relate to the discusion here. We all know the CAW was in the C.L.C. bad books for a short while. Can you figure out why it was someone from the UFCW that patched things up. Do you think they had anything to fear from a CAW that wasn't bound by the C.L.C.s "No Raid" clause. Without the CAW in the C.L.C. the other unions were shaking in their boots (especially the UFCW). I'm lost as to why you posted the Toyota article. Was it to say the CAW sucks at organizing or did you run out of dirt to throw. One thing is for sure, they will try to organize Toyota again.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DeMoN:
[QB]"Scott_ufcw_Lester"

I see your blowing smoke out of your ass again to hide the real issues. That infomation is old news and doesn't relate to the discusion here.

Old news come on DeMoN mostly everything you and "John Aman and Tom Collin" supporters throw at us is "OLD NEWS" quit blowing smoke out of your ass if you guys had the support you guys wanted you would have applied by now!

Why don't both unions put forth their best proposals for representing the employees, ie, if we are your bargaining agent we will..... . Put it in writing and stand behind what they say. If they don't then they should resign their position as bargaining agent.

A pretty simple concept, let the workers decide. Let's keep this clear, the union is paid by the employees to represent them best as possible. In many ways (and especially in today's economic environment) it is a simple business relationship. When it comes to bargaining, the employer is only looking at it from a business perspective. Period.

No matter who wins the vote, the important task right afterwards is ensuring your union does what's in your best interest, and then turning your attention to making sure that NG treats you with dignity and respect and pays you real well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott Mcpherson:
Another thing I've heard UFCW hacks bemoan is what "true unionism" 1000a demonstrated when they accepted CAW and Teamster members into their union. Wake up!

fellow Scott Why dont you come to Ontario and visit Maple Grove yourself and hear both sides of the story......Or do you just want to comment from the other side of Canada???

MG is a new warehouse designed to replace serveral smaller ones. That fact these warehouse's were different unions is irrelevant.

First of all its NG and as of 2 years ago changed to L.C.E,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,U.F.C.W got the rights to be the Union in there . Fact of life get over it or get on with a vote[/B

That would have been true unionism. What Corporon did was take a voluntary rec. deal in trade for "future considerations".

][B]Is it not true that C.A.W get the same agreement when it comes to Ford, GM,Dodge etc...

Then screwed non UFCW people out of their rightful company senority hoping they'd get mad and quit giving 1000a the chance at a windfall of initiation dues from new members.

U.F,C.W members voted on how to let these other people come in to Maple Grove
Maybe you can fool a fool blinded by their new senority and job perks Corporon but it's hard to fool me, I'm smarter than you are. Your local and your "union" is a joke and disgrace and you don't deserve to be the position to represent anybody. That's too much social responsibility for the self serving.

---

WHY ARE YOU SO BITTER TOWARDS THE PRESIDENT OF MY UNION ......WHEN YOU ARE WEST OF HERE WAY WEST

Just FYI "UFCW pom-pom crew" It's an Ontario LRB decision.

quote:

---

It is in this light that the involvement of Frank Kelly, Business Representative for [UFCW] Local 206, must be considered, I am of the view that Frank Kelly's advice to the applicant and to Mr. Shanly as to how to oust [Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Internationa Union] Local 75 has had an effect on the voluntariness of the signatures on the petition document. I as satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the vast majority of the employees of the hotel were aware of hotel management's preference to have [UFCW] Local 206 represent then in their employment relations with the hotel, and that the employees were aware of a relationship between the UFCW and hotel management, in the sense that the former was "an investor" of some nature in the hotel. In this regard, I have concluded that it is unnecessary for me to determine whether the "UFCW" in its organizational form as an International Union or as Local 206, has effective control over Kelloryn via Propcos 14 and 16, as it was overwhelmingly perceived by employees that the UFCW did have a significant investment in the hotel, and therefore some Influence with management. In my view, the employees of the hotel would likely have viewed it to be in their best interests and in the best interests of the hotel and its long term viability (and, therefore, their job security) to have as their bargaining agent Local 206 of the UFCW. This would first require the ousting of Local 75 as their bargaining agent.

40. Here, a representative of the perceived "investor" with a special relationship with the employer urged and facilitated the genesis and circulation of the petition document. In these circumstances, I conclude that the origination of the petition, and its circulation, was tainted by the perception of employer involvement. I emphasize here that I have not in any way concluded that the UFCW is an "employer" at this hotel. I conclude only that because of the perception of the UFCW's financial interest in the hotel, which the vast majority of employees shared, Frank Kelly's involvement in the origination and circulation of the petition would likely have been perceived by the employees to represent the desire of Management. The voluntariness of the signatures on the petition document is, accordingly, questionable.

