St. Louis grocery strike ends with significant company concessions
St. Louis Post Dispatch reports: “Grocery workers end walkout”
“Grocery workers off their jobs since Oct. 7 voted overwhelmingly today to accept a new contract and return to their jobs.”
“Details of the contract had not been released before union members began gathering at the convention center at 7:30 a.m. But the Post-Dispatch learned that the proposal includes several improvements over the rejected contract. Among the provisions are:
An increased ratification bonus of 45 cents multiplied by the hours paid in the 52 weeks preceding the strike for all employes, including courtesy clerks.
A raise for courtesy clerks of 10 cents an hour in 2004, 2005 and 2006.
A raise for anyone paid at $9.00 an hour or above of 25 cents an hour in 2004, 2005, and 2006
Elimination of the $200-$400 deductible in medical benefits.
Restoration of lower caps on the cost of prescription drugs at $25 for a 30-day supply and $75 for a 90-day supply.
Other improvements also were included for current and retired employees.”
That’s more than a token from the companies IMHO.
I was somewhat surprised at the level of public support for the union here. Many acquaintances did not cross the picket line, which was completely unintimidating, so they were definitely acting out of sympathy. I think the companies hurt themselves by arrogantly insisting they were not going to change their proposal. (Ultimately this could have been unlawful — though concessions are not required, the companies seemed on the verge of refusal to meet, as the union said they were willing to meet anytime, anywhere.) They have now hurt their credibility going forward by changing the proposal in so many ways.
I also think they were hiding the ball somewhat, because despite all their full-page ads and media appearances, I never once saw a statement comparing the healthcare costs the companies were passing on to employees with the additional amount the companies would be paying. This amount should legitimately have been viewed as equivalent to a wage increase, because it is a direct increase in cost of labor and a valuable benefit to employees. Had it been significant, it would have/should have been a huge part of the publicity campaign before and after the strike.
The union probably correctly saw this silence as an indication the initial offer was a net wage/benefit decrease, though certainly in this healthcare environment even a wage decrease could be a net wage/benefit package value increase — if the company healthcare cost increased by more than the wage decrease.
It will be interesting to see if this outcome foreshadows what happens in the other UFCW grocery strikes. It certainly will raise union expectations, IMHO
