Visit uncharted.ca!
  • authored by news
  • published Thu, Sep 12, 2002

Ivan You're Our Brother, Help Us Man

In the scheme of things: Where's the Warehouse?

"Ivan You're our Brother; Help us Man"

The UFCW 1518 general membership meeting, held Sept 10th, 2002, began with the OFG/Loman workers getting another boot in the ass from their union. Secretary-Treasurer Ivan Limpright stood up and announced that he would be chairing this most important meeting. President Brooke Sundin was not able to attend again. "President Sundin was required to attend other union business."

The following a some excerpts from Limprights' opening statement:

We're working also on coordination of bargaining with Local 247, Safeway, Overwaitea and Westfair. We'll have a whole industry bargaining this time and we've been working on that for a while.

The next topic and I know a lot of people here tonight are interested in this topic and that's the warehouse.

OFG/Loman warehouse and as previously reported, Lomans served notice of closure. September 28th, 2002. The Local union has made various applications to the LRB. Unfair labour practise, common employer, true employer and so on.

the BCLRB has provided a bottom line response to the first of our application and they have denied 3 out of the 5 things we had applied for. And they've told us that we can't proceed with those particular parts.

We are waiting for a written decision prior to being able to take futher action. We will be following that further. We have already appealed the decision on the previous decision with respect with our right to terminate the collective agreement and we will pursue other remedies with respect to decisions as they come down. If they come down against us any particular with respect to the proper and appropriate information being able to be entered into the case

Limpright briefed the meeting with news that the workers have received strong support from the Teamsters and Firefighters. The Firefighters opted out of an invitation from the OFG chain to hold their Burn Unit presentation in the stores, in support of the workers. This solidarity was met with an appreciative round of applause by the UFCW 1518 membership

The Ballroom at the Guildford Sheraton Hotel was filled with warehouse workers who wanted nothing more than to ask the president of their union some questions regarding the termination of their 250 jobs. With less than 2 weeks until the OFG/Loman warehouse is to close its doors, the workers have not been able to access their union President and the GMM was no exception. They would have to direct their questions and requests to the secretary treasurer.

They did ... one right after another stepped up to ask what their union was doing for them? What was their union doing to help them with their protest? The only relief they got was when Limpright made the following commitment: "Yes, yes we will do some additional leafleting and we will supply the support to the places you need to go." said Limpright. In the face of heated requests, Limpright only agreed to support approved projects with no dollar committment: "We (union) are going to continue to escalate the program outside the the Lower Mainland. I can't give you a dollar figure" said Limpright.

What seemed most fitting by the end of the night is that the meeting was held in the Ballroom, Limpright's circle dance was to die for. Facing layoffs later this month the workers are spoiling for action. Their union's leaders, on the other hand, are spoiling to appeal the decision of the previous decision and to pursue other remedies with respect to other decisions...Round and round we go.

  • posted by T S
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 8:40am

I have seen More co Operation between Wile E Coyote ,and Road Runner. Than you see between UFCW1518 and The Overwaitea warehouse boys. And the UFCW is about as effective as Ol Wile E Coyote too. Dont worry they have ACME lawyers with the Acme Common employer Kit. Can't you see this exploding in our faces somehow? This whole Looney Tune show is starting to really be seen in the light of day, and NOBODY is laughing...
Do something besides put faith in our acme lawyers, Or the fat Pig is gonna walk on stage. And to quote Porky " Buudeeeeba deeeeeebaaa deeeebbbaaa Thats all folks"

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 9:45am

That header could be very effective for union members wanting to get their representatives' attention:

[Leader's name] you're our brother. Help us!

This should be splashed across emails, letters, faxes and yes, even placards by members who don't think they're getting the service and representation they deserve. It really packs a punch.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 1:39pm

RV- Great idea. This would make an excellent sign for a protest rally outside the UFCW head office as Loman members have no other choice but to ask very publically why they have had so little help. In fact the union has been an impediment to action.

Maybe the answer is, "The constitution says I can do whatever I want and there is nothing you can effectively do about it." The refusal by Ivan to commit to anything demonstrates this as well as a neurotic need to be the "man", retain complete control and power.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 1:41pm

You have a way with words LL.

  • posted by <Larry Loman>
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 2:51pm

Lets ask Ivan for some money to make those signs and banners then LL. Remember, he said no reasonable request would be refused, and that he would get us some money for banners and signs.
After we get them made, we can march right down to Kingsway outside the UFCW offices and use them.
Just to show him how effective they can be.
I remember at a meeting a while back he said that UFCW head office was picketted before for some reason but it wasn't sucsessful.
Anybody know what that would have been about or who it was that was protesting?

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 3:35pm

I believe a group of irate retail (Overwaitea) members stormed the 1518 offices. The pictures in the newspaper were great.

I guess if you can say the members' plight was ignored, you could say the demonstration wasn't sucessfull.

However, if the demonsrations become more and more, they the union might become known as one that doesn't meet the needs of the members.

As for Brooke's views about Jimmy Pattison:

quote:


Pattison is creating jobs with the help of a union
BY: Brooke Sundin

Vancouver Sun, November 5, 1998, Final Edition, p.A20.
Letter of the Day (Vancouver-Sun)

The most noteworthy comments in the Business section's article on the meeting of B.C.'s business leaders were those of Naomi Yamamoto (Summit spotlight turns to Pattison, Oct. 30). She indicated that Jim Pattison should be numbered among those
business people in the province who 'aren't the people who are
creating jobs. . . .'

Unfortunately, Ms. Yamamoto's statement is absolutely wrong.

Over the past year The Overwaitea Food Group, owned outright by Mr. Pattison, has created an estimated 1,000 new jobs in British Columbia.

In addition, it is estimated that the Overwaitea Food Group will create another 1,000 new jobs in the province over the next two years.

And how is it that Mr. Pattison accomplished this? By negotiating, with of all things, a union!

The collective agreement negotiated between Mr. Pattison's Overwaitea Food Group and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 1515, will create an estimate total of 2,000 new jobs, provide long-term stability for the company to grow, and at the same time provide job security for our 8,000 members employed at Overwaitea and Save On Foods stores; as well as improve their pension plan, health and welfare plan, wages and other benefits.

Mr. Pattison may not have all the ideas, or even the best ideas, needed to turn the economy around, but at least he is doing a lot more towards improving the economy through his own action, rather than just wringing hands, pointing fingers and blaming everyone else for the economic woes we face.

Brooke Sundin
President
UFCW Local 1518
Burnaby


  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 3:37pm

Back in the early 1990's the UFCW national office was picketed when national office support staff (mostly women - secretarial and clerical workers) went on strike. They were represented by OPEIU I believe. The strike lasted only a few days and drew a fair bit of local media attention. The UFCW settled up in a hurry. So if this is the picketing they're saying wasn't very effective, I would beg to differ.

I'll dig up the media articles and post them.

  • posted by sleK
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 4:31pm

I'll have some audio to serve up shortly.

And the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round...

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 5:41pm

Actually I think you guys have hit the nail on the head here. Stop leaftetting the stores and spend the last two weeks picketing the Burnaby office on Kingsway! when the media ask you why, tell them.

At the very least you'll be trying to clue in a sleeping membership about where this locals agenda and priorities appear to be. Reflecting on the past 3 years I see nothing, and I mean nothing of any substance has changed. Those ballots were stuffed like a Christmas turkey and yet Sundin doesn't even have the integrety to show up at the GMM? he sends his lacky instead.

IF you wanted the job that bad Brooke why don't you try doing it? or are you hoping to get another 15 min of fame for working together with Patterson to create jobs in B.C.? Working people don't need the UFCW be it Sundin, Limpright, Johnny Walker or whatever. Same clone different names [Pearson excluded] If people don't clue in these guys are never, ever going to change their ways you'll all be working for less money than I am. .....believe it!

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 7:41pm

So Ivan says Local 1518 is going to "continue" escalation of the "programme."

quote:


Programme: 1. A specially arranged list of things to be done; 2. A plan, schedule or procedure.


What programme? The Loman guys have a programme--a damned good and effective programme. It's pretty obvious that Local 1518 doesn't have a programme.