41. At the Conclusion of argument of this case, counsel were asked to make submissions on the issue of whether the separate identities of Local 206 and the International should have any effect on the voluntariness of the signatures. Having had an opportunity to consider their arguments, and having reflected on the issue, I am of the view that the distinction is one without a difference. It is clear from the evidence of the employees who did testify that "the UFCU" the "International" and "Local 206" were to them interchangeable entities, and that no distinction was ever made between them. In those circumstances, the concerns I note above remain and, in my view, nothing can rise or fall on the distinction between the International union and a local union affiliated with the International.

---

[ 02-08-2002: Message edited by: HJFinnamore ]

I dont want to get personal no harm intended
If I offend you let me know who you are!!
Please REFER to article from MR.F
I would guess you are lower seniority
than myself or let alone Mr.F
You give me a fire that I will never give-up
born to a proud CAW man 1967 Windsor
John G. Erickson
INVESTIGATE YOUR UFCW UNION YOU SMF

THE LAST WORD

Weiser, DeMoN, Siggy ...

The three of you either GET A FREAKIN' LIFE or GET A HOTEL ROOM !!! I just took everything the three of you have done to improve the situation at Maple Grove and placed it on the head of a pin, with room to spare.

JOHN ERICKSON ... dude please give your head a shake, do us all a favour and refrain from writing that lengthy message you promised was forthcoming. One union feels you are a turn coat, the other union is wondering if, or rather when you would turn on them. Damn, one day you're here, next day you're there. You need to go your local music store and buy a Notorious B.I.G. CD and listen to the "10 Crack Commandments". It goes like this, somebody give me a hip-hop beat ... "Number 5 neva get high on ya own supply"

ALSO, you can all rest assured that any former Union "official" who comes onto this type of website to "expose" union corruption is sure to have a closet door in his house he doesn't want opened (oh those skeletons).

Here is a reminder to everyone INCLUDING MYSELF and some RANDOM thoughts. Don't criticize me for these thoughts, but rather think about them and make comments, suggestions to illicit more thought and more action.

1. Look at your paycheque ... see who pays your bills?
2. Show up for work
3. Put in an honest days work
4. Stand united and stand up for YOUR rights
5. Stop whining all day long about how unjustly you are being treated just because you like to whine
6. Document incidents that demand to be documented. Where? When? Supervisor's name? Witnesses? What was said? It is this kind of clear, HONEST, concise documentation that helps your union steward and/or rep win grievances at the early stages. A pattern develops and you will find you experience fewer and fewer problems.
7.Proper documentation can lead to satisfying members requests say over 80% of the time. Lack of it leads to DISsatisfaction over 80% of the time.
8. Hold yourself AND your brother working next to you accountable for ensuring you maintain a safe workplace.
9.Workers screw each more then companies screw workers, its always been that way and will always be that way. ONLY we change that.

That's it for now I guess. Oh ya ... my three favourite Rossas ... Maria, Testa, and Cramma ... LMAO

Ok then Slek
what is stike pay these days?
A six pack of Mac and cheese and a pack of kool-aid?
right on brother give me a card so I dont know what I will get.
Right now I have good pay which is gauranteed for quite a while.
Do the math buddy

quote:

---

what is stike pay these days?

---

I couldn't tell you. Why don't you ask the UFCW? Then ask them why "stike" pay is so low? Then ask them where all the money you give them goes?

quote:

---

A six pack of Mac and cheese and a pack of kool-aid?

---

People have survived on less. But, of course, it's always "me me me" with you ufcw clowns.

What you don't seem to understand is that a lot of people have had to give up a hell of a lot more than you ever will - so you could enjoy the rights, the pay, and the working conditions you enjoy today.

Selflessness is completely lost on you. And that's a sad fact.

There must have been a "Clown Convention" here last night. I'm sorry I missed it....

This was originaly posted by "Dougle" on the 1000a thread. http://www.ufcw.net/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&amp;f=3&amp;t=000053&amp;p=3

quote:

---

Today I aproached a Union rep, not to be named, And put forth the idea of having a meeting and settling the matter of job postings. I explained my self telling him that it may solve the problem of division within the warehouse. I also explained to him that the pro CAW members only want what they feel is right. I also explained that some feel that Maplegrove has a two tier Union, one for the "original UFCW" and one for the other members. I asked to put it to the floor so that brothers and sisters could vote and put this to rest and carry on with life, by taking it to the company the real enemy. As a result, not shocking, I was laughed at and was told that if I wanted to repost all the jobs, to vote for CAW.
This rep missed the point, there is more then two solutions to this problem. 1. vote CAW, 2. Vote UFCW, 3. repost, etc..etc..
UFCW brass if you are listening... why not compromise with your members to find a solution to our problems instead of beating it into us. Why not take the CAW trump card "...try to repost all jobs..." and beat them before they even come knocking. Reposting may not be the answer perhaps another answer may be to ammend the "Other members" get down graded before "Original UFCW" etc...etc... I believe that we are willing to compromise are U?

