Skip to content or view screen version

Wal Mart up to it's anti-union tricks again?

solidarity | 24.06.2006 16:03 | Social Struggles | Workers' Movements

An article has appeared in the Sunderland Echo  http://www.sunderlandtoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1107&ArticleID=1585149 where workers were being photographed entering the Washington depot. The article suggests that it was the GMB doing this, which they deny... as we know the surveillence and intimidation of workers when the Union is about is classic WalMart.

Strongly anti-union WalMart has a track record of installing survillence to watch their staff as soon as they think there are workers who dare to think they should work in solidarity.

In Washington the implication is that the GMB is keeping watch for scabs. The Union has had to warn temping agencies about breaking the strike, as the mega-corp (which has been condemed for breaking the law and lying about it in court in the US) has made it clear they will try and break the strike. However, as previous form goes this is bound to be the intimidatory work of some of WalMarts professional anti-union team.

solidarity

Additions

Some Things Walmart never told me

25.06.2006 05:57

From Past Form:

 http://www.union-network.org/unisite/Sectors/Commerce/Multinationals/Wal-Mart_union_busting_operator_named_for_threatening_workers.htm

 http://www.union-network.org/UNIsite/sectors/commerce/Multinationals/Wal-Mart_Ontario_union_busting_continues.htm

It would seem that any high level WALMART "Human Resources" Manager having entered the country in the recent past has done so with the intention of breaking the law by interfering in the legal Process of Striking. This is not a statement taking side. And it is a view held widely

 http://www.labourstart.org/wal-mart/

It is not taking sides or encouraging ank kind of doings on either side to suggest the Union Busting that there is so much evidence for is actually bad for business. Shareholders, not traditionally the bastion of Workers Rights, are beginning to question the sense of Union Bashing with resolutions at shareholders Meetings.

 http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article.cgi/article1899.html

This has led to WALMART being reported upon quite critically - using information from Freedom Of Information sources to compile a report

 http://www.americanrightsatwork.org/docUploads/WalmartReport%5Flowres%2Epdf

The accountants for WALMART are Ernst & Young LLP as the independent accountants of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. As part of the accountants duty of care and due dilligence in signing off accounts, the Accountants need to be assured that the Management have proceeded with due care. Should the aggressive Union Busting activities of WALMART be leading to reduction in profits then there might be professional reservations expressed. Persons at Ernst and Young who might benefit from Shareholder concerns are listed below. Mister Nigel Jones might be particularly concerned to Audit the Change in sales from the start of the strike. A complex area requiring the expensive services of qualified Auditors. In order for WALMART to make any clear assertions about Union Activity, Shareholders would do well to demand the independent analystical commentary of the Auditors.

(Only Shareholders could complain - although members of the Public could politely express concern.)

Address: 1 More London Place, London, SE1 2AF
Telephone: 020 7951 2000 Fax: 020 7951 1345
Website: www.ey.com
Main Contact: Mr Nick Land (Chairman)



Mr Nick Land (Chairman)
 cbamford@uk.ey.com

Mr Nigel Jones (National Head of Audit Services)
 njones@uk.ey.com

Mr Aidan O’Carroll (National Head of Tax Services)
 aocarroll@uk.ey.com

Mr Nick Pasricha (Managing Partner, Client Service)
 npasricha@uk.ey.com

Mr Simon Perry (National Head of Transaction Advisory Services)
 sperry@uk.ey.com


For Those not wishing to have any truck with Accountants and that sort of folk, you could contact Walmartwatch

 http://walmartwatch.com

And ask about their need to make links with ASDA employees in the UK. From such a site you download and read the "Managers Guide to Remaining Union Free" - Which is clearly a document inciting conspiracy to break the law in respect of the right to free association.


And the things that Walmart never told me? Firstly that my Union Membership some five years ago (before I went all middle class) within an entirely different organisation was relevant to my current employment. I thought not and chose to leave.

A Disgusted Former Employee


Comments

Hide the following comment

Union calls off strike action by supermarket workers

01.07.2006 18:33

An agreement reached June 29 between the GMB trade union and the Asda supermarket chain will do nothing to protect the working conditions of thousands of distribution and warehouse workers.

The GMB called off a five-day strike by thousands of Asda workers—due to begin June 30—after last-minute talks at the Trades Union Congress headquarters in London.

Asda, which is owned by Wal-Mart Stores, had threatened legal action in the high court to block the industrial action, claiming irregularities with the strike ballot.

The GMB claims 7,000 members out of the 12,500 workers employed at Asda’s 24 distribution centres across the UK and wants national negotiating rights at all depots.

The strike ballot achieved a three to one vote in favour of a walkout. Workers were also demanding bonus payments they say they are owed from 2005 and are opposed to management efforts to increase their workloads. Staff currently distribute up to 10 tonnes of produce each day on a 1,100 pick rate, which the supermarket wants to increase to 1,400.

Asda disputed the union’s membership figures and sought an injunction against the strike on the basis that many more ballot papers had been returned than actual members.

