• authored by remote viewer
  • published Sat, Sep 20, 2003

Secret Deals Done Dirt Cheap!

Secret Deals Done Dirt Cheap!

You are entitled to a decent honest union. That's what Kevin Corporon was telling service industry workers in 1984 when he led a very successful organizing drive in the Swiss Chalet Restaurant chain.

Back in those days Corporon was a pretty committed trade unionist. He worked hard to liberate the thousands of mostly female restaurant workers from the sweetheart union they were fooled into joining a few years earlier. In his campaign literature Corporon slammed the awful sweetheart union for its lack of democracy and its lousy representation. He took its leaders to task for keeping members in the dark about decisions that affected them. "Communication with members is essential to a strong and united union", he said. Workers are entitled to a decent honest union and the UFCW was just that kind of union.

Brother Corporon's organizing campaign was halted by Cliff Evans who, at the time, was on an upward trajectory that would eventually lead to him total control of the Canadian UFCW. With the campaign over and the members handed back to the sweetheart union they were trying to escape, Brother Corporon soft-landed with UFCW Local 1000a. The Local had its origins as an employee association (Union of Canadian Retail Employees) that represented workers at Loblaws supermarkets starting in the 1940's. In the late 1970's UCRE's President, Dan Gilbert, merged his union with what would become the UFCW.

Maybe it was the shock of the backroom deal that ended his organizing campaign or the influence of the business union culture that would consume the Canadian UFCW under Evans' leadership, or both, but Brother Corporon fell into the comfortable world of labour-management partnering and never looked back. Read the rest.

Local 1000a members: Ben Blasdell, a member of your local, has filed a Duty to Fair Representation complaint with the Ontario Labour Relations Board challenging your union's actions in its recent secret deal with Loblaw Companies. We're going to keep you (and the rest of the world) up to date on the progress of the DFR. Local 1000a members can tell Ben that they want to add their names to the complaint simply by filling out this form.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 9:14am

Way to go, Ben!

Remote, that is a fantastic compilation of information, before now not so easily accessible.

sleK, the layout makes it very easy to navigate and read. I love it.

This piece is an excellent example of how the internet has made the so-called "house of labour" and its bureaucracies irrelevant.

The machine heads had the money and the means to control information until the average member gained access to and became proficient at using the Internet. Power Source individuals are communicating like never before and in doing so, they are revealing the glaring incompetence, and sometimes illiteracy, of so many over-paid machine heads.

This article reveals Ben's cogent thinking and the utterly flawed logic of machine heads.

This page after page of excuses and company propaganda is about the most pathetic display of public whining that I've ever witnessed.

I'm left bug-eyed. If you are to believe the 1000a submission, the employer allegedly made illegal threats to the union and then the union used those alleged threats to get people to agree to the company's demands.

The submission brags about the size and sophistication of the union and then goes on to make the union look like its led by labour relations neophytes and ignoramuses. Of course it's not. These guys know exactly what they are doing.

Anyone with a bit of labour relations acumen knows that it would be almost impossible for the company to pull of its alleged threats. Likewise, the costs of buying real estate, selling real estate, building and demolishing stores would be prohibitive.

The union's submission is loaded with hyperbole and unsupported assertions. Most of the assertions are of the, "it's so because we say it's so" category.

If there were vast numbers, give us the numbers. If people were generally satisfied, what data does the union have that brings them to that conclusion?

The union's submission and the employer's look like they were run off the same boilerplate. The partners have been hangin' together for so long that they are starting to speak and sound alike.

  • posted by <I've been reading>
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 10:25am

If you think you are bug eyed, I don't know how to describe myself. The honest decent union thing seems to come from a Swiss Chalet organizing drive. That earlier MFD story is something else. Then I read your Back Room Chronicles. Then I read all the stuff linked to this article, and blood starts squirting out of my tear ducts.

What the hell is going on?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 10:27am

I am looking forward to the actual mediation,consultation and finally Labour Board Hearing.Loblaw employees should not have to swallow this crap.If there is a union rep inthe stores ask them about the labour board complaint.They probably dont know that it is filed

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 2:08pm

What the hell is going on, IBR, is something that's been going on for a very long time now - the corporatization of the UFCW, the devolution of the union from simply a "business union" to a "business partner". What Local 1000a and the other locals pulled off has been done many times in the past, using the same basic forumla. They've taken management's agenda as their own and gone out to make it happen.

Only there are a couple of differences - really significant differences - in the equation this time around. One is that 1000a decided to plow ahead without a ratification vote. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that the "mandate" vote that Local 1977 had was cool either, but there's something in Local 1000a's smug refusal to let the members vote on anything that puts this secret deal in a category of its own. It's the kind of complete repudiation of democracy that has been known to get people out of their seats and into the streets, the sort of hamfisted, arrogant response from the halls of power that has sparked revolutions.

And a revolution has been sparked! People are not taking to the streets - they no longer have to. They've taken to the information highway and some pretty remarkable things have already happened. More are going to happen. It's inevitable now. We're going to see first hand what an informed and knowledgable Power Source can do.