---

I see you got as far as I did when I called the UFCW4Maplegrove Hotline and asked the same question. I talked to Rick (forgot the last name) and was told we would "never" get to vote on that issue (reposting jobs).

Both "Dougle" and "John-CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson" are original 1000a members trying to make changes (for the better) at Maplegrove and both are meeting resistance from the same people! The same people that want everyone to unite and work together, yet they are completely unwilling to compromise their position on the issues causing most of the problems at Maplegrove. Scott_ufcw_Lester what have you done lately (as a union steward at Maplegrove) to try and address these issues? Or are you going to keep riding that "gravytrain" right through the station......

John-CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson and Dougle please don't give up the fight because of the words of a few "very uninformed" individuals. What you are doing shows your strength of character, what they are doing shows just how "LOW" people and organizations are willing to go to fullfill their selfish needs.

"TheSportsWiz" it's very apparent that the only weapon you have in your arsenal (of choice) is the "Personal Attack" and the "Unverifiable Quote". I'm embarassed to have to call you a "union brother". Someone in your position should be trying to inform the membership on why the UFCW is such a good choice for Maplegrove or why the CAW is a bad choice. Instead you attack your own members for having an opinion that isn't the same as your own. I think you should reconsider your career choice and consider something that doesn't require you to have any P.R. skills or an open mind.

"Scott_ufcw_Lester" I doubt "TheSportsWiz" will answer the Question so how about you answering it.

quote:

---

Someone in your position should be trying to inform the membership on why the UFCW is such a good choice for Maplegrove or why the CAW is a bad choice.

---

Give it your best shot!

Don't expect Sports_Wiz to come out from under his bridge until a new page starts. He be shy of anwering questions.

With an appology to the author for a slight alteration, I think the quotation says a lot of the current exchange:

quote:

---

"I don't agree with those who think that the conflict is simply between two [unions], namely [the CAW] and [the UFCW]. . . To me, the key conflict is between irrational blind faith and rational, logical minds."

-Taslima Nasrin

---

Irrational blind faith has nothing to back it up except "they told me so."

Unfortunately s Mcpherson I wish we could get you tohelp in person Aman is good but he is restricted from mgrove property I am willing to donate $500.00 for your trip here!!! Maybe you are on to something here!! We owe it to Canadian workers to expose the ufcw for what it really is again aman is good and thank goodness he is there for us. Again this is not a raid but a RESCUE erty!

Scott_Lester, you won a couple of points with me for your last statement. No points for the UFCW, but point for you as a human being.

Pretty amazing what happens when workers talk directly with each other instead of through the official organs. Just an observation. Keep on talking.

edit: Sorry sports wiz you can't have the

quote:

---

THE LAST WORD

---

twice !!!

[ 02-09-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

Demon that's one of your best posts...good work.

quote:

---

unions are a business. They have revenues, expenses, budgets, goals, successes, and failures. That's a reality whether we like it or not.

---

Wiz, if you and I can agree on nothing else please tell me there is a chance I can still reach you on this point. UNIONS ARE NOT A BUSINESS.

Yes fiscal responcibility is very important but the bottom line for the union as an organization should never, ever take precident over the will of the membership. And in the UFCW it always seems that way.

"at the end of the day" how many times have we all hear that? And no Wiz, it doesn't have to be a reality. We can change it if we have the will to do so. While reforming the UFCW is not a realistic option, forming a new and better union is and it's just a signature away if we as working people have the courage to do it.

I believe unionism is a state of mind, not a membership in an exclusive club one has to pay to get and stay in. I believe the best representatives of working people are themselves. I believe group collaboration and the free exchange of ideas is a better more effective alternative to our current top down Governing structure. I believe a union is family of workers... never a business. And we should always conduct ourselves accordingly.

I think DeMoN said:

quote:

---

...and you're creating sheep out of the new employees that have never been in a union before.

---

I was in the discussions with loblaws for the opening of the Vancouver distribution centre. The distribution centre was recognized as the "heart" of the BC Supersotre retail system. If the heart stopped beating, the system might crash.

As a UFCW official, working under the direction of very senior officials, I worked with Loblaws personnel to create a system that was raid-proof and strike proof.