What a bunch of F%&*ing, whiny, crybaby bunch of drivel flowing over Ivan's purple lips. It's pretty obvious that there ain't no plan and there sure as hell ain't no programme.

If I was Ivan, I would have taken my bank card out of my pocket and marched the guys out to the bank machine to make sure they got their money on the spot. I would have taken the bank machine receipt back for a refund from the office.

I'm so friggin' angry at the size of the load of bullshit dumped on the Power Source that I'm spittin' razor blades. The only bright side is that the Loman guys are about 50 steps ahead of the incompetent machine heads.

  • posted by sleK
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 8:07pm

Question:

Could Brooke or Ivan be held personally liable for the loss of these jobs?

What would be required to bring action against them personally?

  • posted by siggy
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 8:13pm

quote:


I'm so friggin' angry at the size of the load of bullshit dumped on the Power Source that I'm spittin' razor blades.


Dat's why my lips are bleeding, I was at the meeting.

These guys need to be commended on their bullshit threshold. They put the chair away many times.

Ivan you worked with these guys, now you working against them, how you sleep man?

  • posted by sleK
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 8:46pm

quote:


Ivan you worked with these guys, now you working against them, how you sleep man?


This is what I don't understand. And it's rather maddening.

Listening to the audio everybody asks "why" and "how".

"How could you do that?"

"Why did you do this?"

There's no accountability with these jackasses, thus asking them "Why?" is completely useless.

I think I heard only one person at the meeting ask a "what" question;

"What happens on the 28th?"

Not once did Ivan state precisely what the union was going to do. And not once did anyone ask specifically what the union was going to do.

IMO, appeals to emotion are a complete waste of time. Time that would be better spent siphoning useful information from their soft-little-heads.

  • posted by siggy
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 8:58pm

sleK they asked who, what, where and when a hundred times.
The guys knew the answers to all these Q's and answered them when the chair couldn't. It was hot seat night is all.

  • posted by sleK
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 9:06pm

That's not evident in the audio.

  • posted by siggy
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 9:31pm

The audio doesn't seem to cover the meeting after the meeting. Limpright didn't want to take up a lot of time at the meeting with the OFG/Loman guys, so he adjourned the GMM and gave the guys an extra opportunity to Q'n.

The chair tried to insist it was just for warehouse guys, but the guys insisted louder that anyone was welcome. The chair said ... OK ... OK!

  • posted by <Jimbo>
  • Thu, Sep 12, 2002 10:28pm

I've asked why, what, when and where too many times to count. It's just an excersize now so that others can hear what his answers will be.

If he doesent like the question you asked, he'll just give you an answer to a completely different question. If you say, thats not what I asked, he says "yes it is, you just don't like my answer."

Asking questions seems pretty useless at this point.
We don't need answers, we need ACTION annd we need it NOW!

C'mon Brooke and Ivan, your our brothers.
HELP US!

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 1:59am

What about that $600,000 plus cost for the Harrison shindig? That must have been some econo-conference. No wonder Ivan doesn't want to pay for a real Loman fight. With just a tenth of that we could have shut Jimmy down and had this all over with. Ivan can't get the money for a guy who drove over 2500 kilometers in his own car to do the real work until (coincidentally) the day before the meeting.Hang your head you Stay-Puffed marshmellow.

  • posted by <Billy Bob Boxmover>
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 2:45am

Ya got to understand that there are brothers and then there are other brothers.
You have the King bro: Brookie
You have the queen bro: Ivan.
You have the royal court bros: e-board

One large step down are the wannabe e-board bros: business agents and shop stewards. Best be kind to the royal family if you ever hope to get there. A talent for ass kissing and asking few questions about any royal decrees are essential to even being considered.

Way down at the very bottom are the large number of serf bros who pay for everything. Questioning what the bros in the upper class are doing is not your place.

The Harrison conference was not open to the serf bros. Only the very finest bros got into this one. So it is only fair and fitting for the royal bros to have a conference that reflects their station- the deluxe royal conference. Or was it super deluxe. I forget.

The serf bros get the union meetings when the royalty mingle with the unwashed. Water is served in real glass. Sometimes there is even coffee and free parking thrown in.

  • posted by weiser
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 8:11am

quote:


posted by siggy:
The audio doesn't seem to cover the meeting after the meeting. Limpright didn't want to take up a lot of time at the meeting with the OFG/Loman guys, so he adjourned the GMM and gave the guys an extra opportunity to Q'n.

The chair tried to insist it was just for warehouse guys, but the guys insisted louder that anyone was welcome. The chair said ... OK ... OK!


Could that be because if he hadn't shut down the GMM, then the Loman guys could have put motions on the floor and seconded them?

That could also be the reason why the meetings are quarterly. The Loman guys will be gone by the next meeting--OR WILL THEY?

I think it's time to start a campaign for the next President of Local 1518 and the Next Secretary Treasurer and Executive Vice Pres and a whole lot of other elected officers.

Keeping with Doug Dority's theme, These boogers didn't change, so it's time they got out of the way.

G'bye Brooke and Ivan. And, by the way, your designated EI office is the one with nearest your home address.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 11:22am

The audio is a great touch slek. Just like being there. We need more of this. It helps show the world what it's really like to be a union member in biz-u-topia.

One day I hope we experience these events via web cast. (slek? Come back slek. I didn't mean one day this month. )

I thought Ivan sounded most uncomfortable through his dissertation. Would that be a fair statement?

  • posted by T S
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 3:06pm

The serf bros get the union meetings when the royalty mingle with the
unwashed. Water is served in real glass. Sometimes there is even
coffee and free parking thrown in.

Maybe they will give you 2 t shirts and a Hat too! BUT only when they incompetently lose your job!

  • posted by siggy
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 8:43pm

quote:


I thought Ivan sounded most uncomfortable through his dissertation. Would that be a fair statement?


Nope not a flinch, it was fine, the shit got spit at breakneck speed and the only choke was announcing the untimely absense of the divine leader.

  • posted by sleK
  • Fri, Sep 13, 2002 10:36pm

quote:


One day I hope we experience these events via web cast.


It's easy. the software to do it is either cheap or free.

The UFCW has no excuse NOT to offer their meetings online.

Maybe they'll get the hint?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:14am

quote:


posted by Loman Life:
What about that $600,000 plus cost for the Harrison shindig? That must have been some econo-conference. No wonder Ivan doesn't want to pay for a real Loman fight. With just a tenth of that we could have shut Jimmy down and had this all over with. Ivan can't get the money for a guy who drove over 2500 kilometers in his own car to do the real work until (coincidentally) the day before the meeting.Hang your head you Stay-Puffed marshmellow.


I was going to say: They spent $600,000 on a conference?!... where a select few could talk about bargaining. That's just swell. What a great use of resources.

slek, roughly what would it have cost Local 1518 to set up a web site where they could poll members about the issues, discuss the issues in an open forum like we have on this site or maybe a live chat format where members could actually engage their leaders in discussion? Just in case there is a need for speech-making, let's throw in a web cast or two.

What would be a ballpark cost?

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:22am

quote:


They spent $600,000 on a conference?!...


$650,000.00, so it's easy to see why the machine was hesitant about getting a OFG/Loman rep. there, Carter could have been the perverbial straw, right?

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:31am

That will never happen with the current crews that run the "devine" locals. Could you imagine them standing on camera for the world to see? There they be embarassed because they ain't got no pants and now everyone can see they ain't got no cajones. Only one man wears the pants in Canada.

Oh, ya, the employers are never supposed to know what the union's finances are. What a load of hooey. They already know how much they send, they know the numbers of members, they know what they spend on lawyers, and they can figure out how much it costs to put on one of the union parties, and they know how much is sent to the International, and they know what the International's finances are, so SUPRISE the local's finances aren't a big secret to the employers. How the money is spent and exactly on what and whom is what must be kept secret from the Power Source.

