Wal-Mart to Canada Store: Fuck you and your Union

[Guest sek69]

TORONTO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Canada will close one of its two Quebec stores that won union certification last year after failing to reach a labor agreement, the retailer said on Wednesday.

 

The Canadian arm of U.S. retailing giant Wal-Mart Stores Inc. said its store in Jonquiere, Quebec, will close this spring after becoming the first unionized Wal-Mart in North America about six months ago.

 

Wal-Mart Canada said it advised the union last year when the bargaining process began that the store's financial situation was precarious.

 

"Despite this fact and nine separate days of meetings over a period of more than three months, the company has been unsuccessful in reaching an agreement with the union that would allow the store to operate efficiently and profitably," the company said in a release.

 

A spokesperson for the United Food and Commercial Workers union was not immediately available for comment.

 

The company said the union applied for first contract arbitration on Feb. 2, and in doing so acknowledged the two sides were not likely to reach an agreement.

 

The roughly 180 employees affected by the closure will receive severance packages, Wal-Mart said.

 

In January, a Wal-Mart Canada store in Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec, won union certification and said it hoped to deliver contract proposals by mid-February.

 

At the time, the retailer said it was considering all options to block the certification, including legal action against the Quebec Labor Relations Commission.

 

Wal-Mart Canada said the decision to automatically certify the Saint-Hyacinthe store was undemocratic and seriously flawed as employees were not offered a secret ballot vote.

 

 

 

You know, just when I think that maybe people are too hard on Wal-Mart, they decided to remind everyone why they're so hated.

[KanadianKrusty 0]

HA! that was GREAT, saw that on the news tonight, and i have to say, stuff like that should happen more often in our union-invaded province, 'cause really they're taking over it's fucking insane.

[The Metal Maniac 0]

It's funny, because at the Wal-Mart I work at, they gave us all papers about how terrible the union was, and how it was so awful that they didn't get a ballot, etc...

 

Totally ignoring the fact that they got a union BECAUSE a large enough portion of the workers applied for it; vote or not, they obviously wanted it.

 

It's so absurd how they can say that unions are bad, but they're not AGAINST unions, they're just BAD.

 

Fucking WalSquigglyMart.

[Guest sek69]

HA! that was GREAT, saw that on the news tonight, and i have to say, stuff like that should happen more often in our union-invaded province, 'cause really they're taking over it's fucking insane.

Yeah, cause employees should just bend over and let companies plow their tender regions and be thankful for the privledge.

[Justice 0]

HA! that was GREAT, saw that on the news tonight, and i have to say, stuff like that should happen more often in our union-invaded province, 'cause really they're taking over it's fucking insane.

Yeah, cause employees should just bend over and let companies plow their tender regions and be thankful for the privledge.

No, because it's Wal-mart. It's just like people with McDonald's: From a guy who has worked there, you shouldn't be getting something like $12 an hour or whatever a Union would try to bust it up to.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

No love for Wal-Mart.

 

They're one of the most politically fierce comapnies ever, and big friend to China. Seriously, walk through Wal-Mart someday and look at everything you find interesting. See where all the stuff is made. It's fucking ridiculous.

[2GOLD 0]

A union for workers of Walmart....

I'm sorry, but what?

 

Walmart?

I feel myself growning dumber just thinking about a union of WALMART workers.

[treble 0]

Hey, that's where my dad's from.

[NoCalMike 0]

Maybe Wal-Mart is afraid a union might not be too keen on locking it's workers in after hours and making them work off the clock.

[Highland 0]

Funny how it's called capitalism when the employer wants to better its lot and make more money, but it's called communism when the employee tries the same.

[NoCalMike 0]

Our country(USA) is turning so anti-labor it isn't funny. I know there are some valid points against Unions, but to think unions are "BAD" is silly, especially when we have these global mutli-billion dollar monsters like Wal-Mart that take advantage of anything they can throw a uniform on.

[SuperJerk 0]

<----Actual union member.

 

 

Yup. We really exist.

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

<----Actual union member.

 

 

Yup. We really exist.

1) Are you a communist?

2) Are you gay?

[Guest sek69]

 

 

Do you belong to the Gay Communist Gun Club?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Maybe Wal-Mart is afraid a union might not be too keen on locking it's workers in after hours and making them work off the clock.

Don't forget encouraging them to and providing forms explaining how to apply for government assistance to supplement their crappy wages.

[Styles 0]

Eh, I work at a grocery store between semesters, and have no love for the union which I was forced to join upon employment and take far too much out of my weekly paycheck (which isn't much to begin with) and seem to indiscriminately raise the dues whenever they feel like it without telling me. Even the employees who work there full time as their "real" job have no love for the union either..,

[The Czech Republic 0]

HA! that was GREAT, saw that on the news tonight, and i have to say, stuff like that should happen more often in our union-invaded province, 'cause really they're taking over it's fucking insane.

