Unionized Quebec Wal-Mart workers get 1st contract
It took nearly four years, but unionized workers at a Quebec Wal-Mart store now have their first collective agreement, a first in North America.
A Quebec arbitrator sealed the two-year deal for employees at the St-Hyacinthe Wal-Mart east of Montreal earlier this week.
Some 200 workers at the store received their union accreditation in January 2005, but called on an arbitrator when contract negotiations with the retail giant stalled.
Should we start a pool on how long it takes for Wal-Mart to announce that this location is no longer economically viable and is being shut down? The union official quoted in the story says he doesn't anticipate that happening but, to be blunt, I think that's wishful thinking. As recently as October of last year they closed a tire-and-lube garage in Gatineau because collective bargaining is "incompatible" with the Wal-Mart way of doing business. I doubt that much has changed since then but I guess time will tell.
H/t to Unionist at babble.
Still waiting for it to come up at PB.
It's there now. I took the liberty of casting a vote on your behalf. Wasn't that nice of me? ;-)
Lets take a pool on when all the Walmart's will become 'no longer economically viable'.
With all the inflation and 'quantitative easement' going on, pretty soon the US dollar will start to drop, hyperinflation will kick in then no one will be able to afford all the Chinese goods. Of course, that will happen when the Chinese stop buying US bonds or start spending all of the dollars they have in the US. Then they'll be able to buy their own goods instead of shipping it to the US.
Say, September?
Interestingly enough, Terence Corcoran is crowing over how little the arbitrator's CBA actually changes in the existing model. Combined with the Wal-Mart official's quote in the linked story, that would probably make it all the more suspicious if they did try to shut the store down - making for what figures to be a reasonable chance that the union will be able to get a foothold for a decent amount of time to come.
Didn't the arbitrator say that compared to other stores, the Walmart workers were doing well. Rather than the salary raise that the union promised, the only salary increase was for older workers who'would be forced into poverty' by having to pay union dues.
I think it is the Walmart not the union who came out
looking good.
I wouldn't want to pay union dues for no return.
BTW the union would never have been accredited in any other province but Quebec (card count rather than free vote).
I think it is the Walmart not the union who came out looking good.
The union may not have gotten everything it wanted, but neither did Wal-Mart which would much prefer that there were no union at all. I like the way this Canadian Press report put it:
I also noted this:
Unionization is about more than just dollars and cents.
Believe it or not, unions and management can actually co-exist in an relationship that is mutually beneficial. Grievances can result in a more productive, healthier workplace.
Incredibly, people have the potential to focus on interests as opposed to positions. Granted, this is rare, particularly in the arena of union-management relations, or for that matter in ANY aspect of a society built on a win-lose adversarial first-past-the-post system where Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition faces the Party-In-Power at a distance of two swords-lengths.
Some will find it inconceivable, I know. But I, myself, have born witness to such events (albeit rarely). I believe that unions and management can bring their guns to bear on a target, on an issue, with an outcome that benefits both. The company wins, and the employees win.
But I doubt like hell that anything of the sort will happen with Walmart.
Scratch a cynic and find a romantic, hey? And vice-versa.
In the larger picture, I'd be willing to bet that for the good of all Walmart stores, they'll close this one. Wallmart can't be seen to have any chinks in their armour. They can't be seen to weakening their position on unions. Closing one more store will be seen as just the cost of doing business.
I lean that way, too, partly because the battle over the Employee Free Choice Act should soon be heating up in the U.S. Wal-Mart won't want to be seen as compromising on this.
On the bright side, if it happens that's one less Wal-Mart. Other retail in the area might have a chance to revive, and if any of that reviving retail (unlike Wal-Mart) sources anything locally, those sources will have a chance to prosper. Overall level and quality of employment could both go up.
Not instantly a good thing for those union members, no, but quite possibly on average a good thing for them in the medium term.
More communities should have a plan like Revelstoke, BC, which specifies No Big-Box Stores. Prosperous, cheerful town, Revelstoke.
It does make sense to go the way of small Mom and Pop stores. It's far better to keep the economy local. If it shows up again, I recomend that you watch a show on the CBC called Wallmart Nation, It shows just how bad it is for anyone with a small business to survive once Wallmart shows up!!