The warehouse complex was huge. One building had a 120,000 sq. ft. Superstore on its roof. Only unskilled, non-union people were to be hired. Much discussion went on about whether to use a unionized trucking company to do the hauling. Women were hired into warehouse jobs that paid big bucks to what they were ever used to. As many jobs as possible were to be part time to maximize "spin" of employees.

Areas were split into "cells" so that employees would be segregated and less likely to communicate. There was talk about moving the odd person from the warehouse into the stores and from the stores into the warehouse, so that the argument could be made that anyone who wanted to raid had to take the province because the units weren't separate and therefore inappropriate for collective bargaining.

When another union tried to organize the non-union supervisors, we immediately applied to the LRB for "certification" for all units. Up to that point all units except for the "seed" store were voluntarily recognized. The deal was made that if push came to shove that we would fight to have the supervisors rolled into our unit, so that another union wouldn't get a foot hold.

The hiring was carefully planned. No one, union or company, wanted people hired with a lot of union experience. No union experience was preferable. Keep the hours low and never give hope that the job may work into something that could support a family or buy a fancy car. Keep the view that the job is worthless and temporary. Few will fight for something that is worthless. Even fewer will fight for something that will be gone in a few months or upon graduation.

The employer and the union looked very closely at McDonalds hiring practices. They work extremely well for McDonalds, and they can work well for anyone who can work them as well.

"HJFinnamore" thanks for the info:

quote:

---

I was in the discussions with loblaws for the opening of the Vancouver distribution centre. The distribution centre was recognized as the "heart" of the BC Supersotre retail system. If the heart stopped beating, the system might crash.

---

You seem to have the inside scoop on how "Loblaws" and their "Partner Union" work TOGETHER to reach the same goal. I can see a lot of what you said happening in Maplegrove right now.

quote:

---

As many jobs as possible were to be part time to maximize "spin" of employees.
Areas were split into "cells" so that employees would be segregated and less likely to communicate.
The hiring was carefully planned. No one, union or company, wanted people hired with a lot of union experience. No union experience was preferable. Keep the hours low and never give hope that the job may work into something that could support a family or buy a fancy car. Keep the view that the job is worthless and temporary. Few will fight for something that is worthless. Even fewer will fight for something that will be gone in a few months or upon graduation.

---

Please tell us more.....

DeMoN, I'll fill you in a little later, but before I do, I want to comment on a guy named "Ric" who seems to think that I have something to hide. Here's just one of many e-mails I've received from him:

quote:

---

Oh my my my. Once upon a time a boy named Hughie got caught with his hands in the cookie jar, double dipping and so he changed colours and set out to be a hero. But alas, a leopard can't change his spots, you can't teach an old dog new tricks and all those other cliches ruled.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ric <????@????.ca>
To: Steve ????? <????@sympatico.ca>
Cc: workplace@telus.net <workplace@telus.net>
Date: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 9:11 PM
Subject: Kid Rock Here

Hughie,

In a wonderful intimate exchange of information between you on the left coast and Stevie on the right coast (you guys are bi coastal but let's leave that alone for now), you stated as can see below,
"... Ric is a pesky guy. He's been trying to get me to put a noose around my
neck for months, ..." Now Hughie, what noose is it you are referring to? What is it you are worried about? What angst have you within? Your statement suggests that you have done something wrong, illegal, illicit, undignified, unethical (you look in the mirror then pick one) and are concerned that I might get you to expose yourself. That was never my intention for I had nary a thought of thou being such a complicated being. However, thou doth exposed thyself it seems.

Hughie what evil hath you wrought upon your fellow man in your prior career that makes you so bitter so vengeful that thou would commit your total efforts to attacking the very organization that helped clothe you, feed you, and shelter you. Do you do this to justify your existence?

Otherwise have a pleasant day and if you decide to drop in to your local Starbucks I recommend the Vente Soy Latte. It is OUT-FREAKIN'-STANDING !

---

The reason why I even take the time to bring this crap to anybody's attention is because it's so common.

None of these guys has the guts or brains to defend anything mentioned in the following pages:First Interview or Second Interview or The Secret Contract or How Loblaws and the UFCW Created a "special" LocalWho actually signed the First 777 rag.

What really galls me is the stupid comment about the UFCW clothing, feeding and sheltering me. However, if you look and think about what Ric (he writes a lot like Sports_Wiz)says, you'll see what a sick relationship exists between many UFCW cheerleaders and the benevolent machine heads. They truly think that they do nothing and in return, the machine will take care of all your worldly needs.

