Visit uncharted.ca!
  • authored by Troll
  • published Sat, Jan 26, 2002

UFCW 1000a

UFCWa brags on its Maplegrove pages:

quote:


We are also the only union to win a mediated settlement that requires independent review of standards.


How the heck does anyone "win" a mediated settlement? Mediation is a process where both parties agree. There aren't supposed to be winners and losers.

Their claim:

quote:


UFCW Local 1000A is the only union in Canada to have successfully fought against the evils of unreasonable Engineered Labour Standards.


is totally preposterous. Unions like the Canadian Union of Postal Workers and the Telecommunication Workers have been fighting engineered productivity studies and related discipline for decades. Ask a CAW rep about what the CAW has done in the way of engineered productivity fights with the automakers. They've been fighting that stuff and winning battles for decades too.

[ 01-26-2002: Message edited by: Troll ]

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 2:46pm

Yes, it is impossible to "win" a mediated settlement. A mediated settlement comes about when the two sides agree to some stuff and the union withdraws its grievance(s). The mere fact that it was a mediated settlement implies that they backed off and met the employer part-way and withdrew a grievance that they could otherwise have had a ruling on.

Your points about who's been fighting engineered labour standards is well taken. Unions have been fighting those for well over a century. For Local 1000a's spin doctor to suggest that 1000a is the only union to take up the fight shows that either he is incredibly misinformed or thinks the rest of us are.

  • posted by Troll
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 3:05pm

I still haven't heard the answer to why the company chose UFCW 1000a over any other union to do the voluntary "wreck" at Maplegrove.

Hey, "I've got an opinion," or "scotty_lester" do either of you have an answer?

I'd like someone to help me get this straight too. Whomever is writing the tripe on 1000a's Maplegrove pages, says:

quote:


March 2001. UFCW Local 1000A members voluntarily vote to fully dovetail their future seniority rights at Maplegrove with incoming workers from non-UFCW locations, with only one condition: That their initial jobs at Maplegrove would be protected. This was to ensure that the company could not (as it had in the past) play games with their job security. This was an unprecedented act of union solidarity.


First, what other types of votes does 1000a conduct except for "voluntary" votes?

Second, is grabbing off the full-time jobs over senior workers truly an act of "union solidarity"?

1000a goes on to say:

quote:


July 2001. Thanks to the worker-to-worker solidarity shown by Local 1000A members, all workers at Maplegrove, no matter where they come from, can use their Full Union Seniority to bid on vacations, overtime and the hundreds of future new jobs expected at Maple Grove in the months and years to come.


I really don't get this "worker-to-worker solidarity that the 1000a scribe keeps prattling about. The union and the company do a deal so that 1000a will get all workers. The union and the company give the plum jobs to a specially-selected employee group even though they aren't neccessarily the most senior employees who will soon work at Maplegrove. The select group says it's ok for the other transferred employees to have the crumbs left over.

1000a has the audacity to brag that "hundreds" of people are yet to be hired, and that they will have no say in who their union is.

I do not see worker-to-worker solidarity. I see self interest on the part of the employer, its favourite union and the hand-picked workers who grabbed full-time jobs from senior workers.

And as for "Engineering" jobs. I'd say that the huge amount of part-time jobs have been engineered. There shouldn't be hundreds more hired. We're talking about a distribution centre that can easily accomodate many, many, many more full-time jobs.

Part-time jobs create high turnover, and high turnover keeps the union weak. What has 1000a said about forcing the employer to create and maintain full-time jobs at Maplegrove?

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 4:11pm

quote:


Fill out the form bellow. The questions and answers will be reviewed and posted on a regular basis.

 

Comments


There have been 859 visits to ufcw1000a/maplegrove since Nov 21. I have searched the site and have yet to find any comments from interested members. Either all the comments to 1000a/maplegrove have not passed the review and are not postworthy or no-one has queried.

[ 01-26-2002: Message edited by: siggy ]

  • posted by TheSportsWiz
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 4:15pm

Memo To TROLL:

TROLL is an appropriate name for vermin like you. It's amazing you are able to find any time to come on here and spew so much filth and lies while occasionally including crumbs of truth. One question, do you keep your pants around your ankles even when you are at this website or do you save that just for your favourite porn sites. I respect your right to your opinion no matter how misguided, but when you chose to post a message at least keep it factual. I will just question you regarding one of your statements for now. You ramble on about hundreds of future part-time jobs at the Maple Grove warehouse. Nobody said they would be all part-time jobs but you. The fact is this. The Collective Agreement in place calls for 80% of the hours to be worked by FULL TIME employees. Can you understand that? Furthermore, the CAW has proven time and again, and its documented, that they do not care much for part-time employees.

P.S. Besides deflowering canines what other hobbies are you into?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 4:28pm

Hi Sportswiz. I thought we parted ways with you back in the summer when we outed Lee-the-troll who spoke about how much he enjoyed "doing it with the membersheep".

We know you are an official UFCW troll from your past visits. Are you truly the best that the UFCW has to offer?

Please get lost. You and your offensive references to beastiality are not welcome on this site.

[ 01-26-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

  • posted by greeny
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 5:39pm

I work at Maple Grove and what Troll says is an accurate description of what is going on here. TheSportsWiz is just another prime example of the ignorant mentality that these guys have. They dont like hearing the truth, so all they can do is spew out manipulated truth in retaliation ... or in TheSportsWiz's case... immature insults. As for the "worker to worker solidarity", ive witnessed a "protected UFCW member" say, "hey, i picked grocery for 2 years, I've paid my dues, and now i have a good job. All these other guys can have the future jobs that will come" Just another example of ignorance. These guys jumped on the gravy train and will defend the UFCW to the end to keep their Mon-Fri gravy.

  • posted by Troll
  • Sat, Jan 26, 2002 5:39pm

My goodness, "Spurt Whizzz" you are one angry puppy. You said:

quote:


I respect your right to your opinion no matter how misguided...


With all those nasty, nasty things you said in your post, I'm not sure I believe you.

All as you needed to say was, "Hey, Mr. Troll, I think you are wrong. 1000a has an iron-clad agreement that guarantees 80% of the workforce will be full time."

Oops! I'm sorry, you didn't say 80% of the workforce, you said "80% of the hours to be worked by FULL TIME employees." If 80% of the employees were going to be full time, why doesn't the CA say just that?

I agree with you. Most unions would rather have full-time family-supportable jobs for all their members. You also must realize that the way the UFCW's dues structure is set up, it's better to have four people working 10 hours than one person working 40. A forty hour member pays only $6.75 to the union, but the four 10-hour members chip a collective $20 per week into the union bank account. That's $13.25 a week or close to $700 per year extra for each 40 hours worked.

Unions that charge a percentage of a members gross don't benefit from part-time workers.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Jan 27, 2002 12:03pm

% =

per week =

  • posted by Grover
  • Mon, Jan 28, 2002 7:35pm

I work at Maplegrove and I can hardly contain my excitement about a true forum. Where ideals may be expressed without prejudice....Outstanding achievment on it's own don't you think...where even the dribble from those who would try to repress knowledge is accepted in text and displayed.I applaud...I would like to pose a question to those who would accept the U.F.C.W. as thier choice of representation (provided that they were allowed to make said choice) how in an unprecedented act of union solidarity they could have allowed the drivers pool to have there seniority rotated.Seniority would seem to me to be one of the things that the U.F.C.W. just doesn't seem to hold in very high regard.Am I missing something here? Enough for now...thx. again for the knowledge freeway

  • posted by siggy
  • Tue, Jan 29, 2002 6:15am

Grover asked:

quote:


how in an unprecedented act of union solidarity they could have allowed the drivers pool to have there seniority rotated


Seems no-one wants to take your Q. on, so thought we'd bring out again.
Hopefully someone from Maplegrove can explain today how watering down seniority rights and union solidarity go together!

  • posted by weiser
  • Wed, Jan 30, 2002 10:10am

You'll notice that the best the trolls can do when caught is to pee their pants and yell, "Yo Momma Wears Army Boots."

They can't refute the facts, so they call names. They can't argue for disempowering side deals, so they run for cover until their undies dry out.

Not once has a troll been able to refute documented fact, and not once have they had the guts to publicly defend "partnering" agreements and secret deals.

[trollbait] The Machine Heads and their troll flunkies will never answer a direct question with a direct answer because they can't without lookin' like half wits.

However, when they do try to deflect, they finish up wishing they could climb up to the level of half wit. [/trollbait]

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

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Wed, Jan 30, 2002 6:09pm

quote:


[trollbait] The Machine Heads and their troll flunkies will never answer a direct question with a direct answer because they can't without lookin' like half wits.


Amen brother

  • posted by weiser
  • Wed, Jan 30, 2002 9:32pm

Hey, what goes? I bait the troll in this thread, but catch him in this thread.

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Thu, Jan 31, 2002 11:43am

I for one would like to thank "the sports wiz" for his post. I can think of no better reason to rid the workforce of the UFCW once and for all than the kind of mentality showed in his words.

TSW; "I support your right to free speach but you should shut your *&#&ing mouth."

Yep, that pretty much sums up the UFCW's vision of free speach and democracy doesn't it? Thanks for the clear illustration TSW.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Thu, Jan 31, 2002 6:10pm

The latest Maplegrove Union Contact dated jan
24\02 asks "Does CAW really stand for:
Close Another Warehouse?
Here we go again more jibberish without a
name signed to these 1000a mailings!!!
The content of these newsletters not only
attempt to sway support away from the CAW it
creates more sheep.It will prove detrimental
in the future by way of creating fear the way
the company would like when negotiations ever
take place! This sounds more like management
than a union!!I would not be suprised if mgmt.reviews these newsletters before the union mails this misguided B.S.

  • posted by Richard
  • Fri, Feb 1, 2002 7:01am

I know I said that rumour has it that the trolls have had their chains yanked by their handlers, but just in case one slips his leash, I was wondering if one or two of them might read the stuff in the following thread and comment:Top Down "Democracy??"

  • posted by grover
  • Mon, Feb 4, 2002 6:18pm

Hopefully someone from Maplegrove can explain today how watering down seniority rights and union solidarity go together! [/QB][/QUOTE]

well thanks siggy...but even a simplified version of the question still has no response. So maybe one of the misguided might answer why they keep calling on the C.A.W. contract when in fact the C.A.W. has never negotiated a contract...hmmm Or maybe they could comment on why they have suddenly struck up the band on Engineered Standards and seem to be playing the same cords the C.A.W. had already been playing....hmmm And last but not least for now anyways I was wondering why anyone would boast "We are the dominant union in the Canadian retail sector,which is the largest employer of part time workers." If there are so many part time jobs why would anyone want a union that keeps good,hardworking Canadians from getting the benefits and security provided by full-time empoyment...hmmm I think it would be great achievment if they were the smallest employer of part time workers don't you.

  • posted by weiser
  • Tue, Feb 5, 2002 8:19am

quote:


Originally posted by Troll:
...1000a has an iron-clad agreement that guarantees 80% of the workforce will be full time."

Oops! I'm sorry, you didn't say 80% of the workforce, you said "80% of the hours to be worked by FULL TIME employees." If 80% of the employees were going to be full time, why doesn't the CA say just that?

I agree with you. Most unions would rather have full-time family-supportable jobs for all their members. You also must realize that the way the UFCW's dues structure is set up, it's better to have four people working 10 hours than one person working 40. A forty hour member pays only $6.75 to the union, but the four 10-hour members chip a collective $20 per week into the union bank account. That's $13.25 a week or close to $700 per year extra for each 40 hours worked.

Unions that charge a percentage of a members gross don't benefit from part-time workers.


They just don't get it. They think that workers should be happy to have 12 hours a week and be proud to pay most of it to the government and the UFCW. The only difference is that the government gives all income tax back back if you make less than $6 thousand per year.

They brag about dues being tax deductable, but when you don't pay income tax, what's to deduct.

I think Troll is right in that if the UFCW charged a percentage of wages as dues, they would fight like crazy to get the bottom rates up. Likewise, they would fight for full-time jobs because there wouldn't be any financial benefit in having thousands and thousands of part-timers.

Of course the UFCW couldn't brag about numbers, though. They brag that they have over 200,000 members, but that's not a measure of strength. If you took all the CAW units and split shifts into 12- and 20-hours, the CAW would need binoculars to see the much smaller UFCW.

