Visit uncharted.ca!
  • authored by remote viewer
  • published Sat, Jan 8, 2005

Did Loblaws Buy the RCSS Deal?

Did Loblaws Buy the RCSS Deal?

$1.5 Million Offer to UFCW National Office Uncovered
Did a secret payment of $1.5 million to the UFCW's Canadian office help three UFCW Locals to agree to concessions that Loblaw Companies was seeking for workers at its Real Canadian Superstores? Insider information obtained by MfD points to that very conclusion and indicates that:

An offer of a $1.5 million payment to the UFCW National office was made by Loblaw Companies in May 2003.

The offer came at a time when secret negotiations for reduced wages, benefits and greater management flexibility at Loblaws new Real Canadian Superstores bogged down over the issue of ratification.

Shortly after the offer was made, the UFCW Locals dropped their demands for ratification and accepted a compromise on the issue.

The secret deal was concluded shortly thereafter.

The payment to the UFCW's Canadian National Office, UFCW Canada, should not be confused with payments totalling $1.35 million that Loblaws agreed to make to the three UFCW Locals whose collective agreements would be amended by the RCSS deal. We've known about those payments for over a year. Under the terms of the RCSS deal, Loblaw Companies agreed to pay UFCW Locals 175, 1977 and 1000a a total of $450,000 each ($150,000 to each Local each year for three years). While never publicized by the UFCW in the extensive propagandizing that followed the deal, reference to them is made in the "appendix" that was was added to the Locals' collective agreements where the payments are described as being "for education and communication initiatives".

The payments to the Locals were also the subject of considerable discussion on this web site last year and were mentioned in a complaint filed by a UFCW member with the Ontario Labour Relations Board that challenged the legality of the deal.

Those submissions are especially illuminating now given the additional information that has surfaced about the payment to the National Office. Apart from acknowledging the payments to the Locals, the UFCW's OLRB submissions state that on May 23, 2003, negotiations for the RCSS deal "broke down completely" over the issue of ratification. Representatives of Locals 175 and 1977 insisted that their members be permitted to ratify the deal which would alter their collective agreements. Loblaws officials refused and threatened to walk away from the negotiations. Following the breakdown of the negotiations, UFCW Canada Director "Mike Fraser had discussions with Loblaw officials" and announced that a compromise had been reached on the ratification issue. The compromise did not involve ratification but would permit each local president to get a "mandate" to sign the deal from a "representative" number of members. (Local 1977 allowed its entire membership to vote on the "mandate", Local 1000a asked a committee of 22 members - out of several thousand - for a mandate and Local 175 did not ask anyone for a mandate at all.)

Based on the information we have obtained, on May 23rd, the day that the talks broke down completely, Loblaws tabled its offer of the additional payment to the UFCW National Office. The offer was accepted and within days the deal was done.

This is troubling. UFCW members have every right to know about it, to be concerned about it and to ask their union's leaders for an explanation. This is especially so in light of recent news that the UFCW intends to ask members to allow union officials to enter into further negotiations with Loblaw's officials about the RCSS deal and in light of Loblaw's recent threats to close a store in Strathroy Ontario unless the UFCW grant further concessions.

Although the payments to the Locals were not kept secret, they are disturbing in themselves. The payments are substantial and are in addition to pre-existing substantial contributions Loblaw Companies makes to the Locals' training and education funds. Their stated purpose is vague - almost anything can be described as a "communication and education initiative". Taken together with the magnitude of the concessions granted to the company and the UFCW's explanation to the OLRB that "most unions have similar funds" (an exaggeration at best) these payments and their purpose are cause for concern.

The payment to the National Office is cause for alarm. To the best of our knowledge, it has never been disclosed to members. There is no mention of it in the UFCW's extensive communications to members about the RCSS deal. It was not mentioned in the UFCW's submissions to the OLRB and there is no reference to it in the RCSS agreements. Considering the events that both preceded and followed the company's offer - two of the Locals compromised their demands for ratification of the deal by the members - the question of whether Loblaws bought the UFCW's agreement to the concessions and its commitment to deny members an opportunity to vote on the deal is both fair and deserving of a full and convincing explanation.

We therefore invite UFCW Canada to provide an explanation about this secret payment online here at MfD and we undertake to post, in its entirety, any statement they make. We ask that UFCW Canada respond to the following questions:

[1.]Did Loblaw Companies offer and did the UFCW National Office accept a payment of $1.5 million during the RCSS negotiations?
[2.] Did that offer play a role in bringing those negotiations to a successful conclusion?
[3.] If yes, how do you justify your behaviour? How is this not a payoff?

And UFCW Canada guys: In case you plan to tell us, or anyone else for that matter, that the payments to the National Office were "in lieu of training and education fund contributions that would have been required under collective agreements", we know that the National Office has no collective agreements with Loblaws. The collective agreements are between the Locals and the company.

Further reading about the RCSS deal and recent developments:

What Loblaws got out of the RCSS deal: Low Wage Wasteland The Wages, The Benefits, The Working Conditions

How Loblaws Funds the Unionization of Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart Workers Earn More

Manufacturing Consent, Biz Union Style

Why Are UFCW Leaders So F#!@ing Stupid?

  • posted by Info
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 9:34am

Congrats rv good to see your over your writers block.But why oh why do wait until now to post this if it is true

Keep it up your corperate stooging is both sad and funny.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 9:40am

Do you deny that it's true? If it's true, could it be perceived as a payoff?

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 11:01am

"Corporate Stooging?!" So that's what the machine heads call their behaviour?

Info, if you're so proud of the payoffs, why the hell aren't you defending them? Loblaw Executive VP, Deane Collinson wasn't shy at putting his signature on the deals, but the UFCW guys either forgot to tell everyone or they thought that several million dollars wasn't significant enough to bother the memberships' heads with. After all, they were preoccupied with having their CA gutted.

In all fairness, Info, there's still a little under $1 million left to be paid. That comes in July.

Info, why don't you tell us what the dough is for. Is it to help the mighty UFCW organize Wal-Mart? We know the answer, and you know the answer, but do you have the cajones to say it here? Is it on the list of topics you've been authorized to speak on?

C'mon, Info. Give us some info.

Note to self: Be paitient. Info has gone to get instructions. Info will return once the proper words have been put between his ears in the receptical that leads to the tube that leads to his mouth.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 11:50am

quote:


The offer came at a time when secret negotiations for reduced wages, benefits and greater management flexibility at Loblaws new Real Canadian Superstores bogged down over the issue of ratification.

Shortly after the offer was made, the UFCW Locals dropped their demands for ratification and accepted a compromise on the issue.

The secret deal was concluded shortly thereafter.


If you give one to one - then you must give one to everybody?

G'eez makes one wonder if an equally despicable trade-off - cash for concessions - is the reason for the recent ufcw international retail concession concert currently touring the US?

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 2:05pm

We must be patient with Info-the-Propagandist (Apprentice) weiser. He's gotten all confused.

I initially had some trouble understanding why he would be calling me a corporate stooge for posting this story. After all, I can't imagine the boys at Loblaws HQ being pleased at the disclosure of their secret payment but then it occurred to me:

Yesterday, in another thread, I made a comment that I had seen UFCW prostrate themselves before management and was going to "tell all" in a forthcoming project. Info has mistakenly assumed that this is the story about the $1.5 million payment. He believes that I was there when the deal was done and so wonders why I didn't come out with the story sooner.

Of course, I was not there (if I was Info, you'd be watching the whole shameful escapade on streaming video right now). Nor have I ever worked for Loblaw Co's. My comment of yesterday related to an altogether different dirty deal with a different employer. That's a longer story that will take much more than a front page post to tell.

Info can be forgiven for his confusion though. UFCW leaders have prostrated themselves so many times before so many different employers that it's hard for even hardcore UFCW watchers like ourselves to keep up at times.

Now that we've cleared up the confusion Info, please tell us what the money's for. Is weiser correct when he says it's to organize Wal-Mart? Or is it just because UFCW boys just wanna have fun?

  • posted by Duffbeer
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 3:30pm

If Info is a paid "Propagandist", the payer should consider asking for their money back.

Info's persistence would be admirable if it were not for the actual inane content of most of his rambling postings. I have to agree with him though that the amount of attention devoted to him is a little extreme. He certainly is a master baitor!

Having said that, I have to admit my own confusion over this $1.5 million revelation.

Is this "insider information" to be taken as fact?

Is the source of this "insider information" from Loblaw or the UFCW?

If it is/was a "secret deal", how likely is it that the UFCW National Office and/or Loblaw would ever admit to being involved in it?

Thanks.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 3:56pm

When asked by the media about the deal, a UFCW fella, did a lot of ums and ahs and said that he's have to see the documents first before he could make a comment. He then tried to deflect the conversation by blaming the media call on that bad man Finnamore.

Did ya' get promised three installments of $500 thousand apiece from Loblaws?

That seems like a pretty straight forward question. The fact that it couldn't be answered one way or the other is rather odd. How often does the UFCW get $1.5 million from Loblaw that they can't recall without seeing which payment they received.

"Duh! We get so many lump sums from employers that we wouldn't know which one youse was talkin' about unless you show us the docs."

They are afraid to admit it and more afraid to deny it. Mike Fraser, if we're wrong here, you are more than welcome to log on and tell us so. We dare you to state, unequivocally, the truth. Tell us about the payments to the locals and the payments to the UFCW. Put it in writing and we'll post it for you.

In the meantime, we'll wait for the CCWIPP series to hit the news stands first. Then a major media outlet will do a piece on the money. Then another piece on the CCWIPP and its relations with the FSCO.

There's three years of research and document gathering that is coming to a head right now.

As for the insiders, they are all over the place and they come from both camps.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 3:56pm

Duff, I'd love to outline the ISDU Rumour Rules to you sometime. Sometime is not now though.

I will say that RV fully understands them and I am unbelievably curious to see how this plays out.

If it's all false, you have to believe that both UFCW and the Lob guys are furious. They will quickly and separately deny the charges.

If it's at all true, they need time. Time to get together, pull each other's hair out trying to figure out the leak and the spin. The longer they take, the worse it looks.

Now although it might be true, they might decide to deny it. A very dangerous and balsy plan if there is a chance of some 'proof' being out in the public.

Let's just say that they are fucked. A rumour is a fact. There are only varying degrees of 'fact' and I'm betting that this one is gold. The truth is always in the reaction. Fuck what they actually say. How they perform it will tell all. Good luck on this one you bastards.

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 4:01pm

The source I first heard about this payoff from over a year ago was from someone very reputable (IMO) and had far to much inside information about the deal for me to doubt it, but alas I did not see any actual documentation and therefore have been left waiting for the facts to be divulged with something more than hearsay.

Interesting that rv now is reporting it.

Loose lips sink ships, lets see what it does to a union.

Or has deep throat graduated and become the smoking man.

Could there be a ufcdubyer who still has a conscience.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 4:15pm

The underlings blades are being pulled from their sheaths. However, it ain't about conciences; it's about evening scores.

The arrogance of the elitist bastards has rubbed the underlings raw. The underlings aren't out to destroy the organization; they want to drown those deepest in the trough, so that perhaps they can find a place at the trough. This is their big chance at fame, fortune and maybe change, and they are taking it. Then again, there are others who are willing to sacrifice their accomplices to keep their own blood from running in the massacre to come. The trough is no place to hang around in the next while. Stay clear, and keep the info coming.

