-
News and Updates
April 16, 2007
SUPERMARKET WORKERS NATIONWIDE CALL FOR GOOD JOBS AND AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE
WASHINGTON, DC — Grocery workers are standing up to protect good jobs with affordable health care in communities across the country. Members of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) International Union in eight markets are holding store events today and sending a unified message to supermarket giants.
Supermarkets chains nationwide, like Supervalu, are refusing to agree to provide the affordable health care and living wages their employees deserve. Communities may end up paying the price, with taxpayers shouldering the burden of government paid health care.
Workers are taking action and reaching out to customers at Supervalu-owned stores in Southern California, Oregon, Seattle, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Chicago, and Philadelphia. Workers at Kroger stores in Toledo and Houston are bargaining with the company now and holding press events in solidarity with the national action.
UFCW members at Supervalu-owned stores – Albertsons, Jewel, Cub Foods, and Acme stores, are concerned about Supervalu’s bargaining agenda with workers in other markets.
“It’s really important that everybody throughout the country has decent contracts, with benefits and wages that allow them to support their families,” says Eileen Fonseca, a Supervalu-owned Acme worker and a member of UFCW Local 1776 in Philadelphia.
Albertsons (Supervalu) workers in Southern California were locked out by the company in a bitter five-month-long strike/lockout in 2003 and 2004. Now, Albertsons (Supervalu) employees there have already voted to authorize a strike due to the company’s irresponsible position at the bargaining table. The current contract expired last month.
“”I want to provide a good life for my family, and I work hard for my employer. Now that the employers are making such huge profits, I think they need to show grocery workers and our families the respect we deserve,” said Sharlette Villacorta, UFCW Local 770 member who works at Albertsons, in Los Angeles, Calif.
With more than 400,000 grocery workers at the bargaining table this year, UFCW members have launched Grocery Workers United – www.groceryworkersunited.com – as a clearinghouse for unity actions.
“We all do the same jobs, and we all work hard,” said Mike Newman, a Kroger worker from Toledo and member of UFCW Local 911. “We just want to be able to pay our bills, and I think the community understands that. They know what you need to make a living wage here.”
The actions today are all part of a growing national unity bargaining movement among UFCW members working in the grocery industry.
This year, 400,000 UFCW members working the grocery industry will be negotiating contracts with their employers, seeking to improve jobs for all grocery workers. The UFCW represents 1.3 million workers, with nearly one million in the grocery industry.
April 5, 2007
TALKS BREAK OFF BETWEEN GROCERY WORKERS AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUPERMARKETS
Washington DC—The announcement of a mutual aid pact among Southern California Grocers—Albertsons (Supervalu), Ralphs (Kroger) and Vons (Safeway)—hastily ended contract talks between the supermarket chains and their employees represented by seven United Food and Commercial Workers Local Unions (UFCW).
“The supermarkets are up to their old tricks,” said UFCW International Vice President and Region 8 Director Shaun Barclay. “This pact fits the same pattern of their actions three years ago when they forced UFCW members and their families into the streets and disrupted shoppers for nearly five months in a grab to end meaningful health care coverage for employees.”
Talks with national supermarket chains had been ongoing in Southern California for nearly three months.
In the meantime, Stater Bros. and Gelson’s—two smaller Southern California regional chains—and the UFCW reached model agreements, providing wage increases, the end to second-class status for new workers and a return to providing affordable, quality health coverage for all employees.
Supervalu, Kroger, and Safeway all enjoy annual sales that are 10 to 20 times bigger than Stater Bros. and Gelson’s. The smaller chains don’t have the economies of scale in their warehousing and distribution networks, nor do they have the clout with major manufacturers and vendors that the national chains command. And they face the same non-union competition in the Southern California market that is overwhelmingly unionized.
“Given that the big grocers say they want to ‘serve the interests of our employees, customers, and companies,’ it’s a no-brainer for these national companies to reach a settlement along the lines of the Stater Bros. and Gelson’s agreements,” said Barclay. “They’re making record profits and hold dominant positions in markets across the country where they operate.”
“But,” he continued, “forming this pact speaks louder than words. It certainly appears that the big grocers have no interest in recognizing UFCW members for their partnership in the impressive success of their companies. It seems they have no interest in the effects their position will have on employees, families, shoppers and communities.”