In reality, the UFCW probably represents well under 70,000 full time jobs. (I'm talking full time and part time combined.)

[ 02-05-2002: Message edited by: weiser ]

  • posted by Richard
  • Wed, Feb 6, 2002 7:13am

I was right; the NG/UFCW trolls have had a talking to. From what I understand they are frothing because they want to trollerize the threads so bad, but they've been told not to because their trollerizations have brought unwanted responses from all sorts of places.

I miss those trollies.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Wed, Feb 6, 2002 2:39pm

Oh don't worry. They'll be back. They can never stay away for very long. They've just gone back to the big drawing board underneath the bridge to confer and consult with the legions of well paid troll advisers who will absolutely, positively, for-sure-this-time tell them how they can catch and eat those MFD bastards.

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Wed, Feb 6, 2002 6:01pm

Lets not forget that unions are a good thing.The labour movement is necessary requirement to ensure that all employees are treated fairly.
People sometimes forget the real issues. They cloud their thinking with personal vendettas and bitterness that stem from their own poor chioces they have made.
The c.a.w. has its share top down democracy problems. The membership can change the leadership, but not over night.The UFCW is best for NG, specifically my bank account. We don't concern ourselves with trashing other unions unless they are trying to raid us. This is probably getting to long for most people in this room to still be paying attention. Here are some answers to previous questions:
-never has local union granted incoming employees(plant closure) seniority let alone a different union
-does'crumbs left over' refer to chioce vacations, job postings and every plum job that becomes available
-all unions have their corruption prolems when it comes to engineered hours of work, please see the Molson's contract(toronto)
If there is anything else I am here now and I will respond to any questions.
LETS GET IT STARTED THAN CAN WE!!!!!!!!!!!

  • posted by weiser
  • Wed, Feb 6, 2002 8:04pm

quote:


-never has local union granted incoming employees(plant closure) seniority let alone a different union


Not so! Dove-tailing is common with successorships. Who ever told you that allowing seniority was some benevolent thing that the UFCW thunk up?

  • posted by doctor maplegrove
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 2:47am

Successorship?? Is that what think is happening?If so we you pleaese explain how that applies.
I am aware of those situations, but it is not what is happening at the NG Cambridge.

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 7:35am

"Doctor Maplegrove"

 

quote:


Lets not forget that unions are a good thing.


Unless they are being used to help the company manage the workforce or to remove basic worker rights given under the "Employment Standards ACT".

quote:


They cloud their thinking with personal vendettas and bitterness that stem from their own poor chioces they have made.


Demanding our "Democratic" right to elect the union of our choice is guaranteed under Canadian Labour Laws, it's not a "personal vendetta". I think it's the UFCW that made the "Poor Choice".

quote:


The c.a.w. has its share top down democracy problems. The membership can change the leadership, but not over night.


(1) name the problems
(2) At least we CAN change the leadership!

quote:


The UFCW is best for NG, specifically my bank account.


Why, is the UFCW paying you to write this deliberate attempt to misinform Maplegrove workers into thinking that the CAW can't negotiate better wages than the UFCW? The fact is that the worst case would be that we stay with the "Current Terms and Conditions" already in place at Maplegrove. (read the "Ontario Labour Relations ACT")

quote:


We don't concern ourselves with trashing other unions unless they are trying to raid us.


It's not a "RAID" so get over it! If you think it is then call the CLC and have them explain it to you.

quote:


This is probably getting to long for most people in this room to still be paying attention.


Our abilities to pay attention shouldn't be questioned, rather it's your inability to keep us interested that should be questioned.

quote:


-never has local union granted incoming employees(plant closure) seniority let alone a different union


I would say that in similar cases where an employer consolidates its business and there are different unions involved close %100 are fully "Dovetailed".

quote:


-does'crumbs left over' refer to chioce vacations, job postings and every plum job that becomes available


Crumbs means you "cherry picked" all (122)of the PRIME JOBS and SHIFTS and left us the crumbs! Vacations and job postings are by seniority although "NON" 1000a members have "NO" seniority (except for seniority earned since starting at Maplegrove) for GLOBAL POSTINGS into other 1000a facilities. So much for your "Full Seniority" lies.

quote:


-all unions have their corruption prolems when it comes to engineered hours of work, please see the Molson's contract(toronto)


It's nice of you to admit that YOUR union is corrupt but don't drag others into the dirt with you!
Why don't you and your UFCW buddies crawl out from under the DUNG HEAP that you call home and get a breath of fresh air to clear your heads. Start telling the truth to the workers at Maplegrove so we can put an end to this bitterness. The bitterness comes from the lies and misinformation that you are feeding the workers at Maplegrove. Why don't you take the "high road" for a change, instead of the road that you're presently on. If the CAW decided to play the same game as the UFCW (mud-slinging 101)the UFCW would be buried under a pile so deep the only person you'd have for company would be "Jimmy Hoffa". Clean up your act guys, even the blind can see your campaign STINKS!

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 9:42am

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY,THAT THE ONLY PERSON THAT IS MAKING ANY SENSE IS DR.MAPLEGROVE.AT LEAST HE IS TELLING IT THE WAY IS.IF IT WASN'T FOR THE UFCW, THESE CAW GUYS WOULDN'T HAVE A JOB.GUYS GIVE YOU HEAD A GOOD SHAKE.UFCW IS THE WAY TO GO.WHAT TRULY HAS THE CAW GIVING YOU GUYS.PERCENTAGE OF YOUR WAGES IS THE LEAST OF YOUR PROBLEM,NEVER MIND THE WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF IT GOES BACK TO CAW.IE.THE WAGE CUT YOU WILL HAVE TO TAKE.YOU GUYS WALKED ONTO THE RIGHT SHIP.NOW ENJOY THE RIDE.DR.MAPLEGROVE, YOU KEEP TELLING THEM TO JUMP ON THE UFCW BANGWAGON BECAUSE THE CAW TITANIC HAS SANK!!!!!

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 10:52am

"HOLLYWOOD"

quote:


I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY,THAT THE ONLY PERSON THAT IS MAKING ANY SENSE IS DR.MAPLEGROVE.AT LEAST HE IS TELLING IT THE WAY IS.


Obviously he's saying what you want to hear. And it ain't the truth!

quote:


IF IT WASN'T FOR THE UFCW, THESE CAW GUYS WOULDN'T HAVE A JOB.


I was under the impression that Loblaws did the hiring at Maplegrove, not the UFCW.

quote:


WHAT TRULY HAS THE CAW GIVING YOU GUYS.


The CAW is allowing us to exercise our Democratic rights, unlike the UFCW.

quote:


NEVER MIND THE WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF IT GOES BACK TO CAW.IE.THE WAGE CUT YOU WILL HAVE TO TAKE.


The CAW doesn't bargain backwards, do some research and you'll see thats true.

quote:


YOU KEEP TELLING THEM TO JUMP ON THE UFCW BANGWAGON BECAUSE THE CAW TITANIC HAS SANK!!!!!


Everyone has a right to their opinion, just stick to the issues.

And stop using CAP LOCK!

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 12:19pm

UFCW & CAW supporters:

We've talked a lot about what's gone on in the past and what's happening right now. I'm wondering if we can digress into a somewhat different area:

Can you can give us an idea of the values of the union that you support (CAW or UFCW). What does the union you support believe in? What are its priorities? What does it believe is most important for workers? How does it see the relationship between labour and management?

This is a dimension that is often overlooked in a debate over "which union is preferable" but it's an important dimension nonetheless.

  • posted by Dougle
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 1:31pm

Everyone take a step back and look at what is going on. Brothers and sisters at eachothers throats. I've heard for years from CAW, Teamsters, Steelworkers and others that a Union is only as strong as it's membership. If the membership at Maplegrove is so divided and angery with eachother do you not think that in the future, weither it be CAW or any Union for that matter, it would be any different then it is now. Perhaps another solution to the problem may be in order then to just jump ship, Why not try to work with in the Union that U have now to try to resolve some issues. The UFCW is bound by law to properly represent U. Demand a meeting with All UFCW reps. The Issue of the job selection prior to the opening of Maplegrove. Put a motion on the floor to have it reposted as well as the seniority issues. Put it to a vote within. To pro CAW members, At least try to work within the UFCW first. Some the reps may seem a little slimey but they will do their best, they have no choice. If U don't get the answer that U are looking for ask who his/her boss is and then go ask them etc etc. To Pro UFCW members, get off your high horse. It is not helping the situation any. Try to help. They are new to a Union and contract that they now nothing about. Their are alot of grey areas in our contract that they may not understand. Think back to when some of U were part-time, didn't know sh-t did ya not untill you asked or learned.
To all, everyone grow up slinging mud gets U nowhere. If we can't fix the problems through proper means, then Jump ship but at least try.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 5:56pm

Hey DeMon, You have a right to your opinon,and I respect that.Lets face it,both our union have done good and bad.But lets face the facts.They should have never let two different union merge together.This was gonna be a big problem from day one.You know it and I know it.I could have gone to Maplegrove,with great seniority.but two unions.FORGETABOUTIT!!!

  • posted by frequentgrievor
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:15pm

Hey Dougle, you seem like a very level headed person. I'd like to ask you a few questions:

1) Is there any truth to the mediation of engineered standards the ufcw is claiming, if so, how did that come about.

2) How long have you been a ufcw member?

  • posted by doctor maplegrove
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:26pm

The representatives at maplegrove are doing the best to represent the workers from the other union. The disruption comes when instead of aceepting through learning they challenge every little issue. There is no real tension on the floor. The tension is created by the 'attention seaking rebels' that are haging out in this room.
Why didn't they(LCE,CAW,UFCW) sit down and hammer out an agreement, because Tom and Basil have a different plan. Is this about workers getting their desired seniority? Is about Tom and Basil lining their own pockets?
Money money money thats it.Our bank accounts and their bank accounts. who's gets bigger in the end??
go to go be back later.

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:28pm

It's nice to see all the new visitors, but:

Give me a U
Give me a F
Give me a C
Give me a W

All the crap sounds like high school cheer leading. Stick with UFCW 'cause we're winners and avoid CAW because bad things will happen to you is shallow, cheap and uninformative.

What has the UFCW done that's so good for Canadian workers? What's so stupendous about the UFCW's track record of two-tier and secret agreements and "Partnering Agreements"? What's so bad about CAW's track record? Does the CAW do deals to the extent that the UFCW does?

Rah, rah, sis, boom bah is good stuff for the weekend track meet, but we want some substance and if its good we'll do our own cheering.

Defend supportable facts and attack falacies. Be specific.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:29pm

I would like to shake your hand dougle.You make alot of sense.I personally think the CAW guys should try to work with us instead of against us.And we has UFCW member should help them understand why is not our union vs theirs,but our two unions has one vs everybody elses.To show some united force!!!

  • posted by doctor maplegrove
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:44pm

weiser we don't all have the time to sit around and take the negative out of the context. Stop be so silly. You have allowed fools like deemon to preach his crap on here time and time again. That is easy to see through. Ask deemon to go back to and verify his facts.Ra RA Ra CAW?? They just do not work well with National Grocers and that is a fact. NG does not want to deal with them.
Maplegrove is the future, leave the past behind. Some people are having a hard doing this and blaming the union for this. The workers at Maplegrove are the facts, unless you are there it is probably hard for you to truely understand. This makes most of your judgements and comments false.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 6:58pm

quote:


Originally posted by Doctor Maplegrove:
The disruption comes when instead of aceepting through learning they challenge every little issue.

There is no real tension on the floor. The tension is created by the 'attention seaking rebels' that are haging out in this room.


Could you explain what you mean by the first statement - especially what you mean by "accepting through learning"? Accepting what through learning what?

Could you explain what you mean by the second statement? What is "real" tension and why do you believe that the tension on the floor is not "real"? If it's only "attention seeking rebels" who hang out in this room, does that include you?

[ 02-07-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 9:02pm

Ok, if the UFCW glee club can't come up with anything substantive to base their utter sense of uphoria with the UFCW on, can one of you answer this:

Why is the UFCW suing one of its own members because he has the UFCW International Constitution on his site?

The poor guy asked for one and was refused, as are so many members. He finally got a boolegged copy and posted it and now the UFCW is saying that it shouldn't be available publicly.

How many of the glee club have actually been given a copy of the Constitution and Local Union By-laws? What's so "secret" about the Constitution?