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 5:43pm

Interesting take weiser I'll try to keep my eyes open, I guess I should add the fact that reps got a large bonus after the dirty deal was signed, but that to I can not verify, but the source came to me from a family member of a rep with a child who repeated what had been discussed around the dinner table.
Aren't kids great.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 5:47pm

quote:


Then again, there are others who are willing to sacrifice their accomplices to keep their own blood from running in the massacre to come.


I love it - assholes eating their young.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 5:53pm

Duffman, Nights, et al:

The information on which our front page story is based comes from documents which originate with one of the parties to the filthy deal and which we have good reason to believe to be authentic. I will go no further so as not to compromise the source(s) that brought them to our attention. These sources have been advised that their identity(s) will remain confidential and we intend to honour that commitment. (You can appreciate why they might want to stay in the shadows.)

The UFCW dimwits who cut this filthy deal will find themselves in a bit of a bind with its exposure and that's their problem. If they deny the existence of the filthy deal, they run the risk of finding themselves with mud all over their faces since the documentary evidence and its origins are quite convincing. If they say nothing, they will draw suspicion about the deal. If they threaten legal action, they will draw truck loads of attention to the deal (and they know that we don't scare easily - well, we don't scare at all).

If you are unsure as to whether or not there is truth to this story, the best thing to do is go right to Michael Fraser, Director, UFCW Canada and ask him, point blank: "Did UFCW Canada accept a payment of $1.5 million from Loblaw Co's as part of the RCSS deal?"

I'm sure his response (or lack thereof) will tell you a lot.

  • posted by eddy munster
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 6:40pm

Of course they did. Alot of this deal i'm sure had to do with the pension plan. The company bailed them out in the mean time as well as securing funds for the union. I'm sure there was alot more money involved in offshore accounts that we don't know about. These guys had a price and the company paid it.

  • posted by Info
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 8:47pm

You know an interesting thing to do when you think there is a leak or someone is sabotaging your organization is to let them have information and see if it gets out in the case of several suspected leaks it is good to give information to all those suspected but with a slight bit of a change in the information they are given then wait and see what pops out.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 8:55pm

quote:


You know an interesting thing to do when you think there is a leak or someone is sabotaging your organization is to let them have information and see if it gets out in the case ...


classic IF - at the end of the day jes bloody ufcw classic!

  • posted by blasdell
  • Sat, Jan 8, 2005 9:06pm

quote:


posted by Info:
You know an interesting thing to do when you think there is a leak or someone is sabotaging your organization is to let them have information and see if it gets out in the case of several suspected leaks it is good to give information to all those suspected but with a slight bit of a change in the information they are given then wait and see what pops out.


Sounds like someone wants to stop a leak.

Instead they should stop whatever action is being leaked if it is embarassing.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 6:20am

That really is classic Info. It's right up there with your assertion that whistleblowers should only be taken seriously if they blow the whistle before any wrongdoing happens.

Info is suggesting that the information we have posted is something that the UFCW leadership leaked deliberately to someone on its staff, to see if the staffer leaks it. I'm not sure why the UFCW leaders would leak this kind of information - given its damning nature and knowing that it's going to be made public.

Really dumb Info. If I wanted to leak something to identify the source of a leak, I think that I would pick something a little less explosive and damning than "We took $1.5 million dollars from the company to seal the deal on the RCSS negotiations".

Alternatively, if UFCW leaders themselves leaked the information, then they shouldn't have any complaints now that it's in the public domain.

What Info is trying to do - really - is to deflect attention from the substance of the story (the payment of a substantial amount of money by the company to the UFCW to get the union's agreement not only on concessions but to avoid ratification of those concessions by the members) by steering the discussion towards speculation about the source of "the leak".

I will say this much Info (et al) and let you and your handlers chew on this for a few days: If the origins of the information were to be revealed, that would also have the effect of validating the authenticity of the information on which our story is based. If you out the leak, you acknowledge that the information is true. It's a real conundrum for the UFCW.

  • posted by Info
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 6:49am

Okay here is the truth the 1.5 million and all the missing pension funds are going to me. Yes that is right I am being paid millions of dollars to post here, I mean there is no possible way that a dues paying member would ever see things differently than the site moderators and administrators.

I mean what are the chances that there is a dues paying member who isn't whining?

I know it is totally unconcievable to you that someone could realize he is not the only person in the world who is getting it stuck to him by the greed of corporations and indivuals, oh and guess what if I tear down what is here what will replace it? Get ready for it more greed
So excuse me if I do not wish to join the chorus of poor me and I'm the only getting stiffed or even the UFCW is the evil union and espicially if I do not believe these so called whistle blowers who say they are doing us a favour while they seem to be doing just fine all the while advising us to get rid of the union or tell wal-mart workers not to join the union.

So I will take the millions of dollars the union pays me daily to post here and go enjoy a cup of coffee

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 9:36am

You still haven't answered the question that was asked of you at the beginning of this thread Info:

Do you deny that the information in our front page story is true?

If it is true that UFCW Canada accepted a payment of $1.5 million from Loblaw Companies as part of the RCSS deal, could that be perceived as a payoff?

The more you dodge the question, the more I will continue to ask it.

What's a "whostle blower" BTW?

You are a spokesperson for the UFCW. You are here to communicate for the UFCW. Answer the questions. The more you bob and weave the less credible you appear.

  • posted by weiser
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 12:22pm

Info said:

quote:


Okay here is the truth the 1.5 million and all the missing pension funds are going to me.


You're being absurd, in an effort to deflect the point of this thread and avoid answering a valid question.

The $1.5 million hasn't been paid out in full yet; only $1 million has. The other $500 thousand isn't due until July. No one has intimated that the $1.5 million went to anyone at the International for personal gain. The question asked was whether it was given by Loblaw to help finance the UFCW in its efforts to organize Wal-Mart.

As for the shit load of money that has drained from the CCWIPP, no one person got the whole load. It was spread around. Money is never lost. It always winds up in someone's pocket. If I sell you a $500 plot of land for $20 million, you wind up with a $500 asset and I wind up with $20 million. Y'see, it ain't never lost.

Info, that ain't ice-cream you're offering to share. We know the difference. You be holdin' a bowl of frozen poop! Eat it yerself.

Info also said this stupid thing:

quote:


You know an interesting thing to do when you think there is a leak or someone is sabotaging your organization is to let them have information and see if it gets out in the case ...


Hoo, Haw! That be funny!

Tell Brian to rest easy. It anin't comin' from his nest (at least not directly). BTW, while yer at it, tell Brian that the company boys always side with the company. They do what they wanna do. And don't think for a minute that all the BA's aren't comparing notes. They all plan on having their asses intact when the grinder is finished.

  • posted by siggy
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 2:12pm

quote:


What's a "whostle blower" BTW?


Oo Oo I know I know... a whostle blower - that's when you reveal wrongdoing before it happens - it's like tealeaf reading or fortune telling. The term "Whostle blowing" is derived from the latin root word - fockinggoodguess.

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 2:51pm

quote:


What's a "whostle blower" BTW?




The only answer any of you will ever get from Info is the same and only answer Fed up ever had.

Becase the ufcw ist he best onion.

Edit= Fed up replaced Happy, it's hard to keep all the names used by the same person in line with their posts.

  • posted by yankeebythewater
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 3:15pm

A whostle blower is a recipe of unwanted ingredients.

2 parts lining silk pockets
1 part milking (anything)
Add 1 cup of membership dues
Mix Well!

Stir it up. Bake in a oven, 350, 400, 450, 500 degrees..

The recipe also can be done fried.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 6:09pm

quote:


posted by remote viewer:
Really dumb Info. If I wanted to leak something to identify the source of a leak, I think that I would pick something a little less explosive and damning than "We took $1.5 million dollars from the company to seal the deal on the RCSS negotiations".


But my dear RV, you're not 'them'. It's Info logic... this probably IS the least damning/explosive thing they could do or have done.

I think they're following the Holywood rule. Any hype is good hype. Look at Paris Hilton. The video just adds to your fame.

Ask Info, he's got the staged briefcase-full-of-cash handover video. It's the extreme naked orgy version... just in case MfD doesn't do the story justice.


  • posted by remote viewer
  • Sun, Jan 9, 2005 7:48pm

You're so right Potentate. I just had the most bizarre vision of the UFCW leaders - Corporon, Hanley, Williamson and Fraser - in long blond wigs, thigh highs and form fitting attire that shows off their new implants out for a stroll. Along come John Lederer, Roy Conliffe and that Collinson dude all decked out like gangsta pimps hummin' that really coarse tune by Juvenile that goes "I love y'all broads, no disrespect to my dogs..."

Sometimes you really need something like that to put it all in perspective. It's been a great weekend. thumb:

  • posted by Info
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 6:17am

If they did get 1.5 million then you can precieve any way you wish too, but as I said before I do not work for the ufcw and I am not like you, a corporate pig who sits by and watches as corporations try to push down working people so they get a better bottom line.

I love it though that they only backbone some people here seem to have is when it comes to jumping on a spelling mistake I make.Now I am getting a good insight into some of the other posters here and I understand why they end up getting pushed around.Well if it makes you feel better and will help get a backbone so that one day you can stand up for yourself then check this post for spelling and have at her.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 6:50am

Corporate pig?! Wow, Info, that's really intelligent. Did they teach you that at the Cliff Evans Centre for the Performing Arts - oops, I mean the Clifford Evans Training Centre?

But you're wrong again honey. I neither work for nor have any ties to any corporation. So there.

Once again I will ask the question which you have still not answered: Do you deny that the UFCW accepted a payment from Loblaw Companies of $1.5 million during the course of the RCSS negotiations? Could that be perceived as a payoff?

By the way, I did not say that you "work" for the UFCW. You are propagandizing for them. That is evident from some of the statements you have made.

Come on, answer the questions. What are you afraid of?

  • posted by Info
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 7:45am

I did answer your question not my fault if your not bright enough to read.Just because I did not answer the question the way you wish for it to be answered does not leave the question unanswered.

Yes you are a corporate pig, if you get fat off from the paychecks of corporations all the while you know working men and women are getting pushed down you are a pig.Pointing the fingers at others saying they are doing the same just makes you a coward on top of it.

If you did care about the people as you say you do then name the name of the corporations also, or are you no better then those you point the finger at?
Or are you too afraid to bite the hands that gets you fat?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 8:04am

quote:


posted by Info:
Pointing the fingers at others saying they are doing the same just makes you a coward on top of it.


If I remember correctly, that was Happy's argument in the Caw attempt to replace the UFCW in Maplegrove.

You call RV a coward for witnessing an action and then reporting it.....implying she was somehow responsible.... then what is the person who is actually responsible?

  • posted by Info
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 9:00am

Afraid to let rv answer there bb. I understand why you may fear what she has to say, I mean if it turns out the person you trust to give you "inside" info on the ufcw sits by and gets fat off these deals could it be that she is here posting hoping to increase profits for corporations by having us get rid of our unions. Seems interesting to me she targets unions very large in the service industries.

Gee if you can't trust a stranger over the internet to tell you the truth bb who can you trust?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Mon, Jan 10, 2005 7:16pm

who can you I trust Hmmm.....I wish I could trust those in positions of trust.

RV is quite capable of answering ....it is you who cannot answer.

Is it a good reason or argument or excuse or
whatever.......to say they did it so it okay for me to do it?

happy used that arguement in the other thread and now info/happy points the finger for someone else "allegedly" using that type of arguement.

It is okay or not okay by your standards....see if you can anwser that without whostling

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 6:04am

quote:


I love it though that they only backbone some people here seem to have is when it comes to jumping on a spelling mistake I make.