Ben Blasdell's DFR statement is thorough, comprehensive, hits all the relevant nails squarely on the head and will be really difficult for the OLRB to sweep out the door using the standard DFR-removal techniques. If they do, then it's off to see the judges in the real courts and we'll see how long it will be before big profit-oriented organizations can deprive thousands of people of their rights to representation.

The union's lame reply...quite honestly, when I first read it (and the company reply as well) I couldn't f**king believe what I was reading. I've seen a lot of shit go down in my time in the labour relations system but I've never seen a union and an employer quite so candid about their collusion. It's like weiser says in his post above, "The company said Walmart was coming and Walmart is bad, bad, bad. The company wanted lower labour costs and we said well yeah OK. " What a bunch of self-serving bullshit. Back in the days when I was seeing labour-management collusion up close and personal, at least the players went out of their way to make it look like they weren't in bed together. I guess it's a sign of how comfortable the UFCW-Loblaws partnership has become in its "relationship" and how sure they are that the OLRB is going to pat them on the heads and blow the DFR away.

I suspect that the ridiculous response (the union's - the Loblaw's reply is more along the lines of what I'd expect to see in one of these things) was crafted in the hopes that it would scare the DFR complainant away with all that scary conjecture about Walmart and/or that the OLRB can be persuaded to run roughshod over citizens' rights because "Walmart is coming!"

What Corporon and his corporate partners don't realize is that by running off at the mouth they way they have, they have opened the door to an examination of their relationship and to questions about just about every aspect of their deal.

What they haven't addressed in their replies is also siginificant. One very imporant question that isn't addressed at all in the tedious page after page of corporate propaganda is why the union decided to enter into these talks in secret. They have an obligation to consult with the members. That's been stated and restated by the OLRB in other decisions where secret negotiations took place. I just don't think it occurred to them that Blasdell is no ordinary DFR complainant. He's an knowledgable one and as we've been saying around here for a while now Knowledge is Power.

I must say that I am so disgusted with Corporon and his defence of his secret dealings that words fail me when I try to describe the depths of my dismay. For one thing, Walmart ain't coming. They've said so themselves. For another, even if Walmart were coming with bells on, so what? Is that a reason to head for the backroom and bargain backwards. I think he's living proof of the concept that Noam Chomsky writes about in this passage:


"You begin to conform your being to get the privilege of conformity. You soon come to believe what you're saying because it's useful to believe it, and then you've internalized the system of indoctrination and distortion and deception, and then you're a willing member of the privileged elites that control thought and indoctrination. That happens all the time, all the way to the top. It's a very rare person, almost to the point of non-existence, who can tolerate what's called "cognitive dissonance" -- saying one thing and believing another. You start saying certain things because it's necessary to say them, and pretty soon you believe them because you just have to."

That's no excuse though. You're so pathetic Kevin. I hope you burn in hell for what you've done.

  • posted by Duffbeer
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 3:09pm

Even as late as April 30, 2003 Loblaw was keeping the secret deal under wraps.

Loblaw continues to see opportunities for growth


Loblaw president John Lederer told the annual meeting that management and union executives need to maintain "a positive dialogue" in pursuing their common interests while taking on these rivals, although he didn't name the competitors.

Mr. Lederer told reporters later that Loblaw isn't engaged in any major union contract talks, and his remarks were just general.

I suppose the statement Lederer made to reporters could be accurate if the secret "major union contract talks" had already concluded.

Oh yeah, apparently management and union executives have "common interests", but obviously those do not always include the employees/members.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 4:50pm

Ho ho, isn't that interesting. So Lederer states in April that there are no major union contract talks ongoing huh? And the OLRB submissions state that there were major talks ongoing until at least the end of May and probably right into June and that Lederer was a player in these talks. Deliberate deception? Or maybe it's what Bill P. calls, the "artificial insemination of the truth." That's pretty important. What neither of the parties has even attempted to explain is why they never told any of their "stakeholders" what they were donig and why. It's one thing to just say nothing. It's quite another to say "we're not doing it" when you're doing it like there's no tomorrow. I think that by the time the hearings commence, there will be a lot of incredible witnesses - so to speak. Thanks Duffbeer.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 5:11pm

I am astounded at how the truth is coming out.There is a lot on record and someone is going to come out of this with egg on their face.The internet is a WONDERFUL tool.Keep the information coming,when I get the chance I will introduce it all.Thanks to everyone for the input

  • posted by <another screwed member>
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 5:29pm

Can anyone tell me what ever happened to Steve Giuliano? This guy went head to head with the union for years and went to court, suing the union over voting themselves into positions that required a vote from the members. Steve lost the case over a ruling that was similar to a rule that was called "Astopel" which means if a grieveable act by the union occures after the second incident it can never be grieved by any members. This was the case with in Local 1000a where the President (Dan Gilbert) elected himself for the past 20 years without having a vote by the members. This vote should have been held every two years but, Dan Gilbert managed to get away when nobody was paying attention until it was too late. As the judge put it in his view if you walk on a property and it becomes an everday path which everybody uses and the owner does not claim it in ten years, the owner loses ownership to that piece of land. This guy use to show up at every union meeting handing out flyers to members and trashing the current union. I can remember seing him at the labour day parade in downtown Toronto wearing his army gear and a fake parrot on his shoulder. During a time when things are so chaotic within the union you would think that he of all people would lead the members with the "DFR" but we haven't heard a peep from him . It's like he has fallen off the face of the earth. Rumors are circulating around the company that he was paid substancially by the company to not disrupt the company and the unions agreement to these concessions. My friends from his old store tell me that he was paid approximately $250,000 for his silence and his resignation from the company. I could be wrong but I find it weird, for someone who has dedicated the last 10 years fighting the union and losing everything he owned in a court case against the union would stay silent in an opportunity for sweet revenge against the same machine heads who betrayed him. If this is true I guess everybody has a price.