Approximately 400,000 UFCW members are negotiating contracts with retail food operators in 2007. Most work for Kroger, Safeway or Supervalu. Talks have begun in the Puget Sound area, Eugene, Oregon, Houston, and Toledo, Ohio.
“”UFCW members across the country are tuned in to what’s happening in Southern California. They know everyone, including their customers, has a stake in what happens in these negotiations out here,”” said Barclay.
March 19, 2007
Responding to AFL-CIO, UFCW Lawsuit, Bush Administration Agrees to Issue Safety Equipment Rule for Employees
In response to a lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), the Bush Administration has agreed to issue a final rule on employer payment for personal protective equipment (PPE) for employees. In 1999, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) first proposed a PPE rule that would require employers to pay the costs of protective clothing, lifelines, face shields, gloves and other equipment used by an estimated 20 million workers to protect them from job hazards.
“We applaud the decision to finally issue a final rule on employer payment for their employees’ protective equipment” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. “This rulemaking has taken far too long. We will be monitoring the Department of Labor’s actions to make sure they honor this commitment and issue a strong, protective rule.”
On January 3, 2007, the AFL-CIO and UFCW filed a lawsuit against the Bush Administration over its failure to finalize the payment for PPE rule. The court ordered the Bush Administration to respond to the lawsuit by March 19. On March 14, the Secretary of Labor filed papers with the court committing to issue a final rule in November 2007.
“This is a victory for workers who have suffered needlessly while awaiting action by the Bush Administration,” said Joe Hansen, UFCW International President. “According to OSHA’s own estimates, 400,000 workers have been injured and 50 have died while the rule has been in limbo. We expect a strong final rule this November.”
Workers in the meatpacking, poultry and construction industries, and low-wage and immigrant workers are most vulnerable to injury.
The rule was first announced in 1997 and proposed in 1999 by OSHA after a ruling by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission that OSHA’s existing PPE standard could not be interpreted to require employers to pay for protective equipment. The rule proposed in 1999 did not impose any new obligations on employers to provide safety equipment; it simply codified OSHA’s policy that employers, not employees, have the responsibility to pay for it.
In 1999, OSHA promised to issue the final PPE rule in July 2000. But it missed that deadline and has missed every self-imposed deadline since. The agency has failed to act in response to a 2003 petition by the AFL-CIO and UFCW and numerous requests by the Hispanic Congressional Caucus.
March 16, 2007
WAL-MART GIVES UP ON FIGHT FOR BANK
The United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) is pleased that Wal-Mart has withdrawn its application for an ILC and hopes that federal and state lawmakers will now pass legislation that will prevent retailers like Wal-Mart from entering the banking business and jeopardizing the nation’s economy.
Last month, the FDIC extended the moratorium on ILCs, giving Congress another year to consider whether to prohibit companies from acquiring their own banks. There is broad-based opposition to Wal-Mart’s plans, and an unprecedented number of people have registered comments with the FDIC. Just yesterday, the New York Times reported on new evidence that suggested Wal-Mart’s ambitions in banking may extend beyond what the company publicly admits.
“”This is a big victory for consumers, communities, and working people,”” said UFCW International Vice President and Director of the UFCW Legislative and Political Action Department, Michael J. Wilson. “”It’s not everyday that Wal-Mart says ‘Uncle.’ I think that they saw the controversy growing and felt tide turning against them and made the right decision to withdraw their application. But we can’t let up the pressure. We still need Congress to close the loophole by enacting H.R. 698, the Gillmor-Frank legislation. When it comes to Wal-Mart, only the law can really protect us.””
“”Local community banks and other financial institutions are critical to economic vitality and diversity. In recent years, Wal-Mart has destroyed local businesses and dismantled local economies. If Wal-Mart’s bid for a bank had been successful, the company’s economic control in these communities would have been almost complete.””
The UFCW is part of the Sound Banking Coalition which has fought Wal-Mart’s industrial loan company (ILC) application because of its interference with the historical and necessary separation between banking and commerce. A Wal-Mart-owned bank would have put a dangerous concentration of capital in the hands of one single company.
The Sound Banking Coalition is made up of the Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), the National Grocers Association (N.G.A), the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS), and the UFCW.
March 12, 2007
STOP & SHOP WORKERS STAND STRONG TO SECURE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL
NEW ENGLAND—Yesterday, Stop & Shop workers represented by five United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local Unions achieved a solid victory when they ratified a three-year contract agreement securing affordable, quality health care with access for all Stop & Shop workers.