Well no spelling mistakes here

quote:


Well if it makes you feel better and will help get a backbone so that one day you can stand up for yourself then check this post for spelling and have at her.


Nope none here either.

quote:


If they did get 1.5 million then you can precieve any way you wish too


Well perhaps we can reschedule you for a makeup test Info.

You did ask for this.

More fun than a barrel full of trolls.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 7:10am

I don't work for any corporation Info. I thought that was clear in my earlier post. Therefore, I cannot be a corporate pig by any definition.

Do you dispute that the UFCW took a payment from Loblaws as part of the RCSS deal?

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 7:28am

Nope not denying but seeing as it comes from you not accepting it is a fact either. You can be counted on to give about as fair and unbiased report on the UFCW as Michael Moore or Dan Rather could be expected to give one on George W. Bush.

Okay so you don't work for corporate interest and you don't work for a trade union then how is it your around to see all these things you supposedly see?

Are you waitress, maid, secretary?

Failing all that given your animosity towards unions and their presidents were you spurned by a union president, did Kevin C or some other president reject your advances?

  • posted by Elise Grace
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:17am

Info; I do not belong to any of the unions you mentioned earlier yet I fully agree with Remote View's take on unions. I have seen, first hand, the corruption and the abuse of power in my union (IWA/USWA).

Some unions are not unions - at least not what unions were meant to be.

You will never convince me the UFCW is a victim.

  • posted by weiser
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:31am

Info said:

quote:


You can be counted on to give about as fair and unbiased report on the UFCW as Michael Moore or Dan Rather could be expected to give one on George W. Bush.


So you compare the UFCW to George W. Bush. Hmmm.... Now that's an interesting parallel.

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:38am

Yeah why not I paralleled union leaders to JFK before so I may as well move them up quite a few notches and compare them to a president who is doing to more to help people around the world than JFK did.

By the way Susan I am not trying to convince anyone they are victims, I am just saying given rv's one sided view I do not trust her to give an honest accounting of the ufcw.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:40am

quote:


posted by Info:
Are you waitress, maid, secretary?


Seriously in bad taste Info. All women are not in those jobs they can be lawyers, doctors and professors.

Is that the image the UFCW wants to project, as a supporter and UFCW insider you should really think before you write garbage.

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:49am

No it is legit question there bb.

When is the last time you did a business deal with your doctor present or in a school?

If she is a lawyer and is breaking the privilage of her client, all the while she witnesses these things then she really has no ethics one way or the other.Because if she is a lawyer then she is taking money from group and watching people be oppressed and doing nothing to stop it, then she is turning around and betraying those who pay her by being a rat and breaking a contract. You can't sit on a fence without the pole going up your butt and unless you are isdu that may not be a pleasent thought.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 9:53am

Info reveals more and more of the mindset of the UFCW cheerleaders.

I'm keeping track of all the monumentally stupid things that Info has been saying - they'll make good material for a forthcoming article about why unions are so disconnected from the community of workers (their most vocal proponents are often goofs who go out of their way to demonstrate their lack of intelligence).

Case in point: Info believes that most women who have anything negative to say about anything with a labour context must work as secretaries, maids, watiresses or in other "women's work" occupations. (Actually the more appropriate terms these days Info are Office Assistants, Housekeeping/Caretaking staff, Wait Staff or Servers.)

As these occupations tend to have low pay and inferior working conditions (thanks in no small measure to the superior bargaining ability of unions like the UFCW), they must be disgruntled and spend much of their time complaining. Their complaints should not be take seriously because ... they're women who work in low wage occupations that have historically been perceived as women's work.

In the alternative they must be sluts whose advances have been spurned by union representatives and that must account for their criticism of the fine gentlemen of the labour movement.

Wrong on all counts Info. While I have certainly been on the receiving end of "advances" as you put it by various union representatives over the years (all of which I have rejected of course), I have never, ever made any "advances" towards any union representative, official or employee and that includes the the Pillsbury Dough Boy - Mr. Corporon.

Your suggestion about Corporon is really funny however - for reasons that I won't get into, not just yet anyway.

What I do for a living is neither here nor there. I could care less what anybody does for a living. Their ideas are what interest me - not the nature of the servile role in which they've been cast by the oppressive elements in our society.

As I have already told you, I am not employed by any union or any corporation. (If that's got you stumped then you're dumber than you make yourself appear). Unlike so many other people in our society I have come to realization that what one does for a living doesn't have to define them or their relationships with others. What I do for a living is one thing. My contribution to the human race is another.

I consider myself a rider on the storm. I see and hear things, check things out and share my insights and knowledge about things that interest me and which may assist in the enlightenment and empowerment of others.

In a free and democratic society, that's cool. If you don't like it, too bad.

My travels have taken me deep into the murky subterranean jungle known as "the labour relations community". It's a most fascinating place and one that is kept hidden from the millions of people whose lives are controlled from its command centers. Revealing the subterranean landscape and its machines is sort of my life's work. I plan to continue doing it even though it displeases goofy trained seals who promote the benefits of ignorance. The best is yet to come.

Now if you don't mind, I've got some further illuminating to do.

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 10:09am

Actually my mention of those particular jobs had more to do with how one who says that they niether work for the corporate interests or the unions would have the chance to be around the going ons between the two and they would keep talking in front of that person.

It is okay to keep trying to keep trying to knock me, as I question your motives for posting and the methods you use to do it.

If you really did care about working men and women we would see more articles like this
http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=41468

Then you may be seen as someone who cares for the oppressed but seeing as most of posts do nothing but point out the negatives of union leaders and politicians and I am yet to read anything nice posted you seem like another well to do liberal mouth piece trying to ease you conscience by calling others bad.

It is odd besides Zell Miller when is the last time someone from the left of society had something nice to say about the right, oh well better go rent faren-hype 9/11

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 11:06am

Use your brain Info. If I say that I don't work for any corporation then that would pretty much rule out the possibility that I work in the jobs that you guessed at.

Ensure brain is in gear before engaging keyboard or you'll never get a paid communications position - with anyone except the UFCW.

Oh, before I forget, did Loblaws make a payment of $1.5 million to the UFCW for the RCSS deal? Could this be perceived as a payoff? Maybe you can ask some of the people at the Cliff Evans Training Centre what they think if you don't have any thoughts of your own to share.

  • posted by Secret Agent
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 11:19am

Hey Info here's a nice story about some caring UFCW reps. http://www.westword.com/issues/1997-05-15/feature.html

What did the UFCW International do about them?

  • posted by Secret Agent
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 11:31am

More examples of the caring UFCW. http://www.nlpc.org/artindx.asp#ufcw

Wow these guys really care a lot about themselves.

Check it out, here they are caring about themselves again.

Here's a guy who really knew how to help hiimself!

Here's Brother Corporon caring about the workers. He cares a lot about them. So much that he doesn't want them to know what he's up to for fear of making them feel bad.

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 1:34pm

You know rv I guess you must be really thick headed because I have stated because i have stated before I am not paid by the ufcw.

But since you do not work for corporate interests maybe you are paid by a labour organization, which means you are paid to post here, so why the bashing of teamsters, seiu and the ufcw plus the occassional swipe at cupe and the clc.What labour organization has had problems with all the above mentioned organizations?

By the way I have never heard of the Clifford Evans Training Center, so I guess I am not posting from there.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 1:54pm

I never said that you're paid by the UFCW. You're propagandizing for them for free.

You have to be a lot better at trolling to be paid for it. You're one of those sycophantic cheerleaders who comes to our site to show off your devotion to the UFCW by defending its corrupt practices and ineffectiveness.

You do this for free because you hope that it will impress your leaders enough and one day they might allow you to belly up to the trough along with them.

You also enjoy the attention. You can make an ass of yourself in front of a lot of people and not risk getting thrown out of a bar or having someone throw a drink on you. Offline nobody gives you a damn. Here we respond to your inane comments becauses it's interesting to engage biz unionist cheerleaders. Helps us to understand their mentality and what motivates them.

You are also driven by your religious fervour which makes it easy for you to blindly follow the dictates of people whom you consider superior and to chastize those whom your leaders consider heretics. It feels good for you to be here and you have a number things motivating you to be here but currying favour with the UFCW kahunas is one of them.

That's about the only explanation I can think of as to why you are spending so much time repeating the same things over and over again despite the fact that you're convincing no one and making yourself look like a goof in the process.

Case in point:

I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself: I do not work for any corporation or any union. I've said this to you now about 4 or 5 times. A union is a "labour organization". I'm assuming that you knew that but there you go asking me if I work a labour organization.

So once again: I don't work for any corporation or any union. What about that don't you understand? Or are you again trying to show off your profound lack of intelligence for the whole world to see?

Oh btw, did Loblaws make payments totally $2.85 million to the UFCW as part of the RCSS deal? Could those payments be perceived as a payoff? If you don't know the answer could you ask around the UFCW office and tell us what the troughers think?

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 2:08pm

quote:


posted by Info:
By the way I have never heard of the Clifford Evans Training Center, so I guess I am not posting from there.


Info, you're in Guelph and you haven't gone on a pilgrimage yet?

God's house

These goofs. They're still trying to compete with Jim/Tammy Faye Bakker's Heritage USA theme park. They should have done it like our buddy Benny Hinn... Benny dream

Ask for $30mil to build a white holy elephant and then tell everyone a couple years later that God said "put the project on hold til I tell you". And voila, $30mil more to invest in hookers.

C'mon you UFCW theives. Do it properly.

  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 3:33pm

Wow rv your use of all the typical tools of psychological propaganda is to be admired.

Why are ufcw so f------g stupid-use of inflammatory language to get people riled up, good try but truly great communicators such as Churchill and Reagan did not need this to get their points across so you may want to take a lesson from that. Also if your going to copy someone try to copy someone successful i mean a guy who sets out to unseat the president of the united states fails so badly that the president ends up with more votes then he did the first time around is not someone i consider successful.

Machine Head, Troll-dehumanizing people makes it so much easier to see them as unworthy of basic human respect. It works for the Nazis just hint though don't take outside your borders it didn't go well for them.

Our Site-very good example of alienation, used quite successfully by girls especially in high school. Make the person feel like th are an outsider unwelcome and hope they conform to your ideas in order to gain your approval.Did it work for you in high school?

You are also driven by your religious fervor - a typical left wing response when you do not get your way, much the same as the democrats in America calling all those who voted for Bush Jesus nuts.Only problem with that you end up alienating people you want to reach I mean what happens if there are God fearing people unhappy with ufcw now what do they think of you?

Offline nobody gives you a damn-morale breakers, tell someone that no one cares what you think or do, your efforts, thoughts and actions are meaningless.Avery powerful tool in breaking a person a favourite of child abusive parents we know what heroes they are, keep it up.

I love also the assumptions you make about such as it is my hope to work for the union, or to get noticed but sorry like most of your ideas with regards to me wrong again.I keep an active interest in my union because it affects me.I post here because there needs to be someone with another view on things in a discussion.If you do not like what I say then do not engage me, but if your going to post things without proof don't be surprised if I question it or if i have a different way of looking at things.

Rv many of the things i have stated above have been told to you by others, if you want to see change quit alienating everyone. I mean you have what over 600 members here and what about 5% or less post with any regularity?

