Woodman's union challenged

If the union is doing such a wonderful job representing the employees, why won't it allow us to vote now? The idea that some people are management and thereby should not be allowed to vote is ludicrous. If the union truly felt this way, why didn't it get rid of these memebers years ago? Why is it that this vote has triggered this animosity from the union? Any arguement that the union can give for not allowing certain due paying members to vote is moot. They've been allowed to vote in the past, it is only this vote that worries the union. Instead of wasting time with the FLRB over who is management and who is not, allow us to vote. The longer the union stalls, the more members they are irritating, and therefore will lose. As to the individuals that 'feel threatened' by management, what are you doing (or not doing) that makes you feel so threatened? I highly suspect that the people that 'feel intimidated' would feel that way regardless of where they work.

eastandwest: Are you for real in thinking that the dues paying employees are not the union?
.
Granted, there are paid full time union administrators in most unions, but the bottom line is the dues paying members ARE the union.
.
Some of the members may not like the way it is being run, or may think their interests' could be better represented, but like any other similar organizations, I'm sure there are bylaws that govern such situations.
.
I'm guessing that you or your spouse might be in the group that doesn't think they are getting the representation they are paying for with their dues, but that doesn't change the fact that the employees are indeed the union.
.
If the majority of union members feel they are being shortchanged by the leadership, they can surely vote in new leaders rather than "cutting off their nose to spite their face" so to speak.

mymaro:
You have no idea what you are talking about. The employee's pay the union; the union is supposed to work for them. What the hec are you talking about? You think the $1.3 million dollar’s the woodman's employee's paid the union was well spent. That was their wage to the union that was suppose to represent the employee's. What representation? There was none. The union is hired to work for the employee's. Where do you think the dues go?

eastandwest, you dont understand unionized labor do you? you dont "hire" a union. the employees are the union. there are elected officials in the union but they are also members of the union. elected officials of this union may be woodmans employees in janesville or some other place where the employees are represented by the UFCW. please get an understanding before you comment on something.

MrAnonymous: Are you crazy! Let’s assume that this really happened. Why wouldn't you sue over this? Why would you want a crumb when you could have a whole cookie....unless there might be more to the story? "Multi-millionaires don't need job protection, do you?' Like I said if this really went down the way you wrote it the man is built on Reputation he keeps his employees smiling and the employees keep the customers smiling. Why hasn't this been out in the open, in the paper?

Perhaps so many people 'wave their right to the union' because the union doesn't do anything for them.

MrAnonymous...As long as you don't have a history of that offense, you should be fine. I also think it's great that you're using the union to your advantage. That's what it's there for! So many people waive their right to the union when it comes to disciplinary action, then complain when they get fired. Go figure.

Fire the union?
Aren't YOU the union?
How about voting in new leadership if the current ones aren't representing your interests?
Like they say "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater."

To the Woodman's employee's:
I do not think that you all get this. The union is suppose to be working for you! You hired them and you are paying their wages. You are allowed to fire them for not doing their job! Would you not be fired for not doing your job? Think about it!

bigmackdog, you are ignorant. get out out of the union? what do you think will happen then? the workers will be at the mercy of Mr. Woodman. I am also a member of the UFCW, not through woodmans however. with todays economy and unemployment rates the union saves the livelyhood of many hard working AMERICANS. get rid of the union then they can hire people for a much lower wage and cut the wages of the current employees. and with our society today there are plenty of people who would work for minimum wage or close to it. not going to comment on who but im sure we all know.

After reading all this, I'm glad I didn't "make the grade" and got fired by Woodmans back in the day.

Woodmans... I'm very annoyed by that place. The last time I was there, standing in line to check out, they asked me to use their "automated system". I had to scan my food, bag it, and had to deal with the bag weight system which I did not understand. It was a frustrating experience.

After a long day of work the last thing I want to do is a job that woodman's employees were hired for. They did manage to stand there and do nothing but watch me try to figure out how to use their system.

If I wanted to scan and bag food, I would have applied for a job at a grocery store. If this "service" becomes the accepted norm, I will shop through a service like www.peapod.com.

With the same trends taking place at HOME DEPOT and WALMART it may be only a matter of time until someone starts to offer those same delivery services.