The secrecy is aimed at the Power Source not the employers. The machine heads know that knowledge is power, so the Power Source must be kept in the dark so as to neutalize their power to the greatest extent possible.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 5:07pm

The posting of the audio track of the GMM was met with varying reactions at the warehouse. It's hard to say how many actually listened to it as those who cared about the issues were there at the meeting. When the news spread most people I talked to thought it was a good idea. People should know what we are up against and audio has a way of imparting the emotion that was present in a way that the written word cannot.

However, some were clearly upset by the posting of what they felt was private business. Their voices were on that audio. They felt there might be a possibility that the scum at OFG and/or Loman management could use this information to their advantage. They felt that any strategic information should remain quiet as long as possible.

It raises some ethical questions for those given to that line of thought.I personally was surprised by the few objections I heard. As I said most reactions were quite positive. I have given the issue some thought and offer up the following for discussion.

Firstly, I have spent many hours at this site as the issues are very important to me and this seems to be the only place one can get them discussed and out in the open. In that time I have come to the conclusion that MFD is not by any means a newcomer to ethical or moral considerations. I believe MFD has conducted itself accordingly and responsibly. I could only conclude and trust that this was given sufficient thought and a decision was made to post the audio.

Secondly, I do not believe for a second that what information that is shared at any UFCW meeting stays private for long and that the employer has ready access to it. This certainly seems to be true of the Loman UFCW meetings.

Thirdly, I find it difficult to object on any ethical grounds when the UFCW executive has failed so miserably in this regard. Clearly ethical issues are not a priority for them and "leadership by example" a concept they appear unaware of.

Lastly, the audio concerns a union that is bent on doing very little as opposed to sharing strategic information about all that it is doing or plans to do.

Seen in this light I applaud the use of the audio as a valid means for sharing the frustration, anguish, stress and anger that Loman members now feel towards an indifferent and undemocratic union.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 5:34pm

While I respect the views of everyone who was at the meeting about the audio clip (whether their views were pro or con), I must say that I am trying to understand the basis for the opposition to the posting of the audio.

I don't doubt that not everyone is people comfortable hearing their voice broadcast but I have to ask the question (and I ask this respectfully): If you do not want your voice to be heard, how do you expect your voice to be heard?

I myself found the exchange between the workers and their union reps very illuminating and the workers' sentiments - especially the emotional ones - particularly moving.

Something to think about:

If it is the public that you want to reach (and it is the public that you need to reach - your employer could care less about you and your union isn't far behind IMHFO) then it is this kind of discourse that will help you connect with people, that will get their attention and make them think long and hard about what's happening to you.

Was this meeting "private business"? Apart from anyone present being able to talk about what went on with anyone, anywhere, anytime, I have to wonder whether it is in your interests to consider the subject of your impending layoffs "private business"? Is what's happening to you "private business"? Is it something that ought to be kept in the closet or is it something that needs to be aired very publicly? Isn't it just this kind of let's-keep-it-in-the-family thinking that has consigned millions of dispossessed workers to suffer in silence when they ought to be making a lot of noise together?

I'd be interested in hearing everyone's views on this.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 5:44pm

All members at the meeting were part of the conversation being taped, so we're talking about whether people are comfortable with the airing of the tape. Until the matter is resolved, I think the moderators of this site showed sensitivity in giving the tape a rest.

However, I think the recording was extremely powerful in that it revealed the anguish people suffer when their jobs are taken. It revealed that they thought highly of their employer and were proud, dedicated employees. It shows how their union skimped on street-level support.

It paints their employer in a really bad light and convicts both employers in the court of public opinion. It shows that Overwaitea's claim that people are important is nothing but hot air and marketing fluff. It shows the world what a sham union meetings are and the crap that's given for financial reports.

That audio stream was very important for the Loman guys' fight and for the fight of all workers. It showed these workers' humanity and UFCW, Overwaitea/Loman's inhumanity.

It rightly shames the UFCW, OFG and Lomans. It lionizes the Loman guys.

  • posted by <Lomans Guy>
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 5:57pm

It may lionize us, but unfortunatly thats not gonna pay my mortgage.
I'd trade all the acolades for a way to put groceries on my table anyday.

Thanx for the Kudos anyway.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 6:13pm

The UFCW or conventional methods won't put groceries on your table. If the battle is won at all, the victory will come from your works and that of your friends. It will not come from the UFCW or its million-dollar per year law firm.

If you lose, you will know you gave it your best shot and that the UFCW didn't. Win or lose, you guys are what "stand and fight" is all about.

No matter what happens you guys should keep your dues current until you decide whether to run for office.

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 6:50pm

quote:


No matter what happens you guys should keep your dues current until you decide whether to run for office.


I don't believe the UFCW allows for that my friend. Unlike craft based unions employers pay the UFCW dues for workers, without an employer to pay your dues how can you stay current....and if you know and havn't told me until now why the hell not?

Nothing would give me more pleasure than to remain a.... oh mans that's too rich even for me.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 7:14pm

So sorry, my mistake. I thought we were dealing with a union here. Apparently, I was mistaken.

If you havn't been employed for the full 12 months prior to the election, you can't run.

Real democratic. Unless they have every nickle they can squeeze, you can't participate.

These guys are just toooooooo much.

Thanks for bringing that to our attention Scott.

  • posted by KuruptedOne
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 7:21pm

Well I work in the warehouse. And the first question I ask is..

You wonder why Ivan cant give you a Straight answer?

This is why. I understand why you would record the meeting but I also believe that its a private meeting and if the Members wanted everyone that surfs the internet to hear what is said then it should be an open metting. I remember we had a meeting in Langley not to long ago about "MOU I" and by the time i got home from the meeting the minutes were posted on this site. Well needless to say there was some outrage at the warehouse. Alot of finger pointing and a couple of people were wrongly accused of putting it there. The fact is OFG knows about this website and can call on it at anytime the wish to. So if your trying to do the right thing in which you state you are, why give them this information. I understand that they probably know about every meeting but that is just by word of mouth. Being able to access that info here is like inviting Vanderlees and Kavanagh to the metting to write it all down.

I understand that you are trying to bring democracy to "OUR" union, but other than a handful of guys that work there and post here, you dont have to face the harse reality of how important this stuff is to most people at the warehouse.

One more Question, "Was everyone heard on the tape asked if they would mind it being posted here? "

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:08pm

Kurupted One. You raise some valid points but in making them you choose to forget a great deal.

The chance that his voice may have been recorded was not why Ivan chose not to give a straight answer. This is not the first time he has wiggled his way out of giving a straight answer and it won't be the last. There is no relationship between his non-committal fluff and the recording.

Whatever got out about the MOU was easily done by word of mouth and so was anything on the audio stream. I wish the MOU meeting would have been recorded because we would now have a solid record of how many facts Ivan chose not to share with us before we took the strike vote. His failure to disclose the facts that only came in the LRB ruling was simply criminal.

We are talking about a do nothing union that has so far shit on your attempts to get the message
out. The "two shirts and a hat" campaign it is called. Remember that?

Did Ivan or Brooke ask you if it was OK for them to starve us financially in this campaign? Did the union ask you if it was OK with you if they signed the 777 deal? Did they ask you if it was OK that they were spineless regarding the overtime issue? The list goes on and on.

Much of what we have gotten out of this union is largely based on the fact that they know there is a place on the information highway where the truth will get out and could be very embarrassing. Do you remember our chief shop steward not being invited to the Harrison conference? Do you remember them asking us to pay for our own leaflets? These decisions were reversed once the truth became too embarrassing.

Do you honestly think for a second that the audio stream would have been posted if there was anything on it that OFG or Loman or anyone else could have used to hurt us?

As I said, your points may be valid but what you are forgetting negates any weight they may have.

Get off your high horse and get back down to reality.

  • posted by sleK
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:40pm

quote:


slek, roughly what would it have cost Local 1518 to set up a web site where they could poll members about the issues, discuss the issues in an open forum like we have on this site or maybe a live chat format where members could actually engage their leaders in discussion? Just in case there is a need for speech-making, let's throw in a web cast or two.


Well, they already have a website. There are a billion free polling scripts on the web. Some of the best discussion forum software is free. You can get java chat scripts for free. A decent audio suite for producing streaming audio can be had for a few hundred dollars. The biggest expense would be the labour.