  • posted by BillPearson
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 5:46pm

Spectacular piece remote. The tragedy of this deal will haunt biz unionists all the way to their grave. I can tell you, as a trade unionist who lived and beathed the movement for the better part of my adult life, i'm embarassed. In my lifetime, i would never, ever consider this type of backdoor deal.

It's a pax on the movement, and the utter failure to understand; we exist for the members, is beyond comprehension. Shame is too generous a label for these "leaders." Trading members for concessions isn't new, but taking a "payoff" is criminal IMHO.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Sep 20, 2003 5:54pm

A co-worker and I have been leafletting stores in Toronto and I have contacted stores in London and Ottawa,so far 9 people have signed on to the complaint,these 9 people show courage and how many people do they really represent?I have not met ANYONE who supports this crap,yes some members want out and will jump at the buyout but my impression is "I'm glad I am going,pity for those who stay".Most of the people who want the buyout are long term employees,more than 30 years and even they have been mislead.Read the buyout clause very carefully.You may not get what you think and the company has the right to control who goes and when.

  • posted by HJFinnamore
  • Sun, Sep 21, 2003 1:54pm


posted by <I've been reading>:
If you think you are bug eyed, I don't know how to describe myself. The honest decent union thing seems to come from a Swiss Chalet organizing drive. That earlier MFD story is something else. Then I read your Back Room Chronicles. Then I read all the stuff linked to this article, and blood starts squirting out of my tear ducts.

What the hell is going on?

Excellent observations. It's not my place to tell you the real names of the players are in the Backroom Chronicles piece. However, they are deeply connected with the Swiss Chalet/HERE/UFCW debacle from what I understand.

Rumour has it that the International is looking for a heir apparent for Dougie_Do, but they are a bit antsy about anything that involves the Canadians in anything too high profile. From my understanding, UFCW Canada's dirty laundry might not wash too well in the US.

  • posted by gbuddy
  • Sun, Sep 21, 2003 5:46pm


posted by bb:
I am looking forward to the actual mediation,consultation and finally Labour Board Hearing.

bb: You'll be getting invaluable first-hand insight into the the secret labour relations mechanisms that most of us know nothing about. No doubt you already have a lot on your plate, but if you can find the time, perhaps you can make some notes as things proceed, and when it's all over share your labour board, etc. experiences with us.

Congratulations on a great job!

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Mon, Sep 22, 2003 1:35pm

This case is going to be very instructive on a number of different fronts and, I agree, the impact of the Internet on workers' empowerment is sure one of them.

I wanted to respond to the question about Steve Guiliano. I don't know what's become of him but it might be wise to seek him out to find out definitively. It could be that he's been bought off. The UFCW was suing him for speaking out and this would certainly give them some leverage to make a deal ("We'll drop the lawsuit if you....."). It may be something completely different however. I don't doubt that there are a lot of rumours flying around. Some may have been started by machine heads looking to demoralize workers who are intent on justice though. Think about it: If a committed reformer like Steve can be bought off, then so can everyone else. I'm not saying that's what's going on but I wouldn't rule it out either.

Maybe you could try contacting Steve through OCAP. If you're talking to them maybe see if John Clark has any views about the secret deal that he'd like to share. After all, poverty wages promote poverty.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Mon, Sep 22, 2003 5:41pm

I guess by the time the rumour got to Collingwood the number Mr. Guiliano had recieved had grown to 500,000$.There is also a rumour his buddy John Orastevic,an assistant bakery manager,had also taken a buyout.And I saw Mr. Steve Bujna's name on a labour board decision appearing on behalf of National Grocers.Mr. Bujna was an executive vice president of local 1000A.I had heard he had been hired by Loblaws labour relations department.I guess anything goes when you are trying to keep wage costs in line.....with the poverty line.Oh by the way I spoke to the Labour Board today and he said that the union will throw all resources at this DFR "they cannot afford to lose this one".....I bet they are worried sick that all the dirty deals are going to come out.If the Liberals win the election and a few new vice-chairs are appointed to the Labour Board,they might want to change the tide back in favour of the working class a little.

