Grocery workers set to vote on pact

Nearly five months of picketing through fire, rain and holiday weekends for poverty-level pay have striking and locked out grocery workers in the mood to accept a deal, almost any deal.

Most employees believe they will be disappointed today when they learn details of the agreement struck this week by the United Food and Commercial Workers union and Southern California's three major supermarket chains. Yet they predict that the union rank and file will vote overwhelmingly this weekend to accept the proposed three-year contract.

"We will vote in favor of the contract, trust me," said Amado Rosario, a striking produce clerk at a Vons in Mission Hills.

They are tired of walking the line, tired of living without health insurance, tired of wondering how next month's bills will be paid, just tired.

"People are ready to take the deal -- whatever it is -- and go back to work," said Ross Bagnasco, a locked-out checker at a City Heights Albertsons. "A lot of people are financially hurt."

Employees in San Diego County will cast ballots at the San Diego Convention Center starting at 11 a.m. today.

Some union members fear the proposal won't be much better than the one they rejected in October, which rolled back health benefits and called for a two-tiered wage system that would hurt new hires.

But officials on both sides of the negotiations said they are satisfied with the agreement reached after 16 days of talks that ended Thursday. Union and supermarket officials have closely guarded details of the proposed contract.

Vons, Ralphs and Albertsons said in a joint statement that the deal "squarely addresses the challenging health care costs and competitive issues we face."

On the union side, San Diego Local 135 President Mickey Kasparian said the workers achieved their goal of protecting their health care and pensions.

But despite Kasparian's remarks, many workers say they are girding for an agreement similar to what the companies offered before the strike.

"We're hoping for the very best," said Roxie Bauer, a checker at the Vons on Midway Drive in Point Loma. "But in our heart of hearts, we think we are not getting much better than the first offer."

Grocery officials have said the companies needed to cap their contributions to health care plans and to reduce wages for new employees because of increasing competition from non-union competitors such as Wal-Mart.

Although details remain murky, a source familiar with the proposed contract said existing employees probably will pay between $60 and $100 a month for family health coverage. They currently pay nothing.

Sources said the deal also includes a two-tiered hiring system, which supermarkets had fought to get. Under such a system, new employees likely will pay more for health care and earn lower wages than new hires in the previous contract.

Experts say the grocery industry uses two-tiered wage systems elsewhere in the country, but this would be the first time they've hit the West Coast.

That could signal a push by supermarkets to seek similar deals in Northern California, Seattle and elsewhere when bargaining begins later this year.

"The times are different," said federal mediator Peter J. Hurtgen, who helped broker the tentative accord in Southern California. "It's better to agree to a second tier if you can hold onto your first tier as a result."

Union leaders are expected to sell the two-tier scale to members as a means of protecting the wages and benefits of long-time members. But doing that also comes at the expense of new members, who will get lower wages and benefits.

Some union members said their leadership could have made this deal months ago, and that those leaders ultimately failed members by letting the strike drag on for as long as it did.

Ruth Milkman, director of the UCLA Institute for Labor and Employment, said early indications are that it is a "lose, lose" deal. She said the union did not get what it was looking for and that the companies were badly hurt.

"People have been out of work for so many months, and they have gained very little," Milkman said. "It seems like a tragedy."

Although employees might feel backed into a corner, the thorny issues facing negotiators also put them in a bind, Hurtgen said.

Hurtgen, who described these talks as among the toughest in his career, said both sides were wrestling over topics beyond their control. "Health care costs are rising 15 percent a year," he said, "and there was nothing they could do at the bargaining table that could stop that."

Pension fund losses from stock market declines and growing non-union competition also were obstacles that neither side could control but nonetheless contributed to tricky negotiations.

"Once they got into the strike and lockout, what happens generally is both sides try to win the strike," Hurtgen said. "All they're going to win with that attitude is another day of the strike."

The 140 days that workers have been on strike has taken a tremendous toll. Tales of severe financial hardship can be heard on just about any picket line.

The strike has destroyed the savings of many workers. Some have taken out loans to make it through the labor conflict. Most have had to find other work.

When not picketing, Dave Fredrickson, a checker for a Chula Vista Albertsons, has split his time working for the longshore workers union on the National City docks and driving a forklift at the convention center.

So does Philip Delgado, who worked for the longshore workers union as well as at a shoe store.

"We are finding it necessary to work three different jobs to make what we were making here," said Delgado, a picket captain for the Washington Street Albertsons in Mission Hills.

Regardless of the vote outcome, Bauer and other workers said they have done a service for other UFCW locals as well as other unions nationwide.

"We made a stand for all union members," said David Larios, a 28-year employee of the Vons on Bonita Road in Chula Vista.

"We made a stand for all union members," said David Larios, a 28-year employee of the Vons on Bonita Road in Chula Vista.

And you lost. Badly. The fact is, the supermarket companies were NOT trying to take away your healthcare. They only asked that you pay a portion, just like most other workers. And that's what your union ended up negoiating.

About the only "victory" the union can claim is that they hurt the hand that feeds them and badly hurt their members. I asked a picketer yesterday if it was worth it. His body language belied his answer. They've been had and they know it. Four plus months with no pay to get a deal they could have had in a week. No doubt they'll blame the "greedy companies" rather than themselves and the boneheads who led them to strike.

It's quite sad actually. These ignorant people have been led over a cliff by thugs to whom they've trusted their livelihoods. Maybe this will be a lesson to other truculent unions that strikes are anachronistic and dangerous. Or to unskilled workers that acquiring marketable skills through self-improvement and education are a better bet than being a member of a labor cartel that uses force to impose higher than market prices for unskilled labor upon its employer. Nah.

The supermarkets will respond to the unions by adding more automated check outs. They work great here in Texas, and I assume everywhere else they are installed......

Yep...the union bosses screwed up.........again. The rank and file got screwed.....again. The union "leaders" didn't suffer at all....again.

The way to make unions truly useful is to pass a law that no union employee or consultant can make more than $10,000 a year. This would ensure that the "leaders" were truly interested in helping their members and not just agitating to justify taking $300,000 of union dues as "salary".

Much better than a win/lose deal in which the union gets what it wanted and the companies not only lost a lot of money due to the strike but continue to pay higher labor costs.

This is also called, getting permanently laid off when the companies go out of business.

With brainiacs running the unions, it is no wonder why United States is losing the manufacturing jobs to other countries.

Some union members said their leadership could have made this deal months ago, and that those leaders ultimately failed members by letting the strike drag on for as long as it did.

Ya think?

I have a good story that is related to this unmitigated disaster for those union employees. The #1 cardinal rule is, never strike during a recession!

During the last recession back in the early 1990s, on the way to work, I had to drive past a factory. One day I noticed a strike. Union strikers were holding signs and chanting. Every day I saw these people next to the road. A week later, a month later...less and less people were striking. A year later, wouldn't you believe it, they are still on strike. Just a couple of people and then one day they were gone too.

When there is an economic downturn, a lot of people want your great paying jobs. It goes without saying but...at times like this, DO NOT GO ON STRIKE dumbass!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.