You'd think if the UFCW wanted anyone to join their union, the first thing they would do would be to provide a copy of of the Constitution, so that the prospective members could study it and make a reasoned choice about how wonderful and democratic a union the UFCW is. What's to hide and why would any union sue a member for showing other members a copy of the Constitution?

Over to the glee club.....

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 9:16pm

"Dougle"

It nice to finally hear from a UFCW supporter that isn't reduced to name calling and CAW bashing. It's like a breath of fresh air!

quote:


I've heard for years from CAW, Teamsters, Steelworkers and others that a Union is only as strong as it's membership.


You have seen the light, I hope you live by those words. Don't just "talk the talk" unless you're willing to "walk the walk".

quote:


Why not try to work with in the Union that U have now to try to resolve some issues.


Unfortunately, previous attempts to discuss the seniority issue have met with less than an enthusiastic response from the union and the 1000a members.

quote:


To pro CAW members, At least try to work within the UFCW first.


I think if the CAW loses the recognition vote, there will be NON 1000a members wanting to take an active roll in the UFCW.

quote:


To Pro UFCW members, get off your high horse. It is not helping the situation any. Try to help.


Start by telling the union stewards to stop their campaign of intentional misinformation.

quote:


To all, everyone grow up slinging mud gets U nowhere.


You'll get no argument from me or the CAW on that last point.

Good luck on your campaign to bring changes to Maplegrove.

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 10:19pm

"Doctor Maplegrove"

quote:


You have allowed fools like deemon to preach his crap on here time and time again.


Why are UFCW supporters reduced to personal attacks, time and time again? You can post on this forum as often as you like to, but be prepaired to take the heat if you post personal attacks.

quote:


Ask deemon to go back to and verify his facts.


If you're like a some of the other UFCW supporters at Maplegrove then no amount of proof would convince you I was telling the truth. Why don't you show me the proof that i'm NOT telling the truth.

quote:


Ra RA Ra CAW?? They just do not work well with National Grocers and that is a fact. NG does not want to deal with them.


I think thats a compliment to the CAW not an insult. I would rather have a union that the company hates, than to have one that the company wants to represent their employees.

I hope that you took the time to go to one of the CAW open meetings this week and see that the CAW is not the "monster" that you make them out to be. If you didn't get a chance to go to the meeting then call "John Aman" personally and discuss whatever issues you have with him. He would love to hear from you or anyone else from Maplegrove.

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Thu, Feb 7, 2002 11:52pm

DeMon you are a friend of mine and we have agreed to dis-agree.
We have to get together as one and have unity in MapleGrove.
You know I am very loud with my opions as well as you.
Get off the crap that John Aman tells you and lets work together to protect ALL the members in maple grove.
You told me to my face that CAW could wait for a vote until Aug.
Everyone in the building will be at everyone throats by then, or they will be off on stress leave.
lets not make our brothers and sisters go through that lets have a vote or lets get together as a team and run things right!!!!!

  • posted by sleK
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 12:00am

quote:


lets work together to protect ALL the members in maple grove.


Yet somehow you believe that the proper way to achieve that is to jump head-first into a vote?

Bzzzzzzzz!
Wrong!

You need to take your time, do your research and discuss it.

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 2:11am

quote:


all unions have their corruption prolems


Fair enough Doctor, so what is the UFCW doing to stamp it out? Can you name a single case where the UFCW removed someone who was corrupt prior to police action? Can you explain the fund raising for a convicted embezzler of union funds by other UFCW staffers? Can you explain the CCWIP pension "investments" and provide any evidence the CAW or any of it's officals have ever took part in such things. Even if you can how does that make the UFCW the better choice...lesser of two evils?

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 5:39am

"Scott_ufcw_Lester"

Scott I don't enjoy the tension this is creating any more than you do but you've had the last 7 months to convince the membership that the UFCW is best for Maplegrove and now you won't give the CAW the same luxury. I mentioned in one of my posts that you would know when the CAW started it's campaign, well it's started and it's going to end when we get the recognition vote. The CAW will call the vote when "it's" ready not when "you're" ready!
"Scott_ufcw_Lester" sit down, strap in and get ready for the ride of your life.....

Oh, and Scott don't you think it's time to sign one of our cards

  • posted by weiser
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 6:15am

Dr_Maplegrove, successorship has little to do with which union you favour. It's about an employer or employers merging operations.

In Canada, the law protects worker rights when an employer buys, sells or merges operations. The law says the new owner is the successor, concerning employment rights and obligations, to the old owner.

When unions are involved then the process usually involves dove-tailing of seniority. When it comes to which union will represent the newly-created or merged operation, if the bargaining units are relatively equal than a vote happens so that the workers can choose who will represent them. If there are many many unions, then the dominant ones are usually chosen by the LRB to have their names on the ballot.

Get it through your heads, this is not a raid, it's a determination of the true wishes of the majority of union workers in a workplace consolidation.

Dr_Maplegrove's quote in anothter thread is so, so sick, but so, so indicative of biz union thinking that it leaves me shaking my head:

quote:


Ra RA Ra CAW?? They just do not work well with National Grocers and that is a fact. NG does not want to deal with them.


May I point you back to another time a Loblaws subsidiary didn't want to "deal" with anybody but a compliant union: No Uncooperative Unions Please

Are you nuts?! Are you saying the type of union contract you get depends on how much the employer likes the union it chooses to represent its employees? That can't be what you mean.

Please elaborate on how the employer fits in to all this stuff.

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

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 9:19am

Social justice in Canada: off the agenda?

Upcoming anti-globalization and anti-poverty protests go ahead while funds are diverted to security and military spending

Dateline: Thursday, October 11, 2001

By Paul Weinberg

Getting the ear of government to act on growing poverty and homelessness in Canada was extremely difficult before the terrorist actions and subsequent deaths of thousands on September 11 in New York City and Washington.

Now with a war on in Afghanistan that started on Oct. 7 with a bombing campaign by U.S. planes, it has become virtually impossible "to get social justice on the table," says Buzz Hargrove, president of the Canadian Auto Workers.

Not only are citizens focused on the war and the threat of terrorism, they are also in some cases personally affected by either weekly shutdowns, shorter work weeks, layoffs, shift reductions or companies going bankrupt during the current economic slowdown, continues the union leader.

The Ontario Coalition Against Poverty in an alliance of labour, social action and First Nations organizations are determined to plow ahead this month with a province-wide campaign

Until its board meets this week, the CAW has delayed taking a position on the actions of the U.S. led international coalition and Canada's supportive position. At the moment emotions are "mixed" within the union, adds Hargrove. "I want to be clear that I am not in favour of just indiscriminate bombing. But you can't sit back and wait, and just keep waiting for the next terrorist act and wring your hands. Something has to be done; I am not sure what that is at this point."

Hargrove was unsuccessful in his attempt to have the Canadian Labour Congress call for the postponment of the worldwide protest on November 9 against corporate driven globalization, which is apparently still going ahead. He wonders if tis message will be heard and if it is possible to "get people's minds focused on that in any serious way."

Others like the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty in an alliance of labour, social action and First Nations organizations are determined to plow ahead this month with a province-wide campaign against what it perceives as the poor-bashing policies of the Mike Harris government. The focus is on "economic disruption," says OCAP's provincial organizer, John Clarke. One highlight will be a plan on Tuesday Oct 16 to "shut down" Bay St. in the heart of financial district in Toronto.

Clarke explains that the Ontario protest will be particularly relevant in terms of what has happened on and since September 11. "We are talking about repressive initiatives directed against the immigrants and communities of colour, a huge issue in Toronto. But we are also talking about a straight diverting of resources away from the necessary social spending to military and police, something that Chretien [i.e. Prime Minister Jean Chretien] has already talked about openly."

CAW president Hargrove says his misgivings started when OCAP began picketing the homes of politicians and community leaders considered hostile to poor people.

OCAP uses direct action in defending poor people at the hands of welfare administrators, employers, landlords and Immigration Canada authorities. Along with the Canadian Union of Public Employees, it, for instance, helped stop the deportation of three families that was being carried out by government officials even though a tribunal had ruled against it.

Another anti-poverty activist Josephine Grey worries that OCAP will be targeted in any crackdown on civil liberties and increased surveillance. "It has become more dangerous. There is a heightened sense of paranoia and a push for security."

A single parent, Grey co-ordinates the Toronto based Low Income Families Together (LIFT), which lost major funding after she and others complained to the United Nations about Canada's failure to meet its social and economic obligations towards its own disadvantaged citizens.

LIFT is split on OCAP's direct action tactics, which has included a violent confrontation with the Toronto police at a Queen's Park rally and more recently the "eviction" of the office furniture from the constituency office of Ontario finance minister Jim Flaherty onto the street. The latter symbolized what tenants in the province are experiencing at the hands of landlords who have an easier time emptying their apartments following the passage of "tenant protection" legislation.

OCAP's "pseudo-violence," says Grey, grabs a level of media attention that other more polite protestors almost never receive nowadays for rallies and demonstrations. On the other hand, she is troubled by any direct action that "puts vulnerable people at risk."

The incident at Flaherty's office was the last straw for Buzz Hargrove this year. While favouring non-violent protests involving civil disobedience and sit-ins at the workplace or elsewhere, he criticized OCAP for "intimidating" the staff in the minister's constituency office, including one disabled person.

While other Canadian unions still give money to OCAP, the CAW has cut its financial support for this anti-poverty group. CAW president Hargrove says his misgivings started when OCAP began picketing the homes of politicians and community leaders considered hostile to poor people.

But Clarke argues that in the present neoliberal political climate in Canada and globally, the poor have no alternative but to resort to direct action. "In today's context, it has to take the form that can actually put a price tag on the policies that the government is seeking to implement."

Clarke parts company with what he describes as Hargrove's caution regarding public protests during the current political climate. He accuses Hargrove of "demobilizing" workers in face of attacks by government and the corporate sector and taking his union "in a more conservative and collaborationist direction."

In response, Hargrove denies Clarke's assertion and insists he is the same person politically today as he has been in the past.

The CAW leaders recalls October 1970 when the vast majority of Canadians supported a curtailment of civil liberties with the passage of the War Measures Act in Parliament by the majority government of Pierre Trudeau following two political kidnappings in Quebec, one of which led to a murder.

Hargrove worries about a similar overreaction among governments around the world following September 1l. "This perceived threat would allow them to intrude on people's personal lives [in a way] that is unprecedented in my lifetime."
THE C.A.W WAY??????????

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:12am

This is going out to Demon and to all the other who are pro CAW.I have one or two questions.When they told you about this Maplegrove plant,they told you and the other union members that you would get whatever was left over right?They also told you that you and any other caw member that you would not be able to bump any UFCW member out of the position that they hold at that time right?So
my question is why are you BICTHING, MOANING AND COMPLAINING ABOUT IT NOW WHEN YOU KNEW WHAT YOU WERE GETTING INTO.PLAY THE CARD YOU'VE BEEN DEALT. UFCW 4 LIFE

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

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:30am

Hollywood...
My union brother you hit the nail right on the head.....
Way to go brother

  • posted by globalize_this
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:32am

RE: Social Justice in Canada: off the agenda?

I am a supporter of OCAP and I was dismayed to see the CAW cut their funding.

But Scott_ufcw_Lester, you're not suggesting that the UFCW supports OCAP, are you?!

  • posted by Greeny
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 11:29am

Hollywood and Scotty,
Why are we bitching, moaning and complaining?
Because unlike the UFCW does... we dont roll over and accept everything the company tells us. We like to fight for our rights and what we believe in.

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 11:46am

quote:


Originally posted by Greeny:
Hollywood and Scotty,
Why are we bitching, moaning and complaining?
Damn buddy, I guess you have not been to Maple Grove Most of the C.A.W supporters do is bitch, Trust me every inch you give them they complain about.
Because unlike the UFCW does... we dont roll over and accept everything the company tells us. We like to fight for our rights and what we believe in.


Just keep on fighting and making everyone in the work place suffer I guess thats the C.A.W's way

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 11:48am

quote:


Originally posted by Greeny:
Hollywood and Scotty,
Why are we bitching, moaning and complaining?

[/B]Damn buddy, I guess you have not been to Maple Grove Most of the C.A.W supporters do is bitch, Trust me every inch you give them they complain about.

Because unlike the UFCW does... we dont roll over and accept everything the company tells us. We like to fight for our rights and what we believe in.