  • posted by KuruptedOne
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 8:43pm

First of all I say this...

The OT Issue, I said and I will quote " Sue me because I wont stay another minute of OT." This I told to the Supervisor when he asked me to come in. Nothing ever came of it. I understand That Ivan and the other Union guys throw alot of fluff out there. I dont know how many times I went into the Union Office and stated to Gord that i wont stay overtime because that fat fucking loser came and told Me to stay. The fact is I saw numerous guys bend over backwards to stay overtime. I will never forget who they are or how fucking spineless it is to hide greed behind being a coward. And from that day forward I refused to leaflet and participate in any other union functions. I will not fight for people who will bury themselves. Think of me what you will, but remember this. I was spending my time out doing what is right for a buncha pussies who cowar under a bit of pressure. So thank all of them for deflating our boat. You cant blame the union for that.

I ask you this, "If the Union was doing things that you and everyone thought was suspicious, then why would the membership stay overtime?"

"Why would you not see through the smoke screen set up by them, Why did everyone cowar?"

I did and I was told by Numerous people and again I qoute, " You not staying Overtime, will only hurt yourself." You can thank The membership for Fucking themself and you. For Once in the history of the warehouse everyone was united, only to be crushed by a bunch of guys who frankly, dont need the money.

MOU I was too good to be true, and Again I remeber the memvership shutting down some individuals during our meeting that may have gotten some answers out of the fluff machine we call a Union. Again Thank those for putting us in the position we are in.

As for the 777 Deal. This is why I will never again work for a Union.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 9:31pm

quote:


The fact is OFG knows about this website and can call on it at anytime the wish to. So if your trying to do the right thing in which you state you are, why give them this information.


I'm positive the employer has all the info it needs when the warehouse workers are outside the stores, fighting the fight with home-made signage. Pretty big clue if you ask me.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 9:35pm

KuruptedOne- The overtime issue was a big dissapointment for most of us. The union had covered its ass in writing and verbally. It then went on to advise the members that they could be held personally liable for damages by hiding behind Shona's skirt. For some it was all they needed to hear to do what they wanted to do all along-take care of their own selfish ass. Unionism was built on group action- moving with a common purpose towards a common goal. You're right, there was some spineless reaction from the guys and we know who they are. Just remember that it started with a particularly spineless group at UFCW Head Office who knew full well what the result would be.In their own way, be it two tier agreements or bogus legal advice, they have served to divide and conquer just as well as any employer could have.

  • posted by KuruptedOne
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 9:52pm

Hey LL,

Just a Couple of questions,

1. Did you stay overtime after the ruling came down?

2. If Not, why did you not stay?

3. In your eyes what percentage of people stayed and continued to stay well after the fact some of us were not impressed?

4. Did this make you fight harder for people who turned their back on you? (if you answered No to Question 1.)

5. Did you ever believe OFG would take your house car and everything you owned because you opted to execute your right NOT to stay OT? (Again if you answered NO to ques. 1)

6. Did you vote Yes to the contract 10 years ago? If you voted No "why?"

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 10:54pm

KuruptedOne- No I didn't stay, I never do. As far as what others do, I simply cannot make a decision to fight or not to fight based on what other people do-this puts them in the drivers seat instead of me.

I don't know how many people really believed that they would face legal action, very few I think. But with a union that has turned its back on you as clearly as ours did on this issue, you get to feel very alone. Fear takes over. This is a natural human response to stress and doubt.

I admit that it has been frustrating to watch but quitting has never entered my mind for several reasons. There is nothing that OFG, Loman, and the union would like more than to have us quit trying. Also in continuing to fight I am taking care of my own ass in a way that is meaningfull for me. I also can't watch this go down the way it has-it violates most of what should be held dear both by unionism and good business. The fight is worth fighting.

I feel and share your frustration but I cannot focus on the past in anger. The actions of today and the very near future hold much more promise as a way for me to express my feelings and make a difference in all of this. Win or lose I will know I have done everything I could. In my own little world that will help me to move on to the next thing and put this behind me.

  • posted by Gepetto
  • Sat, Sep 14, 2002 11:39pm

mod edit: Not cool. Don't do that again.

  • posted by T S
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 8:51am

The stupidity of some of my loman brothers is astounding. IF for one freakin minute you thought loman would sue for not working OT , You havent paid any attention to what has been happening there for years . this is a company that wont spend 10 cents to go to arbitration or sue, Was just a convenient excuse for scabs to work the OT and shift the onus to" the company made me do it boys". freakin SCABS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. ANd as for Ivan saying we ll we gonna lose and have to go to the supreme court.pfff DID youreally think he was ever gonna say Yup its WON< a done deal

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 9:20am

Does anyone have a copy of the LRB decision on the overtime issue. From what I heard about the issue on the GMM audio, I'm very unclear as to what the LRB ruled. I kept hearing Ivan repeating that the lawyers said it meant this and the lawyers said it meant that, but I'd like to see the actual text of the decision (and the legal opinion too - is that floating around anywhere?).

As to the notion of a company suing individual members for refusing to work overtime, I'll believe that foolish waste of money when I see it. Additionally, I'm quite confused by Ivan's assertion that the lawyer's opinion letter somehow protects members from being sued individually.

I think the UFCW is so accustomed to using lawsuits against individuals as a means of controlling behaviour that it doesn't like, that its representatives are assuming that other organizations are just as eager to piss their money away on such things.

Any chance we could get a copy of the decision and/or the opinion letter?

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 10:07am

Let's get this straight. Lomans can't and won't sue individual members before they serve the individual member with a cease and desist order filed with the court and a copy of the court order.

Loman and Jimmy Pattison don't want the publicity of not only putting people in position of possibly losing their house, but having to go to court for not working expensive OT.

Mr. Purple Lips may be slippery when questioned, but he has a brain ticking under the old rug. Why then would "PL" allow the information about personal law suits to circulate. Why wouldn't "PL" explain what might happen, what has to occur before it happens, and the liklihood of it happening?

As for OFG and Loman knowing what is happening at union headquarters and in the meetings, don't fool yourselves for a minute that they aren't on the phones to union reps and machine heads alike to find out the scoop. Likewise, out of 250 people, there is always a Judas who will fill the company in on what's happening, what's going to happen, who said what etc.

It's a fact of life. Short of having an illegal conspiracy recorded, you don't have anything to worry about or to keep secret.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 12:02pm

The real question is, as suggested above, why the union chose to play company lackey.

A real union may have said something like this:

" Dear Loman Lowlife,

You have made it abundantly clear that you are in the business of going out of business. You have beat this dog since it was a pup and now that it has bitten you, you wish to cry foul. Don't look at us for any help here. We have covered our ass both verbally and in writing on this issue. We will back the members up in any legal action and will loudly advertise the hollowness of any action against them. Make your next move.

Sincerely,

Real Union

The Order by the LRB is moot for the reasons weiser has made above. But for those that are interested here are the two relevant paragraphs from the 4 paragraph ruling:

"The Labour Relations Board, pursuant to s. 133 of the Labour Relations Code as amended, hereby orders that the Union by its officers, members, servants and agents, and all persons having knowledge of this order who are employees of the Employer, shall refrain from ceasing to work, or refusing to work, or refusing to continue to work in accordance with the normal practices and procedures of the Emplyer at the premises of the Employer, contrary to the provisions of the collective agreement between the Employer and the Union and ss 49,57 and 58 of the Labour Relations Code."

"The Labour Relations Board, pursuant to s.133, of the Labour Relations Code as amended, hereby orders that the Union, by its officers, members,servants and agents, and all persons having knowledge of this order who are employees of the Employer, shall cease and desist from declaring, authorizing, counselling, aiding, supporting, encouraging, condoning or engaging in any unlawful strike action, and particularly a cessation of work, a refusal to work, or a refusal to continue to work in combination or in concert or in accordance with a common understanding at the premises of the Employer, contrary to ss 57 and 58 of the Labour Relations Code."