With the support of community members and other employees of Dutch-owned Stop & Shop parent company Ahold, workers held firm in their resolve to improve health care accessibility, quality, and cost for part-timers as well as full-timers. They achieved their aims, with a contract that cuts new hires’ waiting period for health care in half and requires no monthly contribution towards health care from part-timers, who make up 80 percent of the Stop & Shop workforce in New England. Full-timers will make a modest, affordable monthly contribution towards health care premiums. Workers were also able to secure good wage increases and retirement security for all Stop & Shop employees.
Coordinated action with supporters and customers was key to the workers’ success. Community members and grocery workers sent emails of support, called store managers and Stop & Shop CEO Jose Alvarez, wrote letters to the editors of local newspapers, and signed petitions promising not to shop at Stop & Shop if workers were forced to strike.
UFCW members working for Ahold companies in other areas on the East Coast posted flyers in their stores, held rallies and leafleted customers. Presidents of UFCW Local Unions representing Ahold workers attended a bargaining session with Stop & Shop to show solidarity with New England workers.
The coordinated effort in New England is part of a nationwide bargaining unity program among UFCW grocery workers. Over 400,000 UFCW grocery workers across the country and in Canada are negotiating new contracts throughout 2007. By supporting each other regionally and nationally, as well as engaging customers and community members in their struggle, grocery workers can improve grocery industry jobs for themselves and their communities.
March 12, 2007
DECLARACI
Washington, D.C.—Los derechos de los inmigrantes son de los trabajadores.
Miles de personas están participando en demostraciones en el país hoy para demandar una reforma racional y comprensiva de la política migratoria de los Estados Unidos.
La UFCW ha estado luchando por décadas para organizar, representar y mejorar los sueldos y condiciones de trabajo para los trabajadores inmigrantes. Algunas de las primeras industrias que utilizaron la mano de obra de inmigrantes fueron las del empaquetado de carne y del procesamiento de alimentos. Por hecho, la UFCW ha estado metida en esta lucha por cien años.
Los Estados Unidos no tiene una política migratoria que es racional. En realidad, la política de inmigración ha sido privatizada. Empleadores importan y explotan los trabajadores inmigrantes, demostrando poco respeto por la ley federal o las agencias federales encargadas con la ejecución de la ley.
Las cuestiones de inmigración en los Estados Unidos son parte de una tendencia global—la explotación general de la mano de obra. Como parte de su búsqueda para el grupo de trabajadores más explotables, corporaciones exportan trabajos—e importan trabajadores para crear un grupo de trabajadores explotables acá en nuestro propio país.
Una población de trabajadores que viven y trabajan sin derechos existe como consecuencia de la falta de estándares firmes y ejecutables en la política migratoria estadounidense. Estos trabajadores pueden ser reclutados, importados, explotados y dispuestos.
La criminalización de los inmigrantes de los Estados Unidos para remediar el fracaso de la política migratoria estadounidense—como está propuesto en H.R. 4437—es inmoral e hipócrita.
La reforma de la política migratoria tiene que ser comprensiva. Una política migratoria que es constructiva legalizaría los millones de trabajadores inmigrantes que ya están contribuyendo a nuestra economía y sociedad, a la vez que protegería los salarios y condiciones de trabajo de todos los trabajadores—algo menos que eso lastima a todos los trabajadores.
Para mayores informes contacte press@ufcw.org
March 6, 2007
UFCW STATEMENT ON NAACP ENDORSEMENT OF EMPLOYEE FREE CHOICE ACT
(Washington, DC) – The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union applauds the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s (NAACP) endorsement of the Employee Free Choice Act.
As the nation’s oldest and largest civil rights organization, the NAACP’s support demonstrates that the Employee Free Choice Act is an important civil rights issue. If passed, the act would clear a path for workers to have a fair chance to exercise their democratic right to choose a union. Unionized workers have better wages, benefits, working conditions and job security than workers who don’t have a union.
In calling for passage of the act, the NAACP said, “The impact of unions—ensuring that all working Americans are treated well and share in the prosperity—cannot be overstated. Despite the continuing strength and advocacy power of unions, however, some employers continue to treat workers poorly, not paying them a fair wage or providing them with necessary benefits… And some employers continue to fight the legitimate organization of unions.”