My union acts for me when I need it because I treat them the way I wish them to treat me and until they do otherwise I will treat them the same, some of those who use to post here and who were on the opposite side of the decertification at my workplace I have discussions with about how we can make things better for us not because I bring up the negative in what they were doing but rather cause I know they were doing what they thought was best.You have to be flexible and willing to listen to others in order to effect change, all you seem to doing is taking yourself and this further and further away from the dues paying working people like myself and forming your own little elite group who does not wish to hear the thoughts of anyone who may disagree with you.

You want to be leaders in effecting change then act like it.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 5:53pm

Now that's a paid machine head talking!

For those of you who may have been wondering about the rather substantial differences in style and language usage between the most recent post by our friend Info and the previous ones - they're not the same person.

Clearly the Info who was sparring with me earlier today either had to go to work or to the bar or just became frustrated with the progress of our discussion and packed it in. Possibly his handler, the machine head who posted the most recent message, became concerned that he was making himself look a bit less than intelligent and felt a need to step in.

The most recent post is much smoother and is entirely focused on offering up the standard "diplomatic" response that we sometimes get from UFCW hacks when the going's getting tough.

So welcome UFCW Spokesperson. Glad you're here. We thought it would take you a while to appear since the fellas have been busy all day today trying to figure out what to do about that awful story that appeared on the weekend - you know, that one about how the UFCW took a big $2.85 million payment in the course of doing the RCSS deal - that one. They still haven't figured out what to do because every which way they turn, there's a snake pit but they'll work on it. Anyway, in response to your predictable effort to steer the discussion away from the $2.85 million payment and bail your apprentice out, here are a few thoughts to ponder.

Firstly, I have never considered either Reagan or Churchill to be great communicators. Reagan was a B-grade actor who had lost a good part of his faculties while still in office. I doubt that he ever wrote a single one of his speeches (they hire professional speech writers for that - really) or provided any meaningful input into one.

As for Winston Churchill, his oratory was a bit more crowd-pleasin' I'll admit, what with all the fighting on the hills and in the valleys and never surrendering but the bottom line is that Churchill was a racist, elitist, white supremacist who believed in a world order where the have's dominated the have not's and he made great contributions towards the establishment of just that world order.

Churchill didn't save the world from the Nazis, in case you're planning on telling us that. The Americans saved his sorry hide from Hitler's forces just in the nick of time. In exchange for their assistance, Winston promised to help them impose their preferred world order in the post war era.

Here's a quote of his that sort of sums up the kind of guy that he was:

quote:


The government of the world must be entrusted to satisfied nations, who wished nothing more for themselves than what they had. If the world-government were in the hands of hungry nations, there would always be danger. But none of us had any reason to seek for anything more. The peace would be kept by people who lived in their own way and were not ambitious. Our power placed us above the rest. We were like rich men dwelling at peace within their habitations. (Winston Churchill, The Second World War, Vol. 5)


The orthodoxy behind the domination of the many by the few has never been more eloquently articulated.

So I really don't consider either of these two oppressors to be great communicators. Great propagandists yes and that explains your admiration of them.

And that's a good segway into my response to your comments about our harsh and disrespectful communication style when it comes to the biz unionists. It's very funny that you accuse me of psychologically manipulating you by using terms like "machine head", "troll", "dumbass troll" (I think you forgot to mention that one) or saying that your union leaders are "fucking stupid". If you feel that way then I must say that I feel quite flattered. It means that we're making you uncomfortable.

Far from psychologically manipulating you, what the kind of sustained dissing that we do is intented to promote is a concept called liberating the mind from orthodoxies. In a general sense it works like this: Assholes who want to dominate you want you to think that they're powerful and you're weak. By treating them with deference, we reinforce their powerful image. By dissing them, we show people that they're just ordinary shmucks who have been busy hyping themselves. Dissing the powerful is an integral first step of disempowering them. Remember what Steve Biko said about that (if you don't know who he was, do a google search) - about the most dangerous enemy being the one that has outposts in your head? Well, it's about getting rid of the outposts.

I'm not sure what planet you guys live on when you're not in your offices posting on MFD forum. Everybody's getting dissed. Presidents, Prime Ministers, religious leaders, business leaders, everybody. Why the hell shouldn't we diss a bunch of union leaders? This is part of the problem. You guys think your shit doesn't stink and we keep reminding you that it does - and that you're full of it.

And speaking of the Nazis. Well, they always come up when machine heads get desperate. What mainstream biz unionists do to suppress free expression and persecute dissenters has a lot more in common with Nazi methods of suppressing free expression and persecuting dissenters than anything we can be accused of. Oh don't get yourself too worked up. I'm not saying to dumb shits kill people. That's too risky and you'd probably end up killing yourselves. But you do employ egregious tactics including the economic terrorism of many people. I equate your practice of suing members with their own money to the practice in Stalin's Russia (he was one of Winston's buddies and a great communicator too) of executing dissenters and sending their families a bill for the ammunition. I'd be interested in your comments on that.

As far as your comments about religiosity are concerned, I'm especially interested in apprentice machine heads who are also fundamentalists. I believe there is a strong nexus between organized religion and mainstream unionism. Indeed, my sense is that mainstream unionism took over where the church left off in relation to the control of working people. That's a whole discussion for another day - but the similarities between the MO's of organized religion and what is commonly understood to be organized labour are quite stark in my view.

I believe that people like Info the Apprentice are drawn to unions like the UFCW because it gives them a simpler less mentally challenging form of religion and a god that they can see, feel and touch and whose rewards are tangible. It also allows them to persecute heretics thus providing an outlet for the angst that comes from the feelings of inadequacy that must be quite common when one is so close to one's god all the time.

It's an area that is worth exploring and certainly worth discussing. It may also be quite helpful when it comes to liberating our minds from the orthodoxies of the church of the latter day machine heads.

BTW, I'm not a leftie. I don't buy into that left-right label bullshit. I can't stand the leftie orthodoxy or its proponents. They're boring and smug.

With respect to your concerns that we are alienating people with our strong expressive communications, you miss an important point.

We are not reaching out to the porky, the affluent, the smug or the multi-salaried. You guys can have your own clubs and spend you days groping each others' crotches (ooooooh, now that's inflammatory). I could care less if the whole - not very large - lot of you feel alienated. You're actually a very small minority within our society. We're reaching out to the disenfranchised who make up the majority of the community of workers. And we're connecting with them. You know it too. Never mind the number of registered users. You know and we all know about the frequency with which MfD material turns up your union meetings, in staff lunch rooms, in pointed questions to the porky and the smug. We don't measure success by numbers but by the contributions of people to their own community.

Every working person who connects with us, who tells us that thanks to our site they now understand things they suspected all along or that they felt were being kept secret from them, validates our reason for being. Every working person who tells us that they felt inspired by something - anything - on our site to stand up for themselves or to express themselves or to pursue an interest in writing or other expressive form (because they learned from their connection with us that they could do just that), encourages us. Every working person who has initiated a legal battle against their oppressive union and/or employer based on information they received here or through their contact with like-minded others, compels us to try even harder. Every aspiring writer, artist, journalist, activist who we have inspired (even in the smallest of ways) tells us that we are fulfilling our mission.

The connections that have been made by people with like minded others on this site over the past 4 years are awesome and have already made things happen. And we're only just beginning. When your dumbassed leaders learn the full magnitude of what has started on this web site, they will shit their pants, repeatedly, to a point where they might just disappear.

Unlike you corporate tools, we do not measure success in dollars or headcount. We measure success in ideas shared, people inspired and minds liberated from the the corpo-union brainwashing machinery.

So, having said all of that, we're not out to kiss your fat asses. And I'm not hearing a groundswell of support from the community of workers for your porkchoppers either. I don't know why you would think that we'd be interested in reaching out to you. I guess that's just a symptom of your arrogance and inflated opinions of your importance. Your mainstream biz unions shouldn't really be calling themselves part of any labour movement. A movement implies forward momentum and you don't have any of that - except maybe when you're on the runway heading for Vegas of Hawaii on the members' nickel. About the only movement that you guys have anything in common with is a bowel movement.

You represent a shrinking proportion of the working population. You can't organize a piss up at a brewery in the industries that employ the largest numbers of people (and we're tired of your whining about why this is so - maybe its you). Of the people you represent an embarrassingly small percentage actually follow your leaders. You guys are more like a fringe group than a movement. The only thing that keeps your porky keesters in those pricey SUV's is your ability to make it impossible for your members to dump you.

Who cares about you guys? Nobody. Most younger workers today blame unions like yours for the crappy deals their parents got shoved down their throats. People have evolved since the days of feudalism. The lord just doesn't look all that mighty anymore. Their parents blame your sleazy leaders for selling them out. Nobody buys your lame assed propaganda anymore. Nobody believes that you're really out there dedicated to advancing workers' interests. They believe your out there advancing yours. So why should they want to know you? Why should we? You guys have too many fleas. Go get sprayed.

So don't hold your breath waiting for us to show you some respect you dimwit. You're part of a dying order and a dying era. Maybe that's why you stink so badly. You're already dead.

Inflammatory enough for you?

quote:


We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the field and on the streets
....we shall fight on the Internet; we shall kick the asses of the labour fakers and hang their butt kissing machine head lackies out to dry. Then we'll put the screws to their corporate masters. Oh yeah, it's gonna be sweet. I'm gonna do it with wireless and some good tunes...Nothing suffocates you more than
the passing of everyday human events
Isolation is the oxygen mask you make
your children breath into survive

But I'm not a slave to a god
that doesn't exist
But I'm not a slave to world
that doesn't give a shit

And when we were good
you just closed you eyes
So when we are bad
we're going to scar your minds

fight, fight, fight, fight


That's Winston and me and Marilyn teaming up to inflame and inspire.

Anyway, it's been fun informing you. Hope you have a stronger sense of how hopeless your mission really is. Having apprentices like Info the Younger to school in the tricks of your trade can't make you life any easier.

I must say though, that your repeated visits and your boundless energy for propagating your tepid crap on our site is encouraging. You fear this site and the people who express themselves on it. Well, be afraid.

Have a nice night my machine head friend. See you in your nightmare.

Oh hey and please answer the following question: Do you deny that the UFCW accepted $2.85 million in payments from Loblaw Companies in the course of the RCSS negotiations? Could that be perceived as a payoff?

  • posted by siggy
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 6:21pm

quote:


That's Winston and me and Marilyn teaming up to inflame and inspire.


  • posted by Info
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 6:26pm

Now I am another person.You guys are not only cracking me up but some of my co-workers who post here both past and present.

The fact that you believe that the union leaders come here is funny, has Andy Stern ever posted here? I know you have asked him too.

Has Mike Fraser?

Has any national president of any of national or international union ever posted here?

Gee whiz you think rv that when you call people names they would run here to post,guess it is not working they're not here. Why do i have to be an official from the ufcw? Does it make you feel important enough that you try to belittle a dues paying member who works in a warehouse?Is there no glory in bashing a blue collar worker?

  • posted by weiser
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 7:32pm

quote:


The fact that you believe that the union leaders come here is funny, has Andy Stern ever posted here? I know you have asked him too.

Has Mike Fraser?


I seem to remember a post:

quote:


posted by UFCW Canada InfoServ:
I hesitate broaching this subject again in this forum, but, despite repeated attempts to clarify issues surrounding communications between UFCW Canada members and the Director, there continue to be a variety of misstatements or misunderstandings in various comments throughout this forum. Any allegation or suggestion that the Director of UFCW Canada has not or would not respond to communication with a member is incorrect and is treated with the utmost seriousness. I hope the following will set the record straight.

The Director of UFCW Canada (Michael Fraser) responds to all communication he receives from UFCW Canada members, although that response may be in the form of communication from someone he assigns to deal with the particular correspondence, which would be so indicated.