Note that not once is the word overtime used. The reason is clear: the collective agreement clearly states it is voluntary and the Board cannot come right out and say, as Ivan did, forget what it says you have to work overtime anyways. He relys on a legal analysis provided by Shona Moore Q.C. that contains this:

"In other words, if the employees in the bargaining unit are refusing to work voluntary overtime, they are acting in contravention of the Order and could be found in contempt of this Order. Moreover, employees who act in contempt of the Order and refuse to work voluntary overtime, could be subject to an action for damages and be found liable for the damages suffered by their employer, Loman."

Regardless of what one may deem it to say, for the reasons Weiser has made, it remains a sad testament for the state of unionism under the Brooke/Ivan marshmellow slate.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 12:07pm

quote:


some were clearly upset by the posting of what they felt was private business. Their voices were on that audio. They felt there might be a possibility that the scum at OFG and/or Loman management could use this information to their advantage. They felt that any strategic information should remain quiet as long as possible.


I must say that I am surprised that anyone would think that anything on the audio stream could be used by management to its advantage. There was nothing in the stream that is "strategic" information - except some brief reference to continuation of the leafletting program.

Let's get something straight here:

Management already has the only advantage it needs: The right to close the doors and lay you off whenever it wants to. Management has always had that advantage. It's the only advantage it cares about and it's the only one it needs. The OFG/Lomans managers could care less what you talk about at your meetings. The people you want to reach and reach out to are not Loman/OFG management. You want to reach out to their customers. Helping the customers to understand your world is an important step to building support. The audio stream of your meeting was an eye-opener - the kind that can get people's attention, whether they are OFG customers, members of other unions, or even members of your own local.

The only way that you can persuade management to refrain from exercising its right to close the doors is to get the public on your side. That's your biggest advantage. Management knows you have this advantage, they are counting on you not using it or not using it very effectively. Remember, the bottom line is everything to a business. If a decision is going to hurt the bottom line, the decision may well be revisited.

At this point your number 1 priority ought to be getting your message out to the public and getting support from other union members and the community in general. Don't be sidetracked worrying about what management thinks or how much they know about your strategy. The only strategy that will work for you is one that hurts their bottom line. They know that's your best strategy whether you keep it a secret or write it in the sky. You are probably better off writing it in the sky: The more you talk about it, the more concerned management will become that you are serious, the more likely you are to get somewhere with them.

On a different subject:

Scott/weiser: Are you telling us that the UFCW constitution prohibits a member who has not paid dues for 12 continuous months from running for union office?!

That's discriminatory as all hell! What about a member who has been off sick or on maternity or parental leave? Someone ought to visit this cute little restriction with their provincial Human Rights Commission. (It sounds like smething out of the book of management values: If you're not working, you're not worthy.)

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 1:33pm

quote:


Scott/weiser: Are you telling us that the UFCW constitution prohibits a member who has not paid dues for 12 continuous months from running for union office?!


That's right. If a 25-year, paid-up member were to quit Safeway on January 31, and then take a month of R&R before starting work at IGA, that member wouldn't have 12 continuous months as an active member if the elections were to be held in the next 11 months. Anybody who works in a place that closes or if they are fired or permanently laid off, then the union don't want their type running for office no matter how many good years they served the union before, and no matter how much they paid in dues in the past. If the employer doesn't have to take you then the union don't want you.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 2:15pm

We have been advised that we will remain UFCW members until this dispute is resolved. Does that mean that we will remain UFCW members while this thing churns its way through the Supreme Court or is this BS?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 3:16pm

You might want to ask for it in writing. Make sure they say you are "members in good standing with all rights and priviledges as if you were actively employed in a UFCW-represented workplace". Just so there's no misunderstanding down the road.

  • posted by KuruptedOne
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 6:49pm

HEY LL ,

We were also advised that MOU I was a done deal.

Figure it out pal , lube up and bend over it will only hurt a bit.

  • posted by <Eyes-a-popping>
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 7:00pm

quote:


Conclusion

The long-term damage spawned by the Local 777 agreement will be felt by the UFCW, as a whole, for years to come. In fact, it may lead to the permanent crippling of the UFCW in the Province of British Columbia. Local 777 doesn't seem able to offer its members even the level of protection ordered by law.

Over 15,000 Local 777 members have quit or been terminated from Westfair since 1989. The new Local 777 agreement will do little to stem the tide of disgruntled workers leaving Westfair and broadcasting their views of what the UFCW did for them, or should we say -- to them.


Looks like this dude's letter to Tom Kukovica was pretty prophetic. Is that contract any better or has our contract just been lowered to match it.

We have been saying that the Local 777 deal was a killer for all of us and the union keeps telling us that the 777 deal is good and has no effect on us.

I don't know when this was written but its conclusion sure the hell is on the money today.

  • posted by T S
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 7:15pm

Kurupted Pull yer head out . MOU I was nothing but a distraction for the membership. You just seem to pick an choose what IVAN spew you want to believe. Oh Memo I is done deal . Ok Well In mY opinion gonna lose lrb ruling and go to supreme court . wich do you believe One, both or none. Use your own smarts Dont rely on that fat idot to tell you whats what. he is nothing but a drivel spewin lackey, master of the sidestep shuffle, who will spew whatever crud Brooke deems is necessary to placate the uneducated and unwashed.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 7:19pm

Eyes A Poppin- I don't think the UFCW really cares what they can do for members. More important is what members can do for the UFCW - pay dues.

In the end UFCW may be a collection of low wage part time workers. This should very very lucrative and there will be little complaint from those who don't have enough at stake to know or care what rights and pay they could have or should have.

Who is Tom Kukovica?

  • posted by sleK
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 7:38pm

quote:


Who is Tom Kukovica?


The jackass on the left:

  • posted by siggy
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 8:18pm

Kukovica was the ufcw canadian director before Mike Fraser took over wasn't he? Would search the www. but why bother ...

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 8:24pm

A quote from Hoffa from the book by Arthur Sloane,

"Arriving at a Belleville, Illinois, meeting of retired Teamsters and seeing a heavy representation of late-model Cadillacs and Buicks among the cars outside the building, he told his audience, "The reason why unions have gotten so soft these days is right out there in the parking lot. We've fought long and hard, but in the process we've lost something that is very important. You've gotten so soft and your bellies are so full that you have no interest in helping the Teamsters out by going out and carrying picket signs. Until you get skinny again and there aren't wrinkles in your bellies, labor will continue to deteriorate."

Look for it at your local library Ivan.

  • posted by KuruptedOne
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 9:28pm

quote:


Kurupted Pull yer head out


I have pulled it out. I am not fighting for a single fucking thing anymore. Im not fighting for a beefed up severance package, for a bunch of guys who dont deserve it. A buncha lazy dog fuckers. I aint doing it. Im Not Intitled to severance. Yet again Guys on the bottom sacrificing for a bunch of Idiots that only care about themselves. I go and stand out infront of a store telling people that EV Logistics is so bad to their employees, Truth be known I dont work for much more. Part timers have no rights in our building. You know it and I do too.

Everywhere I have worked Ive worked hard except Lomans. And guess what Im considered an above average worker there. That place is full of pieces of shit believe me.

Okay now that thats out of the way, I say this, Its all fine and dandy when you vote away the rights of people who have not even started in the building. Vote Yes to fucking the junior Part Time scum.

Okay Im not bitter about that because I have one fact that really make all us Part timers feel really good. And again I quote " We Know How to Live on Ten dollars an Hour, Have Fun."

Its all fine and dandy when someone else works for that but when its your turn YOU dont Like it. Oh yeah But Id bet you say you didnt Vote Yes to the contract but the fact is, 9 of 10 people who say they voted No are lieing. And there is only 2 people who will tell ya they voted yes, and Why.

  • posted by <Billy Bob Boxmover>
  • Sun, Sep 15, 2002 10:57pm

Kurupted One. Why are you here telling us all about how much yer not gonna do? Do you have any information to share?

  • posted by Blackcat
  • Mon, Sep 16, 2002 7:07am

Speaking about Hoffa...