Every day, corporations harass, intimidate, threaten and even fire workers who try to form unions for better working and living standards. Corporations deny employees the freedom to decide for themselves whether to form unions. And when corporations do that, they deny working men and women the freedom to pursue a better life for themselves and their future generations.
March 6, 2007
UFCW Lauds the Protective Equipment for America
Washington, DC—The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) applauds and supports the ‘‘Protective Equipment for America’s Workers Act,’’ introduced today in the U.S. House of Representatives. The Act, also known as H.R. Bill 1327, sponsored by Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-CA) and co-sponsored by Congressman George Miller (D-CA), seeks to require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to complete its rulemaking on Employer Payment for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for workers. This Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule would require employers to pay the costs of protective clothing, lifelines, face shields, gloves and other equipment used by an estimated 20 million workers to protect them from job hazards.
For nearly eight years, OSHA has failed to issue a standard requiring employers to pay for PPE. The rule was first announced in 1997 and proposed in 1999 by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) after a ruling by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission that OSHA’s existing PPE standard could not be interpreted to require employers to pay for protective equipment. In 1999, OSHA promised to issue the final PPE rule in July 2000. But it missed that deadline and has missed every self-imposed deadline since. The agency has failed to act in response to a 2003 petition by the AFL-CIO and UFCW and numerous requests by the Hispanic Congressional Caucus.
By OSHA’s own estimates, 400,000 workers have been injured and 50 have died due to the absence of this rule. The labor groups say that workers in some of America’s most dangerous industries, such as meatpacking, poultry and construction, and low-wage and immigrant workers who suffer high injury rates, are vulnerable to being forced by their employers to pay for their own safety gear because of OSHA’s failure to finish the PPE rule.
“”Nothing is standing in the way of OSHA issuing a final PPE rule to protect worker safety and health except the will to do so. It is long overdue that the agency takes action on protective equipment. The time has come to force OSHA to act,”” said Joseph Hansen, UFCW International President.
February 28, 2007
STATEMENT BY UFCW INTERNATIONAL UNION PRESIDENT JOE HANSEN ON A&P
Washington — The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) represents 54,000 A&P employees nationwide and nearly 29,000 Pathmark workers.
UFCW-represented employees at both companies have helped these two vital regional chains maintain strong market share, serve customers and communities.
The UFCW will continue to represent our members at both companies and enforce all union contract provisions while any possible transactions take place.
Should Pathmark decide to sell the company to A&P, the UFCW anticipates that all contracts would remain in effect.
February 21, 2007
Federal Judge Orders Labor Department to Answer for Eight-Year Delay in Requiring Employers to Pay for Safety Equipment
A United States Court of Appeals ordered the Department of Labor (DOL) to respond in 30 days to a suit requesting the court to order OSHA to implement a long-delayed standard that would require employers to pay the costs of protective clothing, lifelines, face shields, gloves and other equipment used by an estimated 20 million workers to protect them from job hazards.
The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) and the AFL-CIO sued the DOL January 3 over an eight-year delay in implementing an Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rule requiring employers to pay for personal protective equipment (PPE).
The lawsuit asserts that the Bush Administration’s failure to act is putting workers in danger. By OSHA’s own estimates, 400,000 workers have been injured and 50 have died due to the absence of this rule. The labor groups noted that workers in some of America’s most dangerous industries, such as meatpacking, poultry and construction, and low-wage and immigrant workers who suffer high injury rates, are vulnerable to being forced by their employers to pay for their own safety gear because of OSHA’s failure to finish the PPE rule.
The rule was first announced in 1997 and proposed in 1999 by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) after a ruling by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission that OSHA’s existing PPE standard could not be interpreted to require employers to pay for protective equipment. The new rule would not impose any new obligations on employers to provide safety equipment; it simply codifies OSHA’s longstanding policy that employers, not employees, have the responsibility to pay for it.
In 1999, OSHA promised to issue the final PPE rule in July 2000. But it missed that deadline and has missed every self-imposed deadline since. The agency failed to act in response to a 2003 petition by the AFL-CIO and UFCW and requests by the Hispanic Congressional Caucus. The lawsuit seeking to end this eight-year delay, called it “egregious.”
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, asked the court to issue an order directing the Secretary of Labor to complete the PPE rule within 60 days of the court’s order.