The Director of UFCW Canada is accessible by regular post (registered or otherwise), courier, telephone, and fax, through the addresses and numbers normally associated with the UFCW Canada National Office in Rexdale ON. All correspondence so received has and will continue to receive a response.

The Director of UFCW Canada does not currently and has never personally used e-mail as a form of communication. In the normal course of UFCW Canada administration, an e-mail account was established for him on the ufcw.ca domain, but legal issues surrounding a case of fraudulent e-mail purporting to come from the Director, from an outside source, have prevented him from doing so. The Director's e-mail account remains functional and is monitored by a staff member of UFCW Canada for messages of importance. It is possible that, from time to time, messages received and reviewed by UFCW Canada staff other than Michael Fraser may be brought to his attention and/or responded to by staff assigned to do so, but there is no guarantee that further action will be taken with regard to any communication received solely by e-mail to the Director's address. Additionally, response correspondence from an assignee of the Director could conceivably take the form of e-mail from that assignee, but would normally be responded to in a manner consistent with the original communication.

At one time, links to the Director's e-mail address appeared on the www.ufcw.ca web site. It was pointed out recently that this created an appearance of inconsistency with the foregoing policy, and the links have subsequently been removed. The e-mail account has not, contrary to statements within this forum, been disabled or otherwise altered, nor has the policy for its use been changed in any way.

Thank you for the opportunity to clarify this issue.
Mike Freeman
UFCW Canada Information Services


They come, they read and they sue. Info, don't bet yer momma's false teeth on the bet that the machine heads, even the most elite, don't come here and read, gnash their teeth and weep uncontrolably.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 7:52pm

You have some friends Info? Voices in your head? I know who your bed buddy is!

Info's recent demonic possession here is facinating. But it might be confusing to some readers. This will clear it up...

Info has been getting pummelled. He's got no support here (except for his silent 'friends') as all his posts are assinine drivel.

So DIY comes to play at MfD to try some sort of damage control... to take some heat off the guy doing more damage to the UFCW cause than good. Thinking he's now Super-Spinner, he immediately fucks up, incriminates the boys and has to retreat. 3 posts and see ya later. Although I think it's more that he was scared to meet me at Woody's than he was about answering RV's $2.85mil question.

But DIY is a mouthy fucker in need of a forum to try and salvage anything (because Info surely won't) and needs to get some desperate shots in. He can't use the DIY nickname anymore, because he'd have to face the questions.

So DIY uses Info's name to get the shots in, temporarily turning Info into a literate genius (in comparison to past posts).

And then the channelling is over and our favorite gimp is back.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 8:57pm

I'm sure that everyone here likes to think that 'Info' is a paid UFCW stooge,but unfortunatly for you (sometimes me too) I work with the guy,and I can tell you he is not.

I have talked to him about his possition regarding this union,and though I do not agree with a lot of his views,he is not the monster everyone makes him out to be.

I would also like to add that he was right when he said your bashing of God fearing people on this site could turn some people off.

I,like most of you can't stand the UFCW,however when I see the constant belittleing of people of faith,it makes me turn my computer off rather than learn how much this union stinks.

I'm not going to hold my breath,but I would like to see less religion bashing and more UFCW bashing

  • posted by DIY
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 9:33pm

[QUOTE] Posted by bb
Seriously in bad taste Info. All women are not in those jobs they can be lawyers, doctors and professors.

Is that the image the UFCW wants to project, as a supporter and UFCW insider you should really think before you write garbage. [QUOTE]


I don't even know where to begin. When the change of attitude Ben? Is this so you can stay in RV's good books? When did women even become good enough to work in your bakery? (let alone be professionals) Ahh… I mean the Loblaws Bake Shop since you're not a manager anymore. Would a female manager be capable of even doing the job you have been forced out of(in your opion). And before you answer that consider what former female and male staff of Loblaws Collingwood might say about that. I guess they can be doctors or lawyers and professors, just not leaders of any army or department.

[QUOTE] Posted by ISDU ImPotent
So DIY comes to play at MfD to try some sort of damage control... to take some heat off the guy doing more damage to the UFCW cause than good. Thinking he's now Super-Spinner, he immediately fucks up, incriminates the boys and has to retreat. 3 posts and see ya later. Although I think it's more that he was scared to meet me at Woody's than he was about answering RV's $2.85mil question.

But DIY is a mouthy fucker in need of a forum to try and salvage anything (because Info surely won't) and needs to get some desperate shots in. He can't use the DIY nickname anymore, because he'd have to face the questions.

So DIY uses Info's name to get the shots in, temporarily turning Info into a literate genius (in comparison to past posts). [QUOTE]

It's like a bad ad for the Globe and Mail, miss a day, miss a lot. Sorry to disappoint impy, I do have other things on the go in my life so I can't be here all the time like the guy behind the counter at 7-11. Or in an example you might better comprehend, the towel boy at Club Toronto. Have to take a pass on Woody's not really my scene… not that there's any thing wrong with it. Just think you should know that have me pegged wrong and I wouldn't want your misguided homosexual advances to be wasted on a strait kid. How does Benny Hin feel about your lifestyle?

Oh yeah, I killed Jimmy Hoffa… no I did'nt.

There you have it folks… concrete proof of who killed Hoffa, if its on MfD it has to be true.

Why would I admit I screwed up, say that I screwed up on the numbers that I read instead of edit the post like everyone else does here. I hear CBS news is hiring they love reporting rumors and hearsay as fact. Maybe they could ad a link to this site.

Super Spinning ?
well if any group would know I guess it would be MfD

  • posted by siggy
  • Tue, Jan 11, 2005 9:56pm

Welcome to MfD cmartin.

Ok everyone's had a nice off-topic turn - the question is: Did Loblaws Buy the RCSS Deal?

quote:


I would like to see less religion bashing and more UFCW bashing


Would you like to start cm?

  • posted by blasdell
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 5:41am

Hello DIY, you seem to intimate that you know me....do you? You sound an awful lot like PM who came here and edited all his posts after really shooting his mouth off.

There has been no change in my attitude toward women,I have been happily married to one for many years.

Seeing that the topic of this thread is in no way related to me and I am of very little consequence to you or my Union why are you concerned about me?

Do you know if Loblaws paid 1.5 million to the Union? Was it a pay off.....

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 6:11am

Just for purposes of clarification cmartin (welcome to the forum btw), the forum ID "Info" is used by a number of different people. The guy you know is one of them. There are others and their purpose in coming here - based on any objective assessment of their posts - is to disrupt discussion of issues that the UFCW would rather not see discussed, particularly in so public a venue.

They do this by engaging in behaviour that is intended to distract from the issue and by casting aspersions on other forum participants in the hope that anyone reading the stories-the-UFCW-would-prefer-nobody-knows-about will think that they can't possibly be true.

If you notice, in all of the posts made by the various Info's and the latest addition to their team - DIY, not a single one of them even broaches the subject raised by the article about the $2.85 million payments that Loblaw Co's agreed to make to the UFCW as part of the RCSS deal. That's what this discussion thread is about. Yet none of the B-Team Trolls (the A-team trolls must have decided to give this assignment a miss - and understandably) have even touched on this subject.
None of them have answered the questions posed in the article or asked repeatedly of them in this thread:

Did the UFCW accept payments totalling $2.85 million from Loblaw Companies as part of the RCSS deal? If so could this be perceived as a payoff?

In relation to the first question, none of them have flatly denied that the payments were part of the deal. None have said they were. None of them have stated that they don't know. They steadfastly dodge this question even though a simple "I don't know would be a good answer if they really don't know." In terms of the second question, it seeks an opinion from them. You don't have to know or acknowledge that the payments were made, you simply are being asked to offer up you opinion as to how payments of this kind might be perceived. You can offer up your own perception if you're too busy - or would rather not -think through how others might perceive them.

Nor have any of the UFCW defenders offered up any defence for these payments (or payments of this kind). Really, I was hoping that at least one of them might say something like, "Payments of these kinds are beneficial to the members in that they...." or "Payments of this kind are not likely to be perceived as payoffs because...". Or maybe, "A union is justified in keeping these payments secret from its members for the following reasons...." But noooooooo.

None of our B Team Trolls have touched these questions or the issue of the payments itself with a 10 foot pole.

They have instead, offered up the standard troll fare to which we have become accustomed whenever some news that is especially damning of UFCW leaders is posted on this site:

1. Criticize the site for posting the item.

2. Label those who are concerned about such egregious activities (like secret payments from employers to unions during bargaining) as "whiners", pigs, disgruntled sluts, waitresses with an axe to grind, etc.

3. Promote the notion that things might be bad but they could be a whole lot worse and encourage others to accept that being exploited and dold out in backrooms is just their lot in life.

4. Promote the notion that unions are simply in a position - for reasons that are not explained - where they just can't do much for their members. The members should just accept this and appreciate what little their unions are able to do for them (whatever that might be).

5. Impugne the motives of site participants without offering up any explanation of what they believe those motives to be or any basis for those beliefs.

6. Post disparaging comments and accusations about individuals who have been critical of the UFCW which they could not have obtained other than from UFCW officials.

7. Post comments that are so inane (i.e, whistleblowers should not be taken seriously unless they blow the whistle before the wrongdoing takes place) that their purpose cannot be anything other than to disrupt the forum.

The absence of any discussion on the part of our B Team of the issue of the $2.85 million payments to the UFCW and the nature of their comments makes it abundantly clear that they are hear for no honourable purpose. It has now been 4 days since the story about the $2.85 million payments to the UFCW was posted. To date, we have had no comment from any of the UFCW's defenders and spokespersons about the these payments - none whatsoever.

Look, if you behave in this manner, you invite criticism.

And just on that point, cmartin, I do not believe that anyone is criticizing "people of faith". The UFCW spokespersons and defenders are being criticized for their behaviour on this site and their persistent dodging of the issue raised in this thread (not their religious beliefs). Although they may be trying to wrap themselves in their faith as a means of escaping criticism, they are not holier than the rest of us when they are here.

Indeed, by identifying themselves as "people of faith" (please offer us a definition of what that means) they invite criticism of your activities here. It doesn't seem all that Christian to dissemble, spread false accusations, judge others, encourage others to follow false idols - does it? I'd be happy to hear your views on this.

In a broader sense, issues raised by the influence of the religious right are fair game for discussion on this site and many others (as are any other issues related to religion). That's how it goes in a free and democratic society although I can understand how UFCW adherents would have only a tenuous understanding of democratic principles.

I am rather curious about something and would like to heare from you UFCW adherents about this: If you can't stand open discussion of issues, including issues about which you have strong views, why do you come here? If you think that everything posted on this site is bullshit, why do you bother coming here? Why are unable to explain why it's bullshit or even discuss it? If you are unwilling to make the effort to engage in intelligent debate (i.e., discussion where you don't do the shit that's listed in points 1-7 above), why do you bother coming here?

I suggest to you that you are here because you fear the impact that the knowledge your members gain through this site will have on you, your chances of securing a prominent place at the trough, and on your almighty leaders.

So you come here to dissemble and to disrupt. Your efforts are facile and transparent and when you are called on the carpet for them, you keep coming back with the same childish pranks and predictable distractions. Why? Because the UFCW needs to maintain some kind of presence in our forum - even one that doesn't exactly enhance its image. The Info Handlers need to have someone here to distract the discussion about the serious issues - like the $2.85 million payments they accepted from Loblaw Co's - or members might start asking questions and demanding explanations.