  • posted by <another screwed member>
  • Tue, Sep 23, 2003 9:28am

I was talking to my union rep and I had to ask the question as I was still trying to swallow that bitter pill that Kevin Corporon had forced down all 1000a members throats, " Why have we taken wage concessions mid contract especially after Loblaws has reported record profits for years? His reply was the same brainwashing response that Kevin was forcing on all members minds that Walmart is coming. I had to stop him in his tracks before I was about to knock him out for trying to feed me that kind of bullshit. I told him why doesn't the union itself scale back their wages and benefits as our union dues don't reflect the level of service they are providing to the long standing members of 1000a? He stood there turning red as I popped him with the question that he wasn't trained to answer by Kevin. I also told him that the union was preaching to all of us that Walmart was this big bad company paying minimum wage, but Loblaws was even worse for following the same wage scale that Walmart has in place. The union should be ashamed for agreeing to these concessions as they are not looking out for the best interest of all current members and future members as I gave him a scenario, if a new employee is hired under RCSS agreement and starts at the $7.10/hr. and gets 28 hours a week, that employee will make $198.80/ week, minus union dues and taxes. How is that individual supposed to survive on that kind of income? The rep responded to that question thinking he was out of the woods by saying the individual could supplement their income by getting another part time job. As I stood there with so much anger because these guys did not do their homework and didn't put themselves in these individuals position for one minute to think that how can an RCSS part time employee get another part time job when they have to make themselves available one shift from Monday to Thursday , one shift on Friday, one shift on Saturday and one shift on Sunday. How many companies out there will schedule an employee around Loblaws availability. How can an employee find another job if they were to be scheduled all 4 and 5 hour shifts every day for 6 or 7 days a week. Think about it at $7.10/hour x 5 hours is 35.50 per day minus union dues taxes and $2.25 one way for transportation on the TTC because at these competative wages how can this individual afford a car. I told the rep that they didn't do their job to represent or protect that was rightfully the current and future members rights to fair wages and benefits. They cracked and fell apart in the negotiations by threats the company made in regards to opening under a different name and will open these stores non-union. I understood that the law prevents a company from threatening a union with such demands, if so why not file a grievance with the labour board? Instead they figured it would be cost effective to guarantee themselves more membership with this new format and they would also save on court fees if they were to sue on the threats the company made. All this at a cost to the members and as the rep had said," there is always room to renegotiate these RCSS contracts in the future". I responded by saying with UFCW 1000a in the last 20 Years its one step forward and three steps back for the worker in regards to contracts the union has fought for us. I left off by telling him the union has no problem justifying Kevin Corporon's $146,000 /year salary and Tony Soares $130,000/year Salary as secretary Treasurer as well as raising our union dues while our quality of life is deteriorating. It's funny how quickly these guys had forgotten where they came from.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Tue, Sep 23, 2003 10:18am

Just to let everyone know that this crap is not legal.The more I study labour Board decisions ,the more the unions actions are arbitrary.There is a landmark case called Dufferin Aggregates.Some dumptruck owner\operaterswere having money problems during the recession in 1982.The union negotiated a deal whereby 25% of the drivers would be laid off.The union does not have to act in the interest of an individual or group.It was ruled that the unions actions were reasonable.But a significant portion of that decision is devoted to scrutiny of the union and how it came to its conclusions.But this quote from a very important decision is relevant "Its [the union] determination as to the appropiate proposals is subject,as I have said,to be able to obtain a successful ratification vote and a duty to act in a manner that is not arbitrary,discriminatory or in bad faith".How can a union not consult its members and not ratify a contract and prove they are acting in the members best interest?The union is the members.What a mickey mouse operation. The stupidty is perpetuated from the top to the bottom.

  • posted by edelio
  • Tue, Sep 23, 2003 6:13pm

Just got a reply from the UFCW about the agreement. I posted a complaint about it and here was the response,,,,ENJOY......

Dear Mr. Delio:

The RCSS accord, which does not affect any current employees, any current collective agreements, or any current retail or wholesale locations, was made in anticipation of what is believed by many to be the threat that Wal-Mart and other similar foreign discount combination retailers coming to Canada to set up operations that will almost certainly substantially undermine the business of the traditional retailers that have employed UFCW Canada members for decades. These traditional retailers could choose to do nothing, or respond to the anticipated threat.

In the case of one large system of employers, Loblaws, the choice is to respond by mounting retail operations that will compete head to head with Wal-Mart-like operations, rather than doing nothing. Loblaws could have either opened the future RCSS locations as non-union stores at whatever low rates of pay and benefits they could get

away with, or negotiated with the union that represents the majority of Loblaws employees to try to reach an agreement on the pay and benefits of future locations. Somewhat to our surprise, Loblaws chose the latter.

It has nothing to do with voluntary recognition for us. We believe that workers are always better off with union representation, whether we have to organize them from scratch, such as we are trying to do with Wal-Mart workers, or not. We know that we can do a better job for retail workers in these tough times than they could do for themselves, individually, without a union.

We hope that at whatever point in time Loblaws opens any new RCSS locations, that the employees at those locations will take a positive interest in their union so that we can all work together to improve the conditions for all future unionized RCSS workers.

Thanks for writing.