See What good the UNION is vote no for a better life

Don't forget to vote on Feb.19
OOPS! Forgot my favorite, be strong and see below:

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything...

Dear Fellow Woodman's Employee Owners:

For weeks now, I have shared with you my belief that for roughly a dollar a day, the "insurance" of keeping the Union (UFCW Local 1473) is a reasonable price to pay to have someone sitting on your side of the table should you need them in any disciplinary action. I even shared this belief with Phil Woodman at one of the "Union Busting Information Meetings". As woodworkerdude recently posted: "NEVER make a mistake".

Well, yesterday (Friday 2/15/08) I took an unscheduled break to use a bathroom (couldn't hold it any longer) and I now find myself in such a predicament. Found out at quitting time Friday. I'm currently suspended from employment after 13+ years of loyalty and won't know my fate until Monday 2/18/08. Needless to say, it's not the fun and productive weekend off that I was looking forward to after working hard for the "Man" and my fellow "employee owners" all week.

I'm not a trouble (or troubled) employee and like working at Woodman's (otherwise would be long gone!) and especially like most of my co-owners(?). You know who you are...

Anyway, regardless of what happens to me on Monday, I'll survive, but I sure am glad that my Union Representative will be by my side as my voice, my support, my strength. You will be too if we stick together through this attack on our collective bargaining rights!

In closing, here are some thoughts worth considering should the union decertification vote happen (some are my own and some should be attributed to other authors unknown to me):

Multi-millionaires don't need job protections, do you?

Many came before us to fight for what we have now. Please don't let it slip away.

Some contract is better than no contract. Don't be swayed, think for yourself.

Now is not the time to bail. Don't bail unless you plan to fail.

Narrow minds should get out of tight places.

And Remember: You are the Union! If you fire our Union, you might as well fire yourself...

remember when phil woodman got busted at Wally World for espionage? he was checking out their prices and Sams people didn't like it. i also think his tv commercials are cheesy and dumb.

Eastandwest writes: "Brewster how long do you think negotiations will take when the union wants to build a fairy tale Woodman's.
5 vacations after 29 years
5 PHs after 5 years
Two week schedule posted @8am
$3 premium to buy off supervisors from their right to vote
20% increase on the vacation picking
For every one part time position there has to be two full time positions

And don't forget the $4500 the unions going to get Phil give us in bonuses"

This isn't what the Union is expecting. It's called a barganing unit for a reason. Just like when you sell a house or car, you start out high and negotiate until you reach an agreement on both sides. Without a union, there is NO negotiating, what Phil wants, Phil will get. People also talk about how the non-union stores have the same benefits and wags as the union stores. That's because the union stores are fighting for us! Imagine the uprising if one store was treated differently than other stores. That wouldn't go over very well. Like I said earlier, Phil is a brilliant businessman, he's not gonna jeopardize his fortune! And being employee owned is pretty much just on paper. I never got asked if it was ok to spend my money hiring a union-busting firm to "consult" with us. I was told (not confirmed) that Fred Grubb was paid over $75,000.

I've worked for Woodman's for 19 years now and all I can say is that it's a good place to work if you watch your back, be the perfect employee, and NEVER make a mistake. That's where the union can make a difference for you. If you ever find yourself in a bit of trouble, you will have someone behind you. Without the union, they can fire you because your management doesn't like you if they want! You could fall down in your driveway shoveling and need knee surgery, suddenly, you're a risk, you're not gonna be able to do your job to full capacity...bye bye! We'll hire someone new and pay 'em less. My job security is worth the average dollar a day to have representation. People say "I'm paying all this oney each month, what has the union done for me?" They've been our voice! They've negotiated our contracts for us! You pay insurance on your cars, home, health, right? You may never need it, but if you do, you're glad it's there...same thing here. Phil is a brilliant business man & I have no beef with him personally, I'm just not comfortable giving him total control of "my" company. By the way, Phil drives a cadillac now, as does his son Clint. Got rid of the Supra over 10 years ago.

Hey Brewster are you one of those store union stewards that get half their yearly dues back at the end of the year?