I want all of you to think about the stupidity of what Ric said. I couldn't be bought by the machine heads. I did some stupid things while they rented me, and when I saw what was really up, I'm the one who blew the whistle. I'm the one who sued them. When I wouldn't "back off" I was fired. Yup, Fired. They accused me of all sorts of improprieties. They've stood up at union meetings and defamed me with lies. They've leafletted their members who were leaving to go with the CSN, telling them that I was a criminal. They tried the same shit with their Writ of Summons that they filed when they sued me to try and shut me up. (BTW, the buggers won't proceed with the damned suit. In fact they have totally ignored my 12 page demand for discovery of documents.)However, they did give me a real nice car, some odd jobs to do, and a steady income for four years after I was fired.

Think about it: You don't pay somebody money and give them all sorts of other stuff and have them work for you for another four years if you have "cause" to fire them. Think, real hard about it. Ric doesn't want to.

For some reason Ric and this clan think I'm standing up for the Power Souce now for the first time. Here's something more to think about: I sued the UFCW using my own money while still employed by them. I launched a number of law suits using my own money. The minute I asked about "where's the money gone and what was it used for," I was shipped to Alberta away from my wife and infant son. I was kept out of my home province for over to three months and then shipped to Nova Scotia. I was asked, "What will it take to make you back off?" and I said "nothing." I was flown to Montreal the next day and left to sit in the Hilton for a day, and then fired the following day.

My supposed crime? I walked out of my hotel room in Calgary (six weeks before my termination)parked my rental car at the airport and with my own money, I paid my airfare home to be with my wife and baby boy for the long weekend. I was not scheduled to work and my cell phone was on all weekend should anybody need me. I didn't receive one call, but there were plenty of "hang-ups" (clicks) on my hotel phone message box. Not once was I called. However, it was no secret that I had gone home. I actually phoned a UFCW rep to tell him I was delayed in Vancouver and I spoke with a Loblaws subsidiary president in the airport lounge on the way back to Calgary. He wasted no time in reporting to the UFCW that I was in Vancouver. BTW, I could be back in Calgary within two hours notice if need be.

I could have parked my car at any parking lot and stayed with a friend in Red Deer rather than using my hotel room for all they cared, but because they didn't give me permission to leave province, they decided six weeks later that I should leave.

Did they even ask me about it? Nope! Did they ask for an explanation? Nope! Did I do anything different than other's had done before? Perhaps, others sneak out of province, but others have never had the balls to sue for what's right for the Power Source.

So there now Ric. There's nothin' that I'm trying to hide. And even if I was, what the hell would it have to do with the facts that I provide?

[ 02-11-2002: Message edited by: HJFinnamore ]

I forgot one very important piece. There will be a vote, your democratic right, and labour law correct, buty before we do, all that I personally ask is that we are all educated to the issues. We personally have to weigh the facts and overlook the mudslinging. It is everyone's future at Maple Grove. How can one possibly vote intelligently, no different than government elections, if we can't by pass the un-factual information about both the CAW and UFCW. Do your homework and don't worry about personal egos. United we stand and divided we fall. We can drop to our knees and accept the way things are handed to us or stand and be counted.

Thanks for reading.

John E. I'm pleading with you not to go there. This forum is just starting to take the shape of usefull discussion please don't poison the well. Sportswiz's words are just that. I'm sure it's hard to brush off but that's going to happen form time to time on this forum. People say nasty stuff. For the good of the discussion and the good of your fellow workers I'm asking you to be the better man and brush this off and stick to the high ground? It's your choice but I think your a strong enough individual to walk away from it and still save face.

Looks like your way ahead of me John. Thanks I knew you were a good man.

troll; 'U better make amends b4 I find out who you are'

It's not John, he had a right to be angry. It was me, I read that and I was just worried about how it could be taken and where it might lead that's all. John took care of it on his own so I wish I wouldn't have said anything.

[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: Scott Mcpherson ]

This is in answer to DeMoN's request that I expand on my earlier post on page 13 where I said:

quote:

---

... As many jobs as possible were to be part time to maximize "spin" of employees. Areas were split into "cells" so that employees would be segregated and less likely to communicate. The hiring was carefully planned. No one, union or company, wanted people hired with a lot of union experience. No union experience was preferable. Keep the hours low and never give hope that the job may work into something that could support a family or buy a fancy car. Keep the view that the job is worthless and temporary. Few will fight for something that is worthless. Even fewer will fight for something that will be gone in a few months or upon graduation....

---

A very senior Loblaws official told me "they're here for a good time, not a long time." In an arbitration I conducted, I had the same official on the stand and I was questioning him about the company wanting to have employees quit. I mentioned that it was advantageous to have the spin at the "bottom" but he corrected me and said "no, we want the spin at the top because the expense was greater for top rated employees."

I was told that the company wanted to create an employee profile that was conducive to spin. There was talk about using retirees wherever possible because they just wanted suplimental income (they never did implement that one), or students serious about a career doing something other than warehousing or retail work. I was told that they didn't even want the supervisors hanging around for too long. They get burned out pretty fast, you know.