[B]Just keep on fighting and making everyone in the work place suffer I guess thats the C.A.W's way

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 12:10pm

Here ,here Scotty.Thank you my fellow union brother.And to Greeny I repeat.Why did you go to Maplegrove knowing what the real deal was gonna be.Dr.Maplegrove has highlighted some of the main issues and are the fact of the matter.I myself could have gone to Maplegrove and would have been Mon-Fri with the choice of any job.But that is besides the point.You went knowing the rules. NOW PLAY THE GAME.DON'T HATE THE PLAYERS,HATE THE GAME!!!
UFCW !!

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

  • posted by Dougle
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 12:29pm

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?

  • posted by Dougle
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 1:19pm

To frequentgrievor,
Its seems to me that UFCW 1000A has been fighting standards forever. They took it up a level when WMS was introduced 2-3 years ago. The whole WMS thing is an exact system. enginers maped out each warehouse and did tests and determined that it take X seconds to do this function and x minutes or seconds to get to the next function. No room for human error.

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

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 1:34pm

Dougle,come on guy,give your head a shake.Unless i misunderstood you,you are saying they "should repost the jobs"NO Way.It was told to all members that this would not happen.And to suggest that is just crazy.We has UFCW member were told whatever job we posted for we were STUCK with.That was the gamble they took,and CAW member knew what they were walking into coming to Maplegrove.What are these guy thinking?Does it make any sense making Maplegrove any harder to work at,and make all our lives a living HELL.Its UFCW and for those of you who aren't in it with us are just in the way!UFCW 4 LIFE!

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 1:39pm

C'mon fellas read the latest headlines to this site The UFCW has got to go while we
are given the OPPORTUINITY!! Can't U C its
all TRUE!!!

  • posted by Dougle
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 2:00pm

To Hollywood
I understood the risks involved coming to Maplegrove when i applied. I came from pinebush....rumors started the about the warehouse closing an the product going to another warehouse (Ajax), Friends at the Mill said that reps were telling them that it may be in their best interest to go to maplegrove because after it opens some of the work load will be going there, and as a result there may be lay offs!!!! Freemont just wanted to get away from Smitty and Company...It was only a sugestion perhaps another alternative could be made availiable.
so that UFCW has a long life here at Maplegrove. Find an alternative and have a better chance at staying or do nothing and hope U have the vote.

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

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 2:30pm

To Dougle

I hear what you are saying.Trust me I understand.I've been at the MILL for 12 years,and trust me its no picnic.I regret sometimes not going to Maplegrove.But i made my choice.I have friends at Maplegrove and I know what's going on up there.I respect what you're saying.But staying UFCW is the only way.Trust me the Mill is full of supervisors who are just glorified "security guards" who pick the people they want to harasse daily.Hell I only know this too well.But the union has always step in to protect us.Just ask some of the guy up at maplegrove who came from the MILL!!!sticking together will only make us stronger. UFCW

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 4:55pm

tHE AMMENDMENT IS ALREADY IS PLANS. iT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY IF THE caw WOULD HAVE PUT THEIR LITTLE THING IN AT THE LABOUR BOARD.
i FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE LAUGHED AT DOUGLE. tHE REPS AT MAPLEGROVE THAT i HAVE DEALT WITH ARE VERY PROFESSIONAL.
DO NOT BE AFRAID CRITIZE OR CHALLENGE YOUR PERISHABLE BUDDIES!!!
MAPLEGROVE IS A UFCW WAREHOUSE!!
THINGS WILL ONLY GET BETTER. IT NEEDS NO SILLY INTERUPTION FROM OUTDATED UNION REPRESENTION. JIMMI HOFFA IS LONG GONE GUYS.
MEMBERS WITH BANK ACCOUNTS SINING OFF NOW

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 5:06pm

Dr.Maplegrove is right, the Jimmy Hoffa days are over.Its time for us to take a page from Jimmy's book and re-invent our own methods and stratergies and learn from the pass.Lets face the facts Maplegrove is a UFCW plant.Bottom line.It's up to us to keep it that way.Get on the train or be run over by it! UFCW 4 LIFE!!!

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

  • posted by doctor maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 6:12pm

Hollywood, it seems that you are the only one that is able understand and approach these issues with a clear head. I wish we had more people like you at Maplegrove.
A mebership that isn't afraid to question management and act on it is a strong one. We need to come together at Maplegrove. Once c.a.w. people GET OVER IT than we can get to shaping a united front to fight **** Grocers.The UFCW trashing has to stop. It is very counter productive. IF YOU FEEL THAT SRONG ABOUT THE caw THAN JUMP SHIP. GO WORK AT A caw SHOP.
U F C W IS A PLAN FOR THE FUTURE. THE ONLY PLAN FOR MAPLEGROVE$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[ 02-08-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 6:24pm

Heads up Doctor Maplegrove: We don't call anyone Nazi's on this site unless they really are Nazi's. Show a little respect for the millions who perished.

[ 02-08-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 7:07pm

Holly,lester,DR...while you kids were having fun I was listening to that majority voice I talked about earlier most likely represented by Dougle. Demon I find your message getting lost in frustration too. Don't let them get to ya, you don't have to defend everything they say. Dougle sounds to me like the vote that's up for grabs and yet both sides are so busy slamming each other he's not being heard.

 

quote:


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.


CAW/UFCW... both unions should repost the jobs to reflect company senority. What I've heard the last several posts is the most anti union self serving rhetoric I ever care to listen too. "you knew the deal before you got here"? That's how you justify stealing rightful senority? That makes you a union man? I'd say you'll fit right in at UFCW head office.

And Dougle, that rep laughed because he's not smart enough to answer your question on the spot like that. The UFCW doesn't train or promote qualified people, only loyal people. The guys a $55-78k a year talking puppet. Even 1518 reps are smart enough to give ya the old "I'll pass that around the office and get back to ya with an answer as soon as I can". What an idiot.

  • posted by TheSportsWiz
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 7:39pm

MAPLE GROVE-A UFCW Facility Today And Always

1.Repeat after me, the UFCW has legal rights to Maple Grove and is THE Union best equipped to represent the members in the facility. That's the anthem raise your damn hands up!

2.John Erickson sold out his union brothers, period, end of story. However it is within his right to do so and we hold no ill toward him. Unfortunately for him he jumped onto a bandwagon will no wheels.

3.The CAW's three day eighteen hour open house proved that YES you can have a meeting where the panel outnumbers the members in attendance. Of course parole hearings operate the same way. Now pay attention here. In your rebuttals, save the "parole hearings ya you would know" jokes, they are lame, unoriginal, and not funny.

4.The UFCW has legal rights to Maple Grove and is THE Union best equipped to represent the members in the facility. WORD!

5.What happened when TWO CAW supporters walked into their open house on Thursday afternoon? The size of the meeting doubled. That means there were now FOUR, so a certain elected(allegedly)chief steward still had no need to use more than the fingers on one hand to count them.

6.Did you hear the one about the union that stated that articles in three different major daily newspapers were false and misleading yet never sought to have the damning information retracted. Is that how they fight for their rights?

7.REPOST ALL THE JOBS THEY PROMISE. Again Thursday afternoon they replied they would go to the company to see how they felt and put it to a vote of the members. Are you kidding me? The promise was but a memory.

8.CAW ... "Promises, Promises" That was a good song in the 80's but a bad motto in 2 double oh 2. Back then you could dance to it, and I gave it an 85, nowadays I can't even bring myself to listen to it anymore.

9.The UFCW has legal rights to Maple Grove and is THE Union best equipped to represent the members in the facility.

Except for a few tidbits I want to pass along that will be all for now.

- Fear the high turtleneck and those who wear them
- Toronto Raptors bringin'the noise in 2002
- Leaf fans there is always next year
- Jessica Alba ya baby !!!

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 8:04pm

Hey sports wiz if the shoe was on the other
foot!!!Thanks for a wee bit of no ill-toward!
UNDERSTAND I AM MAN ENOUGH TO SIGN MY-NAME
UNDERSTAND I am only being sincere!!!
UNDERSTAND I want the BEST FOR EVERYBODY
at Mgrove just that some of US 1000a
men are going to have to take a step back
for a short while pending a full Matrix.
Don't worry the place will Grow With Success
if we have total sincerity/solid integrity!

  • posted by HJFinnamore
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 8:08pm

Ric continues to jabber, but never gives any hard evidence to back up the blabber.

Now tell the folks why "Partnering Agreements" are good for UFCW members. C'mon, tell the folks in plain English.

Can you tell the visitors why on earth the UFCW would sue one of its members for letting people see the UFCW Constitution?

Can you tell everyone, why it was such a good deal to give Loblaws its own Local Union when it decided it didn't like the other Locals in BC?

Can you tell the MFD crew why the UFCW's signing of a secret four-year deal with a Loblaws subsidiary was so damned cool?

Can you guarantee that the UFCW has no secret deals with NG or Loblaws that affect Maplegrove? Do you even know what is signed or isn't signed?

You keep making all these baseless rants about how wonderful the UFCW is but you are silent when it comes time to defend their documented activities.

You say the CAW is bad, well provide documented proof. You can't, can you?

Ok, I know I'm expecting too much for Ric to have the guts to answer the questions. How about any of the other UFCW pom-pom crew?

No substance, no facts, no documentation, no proof, just hot air and inuendo.

Case closed.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 8:35pm

Mr.Finnamore great to hear from you!!!
You sound very brave and even more sincere!
I would like to meet you one day!
I hope you write a book the SHEEP need
a wake-up!!
PLEASE MR.Finnamore PLEASE EDUCATE
Please stay tuned!Mr.F
I am only scratching the surface
of my 15yrs.in 1000a
sincerely Johnny E.

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 9:22pm

If it isn't obvious enough. The people that control this site. The same people that are fighting for democracy dictate the conversation. Feeding the wahwwwnabees with info and language. Excellent job !!!Wake up dummies your thoughts are adged as i'm sure you are(15yrs). Does that that mean you are a smarter union person.Who cares?????
The only reason this an issue is because Tom and Basil sold out the RW and a million??? deal.
Finnnamoreee. Look up the history of your steatments. Man you are fooling yourself.
I don't understand a so called union site that is so devoted to trashing unions.
To j4MLPGRVECAWEE Has your union never done anything for you and your 15yrs???
Once again I have to say that if you are not on the good ship MAPLEGROVE(stoll this from hollywood) than you c.a.w. Titanic aresinking fast.U F C W

  • posted by sleK
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 9:27pm

Uhhh... english please? Take your time and write an informative post. I can't decipher a single legitimate point from your tirade.

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 9:40pm

I am so sorry slek
What is it that you are interested in?
I really don't means to confuse you!!!!!!!!!
Yo What is up??

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 9:53pm

Again TheSportswiz tells it like it is.....
I too went to the C.A.W meeting on thursday, and too my delight I found myself in a room that had about 40 empty chairs in it.
When someone approached me and asked if I had any questions all I could say was "Just this minute all my questions were answered"
i left with the biggest smile on my face and went to work!!
Question for john Aman..............
When is enough enough?
the tension is getting out of hand, when are you going to wave the white flag or apply for a vote?

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:05pm

AAHHHMAN the leader of the c.a.w.???HHE was elected in ????????????
You want to talk about top down DEMOCRACY!
scott you are ther baby???
RAMPAGE AND DESTRUCION
THIS IS THE WAY
Lets be clear , ya that is I have had enoouuuuuggh.
U F C W
The only Way to survive is UUU FFF CC WWW

  • posted by sleK
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:17pm

quote:


I am so sorry slek
What is it that you are interested in?


How about an actual argument?
Sprinkled with some facts?
Maybe a legitimate point or two?

Your constant cheerleading is not adding any substance to the discussion and, to be blunt, is really starting to get on my nerves.

If you have a point - make it - and we'll discuss it. If you don't have a point take your text elsewhere.

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:22pm

Wow Slek you have some issues.....
could I suggest you go to another site, Take some anti-depressants or read the bottom line this is where you vent your union issues,where else should we do it at work?
may I suggest www.you_are_ok.com

  • posted by Doctor Maplegrove
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:37pm

SAcotty rockks bbaby!!