Brewster how long do you think negotiations will take when the union wants to build a fairy tale Woodman's.
5 vacations after 29 years
5 PHs after 5 years
Two week schedule posted @8am
$3 premium to buy off supervisors from their right to vote
20% increase on the vacation picking
For every one part time position there has to be two full time positions

And don't forget the $4500 the unions going to get Phil give us in bonuses

This all sounds like a repeat of 6 years ago. Remember when they thought the members were strong but to weak to strike...wow they really showed Woodman's that year didn't they. Come on all let’s stick it to the man again; maybe we'll get retro by December. Brewster that's enough time to buy little Jimmy a new bike.

I've been at West for four years. Phil visits our store nearly every week. The union reps... hmm, I know they were there when I first started. Oh, yeah, that was the signing of the last contract. And they've been there in the last month,...oh, yeah, it's contract time. I find it amazing how a union that claims to represent us, doesn't know us and doesn't bother to make it's presence known except at contract time. Phil is not allowed to give us our scheduled bonuses because the union view them as bribes. Never mind the fact that the bonuses are listed in the contract. (Gee, I thought that the last contract was the working document until the next contract is signed.)The union has stated that it can keep this thing tied up in court for a year. That's a year of employees not receiving bonuses that we have all come to expect and rely upon. Personally, I feel that this is a threat by the union to all the employees that it allegedly represents. How many employees have plans for that money? I know of people planning for vacations, weddings, paying of bills, buying something for their homes, and other things with that money. But it's okay, you can delay those plans for a year. The union's need is far greater than your own. As for the person that pointed out that only 30% of employees signed the petition, perhaps you were unaware of all of the night and weekend and every other weekend employees that were never shown the petition. I know of at least twenty employees at my store that didn't know about this until a few weeks ago. If the union is so concerned about us and doesn't believe that we want out, why not have the vote now instead of delaying this in court (who do you think is paying their high priced lawyers?).

To Brewster 2008,
even though I am a former employee, I still have friends that work at Woodmans. I have personally seen the recent letters sent to employees by both Phil Woodman and the union. The union has recently changed presidents and representives, and hopefully that will make a good difference for everyone concerned. The main problem is that on one wants to work together unless they get something out of the deal, even though they may benefit from it somewhere along the line. Greed on both sides causes problems. When you have a management saying you have to do one thing and then goes and does exactly what you were told not to do i.e: not letting your personal life affect your job (the employees know exactly what this concerns), and then doing the same or worse, and no one is supposed to object. There are a great many good people who work and have worked at Woodmans, it's just the vast majority are never given any credit in person by a manager or maybe, even Phil himself, except in his "newsletters". I must also say that Woodman employees enjoy a great many benefits that are hard to find in todays workplace. It's just some of the employees have only worked at Woodmans and maybe one or two other jobs and have a sense of entitlement. The union only works as well as it's members. Some members want the benefits without any of the work. They would all be better off if they just tried practicing the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would like to be treated. I truley believe that if Phil knew of some of the things occuring in the business with his name on it, quite a few heads would roll, no matter how he had to get it done.

There is case law that declares supervisors' membership in the same bargaining unit as their subordinates IS in fact a conflict IF they are expected to discipline them at any point.

In case you didn't hear: EVERY-OTHER-WEEKEND EMPLOYEES HAVE JUST AS MUCH OF A RIGHT TO UNION REPRESENTATION AS ANYBODY ELSE!!

EVERY-OTHER-WEEKEND EMPLOYEES HAVE JUST AS MUCH OF A RIGHT TO UNION REPRESENTAION AS ANYBODY ELSE!!

Poster eastandwest can't help but be bitter about representation that they benefit from even if it's on the most basic of levels... why so?

Reply to dopperdjs:

You said it, the word "former". Just how do you know so much? As for the supervisors:
"whoever heard of supervisors being in the union? Supervisors get very unfriendly at contract time, and let you know how they think you should vote".
Not true from my experiences. This union vote will affect both the supervisor and the worker... however, thanks for the input

eastandwest, and all these other nay sayers will try to break you down, drag you out, and make you believe that unions are all bad... please make reference to ROCKCOFARMER's posts and come to your senses please. Eastandeast your spouse is once bitten, twice shy. Tell him/ her they better recognize a good thing when they are benefiting from it.

