The side with the 49.5% ownership had the CEO who was recently terminated. Although the supermarket was thriving and expanding, the 50.5% side of the family did not like one bit that some of the profits were going towards quarterly "incentive' bonuses for the employees and wanted those benefits cut so that they could collect a larger share of the profits.
That explains the strength of the 'strike'.
It looks like a bunch of good, smart, employees.
If Arthur T. gains control, he and the employees are going to have a very solid and close relationship. The store could take over damn near everything around it!
I use MB, but this morning went to a competitor... plan to be back to MB when this settles over.
MB to me is the capitalist free-market choice. As a result, they have the lowest prices among all the competitors. I somewhat joke that EVERYTHING in MB is $1 cheaper, even if it is $1, it will be 10 cents in MB. In many instances that is the case in reality, so it really is no joke.
Employees I talk to are conservatives!
We have WINCO markets in the NW. Wiki:"WinCo Foods is based in Boise, Idaho. It was founded in 1967 and most of the company ownership is held by current and former employees through an employee stock ownership plan."
This system works wonderfully. Their prices are very low, the employees are extraordinarily helpful and cheerful, and everyone listens to the customer. You want organic? A month later, they have an organic section. People in other cities are clamoring for Winco to expand to their areas.
Sooooo, I'm wondering whether the 49.5% owner was headed in this direction. It would be to the advantage of everyone but the 50.5% family -- and perhaps to their advantage too, if customer satisfaction drove up their stores' market share.
So one side of the family knows how to treat employees well and probably live within their means, while the other side of the family are the “wantmores”, probably dems too. would be interesting to know if one side of this family is gop and the other dem.