I asked for questions... This is the third time in this apparent 'open forum'
What seems to be the problem??
I am not about to debate crap.
If you have a legitmate issue than lets go.
DAMN IT. iAM READING INCREDIBLE BULLSHIT FROM A BUNCH OF MISINFORMED(JCAW4MG).ASK ME TO TALK ABOT THE ISSUES.
THERE ARE NO ISSUES.MAPLEGROVE IS A U F C W warehouse.
IT WILL ALWAYS BE THAT WAY!!!

PLEASE BRING ON THE QUESTIONS?????

  • posted by sleK
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 10:51pm

quote:


PLEASE BRING ON THE QUESTIONS?????


First of all: Lose the caps lock.

remote-viewer posed some questions on page two. Why don't you start there.

  • posted by fedupwithufcw
  • Fri, Feb 8, 2002 11:05pm

this sure reminds me of the Nash, Ryan, doctor dick, bonnie crew. same stupidity, same crap, same blabber. those guys thought the UFCW was all that. raw raw raw. where are they now? working someplace else cause there UFCW ship didn't come in and they couldn't survive on peanuts. your a bunch of fools too clue less to see your being played just like they were. your posts are very funny though. I get a kick out of watching a guy make a dick out of himself.

  • posted by Richard
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 6:53am

What's really funny here is that the UFCW trolls are the same everywhere. Not one has a legitimate fact to share and not one of them can dispute the truth on this site, so they slither about and spit nonsense and name calling. The UFCW trolls are the same in BC as they are in Ontario. The CAW, Teamster, and UA Power Source who visit (and Bill the UFCW Pres.) lay out logical arguments and back up thier points with facts.

Why can't the UFCW Trolls do that?

One other thing. The UFCW gets better turnouts because NG pays people and they are held captive in the workplace. Pay the guys and gals, keep them in the warehouse and let the CAW have an employer sponsored meeting.

Hey, it's only fair.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 7:16am

First off,The Sports Wiz, you hit the nail on the head.Good job buddy.And Scott Mcpherson,what is this about "us kids" guy we are all just trying to get a point across just like you.I think it was the Sport Wiz who said he went to a CAW meeting and there was more people on the panel then there was seated for questions!my question for you and guys like Demon and Richard and John,is were you guys in attendance,and if you weren't,Why not.If you support CAW should you not attend the meetings.And for the guy who said we has UFCW member get paid to go to meeting,check your head and the facts,because that just ain't so.And the crap about being CHEERLEADRS for UFCW is stupid.We're doing the same thing you guys are TRYING to do for CAW.The only difference is we are just doing a better job.
Guys there still room for you on the BATTLE SHIP U.F.C.W. COME ABOARD YOU ARE MORE THEN WELCOMED!!! UFCW 4 LIFE
SportWiz,DR.MAPLEGROVE,Scotty_ufcw_ THE BEERS WILL BE ON ME WHEN WE MEET>CHEERS!!

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

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

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 8:00am

quote:


there was more people on the panel then there was seated for questions


Then what's the problem?

If there were so few members at the CAW meeting it could mean one of two things, either it means people are afraid to show their choice for CAW .. or .. it means everyone favours the UFCW.

If the everyone favours the UFCW why all the mud slinging?

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

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 8:02am

Hollywood just proved Richard's point--big time.

And I must say, Hollywood, it's not good to drink alone. You seem to have just invited all your own aliasses for a beer. The server will wonder, "who's the guy talking to himself in the corner?" The answer will be: "Hollywood, Sports_Wiz, Scott_UFCW_Lester, Dr._Maplegrove and UFCW4life."

Depending on how much one guy can drink, the bar tab might be pretty cheap. Can we come and watch?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 8:17am

Oh weiser, you aren't implying that Hollywood, Sports_Wiz, Scott_UFCW_Lester, Dr._Maplegrove and UFCW4life are an ABBU are are you?

I will for the moment give them the benefit of the doubt. But I must ask them all - or any one of them - why do you not respond to the many questions we've asked you? We've been very patient with you all. By coming to this web site, you have given your opinions a great deal of prominence and exposure. We've given you an outlet for expression that your own union doesn't provide. (In a way we're quite pleased that MFD is becoming the venue for their members to use for debate and discussion). All that we ask in return is that you respond to some of the questions that other forum visitors have put to you.

What are your views about union-management partnering agreements?

Is voluntary recognition a good thing or a bad thing for members?

Should unions ever make secret deals with management?

Is it right for a union to sue members who criticize it?

Is it right for unions to appoint (rather than elect) their Presidents or other executives?

Should union officials go to parties with management or accept gifts from management?

Are union elections run in a fair manner or do incumbents have an overwhelming advantage? Is this a good thing?

There were others, but I'll stop the list here. A response, opinion or just about anything to any one of these would be much appreciated.

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 9:03am

"HOLLYWOOD" John and I were at one of the meetings but Richard is not a maplegrove employee (if you actually read the posts in this forum you would know that). The question is "did you go to one" and if not "why"?

quote:


And for the guy who said we has UFCW member get paid to go to meeting,check your head and the facts,because that just ain't so.


The company "DID" allow the UFCW to hold a union meeting "ON company premises" and "ON company time". The meeting was about "Engineered Labour Standards" and how the UFCW was going to "kick the companies ass" in some "mediated arbitration" Bla, Bla, Bla! Kevin Corporon is making a fool of himself, he knows and stated himself that nothing can be done about E.L.S. without the proper laungage in the "collective Agreement" there is very little that can be done to fight it (and we don't have that laungage in our C.A.). If you don't remember the meeting it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lets see now if I have the math right: "Company property" + "Company Time" + "UFCW" + "meeting" = (you figure it out)!

quote:


Guys there still room for you on the BATTLE SHIP U.F.C.W. COME ABOARD YOU ARE MORE THEN WELCOMED!!!


Remember that even the greatest battleship ever built (the Bismark) was sunk and now sits rusting on the ocean floor!

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 9:27am

Listen up Weiser,How can you say Richard is right when you are here slinging mud at me."it not good to drink alone"Buddy give you head a good shake.I admit Richard and some of your member have made some good points.Remote viewer is one of the guys who has done that.Plus has shown alittle respect to everyone opinion.You whole statement was just a personal attack at me,but I have know ill witted feeling for you because you are yet again a fellow union member just vented you feeling.I'm pro UFCW and You are Pro CAW and thats the bottom line. UFCW

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 9:47am

Remote Viewer, i read your statement and you had some good question.Some i will try to answer and some can't unitl i have all the facts on them.so here goes. #1: SHOULD UNIONS EVER MAKE SECRET DEALS WITH MANAGEMENT? My answer (and remember these are my answers) HELL NO.this should never happen,but lets face it this type s--t happens in all unions and we has member just hear about the small one.I don't believe any unions yours or mind should get involed in back door deals.
And please don't think the CAW,Teamster,or even UFCW doesn't do these thing in some small way.I know you are smarter the that.

#2 Should union officails got to parties with management or accept gifts from management?

Any union member or union official who accept gift or parties with management should be hung out to dry.I wouldn't let management come to my house to wash my car or even cut my grass.Any caught doing this crap should be thrown to the wolves on the floor.let everybody(union member) know is name and who he was with.Because the is NO room from the two face pinheads.NOBODY should ride the fence of being a union bother and wanting to hang out with managemet.How can a guy like that defend a union brother or sister in trouble to the fullest when he was out play card with the bosses yesterday.But don't tell me that this only goes on in UFCW because that would be a lie.IT happen everywhere and it our job to get rid of these infidles now and for every.

My answers may not be political correct but like i said they are just that MY OPINIONS
UFCW

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 10:06am

Okay, Hollywood has redeemed himself, but he may be surprised who shows up for the beer all the same.

I don't think anyone is asking for political correctness here. We talk facts. You are correct that no union is perfect and there is rot in just about every organization. However, we're not talkin' superficial rust spots, were talkin' about corrosion.

Now could you answer some of the other questions? And can you say without a doubt that all labour documents signed between Loblaws' subsidiaries and 1000a affecting NG employees have been revealed to those who are affected by the warehouseing consolidation?

  • posted by globalize_this
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 10:39am

Thank you for your honest answers, Hollywood. I think you are a thoughtful and definitely pro-union person and if you really think the UFCW is the best union for you I would respect your choice.

I am going to suggest a couple of things for you to think about, based on your answers. But hey, I don't get to vote, so its all up to you.

You wrote:

 

quote:


#1: SHOULD UNIONS EVER MAKE SECRET DEALS WITH MANAGEMENT? My answer (and remember these are my answers) HELL NO.this should never happen,but lets face it this type s--t happens in all unions and we has member just hear about the small one.I don't believe any unions yours or mind should get involed in back door deals.
And please don't think the CAW,Teamster,or even UFCW doesn't do these thing in some small way.I know you are smarter the that.


Very true. This is one of the reasons why many people on this site support independent unions. When the workers are really in charge, without a professional group of bureaucrats to tell them what to do, the people on the shop floor can keep a closer eye on the people doing the negotiating.

I am sure the CAW has come to some "interesting" understandings with employers in the past. Do they do it as often or as sneakily as the UFCW? That I don't know. The truth is, we don't have any evidence of what they might have done in the past. If we did, we would post it. I think the CAW either has less to hide, or is doing a much better job at keeping its secrets.

We do, however, have some pretty damning things on the UFCW. For example, there's the UFCW/Provigo partnering agreement: part 1 and part 2.

Also, quite disturbing, is the Local 777 secret contract. If I were you, this would really bother me. You're already locked into a very long (8 year!) contract. There are a lot of issues that might come up during the life of such an agreement, but you couldn't address in 2006. But still, when 2006 comes around, you would expect that the union could go to the table and hash out their differences. You might have to go on strike, but at least you would be able to fight for what you, the workers, want.

What bothers me about the secret contract is that you have no way of knowing whether, come 2006, it will turn out that the union and the company have already negotiated a new deal, without any input or participation from the workers! The UFCW has done it once before, why wouldn't they do it again? Do you have any guarantees that there isn't already a secret deal?

One other thing - there is this idea of an early reopener in 2004 when Erin Mills negotiates a new deal. The union promises a risk-free chance for contract improvement, Erin Mills does all the work negotiating and, if necessary, striking, and you just get to vote on whether or not you want the benefits. The thing that bothers me about this is, supposing that Erin Mills does go on strike, does that mean your warehouse will get extra work from NG and scab against Erin Mills? Why didn't the union negotiate both contracts to expire in 2004, or in 2006? That way, you would have double the strike leverage against National Grocers. Does the UFCW understand how to use strike leverage, or are they just afraid to?

I just have one thought about your second comment. You wrote:

quote:


#2 Should union officails got to parties with management or accept gifts from management?
Any union member or union official who accept gift or parties with management should be hung out to dry.I wouldn't let management come to my house to wash my car or even cut my grass.Any caught doing this crap should be thrown to the wolves on the floor.let everybody(union member) know is name and who he was with.Because the is NO room from the two face pinheads.NOBODY should ride the fence of being a union bother and wanting to hang out with managemet.How can a guy like that defend a union brother or sister in trouble to the fullest when he was out play card with the bosses yesterday.But don't tell me that this only goes on in UFCW because that would be a lie.IT happen everywhere and it our job to get rid of these infidles now and for every.


I assume you've read The Trough story about Cliff Evans' "retirement" party. This gala was funded in large part by "generous contributions" from employers including Steinberg, Inc., Canada Safeway Ltd., and Loblaws Companies Ltd.

Once again, I really don't know about Buzz. But somehow, I can't really see him living it up like that on members' and corporate money when he retires.

Anyway, that's really all I have to say. Weiser points out there are still a lot of other questions to answer, too. Maybe The Sports Wiz or Dr. Maplegrove can help?

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

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 11:17am

Globalize_this

You brought up some very good points.This is exactly what I've talk about forming an alliance to fight the corruption(CORRISION)is our only way to suvive this (WIESER).Globalize_this you asked "why didn't the union negotiate both contracts to expire in 2004 or 2006?"