I am a former Woodman's employee. I enjoyed my job, but am now glad not to work there, my new place of employment treats me with respect and lets me know when I've done good work. That doesn't happen at Woodman's. One day you are told something by one supervisor, and the next day, get reprimanded from another supervisor. You walk on eggs, because the rules get changed, and no one gets notified until you break the rule. Certain comments made by several different people are correct. Employee owned? What a laugh! Yes, you get dividends and profit sharing monies, but you have NO say so in anything else. The Janesville store must vote with the Beloit and two Madison stores because their contracts were all neogoticated at the same time. The bonus' for this year at Christmas (which depend on how many hours you work, if you're late more than a certain amount of times, or absent} were 7% of your hourly wage times the amount of hours worked during the bonus period. Last year, and for many, many years before that, it was $1.00 per hour worked during the period. So, this year, ulitity workers (baggers, outside workers, and people who pick up garbage and keep bathrooms clean} get the smallest bonus', (.63-,67cents per hour). As far as having a low unemployment rate, people who run out of benefits, or for some reason don't qualify for benefits, don't get counted. There are a lot of those people. The union may not want supervisors and weekend only employees to vote, but they do vote, if they choose. And whoever heard of supervisors being in the union? Supervisors get very unfriendly at contract time, and let you know how they think you should vote. One more thing, if Phil is so sure that people in these stores don't want a union, why did he hire a consulting firm( Grubb, Quist, and Associates), from Vermont, who specialize in union avoidiance? As for the union, it really doesn't do much for employees except help them keep their seniority rights and can make it a little more difficult to get rid of someone. Wisconsin is an At Will state, meaning without a union, the employer doesn't need a reason to terminate an employee. Good luck Woodman employees, whatever you decide!!!!!

By the way Hannah, the long time liquor store employee that got demoted was arrested for drunk driving ON HIS WAY HOME FROM WORK. That has everything to do with his job. Furthermore, in my opinion, he should have been fired for being drunk on the job, but instead the union helped him to keep a job and all of his seniority.

All I have to say about Woodman's is that I am glad I no longer work there. The main objective that Woodman's wants to acheive is to have a workforce made up of part-timers who receive no benefits, getting the most work out of a skeleton crew of workers, and having none of the workers question any policy that is set forth by management. The management at Woodman's only cares about the bottom line. Those checker timings mean everything. If you want a job where there is no compassion, low morale, and oppressive working conditions, then Woodman's is the place to be. I fully enjoy my job right now. I am appreciated, valued, allowed to be creative, and am even told how talented I am. I am not constantly monitored as to where I park my car, if I am one minute late on my break, or if I happen to be idle for 30 seconds. The management at Woodman's is uneducated, inconsiderate, unfair, and highly selfish. I wish those workers luck in their vote, but the truth is that if the management wants a person gone at Woodman's then they will make that happen, Union or not.

FarmerRockco:

"Long time gone" brought up Woodman's Toyota, not me. I responded to his/her post. (you can find it in this thread)

You then followed on Jan 30 at 903am (regarding Toyota) "This was just to antaganize the gm workers I think." (quoted directly from your post)

I am not trying to start an argument. My point is that the utility (read benefit) of union membership has drastically wanned over the past 20 years. The statistical data reinforces my point. The vast majority of the private sector does not belong to one. If its benefitial to belong to a union (for some it is) then I support your willingness to join or start one. Unfortunately, its people like you who dont want to give me or others who want nothing to do with a union the same courtesy.

Woodman, you, and I have a choice in what we drive-I think its silly that anyone would choose their form of transportion to antagonize another person-that person must have a lot of free time. I would not waste one second of my life wondering why someone I dont know buys a particular brand of automobile-but that's me.

tcb-to clarify a point, you brought up what kind of car P. W. bought not me. I said that you involve yourself in union issues because you try to start an argument, and that the reason you brought up the toyota was to stir up the uaw which had nothing to do with the debate. Your so full of b/s it is sometimes laughable.

Rockcofarmer:

A debate is s discussion. Points are won and lost. It is as simple as that.

You conceded my point on choice by stating "If the people at Woodman's don't want to be represented by a union so be it that is there choice" WOW AMAZING you and I agree. I am for choice. Choice in were you shop, choice in were you work, choice in what you buy, etc. It is the bedrock of our market economy.

As for Phil Woodman, whether he bought a toyota truck to spite GM employees-that is your opinion. I could careless why he bought it, but its his choice to buy, with his hard earned capital, any car he wants. If that makes some UAW members made, tough-dont shop at woodmans. The UAW is powerless to stop it-as are the salaried employees, absolutely powerless.