If someone were asked what they wanted to do with his or her life, and if he or she said I want to work here forever, I was led to understand that they probably wouldn't be offered employment. I drove by the Vancouver warehouse a few months ago and saw a sign promising to pay something like a $1 thousand dollars bonus to anyone who would accept part-time employment in the warehouse. In my mind it was an indicator of how desparate they were to keep from having to offer full-time jobs.

In discussions about how to keep the warehouse raid-proof, the company designed a "cell" system to segregate employee groups. Posting between cells was prohibited and seniority was by cell. As well, with so many part-timers, the shifts were staggered so that some workers would never even lay eyes on each other. We figured that such a system would stifle communication and interaction between cells and this make it harder for any other union to raid the warehouse. As the union, our idea was to move some people periodically from the warehouse to the stores and from the stores to the warehouse. That would also make it harder to say the warehouse was a stand-alone operation. Even though the company was enthusiastic about the idea, I don't think it was ever implemented.

There were some people hired who had minimal union experience, but they were few and far between. Most of the people who were hired came from relatively low-paying employment, so they were happy with the pay and they had no idea that other grocery warehouses were making much more.

I did say to the Loblaws official, "the only reason you have this union here is to keep a real union out," and he said words to the effect, "so what's your point?"

The big difference between what NG is doing and what I was involved in is that the company contracted out all of its distribution. They kept it contracted out until all CAs were dead and any claim to successorship had died.

The surprising thing is that UFCW Local 2000 had the company's warehouses before. The contract was premium in every way. It was replaced by a rag when the company took over its own distribution again. And now Local 777 has merged with Local 2000 to form the very new Local 247 (that's "Twenty-Four-Seven" just like the warehouse operation. How witty!).

The warehouse employees, as I understood it, have been told that they can now bargain separately from the retail stores. They probably can, but they can't strike independently because they are part of a 6000-member bargaining unit made up of part timers. Unless the UFCW goes to the Labour Board and is able to out argue the company that the warehouse should get it's own certification, they are stuck being the tail trying to wag the dog.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not berating Loblaws. They run a tight ship and make enormous profits. They know how to run a business profitably. Their managers do what they are trained to do. You know exactly where they are coming from and where they are going. They have performed brilliantly. And you've seen others post here that they don't want to deal with the CAW. If I were them, I wouldn't want to either. Things are fine just as they are&#8212;thank you very much.

[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: HJFinnamore ]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by John-CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson:

3: Did you know we are fighting for a polling station in your London warehouse for the vote

I was in London doing some Organizing about a month ago. We want the london People to vote as well as Fortinos in Hamilton and anyone else who is coming over.

I seen first hand what these workers are concerned with and we can Provide it.

John are you trying to say that we don't want these people to vote or are you trying to make it look that way?

This is from a CAW Infomation Bulletin dated January 17, 2002:

Quote:

"Our members are familiar on how our programs operate and are not scared to speak out if they disagree. We don't hide!"

Then why do ex-CAW members who wish to become UFCW members and remain UFCW members state they are afraid of current CAW members finding out that they are pro UFCW. Don't ask for names as you know these people demand confidentiality.

Quote:

"National Grocers will not be in any position to try and ask for any concessions in future bargaining. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to know that after they close a number of locations, they rely and need all of you more than ever."

This is ludicrous. National Grocers (LCE) has four other warehouses to do the work if the need arises.

Quote:

"John Aman
National Representative
CAW - Canada"

When and where was he ELECTED to his position?

YOU ASKED US TO BRING IT ON. IT'S BEEN BRUNG. AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING.

Oh Sports_Wiz, stop it!

The CAW says you will be strong, and you argue how weak you are. "Help, help, we will be crushed if we resist NG!"

You can't supply fact, so you just had to throw a dig in at John Aman. Who gives a rats ass where he came from. Who the hell elected Corporon when he first got the Prez's job? There now, we're even!

Your message is loud and clear, "NG is too powerful to fight, so roll over and save your lives."

And don't be such a chicken shit, Sports_Wiz. we don't expect you to use your real name, but don't go usin' Just the Facts to try and confuse.

QUOTE FROM JOHN E
What I mean is the St.Thomas Zehrs people
are not too happy!!

I believe thats local 1977.........I have a member of my family thats working there let me call him on Monday and I will have a response to it
If you want to know who it is i will talk to you in person tomorrow

Hey if you're talking to somebody from Local 1977, ask how they're feeling about the 65% pay hikes Pres Brian Williamson and the exec gave themselves last year. Have the members gotten over it yet? That's another bunch that should really learn to learn to "accept" things.

