Southern Ca. Supermarket strike - Do you cross picket line?

[BJ_M]

@BJ_M,
Who is using more fuel:a SUV pilot driving 40km to work and back or you in your econo-car(?) driving 250km?Unless you drive a motorcycle I would say you are.

Sorry to get off topic Roundabout.

i drive country - no bumper to bumper, in winter @ 40mpg avg. = 3.4gallons for 140miles (i don't even drive an econo car) - in summer I drive a ST-1100 (see below) and get even better mpg ..

SUV @ 6mpg in city short trip 20 miles each way = 6.6 gallons

[Roundabout]

Along the same lines, I was talking to my friend that works for Albertsons, and he told me that the unions were monitoring their credit card activity for "naughty employees" - ones that shop at Wal-Mart. He said they found thousands of the union workers that rail against Wal-Mart do, in fact, shop there all the time. Now they know they are being monitored, and my feeling is that it should be illegal for them to do this and send them warning notices. It's the worst example of abuse I've seen in this regard, what's next? You used your credit union credit card to rent movies we don't approve of? You visited the porno sites? Naughty, naughty! Guess you won't be getting that promotion after all! You can see how this would be open for abuse.
On a union website www.scfl.org/uln3.htm they talk about Wal-Mart as a "Bad Neighbor" - here's an excerpt:

Wal-Mart 'Bad Neighbor' Campaign Launched

Last month the national AFL-CIO announced an educational campaign in conjunction with the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) aimed at raising union members' awareness of Wal-Mart's harmful impact on working families and their communities.

"Regardless of industry, occupation, trade or craft, Wal-Mart is destroying jobs, lowering wages, eliminating health benefits and busting unions," wrote AFL-CIO President John Sweeney and UFCW President Douglas Dority.

Destroying jobs? How? They are the largest employer in the United States! Translation: They destroy union jobs.

Eliminate health benefits? All employees of Wal-Mart are eligible for health benefits, but they have to pay for them, like most people at most companies do. They aren't "free" like the grocery industry has done.

Busting unions? You bet! And I'm glad they are, for without it, we'd all be paying far more for our groceries than we are today with the healthy competition from stores like Wal-Mart, SuperTarget, Sam's, and Costco.

This strike is probably going to go on for weeks, but in the end, like I've said before, even if they "win", they will lose as people take their business to the larger, cheaper stores like Wal-Mart Supercenters and SuperTarget.

[Tommyknocker]

I did see on 60 Minutes a story on Wal-Mart. They move into communities, wreck the economy with their low prices and huge malls. Then once they destroyed the competition, they gauge and see if it profitable to remain open, or to close shop and move on to the next community. Then start the process again, leaving the previous community economically devastated.

And one more union comment. I live in italy they have a society we Americans can learn from. When they intend to strike, they announce it weeks and months before hand, along with what days they plan to strike. If they are striking a store, they strike the store and post pickets for something like five days out of the week, and take down the pickets and return to work the remainder of the week, or if it is a lock out, they go home.

They return next week, keeping with their schedule, and repeat the process. They put pressure on the company with lost revenue, and still continue to serve the community, albeit at an abbreviated state.

[BJ_M]

walmart -- yea , don't like them much ... though i dont see them closing up much ...


the strike method in italy seems like a good way of it .. though isnt italy #1 in strikes world wide ? (if not, excuse me)

[Roundabout]

I did see on 60 Minutes a story on Wal-Mart.

Hmmmm. There wouldn't be any bias on that show, would there? Naw. Couldn't be! Dan Rather wouldn't lie to us!

They move into communities, wreck the economy with their low prices and huge malls. Then once they destroyed the competition, they gauge and see if it profitable to remain open, or to close shop and move on to the next community. Then start the process again, leaving the previous community economically devastated.

I respectfully disagree. First of all, you make it sound like the Nazi's moved in "They move into communities..."! They're a business, for God's sake! They exist to make money! That is what capitalism is about.
"They wreck the economy with their low prices" - that's really funny! I guess then, they should wreck the economy with high prices instead!! Why not? Shouldn't everyone pay more? :P
"They destroyed the competition" Again, what capitalism is about, competition. If you can't compete, you won't be in business long. That's the way it works.
"...close shop, leaving the previous community economically devastated..." First off, Wal-Mart doesn't close stores if they're profitable. I haven't seen too many stores closed, and the ones I have, are moving somewhere else in the same community to open a bigger store to serve more customers. And if all it took to "devastate" a community was to open and close a Wal-Mart, then the community had problems long before Wal-Mart showed up.
People vote with their wallets. If they were so concerned with Wal-Mart's impact, why then do they shop there? No one is pointing a gun at their heads. No one is stopping them from going to the competition. It's free will, free choice. I, for one, like to have the choice. If not for them, the price of everything would be higher.
Like I said, Tommyknocker, I understand and respect your opinion. Hopefully you understand mine. It seems the American public agrees with me, or Wal-Mart would be out of business already. We all have a choice of where to shop, and the vast majority of Americans choose to patronize Wal-Mart. If you choose not to, that's fine too. Free will is yours.
(Disclaimer: I do not work for Wal-Mart and I don't know personally anyone that does. I just get tired of the same old bum rap "they destroy jobs and treat employees badly" - I don't see Wal-Mart employees running out of the store, resigning in droves, do you?)