Your rationale to buy GM product is because a certain percentage of the local economy works for GM and a certain percentage also shops at woodmans is a circular argument. It is nothing more than a coincidence. Phil Woodman needs to provide products and services to all of his customers (and employees) or he risks losing business.

As for the state of affairs, in our market economy there are periods of prosperity and periods of decline-there is a business cycle. I know that some people have tough time but I also know that some people are doing very well. These are facts in a dynamic market economy-its all relative. You can't please everyone all the time. I can tell you that gov't has very few solutions-its not in its nature, its people that make America great-

As for my statistics-the US department of commerce has much the data. I dont need to use statistics to prove my point-I use them to reinforce it. A subtle but important difference.

TCB: You have answered my first post as to what type of person is against the union. You talk a good game about your position as to why unions are bad. You can quote all the facts and figures that you want, but those are your facts and figures, fortunately I don't buy it. Where do you get that from Fox news or Rush Limbaugh. You might be the benevolent employer that you claim to be, but thats your opinion. Maybe you pay all you associates $7.50/hr and think thats great because its over minimum wage. It all depends on your prospective I guess. Don't know, don't care. We travel in different circles and have different life experiences and I doubt we will ever agree. If the people at Woodman's don't want to be represented by a union so be it that is there choice. I will still shop there because it is a local merchant. My point was that in the long run the union will be better for the majority of the employee's than to not have one. It's already been stated by employee's that the represented workers had higher pay, the rub was that the bonuses were tied up until the new contract was ratified. Like I said, pay, benefits, health/safety and workman's comp (in case of injury) are just a few things that represented employees will have an advantage over non-represented ones in a big company. You like to bait people into a debate with your questionable facts and figures. The best one was that you don't know Mr. Woodman but yet you know that he bought a new Toyota. This was just to antaganize the gm workers I think. So this will be my last post with you because I see through your scheme. I have had enough of this tripe for the last seven years and hope that the American people will see that your right wing ideology is not been good for this country. You can claim that unions are bad and that your right wing policies are good but I see the downfall of the middleclass and I ask you, as a country are we better off now than we were eight years ago? Again I will not debate you any more. I'm better off going out in the field, find a rock and argue with it versus a "me, myself and I chicken hawk republican . The result will almost be the same, I wont change the rocks mind but at least I will have picked it up out of the field. I've got to get to work.

middleclass:

Do you own anything? Do you own a single share of stock (like 70% of Americans)

Owners for people into bankruptcy? No one should have personal responsibility?

7500 people applying for 400 jobs? I thought no one wanted to work for Walmart? No one is forcing people to apply to work at Walmart. THe fact that walmart can attract that many people for 400 position is good for walmart-which means they can select the best people for their business.

Please site your source for the 50 million "Americans" without health insurance. This is a fairytale. Maybe Russ Feingold mentioned this in one of his class envy speeches?

Interesting- I completely agree with you. They need to give you all the pros and cons of unions vs. no unions and let you decide. There is no need to make this go on for a long period of time. But one needs to remember that the people that signed that petition put EVERYONE in that position. They are the ones that are keeping all union employees from the money they are entitled to receive.

I work at one of the union stores and the raises and bonus information that is posted in past comments is true. It is also comparable to what we have received in the past. A little more this year. It is a lot better for baggers and utility clerks then it has been in the past. It is also true that we here in the union stores will not see this money until negotiations have been settled which again is no different then it has been in the past during contract negotiation times. My frustration in all of this is the fact that we will be going through this process for a long time and as long as it goes unsettled we will not get that money, and we like all of the non union stores have worked hard for our raises and bonuses all year long. My wish is that they would give us the information on both sides and set up the vote so that we can just decide... I am unsettled by comments from our union representatives such as "we can tie this up in court for as much as a year". We as Woodman's employees are intelligent hard working people. We should be given the information needed from both sides and then given time to make a decision, then given the right to vote and make a decision. Then it should end. Yes to the union, negotiations continue we get on with our lives. No to the union.... we see what Phil is going to do for us and we get on with our lives. It is insulting to me to be treated by either side as if I am not intelligent enough to make and informed decision on something that that directly effects my life on a daily basis.

