LABOR TUESDAY! for January 6, 2004

Misleaders’ Strategy Undermines Grocery Strike

By Charles Walker

On December 19, 2003, negotiators for the United Food and Commercial Workers union (UFCW), representing 70,000 southern California strikers, announced that that very day they had offered $350 million in concessions in health care costs over three years to settle the strike/lockout involving three major grocery chains, but the chains rejected the offer. The offered concessions fell short of the $1 billion in health care reductions that, according to union officials, the supermarket owners are seeking.

The three supermarket chains are also demanding the reduction of wages and benefits for new hires. Over the past two decades grocery workers across the nation have experienced a sharp decline in average wages, reductions in work hours, and the loss of work to vendors. The loss of a billon dollars in health care benefits would quickly mean that the strikers’ jobs would be little better than many so-called living wage jobs, as many grocery workers’ jobs already are in other parts of the country.

Sadly, more than two months into the strike/lockout that began October 11 it may not be too soon to declare the grocery strike lost. The grocery chains, separately owned by Kroger, Albertsons, and Safeway, have outfought the strikers, even though to date the companies’ immediate losses in sales and unannounced strike expenses run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. Seemingly, the three corporations are prepared to spend much more than that to win the strike.

By handing the strikers a major defeat, the supermarket owners probably expect to win further concessions from the UFCW and the Teamsters union without further “labor disruptions”—as other contracts are negotiated in the months and years ahead. Wall Street analysts said at the start that the firms were out to win a major victory over their unionized workforce.

If the strikers are badly defeated, that is, if they are forced to give the three corporations what they are demanding; the loss should not be blamed on the rank-and-file workers. The grocery strikers have shown great courage and stamina in their fight. No doubt they possess the qualities needed for an all-out fight. But they have been handicapped.

Membership Participation?

To what extent were rank-and-file union members included in decision making about the strike? Although the rank-and-file members were able to vote on the question of rejecting the companies’ contract offer—which 95% of those voting did—and they also voted to strike, there’s no evidence that they voted to offer the supermarkets any concessions. Nor is there evidence that they voted to remove their pickets not once but twice from the chains’ distribution centers, allowing the Teamsters to return to work. Nor did they vote to remain cooped up rather than extend the strike.

The union’s tops have made all the strategic decisions from the strike’s first day. It’s not clear that the strikers would have made different decisions. Still, it seems reasonable to expect that many of the strikers, if not a majority, after gaining hands-on experience for a month or two, would not have been inclined to maintain the failed strategy that has governed the strike from day one.

The main elements of that strategy consisted in (1) not impacting the grocery barons’ profits, except in Southern California; (2) attempting to take advantage of the chains’ mutual rivalry for profits, at the same time that the firms have erected a united front to deal with their unionized workers; and (3) relying on token picket lines, not massive lines capable of halting deliveries by union and nonunion vendors alike.

The corporations told the UFCW more than a year ago to expect major demands for concessions, and the bosses went on to prepare financially for the anticipated strike by the union. The three supermarket chains even agreed to share financially the hazards and losses of a strike. With this solidarity established among the bosses, the hiring of scabs and the importation of management teams from other areas was comparatively small potatoes.

All of the employers’ preparations were known to the union’s officialdom when the strikers hit the bricks. Yet from day one, the union attempted to portray Kroger and Albertsons as not as bad as Safeway, so it only struck Safeway. Kroger, doing business as Ralphs, and Albertsons simultaneously locked out their UFCW members the same day the strike began. That didn’t sway the union’s strategists, who two weeks into the strike removed their pickets from Kroger/Ralphs supermarkets and encouraged consumers to shop there. Reportedly, the Kroger chain has agreed to share its profits with Safeway and Albertsons.

The union has not attempted to create massive picket lines at any of the chains’ 852 stores, nor at the Teamster-organized distribution warehouses, a vital link in the stores’ supply lines. Even when the UFCW sent pickets to two of the warehouses, they didn’t attempt to halt the flow of meat, produce, and dry goods that scabs began delivering. Two weeks into the strike the UFCW removed its pickets, and Teamsters returned to their jobs, delivering their cargo to the supermarkets’ driveways, where management and scab drivers took the keys and backed the rigs up to the loading docks.

In a turnabout just before Thanksgiving, the UFCW posted pickets at all ten union warehouses supplying the supermarkets in southern California. The 8,000 Teamsters were advised by their officials to keep away from the picket lines, which in the main they did. Then on December 19 the UFCW once again removed their pickets “as a goodwill gesture,” and later that same day the companies rejected the union’s concessions, breaking off talks, initiated by a federal mediator.