Somehow the IWW Vancouver got an invitation to the Instituto Laboral de la Raza 20th Anniversary Awards Dinner honoring "Labor Leader of the Year" James P. Hoffa...as well as Art Pulaski (Sec-Treasurer of the California Labor Federation), Bill A Lloyd (Senior Advisor to Govenor Gray Davis...who by the way just screwed over all the Cali public service workers) and Lilia Marlen Navarro (UNITE Textile Processors Local 75)...here are the options...

-a table of ten in the President's Circle - $2500
-a Patron's table of ten - $2000
-table of ten - $1500
-tickets @ $200 per person
-tickets @ $125 per person/Nonprofit Organizations

If the IWW Van got an invite there is no doubt that most other unions here in BC got an invite too. I wonder how many will be going down and spend their members dues to get into the "President's circle"? Is this why Brooke wasn't at the GMM?

Cocktails at 6...Dinner at 7...

  • posted by siggy
  • Mon, Sep 16, 2002 7:20am

quote:


Is this why Brooke wasn't at the GMM?


It doesn't matter what pressing union business or important dinner was on his schedule. What is apparent here is there was no representation on behalf of the warehouse workers.

There is opportunity to meet with these workers prior to any important engagement and he skipped. He just skipped, no meeting, no accountability, no memo. nada!

  • posted by Troll
  • Mon, Sep 16, 2002 8:26am

Maybe Brooke was getting ready to go to the big Pow Wow in Washington DC. Aren't the UFCW elite having a meeting this month to discuss the bad, bad MFD site and all the problems the TRUTH is causing the rich guys with the jets, SUVs, executive assistants, $200 virgin wool slacks and fancy offices paid for by employer money that was suppoed to educate and train the members.

  • posted by <Billy Bob Boxmover>
  • Mon, Sep 16, 2002 11:47am

I hope all retail members are paying attention. These are the clowns who will be your legal representitives next spring. They have alreadey split you in half (1/3, 2/3) and you know who has the most votes. Those that have somthing to fight for and save should spread the site adress around and get prepared to defend yourself. Look, learn, and be prepared.

  • posted by T S
  • Tue, Sep 17, 2002 1:30am

[QUOTE]posted by KuruptedOne:
[QB][QUOTE] . Im Not Intitled to severance.

Severance pay is one week's wages for an employee with at least three months consecutive service; 1 week's
wages for each consecutive years service after that. In other words, for 5 years consecutive service, the
severance pay would be 5 weeks' wages, but up to a maximum of eight weeks' wages.
THIS is the minimum according to the labour standards act of BC. wich supersedes any contract language..... YOU are intitled to severance, even though you are part time and Lomans contract says you arent . at least till Gordo campbell gets around to changin that law.

http://www.duhaime.org/cabcempl.htm

  • posted by Blackcat
  • Tue, Sep 17, 2002 2:54am

Poor workers without homes occupy Woodwards building to demand social housing. Now if these folks can do it with little or no resources then why can't UFCW machine heads with all their (tax) money help the Lomans warehouse workers???

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Tue, Sep 17, 2002 10:44am

Ivan Limpright from aa August 24, 1993 letter to the Loman membership,

" While you may not always share the same views of your union committee, generally speaking, we must say that "The Overwaitea Food Group" did us all a big favour by their attempt at divesting themselves from us. This may prove to be their undoing, because we can work with our new employer constructively to build all our futures collectively. Our new Collective Agreement, which will be available for circulation in the very near future, is demonstrative of this fact."

Apart from the humour this may arouse there are two points to consider: The new "employer did not work with us constructively or anything close to it. They have in fact been instrumental in running the operation into the ground.

Secondly, the Collective Agreement and the union did nothing to call attention to the fact or prevent the continuation of the Loman agenda.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Sep 17, 2002 11:45am

If anything, it shows how fully these representatives swallowed the corporate BS about how labour-management cooperation is good for everybody. I don't know why it was so easy to do. By 1993, millions of workers across North America had been thrown out of work by employers who preached labour-management cooperation and the great things that it would bring to everybody.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Wed, Sep 18, 2002 12:29am

Ivan fommowed the 93 letter above with the 94 MOU "H" which brought the 777 deal to the warehouse. New hires start at $10/hr. But the Loman management proceeded to ignore just about every established principle of fostering an efficient workplace there ever was written. Ivan said this was good because it meant more work for our junior members who now had the good fortune of making the princely sum of $10/hr. Fortunately they all paid the same dues as full-time so there was nothing to worry about.

Yes union-managment cooperation is a beautiful thing - if your in the business of dues collection.

  • posted by <Mike H>
  • Thu, Sep 19, 2002 12:38am

Ivan...or Andy,I know you read this.

Ivan told us at the general Meeting last Tuesday,Sept. 10, that Rolland, Tom and Brian, whom were waiting to get paid back for money they we're owed from the road trip to Prince George that their Cheques were in the mail (on Sept. 10). They told me they received their cheques today (Thursday Sept. 18) and the cheques were dated Sept. 12.
You said they were in the mail Sept. 10.
They were dated Sept. 12.
They were not in the mail Sept 10 as you said.
Why did you Lie to us at the GMM?
We trust you Ivan, You are our brother.
Why did you lie to us?
You are our treasurer, you are in charge of finances.
You said the cheques were in the mail Sept 10.
That was UNTRUE.
Why did you lie to us?
Why did you tell the members the cheques were in the mail when they clearly were not?
I don't understand? You LIED to us. You lied to 150 members.
Why? Why did you do that?
Unfortunatley, since you lied to us on that issue, I have trouble believing what you say on any issue.
Why Did you LIE to us?
You didn't have to do that. You could have been truthful, but you LIED.
Why?
The audio feed proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you LIED.
You said cheques were in the mail.
They were not.
You Lied.
I have paid dues to UFCW for over 20 years. I am a member in GOOD standing.
You lied to me.
Why?
Thats not fair.
Thats not right.
You Lied to me.
Please....We need your Help.
Don't dissrespect us.
You are our brother.
Remember when I used to help you pick your orders so that you had enough production?
I gave you peices so you wouldn't get fired.
I supported you for shop steward.
You lied to me.
Why?
Thats not right.
Thats not the union way.
You lied.
I am dissapointed.
Can you explain your actions?
Andy Neufeild...your reading this....WHY?
Don't lurk....answer.
Gord Carter....Your reading this..
Do you have an answer?
Don't lurk....answer.
Gary, Dean, Rick...you all read this.
I'm becoming dissillusioned.
Does anybody have an explanation?

  • posted by <Harvey Rottweiler>
  • Thu, Sep 19, 2002 12:39am

So I won't shop at Slave-On because of the way they've crapped on the people who helped builf the company. I won't shop at Slaveway because of the way they have cruelly played poker with peoples lives in Thunder Bay. I won't shop at Real Canadian Superslave because of the dangerous and callous diregard for safety at the warehouse and the resulting termination of a concerned employee, Mike Palechek.

Maybe I need to look for a grocery store that isn't represented by the UFCW/employer Action Team.

  • posted by sleK
  • Thu, Sep 19, 2002 12:53am

quote:


Maybe I need to look for a grocery store that isn't represented by the UFCW/employer Action Team.


Independant, family operated convenience stores for all your non-perishable needs. And the local vegetable and fruit stand, every community has at least one, for everything else.

It's all about choices.

  • posted by <Mike H.>
  • Thu, Sep 19, 2002 1:06am

------------------------
It's all about choices.
------------------------

I understand that.
My choices are becoming very limited.
Ivan, Why did you Lie?
I don't Understand,
I thought you were our Brother?
Don't dissrespect us.
Help us.
Why did you lie?
I don't understand?
'splain yourself.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Thu, Sep 19, 2002 11:50am

We're all waiting for an answer Ivan. The proof is there. The truth is known. Are you waiting until we are no longer UFCW members to come out of your hole? Do we have to come en masse to the union office to get answers Ivan???

  • posted by <JP Hater>
  • Fri, Sep 20, 2002 4:19pm

Well I heard on the radio this morning that the Loman's Boys were out covering the freeway during this mornings rush "Sticking it to Jimmy" as the announcer said.

Keep it up Boys!