Clarification on the bonus that non-union employees get: *Clerks, Department Clerks & Maintenance (these are people that are higher up and get paid more anyway) They shall receive no more than $2500. It's to equal a percentage of what they grossed the year before. Employees with less than 1 year of service get 4%, 1+ years get 6%, 3+ years get 7%, 5+ years get 8%. They will also be receiving a $.35 raise regardless of lenth of employment.
*Utility clerks which are on the bottom of the food chain (no pun intended) shall receive no more than $1500. The percentages are the same as before. Utility clerks will also receive an extra $.50 per hour regardless of length of service. Another clarification- this has nothing to do with what the union stores are going through right now. Every year the non-union stores get this same bonus. The raises though, usually vary by person, but they always are changing things up there. I'm not sure exactly how much the union stores get for bonuses and raises, but I THINK it's a little more than non-union. I'm sure it's to keep the non-union employees from quitting.

TCB says "Only 7% of the employed workforce are members of a union-. This is down from 20+% in the 1980s. Union membership is declining-no increasing".
I am not sure of the exact numbers but this seems pretty accurate. I wonder how this reduction in union members matches up to the standard of living for non skilled labor. My gut tells me the standard of living is going down similar to these union membership numbers.

TCB:
It sounds like you and Walmart have many things in common. They also call their workers associates and they treat their "associates" so well that finally after public protest, not free market pressure, they increased their benefit package. Recently, in Atlanta, Walmart had seventy five hundred people apply for four hundred jobs, so don't tell me free market pressure caused this. Unfortunatley, they still have the largest number of "associates" on Badgercare in Wisconsin. Greedy owners have caused fifty million Americans to be without health insurance and forced millions into bankruptcy. These greedy owners who can never have enough money, will be the only ones to blame when the country has to resort to socialized medicine. Without the union Phil Woodman will lower himself to Walmart standards and his "associates" will pay.

A 50c raise, based on $7.00/hr = 7.1% increase. $1,500 bonus, $7.00/hr x 2080 hours (full time 40 hrs wk x 52 weeks) is more than 10%. Can I get a job there?
This sounds awful generous, and therefore a little too good. I'd clarify who is eligible for these bonuses (length of time employed, # hours worked in week or year) how many people are really eligible for these? Are they at every non-union store or just ones that met certain (performance?) criteria.
If these bonuses are comparable to those in year's past, I might not look more closely. If they aren't, something--either details or motivation--needs to be questioned.

Rockcofarmer:

No I am not bitter, just open minded.

Let me deconstruct your comments:

"Workers build things, sweat, get their hands dirty." Without scarece capital from owners, what do worker get to build? How do they get dirty?

"They have done good things over the years for workers from pay and benefits to workplace safety." Yes, history is always 20/20. Union thuggery never existed, Jimmy Hoffa is alive and well-working as a meat cutter at woodmans-and all nonunion business owners, force workers to work in unsafe conditions, risking their lives, daily.

Just because you treat your associates well doesn't mean that everyone does. True, and if I did not treat employees well, they would seek other employers who did-national unemployement levels are at record lows (4.6%). I do it because I care about my fellow employees and its the right thing to do.

Want an example: mine diaster out west last year, that was a non union mine, want to place a bet on how those guys that were killed would feel about paying their monthly dues if they were alive today? By West do you mean West Virginia or Utah-mining is a dangerous business. Betting is not going to bring those miners back. If Vince Lombardi were coaching the packers would they have beaten the Giants last week? If I was taller, I might be in the NBA. Neither are true and there is no way any of us can know what went through the minds of the minors who were tragically killed in an accident.

You need to look at the big picture and understand that unions have there place and do represent the interests of the workers not the owners. You need to look at the big picture and realize that unions, have their place in history, if someone wants to form a union-good luck and if someone wants to disband-good luck. The issue is choice. Not coercion.

I know this is impossible for you to understand. The great myth is that most people would be working in unsafe conditions or that wages would be depressed without the union. The market tells a different story. Only 7% of the employed workforce are members of a union-. This is down from 20+% in the 1980s. Union membership is declining-no increasing.

I drive a GMC Yukon-a fantastic truck-I'd buy another one tomorrow-even at gas at 3/gallon (made in arlington by UAW/GM employees-not workers) but I also have a foreign car. Choice. It is the foundation of our market economy.