Good question.But you and i both know that would been to logical.Doing that would have given us has union member the uuper hand big-time.Keeping the contract dates the same would alway have been checkmate for us against the company.I'm with you on that on.
and WIESER you still make those beer cracks eh!That cool but remember one thing united we stand divided we fall.And that means all of us!!!!Lets keep the money in all ours pockets and outs of the corrupt ones!!!UFCW

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 11:39am

Hey Demon, what are you new to this game?Are you telling me that every time there is a meeting,that all the workers are on the clock at the same time.Are you trying to tell us that all the shifts are running at the same time.Come guy,heres a glove, get in the game! I've been with NG for 12 F'N years and there has only been 2 meeting that have gone on during my shift no the metion the hundreds of other union bothers and sisters not working who had to drive from all over to come down to meeting or get babysitter so they could go to these meeting.They gotta have the meeting some time and when the business is a 24hr operation some of us get lucky when its during our shifts and some don't.But that is a petty thing to aruge about.Listen to logic,even when the meeting are on company time do you think the one on the clock get to stay for the whole thing,come on guy.We all are given a certian amount of time to get back,and trust me the watch dogs(SUPERVISION)are waiting at the door for us.UFCW

  • posted by Dougle
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 12:57pm

Ihave a few questions to ask.
1.Can a member be self appointed into a stewards position with the permission of a rep with out having a vote?
2. Pro CAW what is your Union offering the members at Maplegrove? and what are the up side to having that union.
3. Pro UFCW same question (2.)
4. What are the legal grounds involved in a Union sueing a member?
5. What would be the steps involved in a possiable clean up of coruption within the UFCW?
6. Are their penalties or fines for a union if certian requirements are not met, ie regular meetings, Annual dues reports, not abiding by their constituation and by-laws?

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 1:18pm

Alright Hollywood...I shouldn't have made the kids crack. I'm letting my frustration over the Willian Gammert lawsuit poison my overall thinking. I really, really really hate bullies they make my blood boil. Still I have no excuse.

Look, corruption in other unions doesn't make corruption in the UFCW acceptable or tolerable. You answered both question the same. NO, but. Shrinks call it the "yes but" defensive mechanism. It's disempowering and used to justify inaction.

I understand the "out of the frying pan into the fire" ideology, I really do. But don't you think it's time workers had more control over their own affairs? Organizations like the UFCW are top down and stiffle political opposition. Why would you want to stay in that kind of organization? The CAW is not perfect and in that we both agree. However, their constitution lends itself to reform where as the UFCW's does not. Pretty hard to argue with me about that my friend I know first hand that road I've travelled it.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 1:56pm

quote:


Listen to logic,even when the meeting are on company time


If I understand you correctly Hollywood, the fact that the company facilitated the Ufcw meeting doesn't sound any alarms with you?
Was the CAW accommodated as well? Were they given the same hospitality afforded the Ufcw, free meeting space and captive audience?

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

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 2:28pm

Scott Mcpherson, I understand everything you are saying and i respect your opinon has well.You state that "don't you think the workers had more control over their own affairs and why would i stay with an organization like the ufcw"

Yes I do think that the worker should have more control over their own affair,but answer me this.How can we gain more control over our own affair when WE all spend so muuch time fighting amongs ourself.We have to get along with one another so we can gain control of our own work enviroment.Don't you agree.

You asked "why stay with the UFCW. No union is gonna make us all happy all the time.They all do some good and some bad. But the bottom line is if I will be with the UFCW when the SH-T is THIN...I gotta be with the UFCW when the SH-T is THICK.

And Siggy,are you telling me CAW doesn't have meeting on the floor during work hours??

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 2:41pm

quote:


And Siggy,are you telling me CAW doesn't have meeting on the floor during work hours??


No, the question I had was " Was the CAW accommodated as well? Were they given the same hospitality afforded the Ufcw,.

I'll rephrase the question. Did CAW also have an opportunity to meet with the members in your workplace?

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

  • posted by HJFinnamore
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 3:00pm

Ok Hollywood, have you ever asked yourself, "why does the UFCW so often show up and have a done deal before employees are in place?"

 

quote:


On November 20, 2992, prior to the resumption of operations at the hotel, a collective agreement was entered into between the United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 206 ("Local 206") and Kelloryn. The collective agreement was executed, on behalf of the hotel, by Ronald Kelly and on behalf of Local 206 by John Hurley and Frank Kelly, the President of Local 206 and a Business Representative of Local 206, respectively. Ronald Kelly and Frank Kelly are not related. The collective agreement recognized Local 206 "as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all employees of the company save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, front desk, office and clerical and security staff".


The above quotation is from an Ontario LRB decision where the UFCW effectively bought a hotel that closed and then reopened (I'll send a copy to the MFD). Prior to closing, the employees were represented by HERE Local 75. HERE claimed that the UFCW was in effect raiding it.

 

quote:


The employees who testified stated that they become aware of Local 75's successful attempt to reclaim its bargaining rights in the spring of 1993. It would appear, however, that Local 206 continued to meet with the employees regularly until late May or early June, 1993. Mr. McDougall testified that the employees were generally upset with the successful application made by Local 75 because they had had "no say" in the determination of which union would represent them. At the last meeting held by Local 206 with the hotel employees, Frank Kelly, the Local 206 business Representative, was, according to the applicant, asked what the employees could do to displace Local 75. Frank Kelly, in what was described as an "off the record" comment, advised the applicant and one Mr. Ernest Shanly, a bartender and cosponsor of the petition document, that employees can "voice their opinion" before the expiry of every collective agreement. Some discussion of the petition process ensued and Frank Kelly told Mr. McDougall at that time that fortyfive per cent of the employees had to sign a petition in favour of the request to oust Local 73. Frank Kelly offered his assistance and, in fact, on occasions prior to the filing of this application provided advice to the applicants regarding certain aspects of the petitioning process. There was no dispute that the UFCW provided the applicant with one thousand dollars to cover his legal fees in this proceeding.


Then, you'll notice that the new employees were mad that HERE would get to represent them without a vote. They thought it was unfair that workers wouldn't get a say in which union would represent them—just like the Maplegrove employees. The UFCW agreed and even gave one employee some money and advised employees how to go about exercising some control over getting a vote of unions. The UFCW thought it was a good idea then, why not now?

 

quote:


It would appear from the testimony before me that the employees at the hotel (at least those who did testify) were unaware of the exact nature and extent of the "UFCW's" investment in Kelloryn. It is, however, clear that the investment by the UFCW was not overlooked by hotel Management on a daytoday basis. Mr. Shanly testified that he would on occasion serve UFCW officials at the hotel bar who would point out to him the UFCW's investment in the hotel. Furthermore, Mr. Shanly recalled being told by Managers "to take good care" of certain tables of customers because the table consisted of UFCW officials who were using the hotel. Mr. Shanly believed that the UFCW used the hotel "a lot" for meetings and lunches. It is clear on the evidence before me that the employees were aware or the "special relationship" existing between the UFCW and the management of the hotel, be it Kelloryn or Accomodex. Not only were they advised of the relationship at the outset of their employment, but the importance of the UFCW to the hotel was highlighted from time to time as testified to by Mr. Shanly.


The decision indicates that the UFCW pumped $15 million into a hotel and did a deal to try and dump the HERE as bargaining agent. Was the contract that they, in effect, negotiated with themselves the best in the industry? Not by a long shot.

Does the CAW own a bunch of hotels? Does the CAW own a Hotel management company? Check out AFM Hospitalityand see how deep UFCW money goes in that company.

  • posted by Troll
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 4:54pm

Now let me get this straight....

quote:


The collective agreement recognized Local 206 "as the sole and exclusive bargaining agent for all employees of the company save and except supervisors, persons above the rank of supervisor, front desk, office and clerical and security staff".


The UFCW bankrolls a hotel to the tune of $15 million or more and they do a slick give us the employees routine, but the UFCW agrees to leave a whole whack of employees non-union? I repeat--non union!!!

Is this a f...ing club or a union? Who gets to join and have a contract and who doesn't?

How the hell does a union negotiate with itself???

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 4:59pm

Thanks for your very candid answer Hollywood. I think all things considered we all want many of the same things. We certainly want unions that put us first - or that have us as their only interest. I think we can get there if we insist on this as a "first principle" no matter what union we support.

One of the things that is highlighted by the OLRB decision in HJ Finnamore's post is that there is a lot of shit that goes down that workers don't have a clue about and that has nothing to do with unity or solidarity or anything other than money, money, money. We've gotta shut this down. It doesn't matter what union you support or what local you belong to - this kind of crap has got to stop. It's what's killing the labour movement. If you support Local 1000a, that's great. That's your choice. The best thing you can do for your brothers and sisters, your local and your union is to demand complete accountability and complete disclosure from your representatives. Once you've got that, the rest will be easy.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sat, Feb 9, 2002 6:04pm

Remote viewer

Well said,my friend,We may be in different unions,but aleast we all want the same thing.A united front.One way or another.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 8:04am

HOLLYWOOD please respect an opinion of
no drinking when on this topic you dont
want to say something You might regret
cause if need be y'all shall be held accountable for what you say to me I
shall find out eventually WHO u guys ARE!
now then with TRUTH and RESPECT to Y'ALL
Yes I was at all 3 CAW meetings with the
Mgrove RESCUE (ufcw beyond REFORM)My only
regret was leaving early thurs.to catch a
ride home with two senior CHATHAM members!
I left Rob Bertin&Vito Cramarossa at the
meeting w|out ME A very disgruntled CAW man
shook their confidence in my educating of them! The Rossa's gave me back their CAW caps
(it HURT)back on your ufcw caps but don't
worry collectively we shall show you how the
UFCW as a whole is beyond reform> it is mainly because of OUR ufcw Constitution.With
education my freinds you shall see the CAW
Constitution is wide OPEN for Reform!!(people
in the know HELP with this)Now Understand this:good ideas Dougle
:I am only trying to HELP even you H'WOOD
:senior members at the MILL agree OUR
UFCW has FAILED us time& time AGAIN
Y'ALL need a CAW RESCUE
:where is Doug Mckenzie??? C'mon POST
your argument on-line!!can K.Fischer
help you guys come on be men bring it
on!!
on't EVER insult me behind cowardice
nameless posts
:this Ship shall be straightened out!!

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 8:19am

Mr.Siggy! NO the CAW has never had an official meeting a Mgrove! Only CAW supporters sharing opinions on the HUGE INJUSTICES to our NEW brothers & a couple
sisters. I want Scott Mcpherson & John AMAN
to be able to hold MANDATORY INFORMATION
SESSIONS on Mgrove property!!

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 9:13am

John-CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson, if we could pull that off we would get at least 90% support for the CAW. Lets work on it

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 9:41am

I suspect the ufcw has been guilty somewhere
to the effect of SLANDER somewhere in their
onslaught of mis-informed mailings.
I seek JUSTICE by figuring this out!
In RETRIBUTION I seek that this MANDATORY
INFORMATION SESSION take place with Mr.S
Mcpherson/Mr AMAN/CMON/DeMoN Go ROCK Go

  • posted by Scott_ufcw_Lester
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 10:01am

Quote from John E:
where is Doug Mckenzie??? C'mon POST
your argument on-line!!can K.Fischer
help you guys come on be men bring it
on!!
on't EVER insult me behind cowardice
nameless posts
:this Ship shall be straightened out!!

Come On John trying to get them to view there beliefs on this anti-UFCW site is showing me that you are trying to bully them in to seeing your point of view...........Some people like to remain nameless on this site and we should respect that

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 10:02am

First off,John Erickson,I never made any shot at you about drinking,Weiser made one to me and i responed back to him.I repeat i made no comment to you.And the thing about finding out who i am.Buddy you and i use to play baseball tuesday nites when we were on afternoon shift together.This is not a personal thing. its your opinon and mine has well.Yours is CAW,mine is UFCW.I ain't here to take shots,I'm here to argue my point of view. UFCW 4 LIFE

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

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 10:18am

What is this bullshit about nameless crap.We all use this site to vent our thoughts.Not to have people telling us that if they will find out who we are.Everbody give their head a good shake.I thought this was suppose to be a site about the issues at hand (ie maplegrove, senoirity etc.)Lets all get back to the big picture and knock off this stupid name that tune shit. Still UFCW !!!!

  • posted by HJFinnamore
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 10:50am

Hollywood has a point. Hollywood is willing to listen and willing to state views in a meaningful way. He's not behaving like a troll, so he/she shouldn't be treated like one. Sports_Wiz? now he's a fine specimen of a troll, save your fun for him.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 12:10pm

Thanks Hollywood!I am glad to be your bro!
p.s.remember hitman striking out on my
infamous Windsor change-up You could
have swung all three strikes on that
one pitch alone ha!ha!PEACE brother
whew! now I feel better!