Yours truly,

UFCW Canada


David W. Watts was sent by Miriam de angelis

  • posted by <Another Screwed Member>
  • Tue, Sep 23, 2003 7:04pm

What a bunch of bologne from UFCW Canada with regards to The Walmart Threat, they sound like chicken little who told everybody that the sky was falling. I can't believe they called it tough times, for who? When I last checked Loblaws almost made 200 million dollars in profits for the last 3 months reported earnings. That's right they didn't make enough so squeeze the employees so Lederer and Weston can increase their bonus off the backs of their workers. Walmart won't be a threat to Loblaws as the Sam's Clubs are targeting Costco. By the way what impact has Costco had on Loblaws since their introduction to the Canadian market in 1985? About 5%. With Sam's Club having the same type of format how many Canadians do you know are going to spend $47.50/year on a membership to shop there. Did the union argue this with the company during these talks as they had the same fear in 1985 when Costco came into the market and launched the Super Centers? Walmart workers are better off being non union as they will make less money being unionized, the only difference being the dues that they pay. As I have told my fellow workers in the conventional Loblaw stores that by 2008 all stores in Ontario whether it's Loblaws or Zehrs will be on the RCSS contract as the Walmart threat was just a front to get the ball rolling to lower wages and benefits while the union heads are sitting comfortably with no watch dogs monitoring their every day movements. As you can tell I am very pissed off at all that has happened with this union and i'll tell you that I have never voted in my life for any political party as I have found them all to be a bunch of bullshiters but I can tell you for sure that this year I am going to vote Conservatives just because if they are elected they promise to pass a "Workers Bill Of Rights". This bill will affect unions in a big way so they can't be protected by their own laws that prevent them from being sued by their members.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Wed, Sep 24, 2003 4:14am

Do I have your name yet ASM?Have you read all the documentation about the Labour Board complaint?The important thing to do now is spread the word about this site so that the membership can be informed.This is cheapest and fastest form of communication and the company and the union have no control here.When there is a hearing it will be very important to apply some media pressure.A picket line in front of the labour board office.Did you know that a reporter from the the Toronto Star was at the Local 1000A toronto divisional meeting.Spread the word,all the allegations and facts are here for all to see.

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Wed, Sep 24, 2003 6:01am

BB Most everyone I speak to are in favor of supporting your DFR but hold back from signing for the fear of retribution from the company !
How do you handle this ?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Wed, Sep 24, 2003 6:27am

I have had no retribution,I had a meetig with the General Manager,Radek Mankaviwich,or whatever his last name is.I called him and informed him about what I am doing,before that I took all the documents to the store manager and let him photo copy whatever he wanted for 3 hours.THEN in formed them that there is a part of the act that states that reprisals are against the act.They know that I have already filed against the union ,Why wouldn't I file against the company.I actually feel safer because the act gives me specific protection.As soon as there are enough names,we will all be secure in the amount of workers against this deal.The dangerous part is getting going,but that has started. Any action by the company now is suspect.They cannot say that they did not know.A soon as the company starts with their bullshit,which I know is going to come,I will ask the union to represent me and when they don't I will file a DFR.They can explain it to the Labour Board.Then all the dirt comes out.Force the Bastards to fight for us and break their un-holy alliance with the company

  • posted by blasdell
  • Wed, Sep 24, 2003 6:43am

The other way I enlist support is ask their opinion and say "I do not need your support,I want your support,It is your choice" empower the membership.I also reiterate that the union says that YOU support the deal which they do in the response.The companies intention is all stores converted by 2008.Fight now or fight later.If you are having trouble remember all the negatives in the new deal Xmas bonus,Sick days,Weekend work,vacation pay, benefits,non union managers,salesmen working in stores, 10 years for 10 dollars,less pay,40 hour work week,sunday work no premium,blah blah blah.I always ask, who would vote for this?Thats why you didn't get a vote the company knew it would not pass and that is why they cannot afford to wait until 2006 when we have a ratification vote and there will be no concessions THEY GOT THEM ALL NOW.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Wed, Sep 24, 2003 1:11pm

bb is right. You can't be penalized for exercising your legal rights. It's right there in the law - it's right here in Section 72 of the Labour Relations Act:


72. No employer, employers' organization or person acting on behalf of an employer or an employers' organization,

(a) shall refuse to employ or to continue to employ a person, or discriminate against a person in regard to employment or any term or condition of employment because the person was or is a member of a trade union or was or is exercising any other rights under this Act;

If anybody is doing the reprisal thing tell them to call their labour relations department and ask what Section 72 says. Better yet, tell them to post their story here. That's a really effective way of keeping a lid on this kind of bad behaviour.

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 7:36am

Hey bb,,, did my name get attached to that?I signed cyberlly but had no verification it was added? ERIC DELIO loud and proud should be somewhere there!!!!!Lemme know if ya can find out and if not how can i try to add my name again?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 9:59am


The RCSS accord, which does not affect any current employees, any current collective agreements, or any current retail or wholesale locations, was made in anticipation of what is believed by many to be the threat that Wal-Mart and other similar foreign discount combination retailers coming to Canada to set up operations that will almost certainly substantially undermine the business of the traditional retailers that have employed UFCW Canada members for decades. These traditional retailers could choose to do nothing, or respond to the anticipated threat.