The GMB argued that any irregularities were the result of Asda’s refusal to inform them of the names of those paying membership dues directly from their pay packets and said it had complained to the Department of Trade and Industry six months ago about the problem.

The threatened strike was hailed as the first significant trade union action against the American conglomerate, which is the largest retailer in the world. Wal-Mart employs more than 1 million workers in the United States alone, where all of its stores are non-union.

Asda was taken over by Wal-Mart in 1999 and has established itself as the second largest supermarket chain in the UK.

Last year the “War on Want” charity revealed details of a leaked document entitled “Warehouse Chip Away Strategy 2005,” which outlined how Asda intended to improve its market share by further undermining working conditions. These included eliminating work breaks, removing grievance mechanisms and cutting the numbers involved in loading from two to one.

In February an employment tribunal in the north of England fined Asda £850,000 for breaching labour relations law in the run-up to a ballot on union rights at its Tyne and Wear depot in January 2005.

The company was found guilty of offering financial inducements to staff in return for surrendering their union rights. The 340 staff had been offered a 10 percent pay rise if they gave up the bargaining agreement established by the GMB. The staff had rejected the offer and later took strike action. In what is thought to be the first judgement of its kind, the tribunal also ordered the company to pay its employees £2,500 each in compensation.

Asda had employed the public relations company Portland to distribute anti-GMB leaflets. Portland was set up by former New Labour advisor Tim Allan, who worked for Prime Minister Tony Blair for six years in the 1990s. The tribunal found Portland’s leaflets to be “very hostile to trade unions and highly disparaging of the collective bargaining process.”

According to reports, Portland had sought a £50,000 payment for its work, including a “success fee” of £14,000 when union recognition was overturned. At the tribunal a leaked email exchange was entered into evidence—between Marie Gill, Asda’s head of industrial relations (distribution), and Allan in December 2004—discussing plans to sack workers who refused to give up their union membership.

Gill wrote: “Following the ballot—assuming we get 70 percent or more, any colleague who refuses to sign the new contract will be given notice to terminate their employment—and we may have a group of hardy refuseniks who cause some disruption—and they may get sympathy from the rest of the workforce. “Our strategy here would be to give them a couple of weeks to sign up and if they refuse we could then terminate and pay them in lieu of notice—thus getting them off the site ASAP.” Allan replied: “Basically, I think it is better to be clear about the consequences of the vote rather than fudge. I think that will actually help us in the campaign and make the process after a victory easier to manage.” “We shouldn’t have a situation where people can claim they did not know the consequences of the ballot.”

Asda is to appeal the tribunal’s decision. In February, it threatened to terminate a collective agreement established by the GMB at its Dartford depot unless it was changed.

This threat prompted the GMB to announce it would begin a national ballot for strike action across all Asda’s depots and warehouses.

For the GMB, the threat of strike action is aimed solely at convincing the supermarket chain to include it as a negotiating partner with the specific task of managing relations with the workforce. The union had already called off one strike ballot after talks between it and Asda in April resulted in an agreement to form a “National Joint Council” (NJC) for distribution.

GMB leader Paul Kenny described that agreement at the time as a fresh start between the union and the supermarket. “I have dealt with this company for number of years. I have to say it was one of the most constructive meetings that I have had in two decades,” he said.

Within two months that agreement was null and void, prompting the latest ballot.

The Mirror newspaper ran an “exclusive” on how Asda’s CEO Andy Bond had said he intended to cross picket lines and work in depots hit by the strike. Allegations had also been made that Asda was employing temporary agency staff to break the strike and intended to bus strike-breakers across picket lines to protect their identities.

The supermarket chain rejected the claims, saying that increased staff numbers were due to busier trade than usual during the World Cup.

Now the GMB is claiming that the supermarket giant has had another change of heart. Once again Kenny claimed that the last-minute deal between the union and management constituted a fresh start.

In truth, whilst matters appear to have been resolved—at least temporarily—to the mutual satisfaction of both Asda and the GMB, the same cannot be said for the interests of the workforce.

The union has been promised that it will get its feet under the table alongside corporate management with the Distribution National Joint Council. This is to “deal with a range of issues of mutual concern and interest in relation to Asda’s distribution depots.”

Asda has agreed that meetings of the company and the GMB “will take place at the most senior level at least twice a year jointly to review major strategic issues facing the company” (emphasis added). The GMB is also “given access” to all distribution sites and “facilities for appropriate levels of union workplace representatives.” It will be able to distribute recruitment material and present the union case during company induction procedures.

However, the appendix to the agreement states that the NJC “is not itself a collective bargaining or legally binding agreement.” The deal also accepts the “modernization” of existing agreements at nine depots with union representation.

None of the issues raised by the workforce, such as increasing productivity or outstanding bonuses, are resolved. Instead, these will fall under a series of vague headings to be discussed by the NJC at some future point.

Copyright 1998-2006
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved

Julie Hyland
- Homepage: http://wsws.org/articles/2006/jul2006/asda-j01.shtml