Visit uncharted.ca!
  • authored by remote viewer
  • published Sat, Nov 8, 2003

Showdown Looming Over Secret Deal at UFCW Local 175

MFD Weekend: Showdown Looming Over Secret Deal at UFCW Local 175

In the swollen ranks of Canadian business unionists, Wayne Hanley is a guy who stands out in the crowd. As President of UFCW Local 175 he presides over a humungous local of about 50,000 members. His father, Bill Hanley, was a former Local 175 President and a devout apostle of UFCW Canada god-man Cliff Evans. Hanley-the-son has the pedigree and the family connections to make him a big player in the UFCW organization and he is. A trustee of UFCW Canada's CCWIPP pension plan, he's also a member of the Board of Directors of a hotel management firm in which the pension plan invests.

But apart from those impressive credentials Hanley has recently proven himself capable of such callous disregard for the interests and the intelligence of his members as to leave the rest of the Canadian UFCW rat pack of presidents eating his dust.

For months now, members of Local 175 who work at Zehr's supermarkets in Southwestern Ontario have been wondering just what involvement their President had in the secret negotiations between supermarket behemoth Loblaw Companies and UFCW Locals 1000a and 1977. Between them, the three locals represent thousands of workers at Loblaw Companies Zehr's, Fortino's and Loblaws supermarkets in Ontario.

Members of UFCW Locals 1977 and 1000a found out this past summer that their Local Presidents, after months of secret negotiations, agreed to a deal with company officials that would change their members' contracts in mid-term and would help the hugely profitable Loblaw Companies make an even bigger pile.

Under the deal, workers at a new supermarket chain called Real Canadian Super Stores would be added to their bargaining units but would be receive lower wages, fewer benefits and be subject to more management flexibility. A lengthy "appendix" was added to their contracts setting out the terms of the terms and conditions that would apply to the new hires. Other modifications to their contracts called for buy-outs and transfers of current members who would be displaced as existing stores were closed or converted to the new RCSS format.

For the hugely profitable Loblaw Companies, the secret deal will mean lower labour costs and more profit. The three union locals will get a lot of new members plus $1.3 million dollars between them for "education and communications" over the next three years. Their tens of thousands of members get....a deal they they never knew was being cooked up and that they were not allowed to ratify, despite the fact that Ontario law requires secret ballot ratification of collective agreements.

In June 2002, a small group of Local 1000a officials voted in favour of the secret deal at a secret meeting. A month later they would advise their members of what they'd done. At about the same time, members of Local 1977 were asked to vote on a "mandate" authorizing their President, the legendary Brian Williamson, to sign the secret pact. Considerable propaganda was published by the two locals presenting the secret deal as a great feat of bargaining or, for those who couldn't quite see their way clear to that, a bitter but necessary pill to swallow in the escalating war on Wal-mart.

Amid all the propagandizing by Local officials and the growing outrage of members at these two locals, officials at Local 175 maintained a studied silence. President Hanley said nothing about his involvement in the secret talks or about what he may have committed to. This despite that fact that materials published by the two other locals and media articles which appeared during the summer clearly indicated that Local 175 was involved and had probably agreed to the same deal as the others.

Concerned members looked for answers. In August, they finally got some. Notices from President Hanley advising members that no negotiations were happening and no deals had been made were posted in their stores. Any sense of relief the members might have felt was premature. Two months later, they'd find out what was really going on.

In mid-October a series of membershp meetings were held for the 4,000 or so members. At these meetings, theywere advised that their Local had indeed signed on to the secret deal and that an appendix similar to the one incorporated into the other collective agreements was been added to their contract.

Would they be permitted to ratify the changes to their contract? Not a chance. No need for that. Members report that they were told there would be no ratification because the amended contract was not their contract, that it was only an appendix to their contract and that it would not affect them in any way. A cheerful news blurb - which implies that the rupturing appendix will indeed affect them - appeared on the web site shortly thereafter.

What are Local 175 members to make of this? What are we all to make of it for that matter? President Hanley's explanation as to why members will not be allowed to ratify the changes to their contract is astonishing. That the altered collective agreement is not their agreement is ludicrous. Of course it's their agreement. Who's agreement is it if not their's? Equally ludicrous is the suggestion that a change to a collective agreement won't affect "in any way" the members to whom the agreement applies.

Even if President Hanley really believes in this innovative reasoning, his explanation conflicts with what the Presidents of the two other locals have said about why members were not permitted to ratify the secret deal: There were to be no ratification votes because Loblaws officials insisted that there be none. Local 1000a President Kevin Corporon stated in his reply to a Duty of Fair Representation complaint filed by a Local 1000a member, that both Hanley and Local 1977 President Williamson felt strongly that their members had a right to ratify the changes they were making to their contracts - so strongly in fact that the secret talks almost collapsed!

President Hanley's August memo is also somewhat alarming. It is true that no negotiations were underway in August. But that's because six months of secret negotiations were concluded in June with a deal which, according to his trough-mates Williamson and Corporon, Hanley accepted.