What I find absolutely infuriating is the persistent suggestion by UFCW official mouthpieces that there has been no change to the current collective agreement. IMHO is this a blatant distortion of reality intended to manipulate the members into quietly accepting the secret deal. In all of my considerable experience within the labour relations system, I have never heard anyone suggest that you could add to, delete from or otherwise modify a collective agreement and that somehow the agreement is the same. What a crock of crap. Any change to an agreement is a change to the agreement. In the case of the change the UFCW boys made - it's a big stinking change! You can't possibly add numerous pages to a contract (whatever you might call them) and change the scope clause and add a bunch of new provisions for current and future members and expect anyone with half a brain to believe that the agreement is the same. This applies whether it's a collective agreement or any other kind of contract. Picture this ridiculous scenario:

Let's say that tomorrow I buy a house. Just to make the example more fun to work with, let's say that I buy the house from a UFCW rep. The two of us agree to the terms of the sale, write up the purchase and sale agreement and, after discussing it with our respective legal advisors, sign it off. On closing day, everything goes fine. I move into my new house and go about my business.

A couple of years later, my doorbell rings. When I answer, I'm surprised to find the UFCW rep and all his earthly belongings waiting on the front lawn. The following discussion ensues:

RV: Whadda you want?

UFCW guy: Hi. I'm here to take back possession of the house.

RV: What the f**k?

UFCW guy: You heard me. I've decided that I want to move back in.

RV: It's my house now. Get the hell off my property you idiot and don't come back.

UFCW guy: Not so fast. Under the purchase and sale agreement we signed a couple of years ago, I have the right to move back in whenever I want.

RV: That's not in the f**king agreement. Now beat it before I kick your ass.

UFCW guy: Oh yes it is. It's in Appendix A.

RV: What Appendix A? There was no Appendix.

UFCW guy: Well there wasn't at the time that you signed it but there is now. Your lawyer signed it on your behalf.

The UFCW guy pulls out a copy of the purchase and sale agreement and sure enough, attached to the back of it is a lengthy document signed by the lawyer who helped me with the real estate transaction. One of the clauses says that the UFCW guy can, at any time, assume possession of the house, without notice and with full rights of access. It goes on to say that RV waives all rights to the property including the right to be compensated for it.

RV is really pissed: What the hell is this crap?! I never agreed to any of this shit. Where the hell did this come from?

UFCW guy: Well you see, just after the closing date, I heard a rumour that Wal-mart might be opening a store in the neighbourhood to which I'd moved. That would be a drag because it would lower my property value and it would just be too tempting to not shop there. As a captain in the great war on Wal-Mart, I couldn't risk the chance of being caught. So I decided that I really wanted to move back to this place. I considered talking to you about it but figured you'd just tell me to go piss off or ask for fair market price for the place so I went to see your lawyer. He and I go back a long way and I thought I'd have better luck with him. I did too. He heard me out and listened to my reasons and said he believed me. He drafted up an agreement and we both signed it off. Then I paid him some money.

RV: Well that sonofabitch never had my authorization to do that. Take your appendix and shove it.

UFCW guy: Well he told me that he did have the right to make a deal on your behalf and that was good enough for me. He said he was sure you'd be OK with it. It's a good deal for you and is in your own best interests.

RV: How the f**k is that you moron?

UFCW guy: Well look here, in Article 66 it says that you get a generous relocation allowance or, if you don't want to move, you can bump yourself into crawl space under the basement stairs and rent it from me. This is a very good deal for you. It's way better than living in a ditch which is where you'd otherwise be if I threw you out. A deal like this doesn't come along very often. It's an unprecedented breakthrough in deal-making. That's why your lawyer signed it. I told him if he hemmed and hawed or wasted my time getting in touch with you, I'd take it right off the table.

RV: Well I'm going to kick your ass and his. This deal isn't valid. I didn't know a damned thing about it.

UFCW guy: Look honey. I've got a signed agreement here. It's binding and if you don't get out right now, I'm going to have you evicted.

RV: I'm not holding still for this. I'll take the whole f**king lot of you to court and kick your asses there.

UFCW guy: Say hi to the judge for me. He and I were golfing together just the other day. Very nice man, really. Understands perfectly well about Wal-Mart too.

RV: Release the hounds!

Have I made my point?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 10:29am

Its there,Thank you,I also got the letter which will be incorporated into the DFR.It proves the union is still misleading members by saying that existing members are unaffected.What FOOLS,I feel like I am on as ship and Gilligan and the Skipper are driving.

  • posted by <another screwed member>
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 6:31pm

Hey BB,
Why would you go to Radek he is the biggest snake in the world. He would sell out his own mother just to get the opportunity to kiss Dean collinson's ass. To this day I can't understand how he was promoted to General Manager because as a store manager he had the worst people skills . This guy would only talk to you if he had to give you shit. Does he still walk like a penguin? My last words with him were ,"your a jackass", before I was transfered to another store. What a great feeling that was. How is Derek Munch has he changed at all? He was my store manager about 12 years ago, Im surprised he is still around. Believe me I have been educating alot of people with what they can do with regards to the union selling us out. There are many people who support your actions but are not aware of what can be done. You have alot of guts and I commend your courage and perseverance.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 8:10pm

I went to Radek because I did not want him to have the opportunity to say " I didn't know what he was doing". Just covering my ass for the day he tries to screw me.Store Managers are store managers..... nuff said.I just hope when the time comes we can pack the room with angry, screwed members.The Lawyer told me he has seen good cases lose because of lack of support and bad cases win because of support.What the company and the union want most is for things to die down.Our job is to keep the membership informed and they will then be upset.One thing that I don't understand is the apathy of the part-time.THEY REALLY GET SCREWED.10 years for 10 dollars,no benefits,no availibility,must work Sundays for no premium.