When members ask you questions about what's going on in the workplace, you wrap yourselves in religion or offer up the default responses noted in 1 through 7 above - none of which even come close to explaining the behaviour of your union.

If I am wrong, then please prove me wrong by responding (without resorting to the behaviours in 1-7) to the following questions:

1. Did the UFCW accept $2.85 million dollars in payments from Loblaw Co's in the course of the RCSS negotiations? (That the UFCW accepted at least $1.35 million is a fact stated in the RCSS appendix).

2. If yes, could these payments (whether $1.35 million or $2.85 million) be perceived by members or by the public (this includes non-union workers in the service industry) as a payoff?

3. Assuming that a union (any union) accepted a substantial payment from the employer during the course of bargaining, are there any circumstances under which a union's leaders wouild be justified in keeping this payment a secret from the members?

4. Does the acceptance of such payments raise any moral or ethical issues? If so, what are those issues?

5. What do you think is meant by the following section of the Ontario Labour Relations Act and particularly the text that I've highlighted? Why do you think this section exists?

quote:


70. No employer or employers' organization and no person acting on behalf of an employer or an employers' organization shall participate in or interfere with the formation, selection or administration of a trade union or the representation of employees by a trade union or contribute financial or other support to a trade union, but nothing in this section shall be deemed to deprive an employer of the employer's freedom to express views so long as the employer does not use coercion, intimidation, threats, promises or undue influence. 1995, c. 1, Sched. A, s. 70.


6. If a union accepts a secret payment from an employer (that is, a payment that it does not disclose to its members) and that payment subsequently becomes known, what assurances do members have that the union has not received other secret payments in the past or will not accept secret payments in the future?

7. Given that the $1.35 million that we know Loblaws agreed to pay to the UFCW locals and the $1.5 million that we have learned it agreed to pay to UFCW Canada are not with respect to any pre-existing "fund" but are simply for "communications and education intiatives" what will these monies will be used for?

OK, there you go. Some good questions many of which simply ask for your opinion. Surely you are capable of formulating an opinion. (Remember though: When you offer up an opinion you should include the basis for that opinion.)

Those of you who are paid UFCW reps - please provide answers on behalf of UFCW Canada.

I'll check in later to see how you're doing.

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 6:50am

A follow up to my post of last night:

Here's a side of Winston Churchill that is not mentioned in the orthoxody about this "great communicator".

As for Ronnie Reagan, here's something that he actually said. Possibly one of his more insightful statements about anything.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 7:31am

Hi rv,
First ,when I said there is too much religion bashing on this site, I don't think I'm far off the mark on that one. Having an opinion on the topic is fine,but a few of the people on here have gone so far as to question the intelligence of people who believe in God (people of faith).
I am not a genious by any stretch,but I hope my belief in a creator does not make me mindless zombie.

Did UFCW get 1.5 mil extra for selling out their members? Most likely yes,but I would like some hard proof ,that kind of dirt could be gold in another union vote at the Grove and I would love to have some concrete evidence to pass around.

For the most part rv,(and everyone else) we are on the same page and I would hate to think my religeous beliefs might turn you against me too.

I would also like to tell everyone that EDelio sends his love,but his computer is a smoldering pile of rubble right now,he might not be back for quite some time.

  • posted by Info
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 7:34am

Yes cmartin I am many many people when you see me at work friday you may now call me eve or cybill.

Here's the thing rv IF the payment and it was secret, then why would the union call me up a dues paying member and tell me.I mean if something is suppose to be a secret do you tell everyone and anyone?

I haved answered before you can precieve anything the way you wish, didn't you ever study preception in school I did an interesting movie to watch with regards to how we precieve things or wish to precieve them is Being There rent it and see what I mean.

By the way just because you can not wrap your head around my answers or cannot understand how I can look at something from many angles does not make me dumb nor does it make you dumb.

It is okay though rv I understand why you get angry. I can spar with you all the while being honest about who I am and what I do, something you seem afraid to do.

by the way did you get Marylin's greatest hits?

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:25am

Hi cmartin and welcome

Re: The religion bashing, You must be fairly new to the site and I'm sorry you see this as the case, however I believe what you are referring to is actually retorts to a poster who instead of answering ligitimant questions chose to quote bible scriptures, and out of frustration at the lack of answers I chose to retort in the same manner.

I won't apologize but believe me it's not the norm.

Again welcome to MFD but beware all opinions are welcomed whether it be race, religion or politics and your and my beleifs are not the same as others but it's a great spot to air them.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 1:54pm

quote:


posted by NIGHTS:
Re: The religion bashing, You must be fairly new to the site and I'm sorry you see this as the case, however I believe what you are referring to is actually retorts to a poster who instead of answering ligitimant questions chose to quote bible scriptures, and out of frustration at the lack of answers I chose to retort in the same manner.


cmartin, if you're gonna play with religion, you gotta have a thick skin. I am not an atheist. I believe there is a ton of dimensional shit going on that I can't understand. My problem is with those that think they know/understand it all. They have the black-white answer to all religious questions. And then they lay that answer on others with no prompting and no backing. I call them on it with an opening 'fuck you' and most times they run. And I think 'good, fuck 'em'. You know why? Throwing a useless scripture and such at me is the same as swearing at me. Think along those lines... a baseless scripture = FUCK YOU in my mind. So I can be, and have the right to be, a highly offended equal of yours. I just don't run or sidestep the issue. And that's the difference. Unfortunately most of the religious types have to grow some balls to be able to hang out in an environment where their 'faith' actually gets tested. That's a rare quality. I only know of that cool bastard Jesus hanging out with the theives and whores (sorry guys, that's us). Tell me where the fundamentalists hang out these days. Bring 'em here and I'll dirty 'em up for you.

As for your friend Info, he's bullshitting you. Look at his past few posts and if you can come back here and say it's the same guy, I'll accept your FUCK YOU and just laugh.

And a welcome from me too.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 2:28pm

I just noticed that the last post was ISDU's 66th. That means it was infused with a powerful demonic energy that won't be felt again for another 600 posts. Try not to let its depraved message sear into your soul. Skip it. Tell the fundamentalists... DO NOT make eye contact with the screen- you'll turn to salt.

Put Info in the hamper for his own protection.

Focus on the $2.85mil, please. RV I don't know if the damage has been done. I wasn't prepared for 66. Allah help us.

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 2:45pm

Oh sweet Deepak Chopra!

The last post was number 66 in this thread. Shivering. What are the odds????

I'm drowning in a pool of Satan's black blood. And it's given me a craving for pizza. Gots to go. C y'all later!

  • posted by cmartin
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:17pm

When I see Info at work on Friday, you can bet I'm going to ask him what's up with these supposed multiple writers,I'm fairly sure he will tell me the truth, and I will let everyone know what he has say.

One thing I would like to know from Info is why he does not just use his real name,infact I ask that question to everyone here.If Info used his real name,anyone questioning who he is could just do some investigating and find out for themselves.

I have no problem assuming that the UFCW took the $2.85 million payoff,but I need some proof of it if I am going to use it against the UFCW in a possible decertification campaign at maplegrove.

I was on the last organizing committee for the CAW,and I will do it again if we need to.The only reason we would not do it would be if the UFCW got their heads out of the company's ass and negotiated a decent deal for us.

Given the unions history,we have a lot of work ahead of us at the grove.

  • posted by Info
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:22pm

I would change it to reflect my name as you asked but I can't as I am locked out of my profile.

Did you bring me back a slice isdu?

By the way isdu how do you expect me to answer questions regarding God without using His word the bible?

  • posted by cmartin
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:31pm

Can I use your real name Info? I hate this secretive shit!

  • posted by Info
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:32pm

Sure

Sorry, your profile has been specifically locked by the board administrators. This means that you may not make any changes to your registered profile information.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 8:37pm

I hope that everyone else can expose their true id's.I like to know who I am talking to,not some dumb alias

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 9:13pm

quote:


posted by cmartin:
I hope that everyone else can expose their true id's.I like to know who I am talking to,not some dumb alias


LOL. Was that what the purpose of the game was? To get the real names out? Mine is Satan's Third Ass-Cheek (it's an homage to Monty Python for any fans). Don't worry about the name... speak to me face to face anytime... just watch for exploding pimples.

cmartin, you had me somewhat respecting you until that one. Now I see you've become an Info whiny bitch. Why? There's no saving him. He's got cement boots on and just keeps on sinking.

Now we're off-topic again. I'm partly to blame, so I'll make up for it here. The questions...

Did the UFCW accept payments totalling $2.85 million from Loblaw Companies as part of the RCSS deal? If so could this be perceived as a payoff?

My 'opinion'... The c_______s took payments. They weren't reported because c_________s don't report c_________. Has it happened before? Of course it has. They're c_________s. You begin crooking from an early age. You graduate c______ville college (just outside of Cambridge) and get a good job in a c_________d office surrounded by c______k-minded individuals. So do I perceive it as a payoff? I'm still not sure what I really think! It's still such a tough question. RV can't you simplify it any more for us?



Ed: We can call them a lot of things but "crook" must be reserved for those who have been been busted by the long arm of the law. It's quite alright to call these UFCW crooks "crooks". It's perfectly fine to call this UFCW-associated crook a crook. This UFCW-pension-funded business guy is a "pardoned crook". But the boys who brought us the $1.5 million story are not technically crooks.

That said, you are free to use a lot of other descriptors that begin with the letter "c" and end with "k" (or any other letter that works). I'll leave it to your imagination to fill in the blanks. RV

  • posted by cmartin
  • Wed, Jan 12, 2005 9:58pm

ISDU,I'm not sure why my rather innocent query has got you all in a huff,but whatever the reason it seems you already have me pegged as a "whiny bitch" because I am not beating Dan(Info)over the head with a blunt object,sorry but I can't slander someone because I don't agree with everything he has to say.

don't forget,I actually know him as a person and a co-worker,and though we don't see eye to eye on a number of issues,I think he is a decent guy who means well,he just has too much faith in the UFCW.

Instead of shit'n on him all of the time,why not try and understand him and have a meaningful discussion that doesn't end with you calling him names.(you catch more flies with honey)

  • posted by remote viewer
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 6:26am

OK, I asked a number of questions related directly to the subject of this thread. cmartin took a shot at answering one and gave what I think is an honest answer.

Our verbose friend Info could manage only this insightful comment:

quote:


Here's the thing rv IF the payment and it was secret, then why would the union call me up a dues paying member and tell me.I mean if something is suppose to be a secret do you tell everyone and anyone?

I haved answered before you can precieve anything the way you wish, didn't you ever study preception in school I did an interesting movie to watch with regards to how we precieve things or wish to precieve them is Being There rent it and see what I mean.


Info, you have still neither confirmed nor denied that the payments were made. Nor have you stated flatly that you don't know. Your question - "Why would the union call you and tell you if it was a secret?" is a deliberate dodge. If you don't know then maybe one of the other "Info's" who posts under this ID could venture an explanation.

"Perception" means "how does it look". You don't have to study perception to respond to the question. If you don't know what it means, consult a dictionary. It's really a pretty simple concept. What you were asked is "How might such a payment look to a member? Might members perceive that the union took a payoff in exchange for the concessions that it gave the company and also in exchange for its agreement to deny members the opportunity to ratify the deal?"

This is a question that seeks an opinion. Surely you are capable of expressing one.

Now, let's get back to the issue. There have been far too many efforts to distract from that. We've let the discussions proceed in the hope that they might eventually lead there but they haven't.