Yeah, cause employees should just bend over and let companies plow their tender regions and be thankful for the privledge.

Yeah, cause employers should just bend over and let unions plow their tender regions and be thankful for the privledge[sic].

[SuperJerk 0]

Eh, I work at a grocery store between semesters, and have no love for the union which I was forced to join upon employment and take far too much out of my weekly paycheck (which isn't much to begin with) and seem to indiscriminately raise the dues whenever they feel like it without telling me. Even the employees who work there full time as their "real" job have no love for the union either..,

Just because one union's bad doesn't make them all bad.

 

Imagine what history would've been like without them.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Slapnuts!, union membership raises salaries an average of 20% and total compensation by an average of 28%. So your salary (probably) and benefits probably wouldn't even be what they are if the union wasn't there.

 

And I hate that union membership is mandatory at some places, but you have to consider that if one works at a union shop but doesn't join, they are enjoying all the benefits of unionization without carrying their share of the load.

[Vyce 0]

 

 

Do you belong to the Gay Communist Gun Club?

Christ, I just did a spit-take.

 

Absolute gold, sek. Goddamn hilarious reference.

[teke184 0]

Unions served their purpose by breaking the slave-wages and hours of the late 1800s and early 1900s.

 

 

However, they have NOT been particularly useful to their members for around 50 years or so. In that time, many have been involved with the mob (the Teamsters in particular), corrupt, and generally pricing their employees out of work.

 

 

In my local area, there were at least two grocery chains, Kroger's and National, that pulled out of the city completely because of unreasonable demands by the grocery workers' unions.

 

The Kroger's situation was before my time but in National's case, the employees held picket lines for months and then, instead of making a compromise and taking less of a pay-raise than they wanted, they refused to accept the offer and, instead, shut the stores down.

 

 

The airlines are another case where the demands of the Pilots' Union, Mechanics' Union, and Flight Attendants' Union have severely limited how the companies can cut costs in order to remain profitable. While I feel that most airline management is not competent enough to run a convenience store, let alone a multi-national company, the demands of the unions do not help the situation.

 

 

If you want to see some real examples of how unions can limit growth and/or destroy companies, take a look at some of the corporations within France.

 

Due to the severance package laws that the unions pushed through in Europe, an employee fired from their job must be paid an amount equal to the sum of their entire earnings at that company. Needless to say, VERY few employees are laid off in Europe.

 

One major French corporation went into bankruptcy rather than close down an unprofitable manufacturing plant because the severance packages for the hundreds of employees there would have been astronomically higher than continuing to run a money-losing plant.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

However, they have NOT been particularly useful to their members for around 50 years or so.

 

The World Bank, a neoliberal organization if there ever was one, disagrees.

[Jingus 0]

<--- wishes there was a union for Televised Professional Wrestling Commentators. (If nothing else, I'd get to hang out with Cornette and Heenan at the meetings, which would make up for having to be around Mark Madden.)

 

I don't understand some unions though. When the airline you're working for has just declared bankruptcy, how can you bitch about a pay cut? Which do you prefer, a smaller check or no check at all?

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Because a lot of union leaders care more about power than the workers. There are a lot of times where the union will completely fuck over most of it's members instead of losing any kind of power. That's the problem with the airlines. Revenue is down but the union leaders don't want to look weak so they'll simply price a lot of workers out of jobs.

[BX 0]

Because a lot of union leaders care more about power than the workers.

You just described every single goddamned manager/CEO/president of every major company that every walked the face of the Earth.

 

What's your point?

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

CEOs and Execs are out for the health of the company. The unions are supposed to protect the workers not stab them in the back.

[Guest MikeSC]

Speaking as somebody working for a major telecom company --- we are FULLY aware of what unions provide.

 

My deal with my company is better than the deals the ONE union shop in my company delivered for their employees --- and suggested, none too subtly, that people who cross picket lines deserve to be killed.

-=Mike

[Stephen Joseph 0]

As the only paid economist here, I'm going to say point-blank what unions do.

 

Unions help those workers who already HAVE jobs by raising the cost of employing new workers to the company (through their wage hike schemes). By pursuing above market wages, you'd think this would increase productivity. This gain to the employer is mitigated if the union shop is sufficiently strong to prevent firings. The effect is indeterminate.

 

However, the effect upon those who could have worked for said employer at the previous market wage is clear. They cannot.

 

It should be no suprise, that like a corporation, unions only look after their own. While benefitting its members, unions tend to push costs onto those not directly involved, and depress employment below what it would be otherwise.

 

And that's just a brief analysis of unions through the lens of economic game theory.

 

Just sayin, that's what they are. You decide if the reallocation, costs, and benefits is worth it.

[Guest goodhelmet]

OK, that is the conservative anti-union economic way of thinking.

 

Now, give us the opposing point of view, smartypants.

[Slayer 0]

As the only paid economist here

Tell us something we don't know