  • posted by T S
  • Fri, Sep 20, 2002 8:37pm

Ya And the adds they are trying to run inthe papers Might actually get printed if the add company they are using would pay their bills,. This is the response from a publisher I corresponded with after reading the official web site

With regards to the ad booked by the agency, I've seen some correspondence
that mentions that the agency in question owes us money for a previous
insertion (we being VAN NET Newspapers). This may be more of an issue than
the ad content, but that's supposition on my part.

Was the ad offered to the MetroValley Newspaper Group? They publish The
Tri-City News, The Richmond Review, The Maple Ridge News, The Abbotsford
News, The Chilliwack Progress, The Langley Times and the Surrey Leader. They
are not owned by the same company as VAN NET Newspapers. They are owned by
David Black from Victoria. Will they be running the ads?

  • posted by weiser
  • Fri, Sep 20, 2002 8:43pm

If Tommy Fawkes is such a media Wizard, why the hell couldn't he just pick up the damned phone and call a VanNet paper? They will place the ad in any or all VanNet papers. You use an ad agency if you can't operate a desktop publishing program. Ad agencies get a commission and discount, but it costs you exactly the same whether you use an agency or phone the stuff in yourself.

Tommy, don't make me have to do your job for you all the time.

  • posted by sleK
  • Tue, Sep 24, 2002 8:00pm

*bump*

Here's the audio again: Link

as per this thread: web page

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Wed, Sep 25, 2002 12:10pm

Dear Brooke,

Thanks for finally coming out with the letter to retail that was spoken to in your July 26, 2002 letter to Angie Schirra of the B.C. Fed. As we are in the last week of employment I wonder about the delay. The strategy of waiting until the battle is over and then fight like hell is something new to me. I can tell you that it does not inspire much confidence in UFCW for the Loman members. I also wonder if the letter to retail might not rate a mention on your award-winning web site.This may be described as "maximizing cost effective communication channels." See if Tom Fawkes has heard of this concept.

I also wonder if you might not have the common courtesy to contact the warehouse chief shop steward and let him know what you are doing at OFG head office. Any fool must know that your presence there is bound to create some confusion and speculation. In the "Two Shirts and a Hat" campaign we have come to expect the bare minimum from you and you have not dissapointed.
True sellout-darity, UFCW style.

Thank you very little.

  • posted by Larry Loman
  • Wed, Sep 25, 2002 11:52pm

yeah real funny Brooke and Ivan.

You shook Tom's hand outside OWF HO yesterday and told him "nothing was up".
You were in dealing with the charges being brought against him and you didn't even tell him he was in trouble.
Chickenshit bastard.
You need to go.

  • posted by T S
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 7:04am

He wasnt dealing with the charges. He was Covering UFCW ass. Making sure Tommy and co horts are left By themselves swinging in the breeze. he doesnt want to have to spend 1 penny of ufcw cash defending loman employees . That cash is marked for"Lionel Hutz",UFCW's crack legal team to be pissed away appealing the Unwinnable memo I. Maybe You shouldnt have signed the contract before they signed memo I eh brooke, Oh but that would make sure all the t 's were crossed and i's dotted, and the measure of security that document was supposed to Impart to the employees for your sellout of the new hires. Yup we sold the new hires out and got BUPKISS in return

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 8:16am

What are the "charges" that you're referring to? Could you tell us a little more about that?

Edit: Just noticed that there is a little more information about the charges in this thread.
Please tell us more about what's going on. If OFG is suing workers who engaged in peaceful protest for purposes of leafletting, that's a very big deal. I would expect that the union would come to their defence and quickly. Considering that Local 1518 took the issue of leafleting all the way to the Supreme Court and won - to turn it's back on these workers would be absolutely unconscionable.

The workers may want to consider going right to the top on this one. If Brooke isn't rushing to your defence, you may want to consider making an urgent and open appeal for support to the International President, the Canadian Director, the CLC and the BC Fed. If any turn their backs on you, a public shaming is in order, IMHO.

  • posted by Troll
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 8:42am

And the Godfather was out of town when the hit on Vinnie took place. He said, "Hey, I was out of town. I had nothin' ta do wit' it."

The Godfather said, dose bastards, I'll fight till my dyin' breath, I swear on the family's honour that I'll find who did this terrible thing to Vinnie."

The Godfather then went to his favorite hotdog and t-shirt stand and met with the "mechanic" who "did" Vinnie. The GF shook the mechanic's hand, and the mechanic pressed a small envelope into the GF's palm. The envelope contained a note saying, "It's business as usual, we count on your further cooperation. We are partners, we take care of each other. You do what you have to do and we'll hold up our end."

The GF winked at the mechanic, turned and walked slowly to his car. He knew he'd miss Vinnie, but he'd get over it. After all, Vinnie and his crew stood in the way of "the partnership" and everyone understood that the partnership was the foundation on which the family was built.

  • posted by <Jimbo>
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 1:12pm

I hear the Overwaitea/Save-On Head Office awards dinner is being held at Newlands Golf and Country Club at 21025 - 48th St. Langley on Sept 27/2002.

Happy hour is from 3:30 - 5:00 PM to be followed by dinner and dancing.

Anybody wishing to attend should be there early because seating will be limited

  • posted by T S
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 4:35pm

I keep asking UFCW questions and can get NO answers so I switched tactics and figure I will ask the RWU what is going on. I emailed them and asked a few questions In 3 hrs I got a response havent heard from Andy in weeks guess he doesnt like me anymore.
I asked
I keep hearing about the overwaitea lomans warehouse dispute, will I
Lose my job at EV if they are successful at the Bclrb? Will I become a
Ufcw memeber? can I be moved to different versa facilities?

response

You ask some very good questions and the answer to all of
the above is quite frankly that they are all possibilites. I am currently
preparing a summary of the hearings for the bulletin board at work so please
keep your eyes open. However, in the meantime, the Board may award any
number of remedies should the UFCW be successful. The possibilites that you
mention are all some things that may be looked at. In terms of how you
would personally be affected it would depend a great deal on your seniority.
The most likely case is that the Board would find someway to try to
accomodate as many of the workers as possible in recognition of the fact
that none of this was their doing. I represented the Union at the hearings
and although I am loathe to predict how the Board will decide anything I
think that UFCW is in pretty tough on this one. They waited ten years to
argue the Overwaitea was really their employer and that is an awful long
time to let something go.

As I say, keep an eye on the Board and we will get copies of the Board's
decision out as soon as it is released. If you have any other questions
please let me know.

  • posted by <Jimbo>
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 5:04pm

That is absolutly unbeleiveable TS.
I've emailed UFCW too many times to count and have never ever ever ever been answered.

They are a sick pathetic joke of a union and should all be in jail.

  • posted by T S
  • Thu, Sep 26, 2002 8:59pm

Overwaitea, Lomans & UFCW Hearings

The Retail Wholesale Union would like to take this opportunity to update you on the recent hearings at the B.C. Labour Relations. The United Food and Commercial Workers applied to the Board last year on a variety of matters relating to the closure of Lomans Warehouse and the transfer of the work to EV Logistics. The final hearing day was September 12, 2002 and the Vice-chair indicated his intention to produce a decision as quickly as possible. All parties are now waiting for the decision.

When the actual hearing phase of the process began, the UFCW's applications had been reduced to two questions: who is the true employer of Loman's employees and are Overwaitea and Loman a common employer?

The UFCW, as the applicant, bore the onus of proving their applications. Accordingly there was a significant amount of information passed between the parties in the disclosure process. Next, the parties were required to provide "will say" statements. These statements were required to reduce the amount of hearings days required at the Board. Initially, the RWU, EV, Overwaitea, and Lomans all had representation at the hearings. EV declined to participate once the application alleging Overwaitea and EV were a common employer was dismissed. The RWU continued to participate in order to protect the interests of its members. Shawn Lakusta, Gary Brassart, Mike Molag, and Rick Janzen attended on behalf of the RWU.