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Sep 25, 2003 9:33pm

RV--- Makes you wanna join a militia,,don't it?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Sep 27, 2003 9:52am

I want thank everyone who is signing on,both online and through the regular mail.A letter went to the Labour Board asking the board to "give full and equal standing "to 19 people representing 8 stores and the warehouse.I also recieved 7 more names in the store mail today.If last week I had no names and now I have 26... where will the the total be in 6 weeks?The employees in Ajax must be upset,If we can break into the east end before all the bumping begins,people will sign when they get upset.Again Thank you everyone

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Sep 27, 2003 9:23pm

Think about this chronological sequence of events

In July 2000 loblaws and Local 1000A BARELY ratify a 6 year deal with 3 years of 50 cent raises and 3 years of lump sum payment.That is the contract after 4 years of no raise at all.

Half way through the 6 year deal the company squeezes the union for concessions on the condition that the members do not get to vote.

The company agrees to the "unprecedented breakthrough in negotiations" of no concessions next contract.

In the year 2006 no concessions..... no strike.

What has the company achieved?....Less wages with no risk of work stoppage.These company guys are no dummies.

  • posted by edelio
  • Sun, Sep 28, 2003 12:41am

"The company agrees to the "unprecedented breakthrough in negotiations" of no concessions next contract."

Well of course they would agree to that!!!! What company wouldnt want all the concessions for their new union contract agreed upon a couple of years before it takes effect. Ingenius if you ask me. All that saved time and insurance that your new chain will go off without a hitch. Whoever got our "leaders" to agree to that will definitely be carried around on all the patrons shoulders at the next stockholders meeting.

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Sun, Sep 28, 2003 12:08pm

For any of you Loblaws employees who want to chance a sick day "followed by one of those threatening letters from the company" you should check out and read the frequently asked questions, but be cautious if you have a weak stomach, I dont but it certainly made me sick !

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sun, Sep 28, 2003 6:45pm

An employee of loblaws from Ottawa has signed on to the complaint,I have also been contacted by e-mail by an employee from london Ont.I have also had a person ask to have their name added who belongs to another union and lives in Regina.The internet will be the downfall of the dinosaurs.I have also had contact with the "thorn in the side of local 1000A" Steve Guliano.He may not be in local 1000A,fighting for reform but he is still Fighting for reform!My message to all 1000A members is PROMOTE THIS WEBSITE as a forum to communicate.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Sep 28, 2003 9:37pm


posted by edelio:
"The company agrees to the "unprecedented breakthrough in negotiations" of no concessions next contract."

Well of course they would agree to that!!!! What company wouldnt want all the concessions for their new union contract agreed upon a couple of years before it takes effect. Ingenius if you ask me. All that saved time and insurance that your new chain will go off without a hitch. Whoever got our "leaders" to agree to that will definitely be carried around on all the patrons shoulders at the next stockholders meeting.

If they couln't stick with the current agreement, what makes the UFCW think that they will stick with their agreement to not ask for more next contract?

And besides, it's pretty obvious that what you and I think is a concession isn't exactly what the UFCW considers a concession.

Hey, if you believe their bull, there were no concessions in this stinking deal.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Mon, Sep 29, 2003 4:32pm

The Labour Board set adate today for a consultation the date is October 23 2003 at 930 am. in the Board Room on the 2nd floor at 505 University avenue Toronto Ontario.All are welcome to attend and the support would be appreciated.The Labour Board is not my (our) ally in this complaint.I attended a hearing recently and no-one was there.There were 2 union guys on on side with a lawyer and on the other side was a company manager and a lawyer.At the front was a vice-chair.It would be great to fill the room,these people love to operate ouy of the public eye because it makes them feel safe if they make a mistake.The lawyer said good cases lose because of no support and bad cases win with support.Try to attend and bring a co-worker.This will say to the Board that Loblaw workers are not okay with this deal.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Fri, Oct 3, 2003 3:37pm

I think that it's very important that as many workers as possible attend the OLRB proceedings. The OLRB officials are at the very top of the big pyramid of elitists who "govern" workers. My impression of them has always been that they do not hold working people in especially high regard. The working people who enter their judicial halls are either hapless victims or uppity shitdisturbers who don't know what's good for them and can't accept their place in the economic pecking order with gracious good humour.

If you've ever attended an OLRB hearing, typically the worker (hapless victim or uppity shitdisturber) is alone. S/he may have a lawyer or an advisor but there are few, if any, other workers present. The OLRB folks like it that way. Alone in a room filled with lawyers and other labour relations "professionals" all decked out in pricey business attire and talking the language of the elite, the lone worker appears - to them - small and insignificant. This reinforces their sense of superiority.

This is not to say that workers who go to these proceedings are small and insignificant. To the contrary, I think that anyone who drags their employer and/or their union to the Board has got a lot of self-confidence and resolve.

But why give the elitists bigger heads than they already have. The more of you that show up, the more difficult it will be for the boys from the Board to shrink you down to a size that they're comfortable with. The more of you that they have to look at and share their space with, the more difficult it will be for them to tell themselves that you are somehow less worthy than the fine folks in the expensive suits who will also be occupying their space.