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 12:17pm

John, trust me I remember your change-up.Buddy you had a great arm.I don't think I ever got a good hit off those pitches.later my union brother.I also want you to know that I respect you choice and opinon in unions too!! HOLLYWOOD 4 GOOD & UFCW 4 LIFE

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

  • posted by siggy
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 12:43pm

Scott_ufcw_Lester said:

quote:


anti-UFCW site


So let's make this perfectly clear again! This site is about .. "Taking back our unions and engaging the future..."

See for yourselves! :geez:

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

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 1:45pm

quote:


How can we gain more control over our own affair when WE all spend so muuch time fighting amongs ourself.We have to get along with one another so we can gain control of our own work enviroment.Don't you agree.


That's a very good question Hollywood, thankyou for asking. It's not weather we all agree but 'how' we disagree that matters. Let me explain:

My wife and I seldom agree on how to paint and decorate a room in our homes. We both like different things and we are both very strong willed individuals. The thing is we almost never agree on anything. Everything is a compromise. Yet the end results are ALWAYS better then either of us had in mind. ALWAYS.

Cooperation and colaboration often mean disagreement but do not have to mean disention. I want to see conflict resolution offered to all union members, particularly shop stewards. It teaches strategic listening skills and ways to speak to each other without attacking. In a debate all is lost if even one party goes into it with a closed mind and a win loss attitude.

We as members have to start to "really care' about what our fellow brothers and sisters are feeling. The hardest thing in the world is care about what somebody who disagrees with you is feeling but it's what is going to save us all. If you feel defensive ask yourself "why am I being triggerd?" if you have 2 yrs and your ahead of people with 20 then I think you already know the answer.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 3:07pm

[. If you feel defensive ask yourself "why am I being triggerd?" if you have 2 yrs and your ahead of people with 20 then I think you already know the answer.[/qb][/QUOTE]

First off Scott,i hear what you are saying.But like i said before they told us all how it was gonna be if you went to Maplegrove.I've been at NG for 12yrs and I really thought about going to Maplegrove.But because of all the hype and knowing what rules were gonna be I didn't.Even though I would have been mon-fri day or whatever job I wanted.They told us all what you appiled for was what you got.CAW knownly went,and they all knew the rules of the game.Its UFCW and that just the way it is.

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

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 3:14pm

Hollywood, the big win is when the Power Source has leaders they can trust and a system not predisposed to corruption and the ability to have a strong voice and influence in the day-to-day affairs of the union.

I'll take you back to Local 1977. The Power Source was outraged that the so-called leaders bargained a 1% per year increase for the Power Source and then gave themselves a 65% increase in one year.

One thousand, four hundred members signed a petition asking for the executive raises to be recinded. The person who brought the petition to a GMM stood to make a motion. Not a motion that the 1,400 names had any weight, but a simple motion from a single member.

What happened? OUT OF ORDER! Out of order? Nothing was out of order. A member can make a motion and it can be seconded. Did the leaders let the member know what was out of order or how she could be IN ORDER? No! It was just "YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER!"

How does one change such a union? Go to the International? No, that doesn't work either. When somebody says out of order, your out of order and nothing will change that.

I don't think CAW operates that way. A constitution is only as good as those who administer it. It the administrators tell you that you are out of order, your only option is to spend a months or years going through the "internal" process and then if you've got a spare $20 or $30 thousand sitting around, you can sue the administrators in the Courts. And when you do, your dues dollars and those of your friends will be used against you. Your dues will pay for a lawyer who will fight you every step of the way.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 3:22pm

Mr.weiser sir! LOOK AT THAT!! This sounds
corrupt I can not beleive my screen.
My head is absolutly in pain! Ouch!

  • posted by globalize_this
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 4:02pm
  • posted by John Erickson
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 4:22pm

Mr. globalize this! Have you ever thumbed
through the CAW Constitution??
It is my opinion the Most Democratic Union
on our Continent!

  • posted by Richard
  • Sun, Feb 10, 2002 4:26pm

Re: the UFCW 1977 fiasco, the K/W Record said:

quote:


We are significantly less impressed with the latest behaviour by the union executive that represents thousands of Zehrs grocery employees across south-central Ontario. The Zehrs workers went on a four-day strike this year and came out of it with a five per cent pay hike, spread over six years, plus one-time bonuses.

Key union executives, meanwhile, were earlier blessed with pay- and retirement-benefit increases in the 65 per cent range, with some salaries boosted from the $70,000 range to more than $115,000. The union board also approved a package that gave senior union executives lump-sum payments equal to 150 per cent of their annual salaries, plus vehicles, upon retirement.

This week, Zehrs workers presented a petition -- signed by 1,400 of the union local's 7,500 members -- that calls for those salary increases to be rescinded. Unfortunately for the workers, the petition seems to have had little impact on Brian Williamson, head of the union local and a beneficiary of the increases. He declared the motion that went with the petition invalid but will send it to the union's international leaders for their ruling on its merits.

It is true that the pay increases for the union executive are ultimately a private matter between the executive and the union rank and file. And we are not suggesting the refusal to consider the union membership motion this week violated the union's rules. But rules and right are not the same.

The new salary-benefit package is clearly out of line in the minds of a good number of union members. Moreover, the executive members of the union local have a moral responsibility to listen to the people who pay their salaries, the people they are chosen to serve. The fair and honourable thing for the executive to do at this point would be to consult with as many of the local's members as possible and act on the wishes of the majority. If the union executive is looking for an example to follow on the delicate issue of pay -- and this is strange to say -- they should follow the lead of the Ontario government.


  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 10:37am

I just want to know,what is the majority feeling at maplegrove?

  • posted by frequentgrievor
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 11:08am

To Demon,

The company "DID" allow the UFCW to hold a union meeting "ON company premises" and "ON company time". The meeting was about "Engineered Labour Standards" and how the UFCW was going to "kick the companies ass" in some "mediated arbitration" Bla, Bla, Bla! Kevin Corporon is making a fool of himself, he knows and stated himself that nothing can be done about E.L.S. without the proper laungage in the "collective Agreement" there is very little that can be done to fight it (and we don't have that laungage in our C.A.). If you don't remember the meeting it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Lets see now if I have the math right: "Company property" + "Company Time" + "UFCW" + "meeting" = (you figure it out)!

_______________

do you know of any agreements that have ELS written into the contract? Thanks.

  • posted by frequentgrievor
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 11:15am

quote:


Originally posted by Dougle:
Ihave a few questions to ask.
1.Can a member be self appointed into a stewards position with the permission of a rep with out having a vote?
2. Pro CAW what is your Union offering the members at Maplegrove? and what are the up side to having that union.
3. Pro UFCW same question (2.)
4. What are the legal grounds involved in a Union sueing a member?
5. What would be the steps involved in a possiable clean up of coruption within the UFCW?
6. Are their penalties or fines for a union if certian requirements are not met, ie regular meetings, Annual dues reports, not abiding by their constituation and by-laws?


These are really good questions. I'd like to see the answers. Thanks.

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 12:46pm

quote:


how the UFCW was going to "kick the companies ass" in some "mediated arbitration"


Only a jackass would ever make that kind of statement about an up coming mediation. I have one more coarse in April, when I've finished it I will be a certified mediator. I'd say that qualifies me to say mediation is never about winners and losers the mediator is only there to help facilitate dialoge and communication between the parties. The mediator can never take sides and should have very little input in the outcome assuming the two sides can agree. Think of a mediator as a ref in boxing.

And there is no such thing as "mediated arbitration" it's either one or the other. Christ get yourself a dictionary Corporon.

  • posted by globalize_this
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 12:59pm

Actually Scott, I've heard of mediated-arbitration before. Check out this link: FEMA Types of ADR.

quote:


Mediated arbitration, commonly known as "med-arb," is a variation of the arbitration procedure in which an impartial or neutral third party is authorized by the disputing parties to mediate their dispute until such time as they reach an impasse. As part of the process, when impasse is reached, the third party is authorized by the parties to issue a binding opinion on the cause of the impasse or the remaining issue(s) in dispute.

In some cases, med-arb utilizes two outside parties--one to mediate the dispute and another to arbitrate any remaining issues after the mediation process is completed. This is done to address some parties' concerns that the process, if handled by one third party, mixes and confuses procedural assistance (a characteristic of mediation) with binding decision making (a characteristic of arbitration). The concern is that parties might be less likely to disclose necessary information for a settlement or are more likely to present extreme arguments during the mediation stage if they know that the same third party will ultimately make a decision on the dispute.


I think a good question to ask Brother Corporon is whether the union is using one mediator/arbitrator, or if they're using two people. Having one person mediate a dispute and then impose a settlement if the two parties can't agree sounds kind of like a conflict of interest to me.

I agree though, its pretty funny to hear someone talking about kicking someone elses ass in mediation. Makes it sound like Corporon missed the point.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 1:32pm

There's a med-arb process that's becoming increasingly popular with many unions that essentially involves an arbitrator conducting a mediation session where s/he gets some background on the issue in dispute and then encourages the member involved in the dispute to agree to a settlement - whatever settlement the arbitrator senses the union and the company are prepared to live with. If, for some reason, the member can't be persuaded to say "yes", the arbitrator then conducts a hearing. The award may be pretty much the same as the "deal" that could have been done during mediation.

Critics of this process argue that the arbitrator can't really arrive at an independent judgement in the hearing, given that he or she has already heard (during the mediation) a lot of information that s/he would not hear during a formal hearing. Further, there are concerns about the extent to which the arbitrator will be receptive to signals or hints from the employer and/or union about what kind of decision s/he should issue. Don't forget, arbitrators operate on a fee-for-service. If they want to prosper, they have to be acceptable to both sides. This in itself, would suggest that they may be more mindful of the "needs" of their "clients" than of the administration of justice.

I don't know if 1000a engages in this form of "ADR" but it's pretty popular out there. The union and company reps like it because it results in what they perceive to be "win-win" solutions and is cheaper than arbitration. For the member involved, it's hard to say what the benefit really is. My own view is that this kind of process gives the illusion of justice but leaves members feeling shortchanged and creates a lot of bitterness within the bargaining unit and a sense on the part of members that they were sold out for the sake of expediency.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 4:10pm

quote:


Originally posted by HOLLYWOOD:
I just want to know,what is the majority feeling at maplegrove?


The part-timers will make the diff.in vote!
My concern Mr.H.is they were told something behind closed doors something FALSE by UFCW
I seek part-timer to speak the TRUTH here!

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 5:49pm

John Erickson, wouldn't it be a majority vote by the full-timer?And I wonder if you could strike me out with that change up now.I have a faster bat speed then I did back then.Just kidding my fellow union brother.But i was wondering when is the offical vote.We here at the mill keep hearing different dates.

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

  • posted by TheSportsWiz
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 5:53pm

HUGH FINNAMORE - A Hero - NOT !

Hugh, I wonder what would happen if we took away the words "troll", "machine", "machine head", "PR", and "sheep" away from your vocabulary? I think you might just sit there at your computer and wait for the men in white suits to come and take you away.

When we (UFCW supporters) sling mud, you call it mudslinging, when YOU do it, it's called stating facts. When we poke fun at someone YOU call it a personal attack. When you poke fun at someone, its ok. If you were the all righteous person you THINK you are then you would NEVER, and I mean NEVER, engage in any of the "crap" you get involved in on this website. YOU see there is a difference between you and us, I, for one, knowingly make some comments that are considered humourous and may agitate some people. YOU, on the other hand come on here thinking like you are GOD's gift to the anti-UFCW movement. Well, I for one, could care less about what you think you are. Believe this, your fesces DOES stink.

This forum for Maple Grove workers would be better suited to having UFCW and CAW people who have a direct interest in the situation. Outsiders like Hugh Finnamore have no place here. There are plenty of other areas on this website for them to "troll".

One more thing, one of my posts was edited/deleted because I "can't have the last word" twice.

It states on this website:

"I look upon those who would deny others the right to urge and argue their position, however irksome and pernicious they may seem, as intellectual and moral cowards." William E. Borah

Either publish everyone's input without censorship or remove that quote from your site, as it is hypocritical in the extreme.

Buh Bye
P.S. Weiser, Finnamore, MacPherson, Siggy ... your messages from here on out are effectively and definitively on IGNORE. They will neither be read nor responded to. Keep blowing smoke.