The UFCW's strategy was very basic. They called forward some of their members who work at Lomans to give evidence of Overwaitea's daily involvement in the Lomans operation. Not surprisingly, UFCW's witnesses painted a very different picture than those painted by Overwaitea and Lomans' witnesses. UFCW witnesses indicated that there was heavy day-to-day involvement directly with Loman employees. Overwaitea and Loman witnesses minimized Overwaitea's role and suggested that most communication was done by Overwaitea management to Loman management. In response to UFCW, Overwaitea asked why UFCW waited ten years to file a complaint when Loman's employees apparently knew what was happening for years. Although UFCW said that they did nothing because their members continued to be employed, Overwaitea's question is quite problematic for UFCW. How long can you allow something to happen without losing your right to complain? Overwaitea's answer to this question is that UFCW never complained because they knew that their members were working for Lomans and they are only complaining now because Lomans is closing.

What does this mean for RWU members working at EV? There are numerous answers to this question all depending of course on how the Board rules. Obviously if the Board rules against UFCW there will be no further legal ramifications for our members. Should the Board rule that there is some merit to UFCW's applications then they will also fashion what they see as an appropriate remedy, which would most likely involve some type of seniority list merger.

As with all court cases, there is nothing left to be done but wait for the decision. As soon as the decision comes down the RWU will make sure that copies are posted on the Union bulletin boards.

Please rest assured that no matter what happens the RWU will do everything in its power to ensure that your rights are protected to the fullest extent.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Fri, Sep 27, 2002 9:23pm

It does not surprise me that the RWU would "paint" the situation in these terms. Spin is everything these days and spin artists are a dime a dozen.The situation may well be painted in other terms less flattering to the RWU and more complimentary to the legal case put before the LRB by the UFCW.

I believe that the RWU would prefer that the UFCW not be successful and that their jurisdiction over the EV site be maintained. Union against union. What I see here in this letter, if it is authentic, is proof of animosity rather than cooperation. This is the race to the bottom biz-union mentality that has left workers high and dry.

The legal case will be settled shortly and I'm not sure that it warrants speculation. I am quite sure that it does not warrant criticism from another union.

What is known is the RWU collective agreement with EV. It is in my opinion it is a shoddy and unethical deal. What is most important is that the EV workers start to do what every worker should do: study your collective agreement. Pay special attention to the memorandums at the back. This is where side deals are put and every word should be scrutinized. Don't be afraid to ask questions of your union representatives. They work for you. If you don't feel that you can speak up, for whatever reason, document with as much proof as you can silently. Once it has reached a certain point, with the backing of some of your co-workers, you can make a much bigger impact. Document everything!!

Know your rights. Get involved. Defend them.

  • posted by ufcwwife
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 9:41am

my husband said that it was very disheartening to walk out of the warehouse for the last time after 2o + years of loyal service. It is a shame to see what this dispute has done to many loyal conciencious employees. They are very bitter over the fact they helped build this company and are being tossed asside like used trash.Now they are angry and are vowing to take OFG down with them.the leafletting campaign will be stepped up, and OFG will see that the guys are as dedicated to this task as they were to doing a good job in the warehouse. Now, more than ever we need the support from all the people who have promised it through out the campaign.This is the tip of the iceberg as far as the dissapearence of the middle class. Corporations have to learn that the human element can make or break their business, so they have to be treated with fairness and dignity.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 12:33pm

You have to figure that if the 250 can convince the same number of families to never shop at and OFG outlet again, OFG will be down a about three million a year in gross sales. It might not seem like much in the big picture, but each family means thousands per year to OFG. It all adds up.

  • posted by T S
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 12:49pm

I almost cant wait for wal mart to start seriously selling groceries in bc, OFG save on will be back where they were when I Stated 20 years ago in 4th place in the market share. Instead of being behind safe way Iga and super value, they can now be behind wal mart superstore and safeway. OFG is Jimmy's best asset. lets see 2oo warehouseman make it his worst asset. Let see him get the team work and loyalty to turn OFG around again when everyones workin for Minimum wage and paying Union dues to do it. wont happen! screw me once Jimmy shame on you! screw me twice Jimmy Shame ON ME

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 2:23pm

I would have loved to have been at the OFG awards dinner just to see what awards were handed out.

Most expensive restructuring in corporate history goes to...

Highest trucking costs in OFG history goes to...

Lowest employee morale in OFG history goes to...

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 5:21pm

ufcwwife: I don't know if you've ever heard of this book, Women, Community & the Hormel Strike of 1985-86, but it's worth a read if you are looking for some inspiration. It's about the incredible impact that women had on this very well-known UFCW strike in in the midwestern US in the 1980's.

The workers involved in the strike were sold down the river by Bill Wynn and his cronies but the efforts of these women at raising community support were very successful considering what they were up against. Might be worth a look.

  • posted by Scott Mcpherson
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 5:34pm

I've heard OFG has let a few VP's go over this. Can anyone confirm this? I've also heard the company lost more than 14 million in the last few weeks, can anyone confirm this?

A company's two strongest assets are
#1- it's employee's
#2- it's customers

# 1 has a direct impact on the satisfaction #2 has with the company. Employers who think cutting deals with greedy unions is a blank check to treat their employees any way they feel like will quickly learn the value of the aforementioned theory when competitors move in and take away their market share. Good luck OFG.

  • posted by Loman Life
  • Sun, Sep 29, 2002 8:26pm

We understand that Brent Louth has been given an exit-level position. There was a rumour about a Loman mismanagement supervisor, now working at a versacold facility but it is apparently not true or at least unconfirmed. Brent seems to have gotten into some hot water over why 3 additional warehouses are required to help out EV and the answers were not to the big guys liking. Or so the story goes.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sun, Oct 27, 2002 5:46pm

quote:


We understand that Brent Louth has been given an exit-level position.


quote:


Announcement

An Overwaitea Icon Retires!

After devoting the better part of his life to our company, BRENT LOUTH has decided to retire. With his tremendous knowledge and work ethic he has been a part of just about every major development of our company for decades. If anyone deserves a long a happy retirement it's Brent - this is a guy who lives, breathes and sleeps Overwaitea.

And - true to form - although he will be technically retired, he has made it clear that we all can continue to count on his loyalty and support. Already, he's agreed to help us out with our Shrink project and a couple of other OFG initiatives!

Brent, who will always be affectionately referred to as a Meat Head ... (emphasis added)


  • posted by <Jimbo>
  • Mon, Oct 28, 2002 7:24pm

Ha ha , thats pretty funny. One down and about 3 or 4 more to go.
I've been leafleting for about the last 10 days straight and let me tell you, since we won the LRB case they brought against us to restrict leafleting, things have really been gathering steam. I'm seeing people come out with us again that we had figgered had given up the fight. 15 guys at a store all carrying signs, wearing sandwich boards and holding the banners gets Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy better resukts than 2 or 3 guys trying to hand out leaflets.

  • posted by <Peter>
  • Wed, Oct 30, 2002 2:10pm

I would agree with you Jimbo. I was at the Chilliwack store leafleting today and we had about 20 people out there with pickett signs.
Lots of grumpy people in that area (mabey because it was so chilly) but still lots of good people willing to turn away and help us by shopping elasewhere even after driving all the way there.
God Bless them, each and everyone of them.
It's good people like that that will actually help to change the evil ways of that greedy little man known as Jimmy.
Halleluya Brothers!

  • posted by siggy
  • Wed, Oct 30, 2002 9:52pm

Hey ... I was inside the store when the right to freedom of informational picketing hit our store and I have to tell you it was great. (not that you have to be out there). ufcw 1518 power source haven't been witness to that kind of solidarity in many yrs. Fact is I don't remember any in my time. The lock-out of '96 was a sham because we all knew what was going down and most were just pissed at the machine and trying to collect the pitiful picket pay to survive, so solidarity really never surfaced.

Don't ever doubt it's impacting. It's impacting the bottom line and it's pro'lly the only lesson in solidarity 1518 retail members will get before 2003. Thanks

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Oct 31, 2002 12:48pm

That is very good to hear! I'm confident that these workers' efforts are going to snowball into something much bigger.

BTW, why is there nothing about this on Local 1518's web site?

© 2017 Members for Democracy