It's your inability to allow others to choose what's best for them is what bothers me.

Hi the ignorant one here that doesn't know the fact but only has a spouse that's mixed up in all this union stuff. On Feb. 6th the non union stores will be getting this, $1500 bonus for baggers $2500 for everyone else. $.50 wage increase $.35 for everyone else. Now while the union ties this process up for what could be a year....the non-union group get to reap in the benefits. Thanks Phil for your generous donation.

Unions do have a place and have had an amazing effect through out history. The question for this blog is does this union have a place at Woodman's. I have worked at Woodman's a long time, and I am not so sure, but I am collecting the information, and will make an informed decision based on my needs.

TCB: Yes to all. Workers build things, sweat, get their hands dirty. Associates are in retail and are lawyers also. Like I said you have a chip on your shoulder about unions. They have done good things over the years for workers from pay and benefits to workplace safety. Just because you treat your associates well doesn't mean that everyone does. Want an example: mine diaster out west last year, that was a non union mine, want to place a bet on how those guys that were killed would feel about paying their monthly dues if they were alive today? You need to look at the big picture and understand that unions have there place and do represent the interests of the workers not the owners. Did you lose to a union? Is that why you are so bitter?

It would make sense that you don't understand the union thing if you don't know the difference between a worker and an associate.

If everyone were associates, then workers would not need unions.

farmer:

So, if I understand you. Owners are greedy. Foremen are greedy. You have no childred yet pay property taxes, and if I dont like the union, I am not welcome? Oh yeah, I allegedly anti-worker (whatever that means). What is a worker? Is it similar to a worker bee?

If you pay property taxes, evidently you are an owner of something, are you greedy? Maybe your a foreman?

I hire employees, who are associate of mine. No one is a "worker."

TCB: Like I said I'm pro-worker, you are not. I should whine like you about my school taxes. That's my money and I have no kids in your school. I should get to keep it all myself. Whaaaaaa!!!!! If you don't like the union in the place you want to work, then don't apply. Unions have been a good thing, unless your a greedy owner or an egotistical foreman. I'll take my chances with the union over management anyday. nuf said

The mandatory joining of a union in a closed shop is a state governnment issue. It has nothing to do with union rules etc. While unions are in decline, there is still a place for them when dealing with larger groups. It ensures that there is not abuse of management powers with individual workers.

I have been in strong and weak unions and yes there are times that I am not happy paying those dues. Yet, the overall experience has been good.

Rockco:

Here is were you and I differ, if I am hired by a company that offers a union I should have the option of not joining the union. Correct? Why should I let a group that I choose not to be a part of confiscate a portion of my wages and then use those confiscated wages to support causes I am deeply against? Why is this such far fetched idea?

A union is not a govt and it cannot tax its members without impunity, dont you agree?

tcb-if you hire in to a union shop then join the union. What are you afraid of? I'm sure you wouldn't like it if I hired into your non-union shop and demanded that I be covered by a union. The way I see it your doing pretty good for yourself and at this time you don't have a need. That's not to say that there are not benefits with a union. I'm blue collar all the way, obviously you are not.

where was the union when a very long time liquer store employe received a drunk driving and was demoted. that has NOTHING to do with your job i dont care if it is the liquer store or not. UNLESS you actually needed the licence to do you job. pretty sure liquer dept doesnt deliver!!!!he is still able to probalby purchase stuff in the liquer store

Long time gone:

"Phil Woodman...purchased a brand spanking new Toyota Supra sports car."

So what. One of the great things about America is the freedom to choose. Choose where you work, where you live, what you eat, where you buy your groceries, even what you drive.

It is the height of arrogance to assume that Phil Woodman (or anyone else) should be forced to buy something he doesnt want. You can hold a grudge against him, Woodmn is a succesful business man-I dont know the guy, dont shop there-but I support your and his ability to choose what type of car to buy.

Brewster:

reply to TCB:

"You are exactly right, anyone can post whether opinion or rebuttal. I just feel when someone posts info that is unsubstantiated word of mouth it needs to be challenged."

I completely agree with you

Cheers!