P.S.S. If you have posted over 900 messages on this website you may need to get a hobby.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 6:19pm

Excuse me WizKid - everyone with a view to express is welcome on this web site and may participate in any discussion that interests them. I'm not sure where you get it in your head that the discussion in this or any other thread in this forum is the private preserve of UFCW members. It isn't. If you don't like that, don't come here. That's the problem with you biz-unionists: you're always looking to control things.

I doubt very much that your nemesis Finnamore invented the terms troll, sheep or machine head. In fact, I am quite sure that he did not. "Troll" was used on this site long before Finnamore showed up. "Machine/head" has a quite different origin and "sheep" was first used by a UFCW supporter who told us how much he enjoyed sex with the "membersheep". Perhaps you should take issue with him for bringing "sheep" to our web site. We think we know where you can find him. He ran off when someone asked him how things were going at Local 1977.

I must say that it was the UFCW's persistent attacks on Finnamore in this forum that first got some of us interested in him. Few of us would have known of him if your union hadn't kept bringing him to our attention. Thanks for that anyway. He's an interesting guy.

I for one am getting quite tired of you passing off offensive and inappropriate remarks as attempts at "humour". I strongly suggest that you ask the UFCW to educate you about the inappropriateness of sexist remarks and sexual innuendo in discussions of this kind. Otherwise, find a site that is more in tune with your juvenile brand of "humour".

Now then Wiz - on a number of occasions, we asked you some questions about your views on a wide range of practices (parterning agreements, lawsuits against dissidents, voluntary recognition and various other subjects of high interest to reformers). Please do us the courtesy of responding to those questions.

[ 02-11-2002: Message edited by: remote viewer ]

  • posted by siggy
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 7:21pm

quote:


YOU, on the other hand come on here thinking like you are GOD's gift to the anti-UFCW movement


Whoa! HJ Finnamore you must have hit nerve central, the wiz sounds really frustrated.

quote:


One more thing, one of my posts was edited/deleted because I "can't have the last word" twice


Well wiz 'dat's the way it goes! If ya' post the same stuff two times! .. ya' get edited .. get over it!

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

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Mon, Feb 11, 2002 7:23pm

SHEEP TO GOATS SHEEP TO GOATS
that is reformation! I like the term sheep
and so did JFK thats right John F.Kennedy
and also the provincial leaders conference
on the state of dispair of medicare in Canada
refered to the the term sheep for the OPPRESSED! The freightliner\sterling drive
which happened here in St.Thomas my CAW supp.
family\freinds refered to the scared as SHEEP
I also love the term CATTLE
SHEEP INTO GOATS No Fear from employer
intimidation

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 4:38pm

"John-CAW4MAPLEGROVE-Erickson"

How did the meeting go with "TheSportsWiz"?

I hope you told him that "The Winds of Change" are coming.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 4:57pm

Mr.DeMoN sir! The lunch went south!I am the
only guy from former 1000a whouses that has NOT signed a ufcw card!I want this vote over with so I can start to figure out how to straighten out this WRONG!!!

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 4:59pm

Sports...It's pretty obvious to me you do not work at maplegrove. I'd say your not a UFCW member so much as you are on the payroll. I couldn't care less what your job title or duties are, your on the gravy train and your posts are a testiment to what's killed this union. Your attitudes, disdain and disrespect for the men and women who pay for your seat at the trough reflect on those who control the UFCW. They exemplify just why our members need to do their best to remove the cancerous attitudes and beliefs that fester within the leadership of the UFCW, or failing that remove/replace the UFCW entirely.

You and your cohorts have done this to yourselves. It's not the reporter that divides a nation but actions of the corrupt and oppressive who are responcible for the story in the first place. Had 1000a represented the interests of all members and seen to it all jobs were posted with common sence the CAW wouldn't have ever been a factor at Maplegrove. You guys love comparisons to employers so I'll give you another one.

quote:


If I do not like the service I'm getting from my current grocery store and the management of that store is unresponsive to my concerns and disdainfully say's something like 'you knew the deal before you walked in the door so tough' I will walk out the door and do my shopping some place else.


Is the loss of business the customers fault, or the store managements fault? Stop calling it a raid, call it what it is..."a liberation" or better yet "a rescue mission"

[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: Scott Mcpherson ]

[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: Scott Mcpherson ]

  • posted by Shadow
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 5:42pm

John-CAW4Maplegrove-Erickson: Take everything the hacks tell you with a big grain of salt. If they saw fit to have lunch with you, that means they want to get you on side. That's for a reason. Keep the faith.

  • posted by doug mackenzie
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 7:02pm

Coming late to the party Johnny, sorry.
There is some really good stuff here.
It may be that the corruption war is not won overnight. A very good thing to thing to direct our attention to if we ever get our membership(the grove) in the same groove.
John i think that sometimes you are the only true auto worker in the building. Most of the guys i talk to are hiding their self motivated intentions behind the auto workers mask.
It is to late to repost all the jobs, COMPANY seniority at the start up may have worked.
Grove comment:
the vacation crap needs to be organized NOW!
later

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Tue, Feb 12, 2002 9:39pm

I am Doug (thanks)the biggest CAW ANOMOLY !!
In the GROVE(thanks wiz for reminding ME)I
am TRULY one of a kind!!CAW4MAPLEGROVE

  • posted by DeMoN
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 7:58am

hey doug mackenzie you said.

quote:


Most of the guys i talk to are hiding their self motivated intentions behind the auto workers mask.


What exactly are those intensions?

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 10:34am

Before this post gets too outdated;

quote:


Mediated arbitration, commonly known as "med-arb," is a variation of the arbitration procedure in which an impartial or neutral third party is authorized by the disputing parties to mediate their dispute until such time as they reach an impasse. As part of the process, when impasse is reached, the third party is authorized by the parties to issue a binding opinion on the cause of the impasse or the remaining issue(s) in dispute.


For all you yuppie bubblegum labour relations people who try and sell this B.S. let me say this...I can glue a carrot to the nose of a jackass, spray paint it white and call it a unicorn but just because some clown at the union office buys into it doesn't mean I'm right.

You can't be a slave to two masters. If there are two people involved in this process, an arbitrator and a mediator than sure, for the sake of saving space on paper call it what ever you want. But the two processes are seperate and completely distinct. Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 3:58pm

Hey Doug Mack, Buddy i'm behind you all the way.And so are you ufcw brother here at the mill.
I've been keeping them informed on the hype at Maplegrove.The jobs have been posted and that the way it is.I only now wish i was at maplegrove to help you in your fight.Your fellow, and proud union brother,Jayson "Hitman" Anderson

  • posted by TheSportsWiz
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 5:20pm

It's nice to come on this site and not see any posted messages from the single minded clones from the left coast or those who front for them in GOD's county, Ontario.

It's nice to see HOLLYWOOD standing up and telling us the truth, that the 1000A brothers at the Mill are on our side. Brother HOLLYWOOD feel free to offer your support and assistance. If needed we will call upon you to help us out directly. Also, Scott_UFCW_ Lester, Doug MacKenzie, DrMapleGrove, keep up the great work. I, for one appreciate your efforts and your willingness to stand up and be counted. Your willingness to take all our Kitchener brothers are throwing at you on a daily basis. Your willingess to understand that we are simply standing up for what is rightfully ours. We are standing up for the Collective Agreement that we ratified.

Thanks to the UFCW's better Collective Agreement our new brothers who came in from Kitchener received a nice sum of monies in their paycheque today. The monies represented the higher hourly wages they are now earning as a result of being UFCW members. Additionally, again, I hope that as many of our new brothers from Kitchener, Chatham, London, acquire job postings preferential to the ones they currently hold as a result of the current job selection process.

John Erickson, it was pleasure meeting you and hearing your story brother. Now do you think I'm a "sheep" or do you think I am one who is interested in doing what is best for my brothers.

  • posted by siggy
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 5:46pm

Don't worry SportsWiz, you are not really seeing my post.

Remember you pushed the ignore button.

This is just another figment of your imagination.

  • posted by ERICKSON
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 5:48pm

Mr.wiz. you ain't no sheep
I commend you on your quick action with being pro-active into what YOU feel best for the members!!I want you to know pending the voteyou shall be kept very busy into reforming our local
and our Collective Agreements. There will be lots of work ahead and it has to be a huge collective effort by those who are not afraid to make change(some change will be radical) I am sorry to offend anyone with my view ! I feel as RADICAL as you can be in 1000a.My views are much different than yours but there are lots of similarities just the same.I am taken the view of the ultmate reformation as being replacing the ufcw at the groove ad thru-out LCE ontario w/house division.If yo are offended I am sorry but I want a whole lot more respect for OUR BROS!! Y'all shall deal with me later!! I think though for the moment as though we are in RUSSIA or CHINA with the silencing (attempt) from the union ldrshp. of our reformists members throughout CANADA. EVERYONE shall be held accountable for his/her own actions call to the voices help the
oppressed BROTHER FROM THE LEFT J.E

  • posted by ERICKSON
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 5:55pm

Brother H'WOOD thanks for stepping up to the plate/you seek out
mr bertin he shall be back to the mill late this week Rob like yourself ain't no SHEEP.Rob must be true as well as yourself to help fight for the unjust in the w/house. NO FEAR

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 6:42pm

So intriguing. As much as the Sportzwiz can't stand so many of our activist forum regulars and seems to be forever complaining about being censored (I don't believe that he actually has been, BTW), he keeps coming back. It's like he just can't pull himself away from this site. Wonder why?

  • posted by doug mackenzie
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 7:25pm

Now this may be a totally crazy idea.
How about a neutral day at Maple Grove?
Sort of a union(the Maple Grove members) statement to the company. That as divided as we may be, about representation, we are still are united in the cause for fair treatment and RESPECT at Maple Grove.
Is something like this possible? Will it ever be possible?
John E. stay on track with Maple Grove. You are sometimes heading in another direction. Those battles are bigger and take alot longer to fix.
DEMON I noticed that some garbage cans were out of place today. Also there was a really bad smell in the warehouse. We have to get that shit taken care of. Can anybody answer me on those issues???
I need an answer ? No I didn't think anybody would answer. Doesn't anybody care??
later

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Wed, Feb 13, 2002 8:36pm

It's a hell of good idea Doug, I hope people follow through on it.

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Thu, Feb 14, 2002 4:07pm

Today at the grove I watched the janitors throw out 24 full pallets of tortilla chips(30csper)
In the not so distant past my fellow bro's and I saw massive quantities of dairy product
go right in the dumpster.It is with alarm that WE are very concerned about this gross
waste!!!!! Every time I see this kind of waste I remember the closure announcement in 94
In defence of the waste the comp. stated that our closing whouses were part of the blame
I hope and trust that we shall not see this kind of mismanagement of product too much
more in the future! One question I ask /Is it too easy for Procurement to hit their #'s??????
One more Q if anyone knows is this happening at the Mill??????

  • posted by doug mackenzie
  • Thu, Feb 14, 2002 5:59pm

Is it possible that the product was unfit for human consumption?
There are programs set up at Maple Grove and at Erin Mills. Product is always being set to shelters, churches. Some is sold to the smaller stores and corner convenient shops.
later

  • posted by HOLLYWOOD
  • Thu, Feb 14, 2002 6:20pm

This is to all my fellow union brothers,UFCW and CAW.In the last couple of days,I have notice one great change.UNITY.Just look at the replies in this site today alone.Brother John Erickson,Doug Mack,Sport Wiz,everybody just look.we have made a big step here.No Mud slinging no bullshit.We put aside the name calling and anti-union crap and talked about some issues.Now we should put this in hiigh gear and make a point in our causes.U.N.I.T.Y.
HOLLYWOOD SALUTES YOU ALL

  • posted by doug mackenzie
  • Thu, Feb 14, 2002 6:38pm

HOLLYWOOD
Always good to hear from you my friend. Are the boys down in your world up to date on issues and shit happening at Maple Grove?
What you say is good, but it is also boring.
Maybe people are sick of this stuff. Maybe the cream is rising to the top, and the good ship UFCW is gaining some wind in her sails.
later

  • posted by John Erickson
  • Thu, Feb 14, 2002 7:10pm

Product ending up in the dumpster!!!!!!!!
This stuff did not go bad over a 8 hour shift I think a
RED FLAG should come up on inventories computers to
make use of this stuff!! example for SOON to BE outdated
product [buy a case of PC pop get a FREE BAG of tortillas
WHAT A WASTE________________

© 2017 Members for Democracy