If the strike had been extended to much of the nation, costing the grocery corporations far more than they had budgeted, perhaps their shareholders and creditors would by now have had second thoughts. As it is, the workers’ finances—which while working meant for many living from paycheck to paycheck—have got to be stretched thin, and, understandably, they may be entertaining thoughts about settling for what the bosses are willing to offer.

Seemingly, the grocery corporations are prepared financially to endure the strike/lockout for many more weeks. Obviously the workers are not similarly financed. John J. Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, has failed to raise the massive funds necessary to keep broke strikers on the token picket lines, stave off evictions or ensure needed health care.

To this day, while strikers walk picket lines, other grocery workers in adjoining counties report to work each day. Yes, those workers have contracts (to be renegotiated next year in some cases), but it is entirely legal for them to honor picket lines of other sanctioned pickets.

To this day, the union has refused to damage the three chains’ profits further by picketing those stores. It’s true the union has sent token teams of “informational pickets” to a few stores owned by Safeway in northern California and the Washington, D.C., area, but the results have been meager. In contrast, a few years ago Safeway workers in northern California struck, and Safeway’s stores were virtually abandoned by shoppers. However, informational pickets don’t stop many consumers, don’t stop deliveries by unionized drivers, and of course, don’t stop the employed UFCW workforce from daily continuing to contribute to Safeway’s revenue stream.

These days labor victories are rare, but as the 1997 UPS struggle showed, they are not only possible; they attract the attention of other workers, organized or not, and inspire them. That attention and inspiration may well have become emulation after the UPS strike were it not for the government’s removal of the Ron Carey leadership of the Teamsters union. But labor victories will not occur as long as the outlook of a strike’s policymakers resembles those of the grocery workers’ leadership.

No doubt, the strike has been marked by tactical errors and mistakes. But more importantly the strike has been undermined by the UFCW officialdom’s strategy of refusing to wage an all-out fight, despite the supermarket owners’ outrageous provocations.

Grocery Pickets Defy UFCW Officials

By Charles Walker

Just before Christmas, the United Food and Commercial Workers union once again, ordered its pickets to halt their picketing of distribution centers that supply some 850 supermarkets owned by Safeway, Albertsons, and Ralphs engaged in a concerted attempt to drive down medical benefits and average wages of 70,000 union grocery workers in the Southern California region.

Pickets at seven of the centers complied and the Teamsters who man the warehouses and drive the 18-wheelers to the stores were forced under their contract to return to work. But pickets at Vons’ centers (owned by Safeway) refused and as of this date have continued their picketing. Consequently, the Teamsters employed at the Vons’ distribution warehouses have continued to stay off the job.

A well-placed Teamster source says that the rebellious pickets expect that both UFCW and Teamster officials will renew their attempts to force the pickets to leave the warehouses. An earlier unsuccessful attempt by UFCW officials to remove the pickets ended when the union officials, chased by the pickets, ran to their cars and drove off, suggesting that the pickets had expressed their determination to stay in unmistakable terms.

The labor reporter at the Los Angeles Times, Nancy Cleeland, was told of the efforts of the UFCW to remove the defiant pickets, but as of this date, the paper has not reported what has happened.

Meanwhile, the UFCW has told the press that it is thinking about sending primary pickets to other parts of the country, shutting down grocery operations owned by the three corporations. “We will begin asking UFCW members in stores outside of Southern California to honor the picket lines,” said Greg Denier, director of communications for the UFCW office in Washington (AP, Jan. 2). The report correctly noted that, “Such a move would be the union’s most aggressive tactic to date and could further erode profits at the three major chains.” How many pickets would be dispatched and where they might picket was not revealed.

A Teamster official told this writer that given what he has seen to date, it was unlikely that the UFCW would extend the strike and was merely rattling a paper sabre. In any event, the UFCW doesn’t have to go far to hit the three chains in the pocketbook. The union has yet to even threaten the picketing of other supermarkets and drugstores in the region that are organized by the UFCW. Further, in some cases since the strike and lockout began October 11, the UFCW has granted contract extensions to supermarkets owned by Safeway in other areas, allowing those stores to continue to beef up Safeway’s revenue stream.

No doubt the spreading of the fight would greatly renew the strikers morale, now sagging, especially after the UFCW pickets were ordered to leave the distribution centers. Another blow to their morale occurred last week when the union slashed the pickets strike benefits. The cuts vary according to the UFCW local union, but range from $100 to $200 a week, that is, from one-third to two-thirds of the previous strike payments. Earlier, a striking San Diego local union drastically reduced its strike pay to pickets.