Maybe President Hanley is just a well-meaning guy who really thought the members were asking if there were any negotiations going on in August. Maybe he's just a very literal guy and thought the members meant "are there any negotiations taking place today?". Maybe he's just such a busy guy that he forgot about the six months of difficult and protracted (according to his fellow Pres' secret bargaining that wrapped up just two months earlier. Maybe through some bizarre mental gymnastics that only UFCW Local Presidents can do he really believes that a collective agreement that covers a group of members is not really their agreement. Or maybe he just thinks the members of Local 175 are too stupid to know the score and too insignificant to deserve a voice in decisions that affect them.

If it's the latter then Wayne Hanley has truly set a new standard for unconscionable behaviour by a biz unionist. We'll find out which way it is soon enough. According to a group of Local 175 members who are tired of being treated like the Presidential doormat, a Duty of Fair Representation complaint is on its way to the Ontario Labour Relations Board. We wish them well and look forward to telling you more about their complaint.

DFR Update: The Ontario Labour Relations Board hearing into Local 1000a member Ben Blasdell's Duty of Fair Representation complaint concluded on October 23rd. A decision of the Board is pending. Local 1000a has called a membership meeting for Tuesday, November 11th, at 7:00 p.m. at the Travelodge Hotel, 2737 Keele Street in Toronto. The purpose of the meeting has not been announced - all the more reason for Local 1000a members to turn out and give your Local President a piece of your mind about...whatever it is that he wants to talk to you about.

Knowledge is Power.

  • posted by Secret Agent
  • Sat, Nov 8, 2003 9:43am

Seems like Hanley, Corporon and Williamson aren't talking to each other much since the secret deal went down. Their contradictory statements are going to come back to haunt them. Very sloppy scheming. Shame on you boys.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Nov 8, 2003 2:40pm

No vote, not your contract, dont have to consult with you, less money, less benefits... who needs a union?

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Nov 9, 2003 3:47pm

Ain't it strange that in June 2002, Clifford Evans writes to a member on behalf of the Canadian Commercial Workers Industry Pension Plan (CCWIPP), of which Loblaw Companies is the largest contributor, and says:

quote:


In order to provide additional moneis to cover any potential short-fall, increased contributions are being negotiated.


Well it turns out that there were plenty of potential shortfalls.

It's also amazing that while "additional monies" were being "negotiated" presumably with Loblaw Comapnies, so were wage cuts and all sorts of other contract gutting measures.

I wouldn't blame anyone who thought that there was the potential for a trade off here. Y'know, give us some dough to save the CCWIPP from collapse and we'll see what we can do to accommodate you with a Superstore deal.

We know that at least David T. Watts visits here, so David, did something like that happen? If not, could you tell us what the deal was with the increase in the pension plan contributions by Loblaw Companies?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sun, Nov 9, 2003 5:27pm

Hopefully that answer is coming soon . I have requested all information regarding increases in pension contributions by loblaws since 2000, whe our last contract was signed.

  • posted by <ZEPHUR>
  • Sun, Nov 9, 2003 6:30pm

quote:


posted by bb:
Hopefully that answer is coming soon . I have requested all information regarding increases in pension contributions by loblaws since 2000, whe our last contract was signed.


BB I'd like to see those answer also. I attended last spring quarter century diner with my wife, and something about contributing or adding to the pension fund was mentioned in a speach by Galen Weston as well I believe Leder and Carman Fortino.
Upon leaving my wife and myself both had an uneasy feeling in regards to this and the number of times the great relationship the company and union had in regards to looking after us dedicated employees.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sun, Nov 9, 2003 7:35pm

The contact numbers for the financial security commision of ontario and the canadian commercial workers industry pension plan are available under drama in the bahamas and you can contact them the same as I did.I have not heard from them yet

  • posted by weiser
  • Mon, Nov 10, 2003 10:06am

Hey good goin' Ben. Well said:

quote:


Financial Post, Monday, November 10, 2003
FP Comment – Letters

Negotiate for whom?

Re: Will Wal-Mart's Warehouse Plan Backfire?, Oct. 30.

I take issue with statements in the article about union negotiations. Loblaws has not negotiated anything with anyone justifiably under Ontario law. As a union member, I take issue with a company that makes an offer with the condition that the members not be allowed to ratify any amendment to their own contract. Loblaws dangled a significant amount of money for 'education and communication' to union leaders and they took the bait hook, line and sinker.

At the same time, union leaders did not allow members to vote; they concealed secret negotiations for six months. Union president Kevin Corporon is represented before the Ontario Labour Relations Board by union lawyer Ian Anderson on a complaint under section 74, Duty of Fair Representation. More than 100 Loblaws employees support me in trying to have Loblaws and UFCW Local 1000A abide by the terms of the collective agreement that does not expire until 2006. I ask you a simple question: How would you feel if your union president secretly negotiated away your sick day and Christmas bonus to receive lower wages, a longer work week, less benefits, and mandatory Sunday work, and then said you are not entitled to vote?

Ben Blasdell, Collingwood, Ont.


© 2024 Members for Democracy