Comments on: First thing Tuesday Headlines http://theedmontonian.com/2009/09/08/first-thing-tuesday-headlines/ Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:32:33 +0000 hourly 1 By: Derjis http://theedmontonian.com/2009/09/08/first-thing-tuesday-headlines/comment-page-1/#comment-586 Derjis Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:44:57 +0000 http://theedmontonian.com/?p=5479#comment-586 WHAAAAAAAA?!? 14% over 3 years?!? wow, that's a pretty nice contract... I'm assuming that the big stink over the hours is that they're salaried, and are therefore being asked to work an extra 3 hours per week for free... not really surprised that the replacement workers are making more money than the people on the picket line (although the phrasing of that might lead me to believe that the replacement workers are making more money than the picketers are via strike pay...) dunno. admittedly, i have no idea how well or poorly Safeway Inc is doing, but with economic times being what they are, going on stike because you don't want to work an extra 3 hours a week and because you want a raise structure of almost 5%/yr doesn't exactly seem like the best plan... There are people (mostly in the US, mind you) who are ASKING for a reduction in salary in order for them to keep their jobs; people working for the government of California, incl. teachers, construction workers, etc. are having to take Furlough days (i think it's 3 unpaid days off per month) so that the state can keep from going bankrupt; the job market isn't as hot as it was a few years ago, and there's no shortage of people who would be willing to take over their jobs and settle for, y'know, like a 3% raise per year... As someone who's been through a largely unnecessary and largely fruitless strike, I can say that any prolonged action usually ends up hurting the worker far more than the company. if your working conditions are horrible and you're being mistreated by your employer, I absolutely think that going on strike is the right thing to do; if you're trying to get a bigger piece of the pie when people are getting laid off all over the place, I'm not so sure... WHAAAAAAAA?!? 14% over 3 years?!? wow, that’s a pretty nice contract…
I’m assuming that the big stink over the hours is that they’re salaried, and are therefore being asked to work an extra 3 hours per week for free…
not really surprised that the replacement workers are making more money than the people on the picket line (although the phrasing of that might lead me to believe that the replacement workers are making more money than the picketers are via strike pay…)
dunno. admittedly, i have no idea how well or poorly Safeway Inc is doing, but with economic times being what they are, going on stike because you don’t want to work an extra 3 hours a week and because you want a raise structure of almost 5%/yr doesn’t exactly seem like the best plan… There are people (mostly in the US, mind you) who are ASKING for a reduction in salary in order for them to keep their jobs; people working for the government of California, incl. teachers, construction workers, etc. are having to take Furlough days (i think it’s 3 unpaid days off per month) so that the state can keep from going bankrupt; the job market isn’t as hot as it was a few years ago, and there’s no shortage of people who would be willing to take over their jobs and settle for, y’know, like a 3% raise per year…

As someone who’s been through a largely unnecessary and largely fruitless strike, I can say that any prolonged action usually ends up hurting the worker far more than the company. if your working conditions are horrible and you’re being mistreated by your employer, I absolutely think that going on strike is the right thing to do; if you’re trying to get a bigger piece of the pie when people are getting laid off all over the place, I’m not so sure…

]]> By: Jeff http://theedmontonian.com/2009/09/08/first-thing-tuesday-headlines/comment-page-1/#comment-583 Jeff Tue, 08 Sep 2009 19:19:45 +0000 http://theedmontonian.com/?p=5479#comment-583 The problem with strike stories is that neither side (usually) is willing to tell the public everything that's on the table/rejected/sought. Here, there's the change from 37 to 40 hours of work (don't know if that means 40 hours with lunches/breaks or 40 hours on top of that), wage increases (14% over 3 years...and the replacement workers are making more than some on the picket line) and something in benefits to do with the heavy labour aspect of the jobs. The problem with strike stories is that neither side (usually) is willing to tell the public everything that’s on the table/rejected/sought.

Here, there’s the change from 37 to 40 hours of work (don’t know if that means 40 hours with lunches/breaks or 40 hours on top of that), wage increases (14% over 3 years…and the replacement workers are making more than some on the picket line) and something in benefits to do with the heavy labour aspect of the jobs.

]]> By: Derjis http://theedmontonian.com/2009/09/08/first-thing-tuesday-headlines/comment-page-1/#comment-581 Derjis Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:45:11 +0000 http://theedmontonian.com/?p=5479#comment-581 Are there any more details re: what the workers are asking for in the Safeway strike...? Seems like a foolish time to go on strike, esp. over the prospect of *gasp!* having to work 40 hours in a week. My feelings towards unions have completely reversed since I've actually been a part of one... Are there any more details re: what the workers are asking for in the Safeway strike…? Seems like a foolish time to go on strike, esp. over the prospect of *gasp!* having to work 40 hours in a week.
My feelings towards unions have completely reversed since I’ve actually been a part of one…

]]>