UFCW strike at crossroads

By Karl Swinehart and Gillian Russom

LOS ANGELES--In defiance of a decision made by leaders of the United
Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), rank and file
union members at a grocery distribution center near Los Angeles decided
to maintain their picket line in the big Southern California
supermarket strike and lockout. "That’s where we work, that’s where we
stay, and no one can drag us out of here," explained Jim Davis, a UFCW
member and a 27-year employee at Vons, which is owned by Safeway, Inc.

Following the union’s call to pull the picket lines, UFCW Local 1167
President Bill Lathrop visited the distribution center in El Monte
December 21 to convince workers to take down the picket line, but they
refused. "Our general feeling down here is that we shouldn’t have taken
the [picket] lines down anywhere --stores, distribution
centers--anywhere," UFCW member Matt Bruno told Socialist Worker. "Our
local president knows he works for us now."

Following this bold stand by rank-and-filers, the UFCW and Teamsters
modified their strategy and agreed to maintain picket lines at the four
Vons distribution centers in Southern California--but not centers owned
by Albertsons or Kroger Co.’s Ralphs stores, which locked out the UFCW
after the union walked out at Vons and its sister chain, Pavilion.

At the Vons grocery distribution center in El Monte, UFCW meat cutters
normally work side-by-side with members of the Teamsters union. UFCW
members had been picketing grocery distribution centers for a
month--and 8,000 Teamsters members refused to drive or load trucks that
supply the markets.

Under pressure from the Teamsters leadership--which said their members
want to return to work-- the UFCW announced that picket lines at
distribution centers for all three chains would be removed the Monday
before Christmas. UFCW leaders told their members that they were
pulling the pickets as a "goodwill gesture" toward the companies in
order to get negotiations restarted.

But that’s meaningless to these giant corporations, which together
control half the U.S. grocery industry-- and who joined forces to put
70,000 UFCW workers on the picket line. When the UFCW removed picket
lines at Ralphs in October to try and divide the employers, the
companies agreed to share profits for the duration of the
strike/lockout.

Healthcare is also a central issue in this battle. The companies aim to
make the employees shoulder the burden of rising health care costs
through drastically increasing the amount employees pay for their
benefits--putting coverage out of reach for thousands of the low wage
and part time workers.

These highly profitable corporations are asking their 70,000 Southern
California UFCW members, in effect, to grandfather out the union
through subcontracting and a two-tier wage system.

This strike has electrified the local labor movement and dozens of
unions have been carrying out solidarity actions on a weekly basis. A
spirited march of 8,000 strikers, led by AFL-CIO President John Sweeney
and Miguel Contreras, LA County Federation of Labor Executive
Secretary-Treasurer, took the workers’ message to Beverley Hills
December 16.

Rick Icaza, UFCW Local 770 president, announced on the radio later that
day that the assembled unions together put $4 million towards the
workers' strike fund, that the International Longshore and Warehouse
Union has pledged to do a second "stop work" meeting in January, and
that informational picketing at Safeway stores will extend to other
parts of the country.

Yet these efforts are undermined by the union’s own strategy of
de-escalating the struggle where it matters most--at the distribution
centers and outside the grocery stores themselves.

Moreover, UFCW’s plans to cut members’ strike pay in half on January 2,
despite the large sums of money raised by union members in solidarity
with the supermarket workers. Even worse, picketers at one Los Angeles
Vons store showed Socialist Worker that the union had cut their pay
without warning one week earlier, on the day after Christmas. Now most
union members will be receiving only $100-$125 a week. The union also
advised its members to look for other "interim employment." This level
of hardship for strikers will undoubtedly create a sense of desperation
and a willingness to accept any conclusion to the strike, even if it
involves major concessions to the corporations.

This is why the action by rank-and-file workers at the El Monte
distribution center is so important. As El Monte worker Jim Davis told
Socialist Worker, "There is no goodwill with corporations. Us keeping
the picket line up was a good decision. It’s definitely good for
morale. We took a stand. It may not have been a popular stand, but it
shows people that we’re serious. And we’re here for the duration."

In deciding to keep their picket lines up, rank-and-file workers at the
El Monte distribution center have taken a very important step forward
in pushing for a more militant strike strategy--and more democracy in
the union’s decision making. The courageous stand by the UFCW strikers
in El Monte shows that initiative by the rank and file to escalate the
action is the key to winning this fight.

Maya de Leon, Bill Neal, and Randy Childs contributed to this article.

---from the SOCIALIST WORKER, Jan. 2, 2004

LABOR NEWS LINKS

LABOR STANDARD
KC LABOR
US LABOR AGAINST WAR