After I read this article it sounds like the C.A.W likes to raid other Unions and then claim "Its Not A Raid" Call it what it is A RAID!!!!!

Sharleen Stewart, the newly-appointed SEIU international vice president, said that "the current raid by the CAW has touched off one of the greatest crises in modern Canadian labor history." Stewart accuses the CAW of "planned and deliberate destruction of inter-union solidarity" and "cannibalizing already organized workers instead of trying to reach Ontario's hundreds of thousands of unorganized workers."

Other unions have joined in rejecting the CAW's actions. Fears abound of raiding wars, of the risk that the labor movement is incapable of acting collectively--in short, of a debilitating rift that can no longer be bridged.

The CAW maintains, however, that the split has been present for years. It says that there is a fundamental disagreement as to a direction and strategy for labor.

What is at stake here this is not just the issue of raiding, the CAW claims. In supporting the dissident SEIU locals, the CAW says it is also upholding the right of Canadian workers to self-determination and national autonomy.

Hargrove says he is shocked that the Canadian unions in the CLC have not chosen to send a united message to international unions that Canadian workers must have the right to leave an international union and join a Canadian union. He points out that 70 percent of Canadian unionized workers belonged to international unions ten years ago. Now only 30 percent do.

Heres the heading its sounds right to me....

Auto Workers Sanctioned Over Raiding Charges
Split Threatens Canadian Labor

by Marsha Niemeijer

"HJFinnamore" thanks for the insight into what really goes on behind closed doors! It can be disheartening to see the extent of the collusion between Loblaws and their choice of "parner union",but it makes my resolve to get the UFCW out of Maple Grove that much stronger!

Thanks for your time and effort

quote:

---

Originally posted by DeMoN:

I'm surprised that the UFCW would want London or Fortinos to have a vote, knowing that well over 90% of their members want the UFCW out as much as we do![/QB]

---

Who the hell did you get your numbers from?.........someone is giving you B.S or its hopefull wishing! I have been out in the feild . HAVE YOU? too see this first hand

I'm still waiting for an answer on my post dated Suday Feb 10. Why doesn't the UFCW file grievances or why doesn't the UFCW stewards carry grievance forms and why doesn't the ufcw or the company follow yet alone carry the Maple Grove collective agreement.

Thanks for any response.
Keep up the educational conversations Mr. Erickson

Demon,

Buddy ....get a Life.......and by the way "IT IS A RAID".....that is why "Teamsters in not on board with this action by CAW".

Quote:
The only number you got right is how many warehouses could do "SOME" of the work in case of a work stoppage at Maple Grove. As for them actually being able to do even a "SMALL" percentage of that work is just more "smoke and mirrors" on your part.
(1) Sudbury is too small and too far away to do any of the work!
(2) Peterburough is too small to do more than a few stores and doesn't carry the products exclusive to Loblaws or Fortinos.
(3) ottawa is too far to do more than a handfull of the closer stores (even the closest store is a 4-5 hour drive)
(4) Erin Mills is at capacity and would like to send more stores to MapleGrove!
I would say they could (at most) do 25-35 stores using the other warehouses but that still leaves well over 100 unserviced stores. Hmmm.... not so great for business!

This is a Company that will challenge "ANY" union if it is faced with one. May I remind you of 1994. Which I believe KITCHENER accepted a (2) tier wage scale and a rake over the coals in language as well. My guess is you were on the tier 1 scale and sold out "potential" brothers to save your own ass.

" Don't bother saying that it wasn't the CAW who negotiated that agreement, as the same staff that negotiated that agreement are currently employed by CAW" read the CAW web site or call them.

NG has enough Warehouses to operate with out a problem and "YOUR" facts are as per usual half truth.

1. Erin Mills
2. Servayor's
3. Cambridge GM
4. Sudbury
5. Fortino's
6. Sudbury
7. Ottawa
8. Peterburough

Let us not forget that there are other empty warehouses that could become operational if needed. Let me guess you would probably become employed at one of those if asked and count your lucky stars that you have a pay cheque while leaving your brothers and sisters on the picket line.

Don't think that the company is not aware of what is happening and has a plan if needed. This is not fear monger but a "REALITY". It is a fact of labour.

Quote:

I don't know where you're getting your numbers from, I suggest getting a new source.

I suggest you do the same buddy!

Quote:
What you forgot to say was that most of the workers were from UFCW represented stores!

What is your point about this. The issue at hand is what had happened to the warehouse workers
Can you read yet? Just to help you here is a Quote so you can read it over again and get the point.
I think it is self explanatory to see the help that UFCW had done in favor of the affected employees compared to the CAW.