I'm going to suggest to those of you who want to pursue a discussion about religion consider starting a separate thread about that. Those of you who are interested in why participants in online forums post under aliases, read this. It will give you some insight into why this is a common practice - especially on union reform sites. If you have some views about the use of alternate ID's that you'd like to share, feel free to start a new thread about that.

As far as the payments that Loblaw Companies made to the UFCW during the RCSS negotiations, my view is that this is reprehensible behaviour in which the union should not have engaged. It's bad enough that it took a significant payment from the employer but the following other factors make the whole scene positively stink of payola:

1. The negotiations, which took place over several months, occurred during the term of the collective agreements and were kept secret from the members.

2. The negotiations resulted in an agreement that clearly will affect existing members and future members.

3. The payments to the locals, while not secret (reference to them is included in the RCSS appendices) was not otherwise disclosed to members. The payment to the National Office was never disclosed at all.

4. The UFCW organization clearly will benefit from these payments. Their purpose is vague - so general in fact that it could relate to any activities loosely related to "communications" or "education". How the members will benefit from these payments is a mystery.

5. In the event that the payments are to be used to promote the company's interests, I suggest that that is improper.

6. Members have never received an explanation of why their union accepted these payments or what purposes they will be put to. Nor are members entitled to any accounting of how these funds will be (or are being used). Nor have members received any explanation of the role that these payments played in bringing the negotiations to a conclusion.

7. Members have no way of knowing if this the first time that the National Office has received such payments from an employer or if it will be the last.

Comments?

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 7:21am

Why would it matter what I say on this topic, I have told you previously that I am one person, other posters have told you who I am, but you still refuse to believe who I am.

I understand why you do not wish to believe me, I mean if your wrong (and you are) about who I am then what else have you been wrong about? You fear that you will lack creditability in front of the ones here whose admiration you seem to need.Also it can not look to good, you in a position of authority as moderator beating down on a blue collar work such as myself, I mean where is the glory in that? Isn't that what you tell us that the union leaders have been doing to us?So how are you any different?

Back to the topic at hand taking let's your word for it and say the national did get 1.5 million IF they did and they were to use that money to organize the wal-marts through out Canada thus removing the company threat of competition by non union shops, then it is short term bump in the road on the way to getting a long lasting solution. Or IF they did get the 1.5 and it is used to fix any shortfall in the pension then someone like bb should not have a problem with it. I mean he has said before that he has no problem with low seniority employees being laid off or fired to protect higher seniority employees, and who is higher in seniority than those who have already spent their lives working to retirement, I mean these are the same people who fought before us to get us what we have today. But like I said this is based on the assumption that the National did get a payout.

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 7:25am

I am back. Borrowing a computer right now,my motherboard is toast. Listen Craig, don't let ISDU get to you. He is the consumate "Devils Advocate." Just enjoy the humour of his posts and relax. His "in your face" anti-religious-establishment comments are guilded as to invoke a free thought or two. He makes sense. As for Info\Happy\Fedup, Dan,,,, let me ask you a simple question that will sum up all your views as of late. Due to the constant badgering you take on this site, do you disagree with everyone here out of spite or is it some sort of Pavlovian conditioned response? And finally, in closing, do you believe, given the track record of the store level representation and that of the warehouse, does the UFCW deserve to remain the bargaining agent for the Maplegrove warehouse?

ps..... a lil advice,,stop referring to G. Dubya as your modern day hero and " the man who has done more to help the world than anyone before". It shows a level of willing ignorance that leaves any intellectual discussion as an act of futility!

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 7:34am

The extra 1.5 mill being referred to aside, what do you think about the contract that is available in the RCSS places. You know,the cuts? There is your simple math for ya. Don;t forget that these concessions were done without member ratification. Do you still believe the Walmart threat? Do you think a union can justify concessions without ratification with a company that has broken profit records hand over fist over the past few years? Thats what I don't understand about you Dan. I am 97.5% sure that you are not under the employ of the UFCW so I have such a hard time coming to grips with the fact that you cant see the obvious torts here. Concessions and a pay-off! It can't be more clear than that.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 8:24am

quote:


posted by Info:
say the national did get 1.5 million IF they did and they were to use that money to organize the wal-marts...... Or IF they did get the 1.5 and it is used to fix any shortfall in the pension then someone like bb should not have a problem with it.


If the national recieved money, under what authority did they recieve it?? they have no contract with Loblaws, that I know of, and OUR contract was altered.

If the money is for Walmart organizing....Ontario walmarts are a better place to start and will benefit US more than Jonquiere or Saskatchewan.

If the money is for the pension....let us know it is in trouble and in need of assistance. and take the steps to get it on sound footing like replacing those responsible for money mismanagement...dont lower thousand of weekly paychecks.

Just to be clear info, THREAT of job loss is not the same as job loss.

I am not in favour of people losing their employment but if we have to endure pain, as a group, seniority is the best system.

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 8:52am

Welcome back Eric, my support for the union has something to do with what i learned working with kids from troubled homes, you will usually get better results through encouragement and support than by name calling. If you you believe that someone is going to try their best they usually will, the same can be said of our unions if we stand behind them and believe they are trying their best then hopefully they rise to the occasion.Yes there may come a time when you have to cut your losses but as we are entering contract talks now is definitely the time to support them.Oh and I do believe a union that is really trying organize the likes of companies like wal-mart does need all of our support.

bb do you think that maybe Quebec and Sask were selected as they may have more union friendly laws?

Have you gone into a wal-mart anywhere in north America and asked what the baker there makes?

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 8:52am

Info, look at it this way:

You're driving your uninsured car down the highway. An impaired person broadsides you, and he too has no insurance on his car. You sustain serious injuries but may eventually recover. You receive a substantial fine for driving your car without insurance, but you may be due substantial money from the impaired driver whose fault it is that you are injured.

You hire a lawyer.

Your lawyer, unbeknownst to you, cuts a deal with the guilty driver's lawyer. You're lawyer gets the guilty driver to pay $1 million in cash, but your lawyer doesn't tell you that.

Your lawyer takes the $1 million, pays his fees, and tells you that his services are pro bono. He pays off your fine and tells you he beat the rap for you. He pays for the repairs on your car and tells you that there apparently was a mistake, you actually were insured for collision, so you get a used, but good, car to replace your demolished one. The lawyer on his own resolve decides that the rest of the money would be best spent by giving it to a drinking-driving awareness program.

He tells you, there, you have a car to drive, no legal fees, no fine to pay and you will get over your injuries with a little time, exercise and right eating.

When you find out what the guy did, do you say:

a) Hey you are the best lawyer in the land. Thank you. Thank you.
b) You mealy bastard! How dare you settle without consulting me about the terms!? How dare you take my settlement in secret!? How dare you spend my award without my advice, knowledge or permission!?

After this, you find out that your lawyer's brother got involved and got $1 million in damaged from the guy who hit you too. However, you don't have a clue what happened to that money, ‘cept it may benefit you somehow.

I'm not even going to take a guess at what you might say when you found that out.

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:05am

Okay if I am driving uninsured then I am breaking the law, the other driver also so we will answer before a judge.

Now if the lawyer has done something illeagal he will be can be taken before a judicial panel much the same bb asked for a hearing before the orlb. Now if they rule it was legal then I have the choice to make appreciate what i have take a lesson from it and take the steps to make sure it does not happen again like purchase insurance and move on or do I dwell on it and in the process cost myself money, time and health?

I am going to go with the first choice myself.

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:15am

For Gods sake DAn,, the union isn't some child thats been molested!! You live on mars dont you? I will gladly have patience for a kid but not for a bunch of corrupt adults who sell out the same members who pay thier salaries!!!! Pull your head out of your ass!!

  • posted by cmartin
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:17am

In my humble opinion,It doesn't matter what the union does with the money,dirty is dirty.
Dan what if they got the money by shaking down some mom and pop operations in return for a little protection.or beat the crap out of some guy on the street and took his wallet,does it make it less wrong as long as they put the money to good use?

I know you are a guy with pretty strong morals Dan ,and I have a hard time trying to figure out why you would let something like that slide.

There are no verying degrees of wrongness,wrong is wrong no matter how you slice it.

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:25am

Well let's see if it did happen first.I mean we do not want to end up in a WMD situation and find out there is faulty information out there.

  • posted by edelio
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:34am

Your "blinders on" routine is getting real old. Every single weapons inspector in Iraq told the prez there weren't any WMDs.Chalabi was the guy who said there was. Thats besides the point tho. The real problem here is you cannot come to grips with blatant evidence. Time and time again its been dropped in your lap to look at no matter which topic you choose to pipe up in yet you incessantly disregard it as "propoganda". Some of the older posters here may get this , "You sir, are a willy-wog, sir." There is no saving you Dan because you are naive and sheltered. Its as if you argue the contradictory facts in front of you due to some notion that you can't handle popping the bubble you live in........g'by,,work time

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 10:43am

Eric at work one time you and I had a discussion regarding the history of the democrats, during which I brought examples of brutality, stuffed ballot boxes, the drafts and resistance to the civil rights movement. You are able to find documented reports of how crooked mayor Daly and LBJ were how Kennedy Sr was a Nazi sympathizer and yet you said more people should be raising their children to be democrats.

Now do I tell you that you are blind, that you refuse to accept facts or do I accept that fact the you see good in the Democratic party and show you tolerance?

  • posted by BillPearson
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 11:28am

Here's the deal info...do you honestly think the folks at mfd would have posted this if they didn't have solid information? While we may bang heads from time to time, the reason i came and stayed because what they were saying was important for members to hear.

Even more disturbing is the fact that if this kind of payment was made in the US, there would be hell to pay. It is patently illegal for a union to take money from an employer.

I always thought Canada had better labor laws, but the shit that is going on there is mind boggling. Between the CCWIPP, the Loblaws deals and the failure to properly conduct democratic elections, workers/members should be up in arms.

There will never be a revitalized free trade labor movement until this crap is flushed as far out to sea as they can get it. Shameful is being very generous. Whay is even more disturbing is people trying to defend it. The boys won't, why are you?

  • posted by hellraiser
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 1:24pm

Info gave me a precious image of his work with kids. I'm wondering how he dealt with the one in the corner, thumb in mouth, shaking his head no, no, no, no, no, then removing thumb, hands on ears, singing 'blah, blah, blah, I don't hear you'.

Help the people learn to deal with you, Info. give 'em some pointers.

Thanks for the 'Devil's Advocate' line edilio. But I'm kinda infringing on Bill Pearson territory. I'll have to clear up the legal stuff with him.

And RV... That edit was sick! I vomitted with delight. What else can I call them that begins with a C and ends with a K?? That bunch of cranks!!

I love your mind

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 2:03pm

Bill isn't the 789 looking for employer assistance with the organizing of non-union competitors?

Before you get up in arms about the idea of democracy some of those who advocate it have also told me the idea of certain people voting scares them as it affects their future.

By the way have I ever said that I defend dishonest actions?

As I recall all I have said is I can see both sides, and I have chosen to air out the other side (guess I am the devil's advocate)and I would like some proof, and as you have asked before also why not post the good done also.

But that said at the same time I am not going to sit by and watch the efforts by good people be bashed because a of a few bad apples. When the ufcw So Cal strike was bashed here, it lumped in the efforts of all including those on the line, when in effect they set the building block for all the new contracts that the locals are in the process of getting now, the 588 got a better deal than those in So Cal and hopefully each successive local will build on what the last one got.

