Would you support another strike or do you think grocery store workers should rethink their work stoppage plans?
Here are your responses: “THE UNION MEMBERS SHOULD definitely veto another strike and show the union bosses they have the guts to say no to their latest manipulative plans that benefit them the most and, once again, shaft the consumer. I would not back or support another strike, and if there is one, would switch to a non-union market forever. Enough already.”
“I DO FULLY SUPPORT A STRIKE IN THE supermarket workers because not only will I cross the picket lines, I will cross the picket lines and work. If those idiots don’t want to work, to hell with them. I’ll work and take their jobs if they don’t want them, fine. I’d rather work as a strike-breaker than be unemployed. It’s more money than I’m making now. What they don’t want, I’ll take. So let them go on strike and stay on strike.”
“EMPLOYERS SHOULD DEDICATE themselves to fulfilling the needs of their employees. Once this is done, employees should dedicate themselves to providing the finest work effort on behalf of their employers and the business of their employers. The worst thing an employer can do is deprecate and depreciate the work efforts of an excellent employee and rate that employee as being expendable. This form of action by the employer short circuits the very foundation of the work ethic; a shocking short circuit that the employee will never forget. I, personally, as a consumer, hope that a strike can be averted due to my thought that the consumer will not be as understanding as during the previous strike that was lost by the employees; a strike that created a horrible inconvenience to the consumer.”
“OF COURSE I WOULD SUPPORT THE supermarket workers if they have to strike to secure decent wages and benefits. In fact, all California workers deserve fair compensation in this very expensive state to live in.”
“I DO NOT SUPPORT ANOTHER supermarket strike. They should be happy with what they have. Quit messing around with the lives of the people who live in Santa Monica. The strike is a bad idea.”
“NO, I WOULD NOT SUPPORT ANOTHER strike for the supermarket. I would walk right through those people. Their sticking point is that the new hires get the same benefits as far as health and other benefits that the older hires have. And I think it’s reasonable and just that the seniority or hierarchy of employment dictates according to what the current environment allows. The truth is health care costs are skyrocketing, and those people are very lucky to have health care, and I think that this time they are just pushing the envelope a little too hard. So no, I would not support it this time. It was a nightmare last time and I supported it, but I’ve got to shop, got to eat, and doing things on principle just doesn’t work sometimes and it can be very disruptive.”
“I DO SUPPORT ANOTHER STRIKE FOR the market workers. What happened last time was that the proceeding workers had a different deal from the preceding ones. The new deal is not that good for newer workers, they’re hardly able to sustain themselves. The employer’s argument with regards to Wal-Mart and the Costcos coming in is not valid right now. So check, there’s profits versus how much they’re really not paying the new workers under pretty trying conditions. Check out the Steve Lopez article in the LA Times. Yeah, I totally support it.”
“I’M A STRONG UNION MEMBER AND I have problems with the upcoming strike as far as the markets because I feel that many of the unions are corrupt. They don’t go to their leadership and I’ve been told this by people in other unions, and I don’t see why we should be hurt by higher prices for giving them help and benefits. I really have a problem with that. So, I have a serious problem and would not support a strike if it happens.”
“I CERTAINLY WON’T BE SUPPORTING another strike from the grocery workers. I found after going to Ralph’s in West LA, where they have their own scanning service for groceries, that I do it myself and it’s quicker than standing in line. I don’t get a discount for doing it and I don’t have any employees helping me. They should rethink before they go on strike.”
“I WOULD SUPPORT THE MARKET workers in their legitimate effort to secure fair compensation. If you were working there, you’d do the same.”
“IN 1970, WHEN I WORKED AT MAYFAIR Market on 18th and Wilshire, the checkers made $7 an hour and the box boys — excuse me, bag persons — made $1.75 per hour, triple on holidays and an increase after midnight. I don’t like the idea of two-tiered union employees, but why should a 30-year employee sacrifice benefits for a six-month employee? The workers must rethink the triple holiday pay and maybe a deductible on their medical, but there should be a bonus system if the store or chain meets both parties’ approved percentage increase. I did not cross the picket line on the last strike. Both sides need to get rid of big egos and use common sense to compete with Target, Wal-Mart and Whole Foods — non-union stores. Management and the union must eliminate the socialist post office of school-district economic mentality to be able to compete. It’s a money-making business. Also, the employers should be the most valuable resource.”
“I’M SUGGESTING THAT YOU ARE ASKING the wrong question. The question in my mind is, considering the fact that the supermarkets have made huge profits in the year 2006, why aren’t they willing to share their profits fairly with their employees? Kroger, the parent company of Ralph’s, made $3.4 billion in 2006; Supervalue, which is the parent company of Albertsons, made $2.4 billion in 2006; and Safeway, the parent company of Vons, made $2.6 billion of profit in 2006. Now my question is: The workers helped make those profits possible, why aren’t they being offered a fairer share of it? That’s an honest and fairer question.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 14, 2007. Read the original PDF.