I'm not suggesting that the number of worker supporters who show up will decide the case (it won't) but it may just make the judiciary more cautious and more respectful also.

Your presence will also send a message to your employer and your union: No, you idiots, this isn't just one worker's crusade! There are many of us who support this complaint and who are seeking justice.

Remember: It's happening on October 23rd, 9:30 a.m. at 505 University Ave. (@ Dundas St. W.), 2nd Floor.

  • posted by <Bobbie>
  • Fri, Oct 3, 2003 5:43pm

I saw a flyer today in my store that said President Loveall was behind the RECALL of Gray Davis, does anyone have any information regarding this?
I am very distrubed over this

  • posted by blasdell
  • Fri, Oct 3, 2003 7:58pm

Just to let everyone know the total is now 36 names representing 13 store and the warehouse.There is terrific support from store # 1194 yonge and yonge.4 people from ottawa and 3 from london.i hope people can attend on Ocober 23 at 930 am, it will be pleasant to meet everyone.

  • posted by gbuddy
  • Fri, Oct 3, 2003 10:33pm


posted by bb:
i hope people can attend on Ocober 23 at 930 am, it will be pleasant to meet everyone.

Just want to express my support for what you are doing. What rv and bb have said about being there in numbers is VERY VERY important. If I weren't 3000 miles away nothing would stop me from attending. The effect on the suits of seeing lots of real people there cannot be overestimated. As rv has indicated it will be a new experience for them.

Everyone though should remember to respect the rules of decorum (whatever they are). Otherwise, it gives them the opportunity to just dismiss us as rabble. A few days after this hearing I'll be facing the LRB and their friends in the Court of Appeal in Vancouver and I am very optimistic about the outcome. Finally I think we are seeing some momentum building across the country. It's very important to share what we know via the Internet, but that's not enough if we don't challenge the labour law regime at the Boards and in the Courts.

Good luck!

  • posted by unionnow
  • Fri, Oct 3, 2003 11:00pm


That sounds like a pretty ridiculous claim. What else did the flyer say? Is there any contact information on it? If you can grab a copy and post some of the interesting parts online.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Oct 4, 2003 9:49am

I heard a rtmour today that local 175 did noy give the mandate to finalize the rcss appendix,and there is a store in windsor that is built but not opened.Any information anyone?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Oct 4, 2003 12:40pm

I suspect that the three local presidents were not and are not on the same page when it comes to the secret deal. The issue of ratification seems to have been quite divisive. In the Local 1000a response to the the DFR there is mention of the secret talks almost collapsing in May of this year over this issue. It was only after Canadian Director Mikey Fraser intervened, and Local 1000a Pres Corporon came up with a half-baked compromise that things were patched up and the deal came together.

While Local 1000a was eager not to have the deal ratified, Local 1977 insisted on at least going through some motions and holding its "mandate vote" while Local 175 has done nothing to date. My guess is that Wayne Hanley decided to sit back and wait until the dust settles.

I've heard for several years now that there has been tension between Corporon and the other local presidents (particularly Hanley).

It' worth exploiting this tension. Members of Local 175 and other UFCW Locals may want to write to Wayne Hanley asking for an explanation of where Local 175 is at in relation to this deal. Have they signed anything? Will members be permitted to vote? When will members be provided with information about what's going on? While you're at it, ask Mikey Fraser the same questions.

  • posted by <Michael Troy Moore>
  • Sat, Oct 4, 2003 2:25pm

It's common knowlage that the Useall Hates Gray Davis.

  • posted by edelio
  • Sat, Oct 4, 2003 8:26pm

I have a feeling that if that is true about 175 , that attitude wont last long once the company says they will back out of their bribe,,errrr,, i mean,, education fund grant which is a few hundred thousand dollars over the next 3 years. If everyone remembers that was the big gift to each local for selling out the members. Remember that Judas couldn't stop himself from collecting his silver pieces too!!

  • posted by <Part-timer>
  • Fri, Nov 14, 2003 9:42am

Well i just finished reading all these comments facts and i have only one thing to say. Bout bloody time. I am a long time part-time employee that honestly is so tired of hearing about how this company has to cut wages and benefits because of big bad Wallymart coming in and taking our business(hmm kinda sounds like the line i got years ago with Sobey's) and having our union turn and say sorry guys u have to take it because we said so. To think that i pay dues to have our "Reps" basically bend us over for the company and take away the lube on this subject just gets under my skin but what really gets me is that until i came on the net looking for information about transfering between stores, i didn't know any of these complaints were going on. Sure no one is happy about what is happening but everytime i brought up that we shouldn't have to take it and that our union isn't doing what it is suppose to be doing, i.e. representing us, the standard answer i get is we can't do anything about it and that no one was willing to try. I do feel ashamed that i didn't take up the fight myself now that i know that there was a way to fight but now that i know show me whare to sign on.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Fri, Nov 14, 2003 7:22pm

Hi Part Timer (dont like your handle, you are worth more) you can sign on to the complaint online at this site under secret deals, nera the top of the first windo there is a box add your name , if you decide to sign on you will join 175 other Loblaw employees from accross Ontario.

© 2022 Members for Democracy