Quote:

Is the CAW going to acknowlege the seniority of those workers moving to their warehouses? Here is the answer which is NO. As per the CAW Collective Agreement: "3.02 Employees of the G.A. Love Distribution Centre who were full-time as of the date of acquisition shall be credited with a permanent seniority date of January 15, 2000 and with their full service date with G.A Love shall be utilized for the purpose of vacation and benefits." That agreement means some people lost 16 years' seniority.

What was not mentioned was that the CAW negotiated only a "1 week" per year of service severance for it's members.

Seems to me like most of the CAW closure agreements that they forget about the members because they are no longer going to pay dues so the "Who Cares" applies.

I think it is self explanatory to see the help that UFCW had done in favor of the affected employees compared to the CAW.

Quote:

"In addition to negotiating a severance package for the members, Local 175 will be setting up an Employment Adjustment Committee ensuring those members are aware of all the resources and programs are available to them. We will continue to work for them ensuring that other employment opportunities will be available for them." said Local 175 President Wayne Hanley.

Hmmmmmm......Guess it is apparent that UCFW has the "Does Care" application compared to CAW.

Quote:

The first mistake you made, was to Quote "section 3.02" which isn't from the G.A. Love Collective Agreement but from the A&P Toronto Warehouse, CAW Local 414 Collective Agreement.
The second mistake was trying to compare the A&P situation with Maple Grove. Maple Grove was a new warehouse being filled with workers from 5 closing warehouses.
G.A. Love workers were allowed to enter an existing CAW warehouse and carry 2 years seniority with them.
If "NON" 1000a members that came to Maple Grove try to post into an "existing" 1000a warehouse we carry seniority back to Aug. 1/2001 (the date we became UFCW 1000a members)
I would say the A&P CAW members were very generous to workers coming into an existing warehouse, compared to the UFCW giving Maple Grove workers "NO" seniority in existing 1000a warehouses!
Please get the "FACTS" right next time you "THINK" you know something!

I will respond to each sentence/response with a number. For you Demon the 1st being "the first mistake"sentence, the 2nd being the second mistake sentence etc.......I hope you can fallow....The purpose is, so that the readers know that you are not a credible and educated person as you try to appear with your twisted half truth's.

1.Good catch if the "3.02" is from the A&P warehouse. It shows that you can read when you want to.

2. Again you are not as smart as you want to be. Maple Grove was not being filled with 5 closing warehouses. It was being filled with existing UFCW members and originally new hires as the company see fit. Meaning the company could have selected the "BEST" workers from other warehouses and discarded those they didn't want "You could have been in the crowd of those they didn't want". It was the "UFCW" who negotiated to protect your job and seniority and allow you to post into "MAPLE GROVE" using your CAW seniority. IF it wasn't for the UFCW and it's members "WHO VOTED" you would have come to Maple Grove with "NOTHING".

3. G.A. Love workers were aloud to enter into the "A&P distribution warehouse only" with back dated seniority to January 15, 2000 as that is the date when "NO EXISTING CAW MEMBERS" would be affected. One point to make is, the CAW was aware during that negotiations that the company was contemplating closing GA Love so they "CAW" negotiated to protect the A&P warehouse while leaving GA LOVE to "hang".

4. Well uneducated "DEMON" you have "FULL" seniority in Maple Grove since you arrived. Waaa waaa.....U didn't have first pick at the Job and you get downgraded first. You didn't have a right to post for it in the first place. If it wasn't for "UFCW" you might not even have a job with Maple Grove. What part of this do you not understand? When the "COMPANY" decided to "CLOSE" your warehouse you were effectively out of a job. Just like anyone else who deals with a Closure. Your so called union didn't even help "YOU" or "G.A. LOVE". Who helped out "YOU"? The answer is clear the UFCW did so, stop your winning.

5. Sorry buddy democracy rules, the members of UFCW "VOTED" to not allow you to have more seniority outside of MAPLE GROVE of AUG 1, 2001. But hey you would never have that if the MG became CAW anyway's.

6. I fail to see how this is true read "SUPRA".

7. Demon.......please get "YOUR" facts straight the next time "YOU THINK" that you know something.

This is again "In My Opinion"

On a Sad note.......
there was part-timer from prouce afternoons that was killed in a car accident late last week.
Since both our Unions are actively in Maple Grove The C.A.W and the U.F.C.W should send flowers.
I will find out the address of the funeral home and I will give it to ever wants it.
Good Night Brothers and Sisters
Scott

"In My Opinion" or "Scott_ufcw_Lester" can you tell me how many of the closing "Barn Store" workers were UFCW and how many were CAW?

"In My Opinion" or "Scott_ufcw_Lester" can you tell me how many of the closing "Barn Store" workers were UFCW and how many were CAW?