  • posted by weiser
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 3:13pm

Info said:

quote:


But that said at the same time I am not going to sit by and watch the efforts by good people be bashed because a of a few bad apples....


Some of the good apples of whom you speak are the ones that enable the bad apples to set rot to the whole barrel.

  • posted by blasdell
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 3:36pm

quote:


posted by Info:
So Cal strike was bashed here, it lumped in the efforts of all including those on the line, when in effect they set the building block for all the new contracts that the locals are in the process of getting now, the 588 got a better deal than those in So Cal and hopefully each successive local will build on what the last one got


How would you like to have been one of those strikers?

It was an utter defeat. It was totally mismanaged.
They could have kicked butt. They had a broad base of support, Government sided with them but there was no leadership. The Longshoremans Union
was was with them.

How much more do the people need in order to stop the erosion of their way of life?

The Union took down an important picket of a warehouse at a critical time and cut the benefits of strikers just before X-mas. In one case strikers chased the Union rep away.

Is that the way it should be handled? If you happen to go out on strike do you want to settle for something less than you have so that some other brother can be saved in another part of the country?

If they had won the strike and stopped the benefit concessions ....what would the other contract negotiations look like?

That strike was a disaster and the Union should be ashamed of its management.

  • posted by BillPearson
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 6:43pm

quote:


Bill isn't the 789 looking for employer assistance with the organizing of non-union competitors?


I figured the point of the 789 post was for that purpose and am delighted you finally got to it. Here's the answer: In every circumstance of going to the table looking for a joint labor management venture, it began at and with the members approval. It also would have taken membership approval for it ever to have happened.

It also was a jointly managed fund we proposed where members would have had input as to how the money was spent. The idea of a secret deal being cooked and done behind closed doors sickens me.

quote:


But that said at the same time I am not going to sit by and watch the efforts by good people be bashed because a of a few bad apples. When the ufcw So Cal strike was bashed here, it lumped in the efforts of all including those on the line, when in effect they set the building block for all the new contracts that the locals are in the process of getting now, the 588 got a better deal than those in So Cal and hopefully each successive local will build on what the last one got.


I hope you are saying this tongue in cheek info. I have the Northen CA settlement in hand and it is nothing but a massive concessionary contract. We are talking about cutting employer costs by 100's of millions of dollars over three years.

I defended the UFCW two years ago on this site, i was openly complimentary of the "good things." I still speak of them when it serves the purpose.

Unfortunately, the things that have happened in the last two years make my skin crawl. The leadership has failed the membership and several of us are actively working to instill a reform movement within locals that see the fallacy of this failed biz union model...and especially of those UFCW presidents who are feeding off the members.

quote:


Some of the good apples of whom you speak are the ones that enable the bad apples to set rot to the whole barrel.


Weiser's point should not fall on deaf ears. As long as these good guys continue to allow this shit to continue, they are just as guilty.

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 7:05pm

No Bill I posted it because 1 I thought it would be of particular interest to you and also because it involves the UFCW.

I bought the part about companies and unions working together in response to this comment.
"It is patently illegal for a union to take money from an employer."
It was only after this that i went back and brought it up, I try not to get involved in slamming unions there is enough of it here.Yes I did it before to the CAW but the only thing I proved is disgruntled members willing to complain publicly can be found in any union.To be honest I would rather see CAW and UFCW along with the other unions in Canada work together and harder and smarter to preserve a decent living for all while keeping them employed.

But you know Bill think whatever you want about I don't really care if I was worried about what others thought about me I would be a politician.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 8:25pm

Dan, this might be a stupid question,but if you could change one thing about this union,what would it be?

  • posted by Info
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 8:53pm

If I was to change something it would be in communication aspect. I would love to see things such as interactive forums for our local, so for instance if something happens in the workplace it can be reported that day or night and if there is a resolve that can be posted we all see the results. It would also allow those taking the lead to keep in touch with those that they are leading and for them to get an idea where they would like to head.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 9:07pm

If I remember correctly Dan,that was what I told you we did in Kitchener.
We were always kept posted on the progress of our grievences by way of memo on the union bullitin board.
I agree that it is a good idea,but it doesn't even scratch the surface of what the UFCW needs to do to get the bad taste out of their members mouths

  • posted by siggy
  • Thu, Jan 13, 2005 10:15pm

quote:


I agree that it is a good idea,but it doesn't even scratch the surface of what the UFCW needs to do to get the bad taste out of their members mouths


It used to be that labour precedent was something to lust after!

Isn't one of the objectives of unionism to challenge corporate encroachment at every opportunity - to make labour ground - if employers understand you're coming at them at their every wrong move, it stands to reason there would be far less wrong moves - advantage aggressor! At this point in ufcw - I would settle for visible.

  • posted by eddy munster
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 5:26am

I guess everyone has a price. These 3 unions had a price and Loblaws delivered and now they work for the company. These guys crossed the line, have they no shame?

  • posted by BillPearson
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 5:38am

quote:


To be honest I would rather see CAW and UFCW along with the other unions in Canada work together and harder and smarter to preserve a decent living for all while keeping them employed.


So would i info, but what you are seeing is hardly the union and the employer working together. I have worked with employers to "fix" problems, but what you are seeing here is the union simply giving the employers what they want.

The shit that is going down in california and around the country is anything but bargaining. The employer is coming with an agenda and the unions are simply giving up the gains they have made over the past 30 years.

Ya gotta ask yourself, where does that leave the members? If the employer having a contract with 588 save 200 million dollars in labor costs, whose pocket does that come out of? And that says nothing about what happens as the cost of living skyrockets and workers fall further behind.

Eventually the UFCW will simply implode. You can't pretend to be a union when the only thing you can do is giveback pieces of your contract...eventually there is nothing to give back...and then you are done.

There has always been a fine line in when to fight and when to compromise. Unfortunately, the decisions being made by the UFCW are all about the organization surving while the members are losing. Even you has to see that picture and how pathetic it truly is.

  • posted by edelio
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 6:39am

"and yet you said more people should be raising their children to be democrats."........ honest to God man,,,where do you get this crap from? I have never said that Dan. You are greatly mistaken if you think I believe we should all be democrats. I will leave the "team cheering" for my hockey passions ,not for important social issues. Once again you go looking for contradiction instead of listening. You see Dan, I do not believe in this concept that you seem to live by that requires me to pledge my undying support for "whatever" the leaders of this world "think is best for me."

"By the way have I ever said that I defend dishonest actions?",,,,no,, you just think that if we wait,give the union a hug, tell them we know you guys are tryin yer best, they will magically stop what it is they are doing to its members in time. Weren't you the one who thought the union did all it could under the circumstances when it agreed to the RCSS appendix?

  • posted by Info
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 7:31am

Actually you said that when I had told how my ex-girlfriend's daughter came home from school and told her mom that the teacher told them they should tell their parents to vote for Kerry.

Under the circumstances yes.The threat of job loss is a real concern when a company already has 26 banners and a tax loop hole that allows them to close and rebuild and write the whole thing off.Okay Eric what would you do, your in the hot seat now, the company has said to you they will start to close down more stores and re-open under new banners offering less money and less benefits and no union protection. Now you do not know which stores, you do not who is employed in these stores if they could afford a fight with the company or to lose their jobs, let's say in the first store there are 3 single mothers who all lose their jobs and a few guys with families.On top of that you are told if you go to the members and ask them the deal comes off the table as if it was never offered.So what do you upset some of the members by taking the offer or risk peoples livelihoods and tell them no way?

  • posted by edelio
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 8:15am

I give up on you Dan. Only a kidnapping coupled with a de-programming will help you. You are as thick as a brick, hopeless.What discourages me is that your words are given too much attention here.I swear you were raised in a bubble. Heck,why not just change yer handle to "bubble boy".At the chance that I may have uttered those words in jest we spoke of before,it proves my point. That being that you don't listen, you have absolutely no clue about the world we live in , and whomever taught you the bullshit you spew, disregarding the facts as they are smashed in your face, they should be ashamed. I for one will love to be there when the bubble bursts.

PS..... don't bother me at work about any of this crap,,its one thing to argue on a forum, I can't promise restraint on my part if we speak in person anymore.

PSS...just let Kevin do the thinkin for ya from now on buddy!!!

  • posted by NIGHTS 046
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 8:20am

quote:


On top of that you are told if you go to the members and ask them the deal comes off the table as if it was never offered.So what do you upset some of the members by taking the offer or risk peoples livelihoods and tell them no way?


I just abducted your child, Do you pay me or go to the police?

It seems to me by paying, you have just risked both your money and your child.

  • posted by weiser
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 8:24am

Okay, let's get back to the part where Loblaw Companies Industrial Relations Vice President Roy Conliff tells National Director Michael J. Fraser that the $1.5 million in annual installments is a deal.

I think that the best thing that any of the Infos could do is to march right into his handler's office and say, "Hey, let's put our position in writing, pdf it and send it to those pesky MFD bastards, so they can post the answer right from the bovine's mouth."

I'd like to see them deny it, which they probably won't. Better, yet, maybe they could tell all the members exactly what the money has been used for and exactly how much is left.

  • posted by Info
  • Fri, Jan 14, 2005 8:24pm

There is more than one info. Have I been cloned or do I have imitators?

  • posted by M Raymond
  • Sat, Jan 15, 2005 1:05am

HOW TO RESIST LOBLAWS CONCESSIONS

The reason the UFCW is so hated by not only many posters on this website, but a great many in the trade union movemenet is because the UFCW undermines the bargaining positions of other unions by accpeting concessions.

If the UFCW had any ethics or leadership they would resist lowering the standards to non-union levels, especially the continueing trend to part-time workers. This is what the Retail Wholesale union did with Westfair in the 80's and 90's. Unfortunately, the UFCW was all to willing to accept concessions for dues. That is why they were given the voluntary recognition clauses. This kept other more militaint unions out.

If the so-called leaders of the UFCW had any backbone, they would resist these changes, take it to the OLRB and fight it out from there. It's the members work that is moving to these stores or banners and successorship rights should be easy to win IMO. For the UFCW to attempt to weazle a mandate to engotiate under these terms is a smoke screen. There is a solid legal case here that should be argued. Anything less is a sell-out of the member's interests. Learn from this site and you will see countless examples of this.

If they lose fine. Find another way to fight it. It's far too easy to hide behind the members and say that jobs will be lost. Leaders accept that they can't win a total victory and move on. But they don't back away from their principles. Where there's a will there's a way.

  • posted by Info
  • Sat, Jan 15, 2005 8:25pm

Not to be mean or burst your bubble but guess what inside the labour movement there is much hatered between unions at times. It is one of those gifts now that you can choose your union. It is great a spirit of competition between the labout oraganizations that keeps them so preoccupied that the corporate interests can slide right in and do as they please.so now instead of building one another up you end up tearing down.

  • posted by cmartin
  • Sat, Jan 15, 2005 8:44pm

There should be competition.it keeps people on their toes(or should),and idealy would make them hungry to do the best they can for the members.

Although you would think the UFCW would have pulled up their socks after their very narrow win at Maplegrove,but they have been M.I.A since the vote.

  • posted by eddy munster
  • Sun, Jan 16, 2005 9:31am

When can we apply to DECERTIFY these crooks? Does this early negotiations nullify any chance to decertify this union because of the timeline? Is it 3 months before a contract ends in order to apply for decertification?

  • posted by cmartin
  • Sun, Jan 16, 2005 11:17am

I'm not sure of the timeline or the open period at the store level,but it is something you could look into just incase.
Explore all of your options!

© 2018 Members for Democracy