[g_shocker182]

SUV @ 6mpg in city short trip 20 miles each way = 6.6 gallons

The only kind of SUV that gets less than 6mpg is this:



RVs even get better gas mileage than 6mpg

[Tommyknocker]

I have seen their handiwork. And I believe 60 Minutes more than Wal-Mart. And when they pull up stakes and move on, trust me, it will not be in the same community that loses money. That does not make to them or me. Time will tell who is right, but given the chance between Wal-Mart and somewhere else I will go somewhere else. That's my wallet voting.

[BJ_M]

SUV @ 6mpg in city short trip 20 miles each way = 6.6 gallons

The only kind of SUV that gets less than 6mpg is this:


RVs even get better gas mileage than 6mpg

no -- i am using the correct figure , as reported by several agencys , for short haul avg. stop and start driving - avg. year around in canada (remember it gets COLD here) 20 mile or less .. 6.6 is the official avg. in fact ford got sued over this .. http://www.brennanlaw.com/lemonlaw/suv-gas-mileage.htm

I know a navigator owner who in winter gets only 3-4 mpg in the city .. none to happy about it - but locked into lease ..

[Roundabout]

I have seen their handiwork. And I believe 60 Minutes more than Wal-Mart.

You believe what, specifically? Wal-Mart doesn't have a TV show.

And when they pull up stakes and move on, trust me, it will not be in the same community that loses money.

Of course not! If the store (not community) doesn't make money, it will be closed. That goes for any company and any store - not just Wal-Mart. I don't know of many that will stay in business if they're losing money. Maybe you do?

That does not make to them or me.

Time will tell who is right

Doesn't matter who's "right". I'm not trying to say I'm right and you're wrong - I am merely stating my opinion. Doesn't make me right and you wrong or vice versa. We both have our own opinion and nothing is going to change that. But that's what is great about America! We all have the right to feel differently than our neighbor. I'm actually glad to hear a different point of view, and I'm glad you stated yours. I don't want you to be upset with me because I have a different point of view, and I most certainly am not upset with you in the least. It's a nice discourse, and we've avoided personal attacks like the one George started.

but given the chance between Wal-Mart and somewhere else I will go somewhere else. That's my wallet voting.

And I don't have a problem with that. Again, we all can choose to patronize the stores we want. I don't like K-Mart, so I don't shop there. That's the way it should be, IMHO.

[Tommyknocker]

"That does not [sense]make to them or me."

Of course not! If the store (not community) doesn't make money, it will be closed.

That was the point I was making. They drove every mom and pop operation into the ground, then found out their own store were not profitable, so they moved out. Leaving the abandoned community without even a mom and pop operation.

[Roundabout]

That was the point I was making. They drove every mom and pop operation into the ground, then found out their own store were not profitable, so they moved out. Leaving the abandoned community without even a mom and pop operation.

Is this happening in thousands of cities coast to coast? Is it possible to prove that they came in just so they could destroy a town? Or does it just make a good TV story: "Big bad company drives the little guy out of business, how dare they?" Makes great copy, who hasn't been "bullied" in their lifetime by someone bigger? Whether there's any basis in fact, doesn't matter. Sensationalism sells.
Any idea how many millions of dollars are invested in opening a store? I'm sure they look at it long and hard before opening a store. I don't think they would open just so they can close. How is losing a multi-million dollar investment making them money?
What about the large supermarkets, did they intentionally drive the small grocer out of business? No, they found a better business model and applied it. Are we crying the Albertson's down the street drove Joe's Grocery Store out of business? Why then is WM singled out? Just because they're bigger? So that makes them an easy target?
And I'm quite sure that even if they left a community, someone would be glad to take their place. There's always someone waiting to open a new business, or has a better idea.

[gmatov]

Roundabout,
I don't know your situation. If I were callous with your back injury, and you can't work, my apology. If you are a company shill, screw you. You do sound like it.
You were willing to tell a group of picketere you WOULD go into that store just to get milk, and told us you would have to go many minutes out of your way to get it elsewhere.

To some of the others here who are complaining that the "unions" are the cause of all our problems, you are all out of your gourds.

IF you had no unions to precede you, you would be working for peanuts today. Many of you are.. And many of you will continue to do so. Many of you are college students, who automatically asume you will be hundred thousand aires as soon as you graduate.

I have news for you.l The climate iss not the same.

If your forebearers had not had balls enough to go on strike, you "kids" would be working for peanuts, today.

When those of you decide that them bums shouldn't be making that much money, they're only peons, you are a bunch of jerks. Your dad probably busted his ass, and put in mucho overtime to make the bucks to put you in the colleges you are in..
If it were not for the unions, all of you would be in the same situation as Tiny Tim's dad, you're fired. Andd I don't mean the hermaphrodite singer.

I can't believe some of the comments I have read here. Is this a hoi polloi site, everyone of you is "upper crust" or do you just wish to be, so you bash those who came before you?:

Well, my dad should have gone to college so he'd have been a boss. That way I wouldn't have had to work so hard to stay in college..

Scab is still a word that is in my vocabulary.

And you kid who are getting 6 bucks an hour to tend a self serve gas station, you should bend over to kiss your own asses for being so worthwhile. You're about worth what the guy above says his employees are worth. Nil; We could hire a monkey to do your job..

Ah well, takes all kinds, but thought a few more of the actual working people would be here, but then, we do have to get upin the AM.

[Roundabout]

Roundabout,
I don't know your situation. If I were callous with your back injury, and you can't work, my apology. If you are a company shill, screw you. You do sound like it.

George,
Since I was injured on the job, I haven't been able to work - I have been trying to find something that I can do, but have been unsucessful thus far. I got a very small settlement from my injury, not even a fraction of the amount of money I could have earned in one year had I been able to stay on the job. It's been a struggle since then, but I don't expect sympathy from anyone, nor do I want it. We all have our problems. Same goes with these people on strike. Their problem is not my problem. Not that they care, but I can't afford to spend extra money on gas to go somewhere else in town to buy something just because of their self-serving interests. They don't stop to think of other's situations, which to me is extremly hypocritical. I read stories of people a lot worse off than my situation, where older people can't get into the pharmacy to get their needed medication. What's right about that? Hearing that kind of thing happening angers me, and everyone should be angry.
I haven't heard one union leader stand up and say "Don't harass customers as they try to enter the stores". Instead they say "We don't encourage that behavior". By not condemning it, they are complicit in it. They don't have to tell the strikers to do it, it's "wink, wink - now, don't you be harassing the customers". The leaders of the unions have already lost in the court of public opinion. Now they will use the twin sword of violence and intimidation to get what they want. They claim "The public supports us, they have been staying away from the store in droves". Yeah, right. They intimidate little old ladies from entering and getting their medications, I hope these "tough guys" are able to sleep well at night. Yeah, that's a real show of support, all right, threatening and bullying so people stay away.
What do you think is going to happen in a week or so, when people start running out of things that they stocked up on before the strike? They are going to return to the stores one way or another. If not by choice, then by necessity. Not everyone has unlimited time to run around all over town looking for things just to please some idiots who couldn't give a s**t about them anyway.
One thing I do agree with you on, is that there was a time when unions served a purpose. Back in the days of sweatshops and factories, where people were treated like disposable trash, there was a genuine need for them. You can't honestly say these mollycoddled workers are enduring the kind of treatment that people back in those days received. The unions have outlived their usefulness, a long time ago.
There are a lot of the workers that are on strike that want to just go back to work, and are prevented from doing so. They are real victims, being bullied by their union and peers into doing something they don't believe in. I feel sorry for them, but there's nothing they can do about the situation as it stands now. That's what is so wrong about all this.
If you've noticed, most people agree with this point of view, that these workers should be glad to have a job in this horrible economy where so many are out of work and would love to have a job, any job. That's why there's no sympathy for them, then the strongarm tactics on top of it... they have already lost the battle.
Don't condemn everyone because they have a different point of view that diverges from yours. You and I may not agree about this subject, but you have the right to your opinion without me badmouthing you. I expect the same respect too. I would not personally attack you, even if I disagreed strongly about your feelings on the matter at hand.
I like the way Tommyknocker put forth his opinion and refrained from attacking me and others who feel the way I do about this. Sure, we won't ever agree, but the discussion has been civilized. That's the way to disagree - we agree to disagree and I respect your opinion and you respect mine. To do less would be sinking to the level of guttersnipes. I refuse to do that.
BTW: I don't know why or how I could sound like a "shill". I don't work for Albertson's, Ralph's, Von's or Wal-mart. I wish!
I just disagree that these companies are the cause of all ill in this country.
Thanks for stating your opinion.

[lordsmurf]

I'm in a right-to-work state. Unions are stupid. I only have a few reasons I want to stay in this state. That's one of them.

They want $17.90 per hour? I don't think so. That's a minimum-wage job, and requires zero brain skills. Rates are dependant upon skill and experience. This is a case of losers with greed, having grown up in a video-game world. Sad.

[BJ_M]

i guess they wouldn't like what we have more and more here -- you check out your own stuff and bag it your self .. you pay the machine .. that would freak them out ....
(it is working out very well -- though sometimes slow)

it will get to the point where everything is microchipped and when you walk out the door -- you are automatically debted the amount (would not be that hard to do - the technology is already here and in use)

[tgpo]

I'm in a right-to-work state.

Same here.