TCB

Brewster-I do have a vested interest and how dare you presume I do not. The information I did provide were facts from an Employee who happens to be my spouse, not that it is any of your business. Yes, this does directly affect me and my family. You are obviously a very angry person that does not believe anyone. I have lived through allot of the Woodman's/Union bull!

I worked at Woodmans many years ago, and I gotta say, both sides of the posts are absolutely correct -
The UFCW is an absolutley miserable, do-nothing ignorant union who do nothing in terms of tangible labor representation.
On the other side, Phil Woodman and the upper management are treacherous and deceptive and treat even the most senior hourly employees like high school baggers who are simply disposable and replacable.
Phil Woodman, during the worst economic conditions Janesville had seen in a long time, a time when UC benefits were running out and GM families were using food stamps to buy their groceries (at Woodmans), purchased a brand spanking new Toyota Supra sports car. Even the most anti-union, anti-GM, pro-free marketplace people on this message board can see the arrogance, the selfishness, the cold-heartedness of that petty tyrant.
Phil Woodman might very well win this union-busting move, if only because he is more vindictive and smarter than the bozos at the UFCW.
Instead of being a pillar of the community, someone like a Ken Hendricks or a Jim Fitzgerald, Phil Woodman has denegrated workers as replacable cogs in the machine. No one will ever, or should never, name a park or any other public facility in this guy's name.
Good luck back there, Woodmans employees.

reply to TCB:

You are exactly right, anyone can post whether opinion or rebuttal. I just feel when someone posts info that is unsubstantiated word of mouth it needs to be challenged.

Can the Janesville store employees vote independently of the Beloit and Madison stores or must they remain linked together?

Reply to eastandwest:

Why do you care anyways if you are not a woodman's employee? Why is this situation your concern to the effect that you feel the need to propagate such unsubstantiated information? If I told you the pope was a protestant would you believe it? You probably would and then run and tell everyone. You are just a non-woodman's employee that has no vested interest in the outcome of the vote either way! Yahoo has some good gossip blogs if that is what you are into...

Brewster-
Obviously you are the one that is ignorant- my information comes directly from an employee of over 10 years. I myself am in a union. So I do know both sides. Why would the facts that are being stated be trash talk when it comes from Woodman's employees?

Brewster:

This is a forum for opinion. Anyone can post, you cannot decide who is elgible or ineligible, ignorant or informed. Anyone is free to post whether they have read others posts is not relevant.

Reply to eastandwest:
I know Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction because an Israeli told me...
Please, if you don't have first hand knowledge what are you doing posting trash talk here? Just because you have read all the posts does not qaulify you to know "both sides of the story". If you are not a Woodman's employee or a Union member, why is this your concern? Please take your ignorance elsewhere.

Reply to seabee:

Employees at Woodman's share profits in the form of a ESOP plan. However, they have little say as to everyday operations. Employees do not decide wages, benefits, vacation time, etc. This is done by the upper management just as in a company that is not "employee owned". The Union negotiates contracts on the employees behalf in hopes of getting an improved contract. Union staff are also knowledgable when it comes to legal issues and take appropriate measures when deemed neccessary. Hope this helps.

Reply to lierre04:

FYI: I'm sorry to say, but it seems you are uneducated on the formation of unions. You must be a non-union employee. Yes, the employees have every right, at any time to vote for a union shop under U.S. labor laws. It has nothing to do with new hires, transfers, etc. If the required majority of workers vote for a union shop, then the store becomes a union shop. This can happen at any time the store is open. The first week or three years later.

rockcofarmer:

Serious question:

You wrote "but they do have a purpose" what is that purpose today 2008?

If someone wants to organize and join a union, my issue is with compulsory membership. If I work in a union shop as a rank and file employee, I should have the ability to NOT join the union, dont you agree? If not why not. Why should I be forced to joinand pay for a club that I receive little or no benefit from its membership?

Why would an "employee owned" store need a union?

Eastandwest, how can the employees that Woodman's hires for the new store have a say in whether or not there should be a union? First, they transfer a select amount of people from other stores, both union and non-union, then they hire people. It is decided before the new store is built if there will be a union or not. It's not as if every employee they hire picks whether or not there will be a union because a lot of the new employees don't make it through the probationary period. Doesn't make much sense to let people choose if they might not stay long.

not you, but there are people that post the same thing over and over no matter what union is involved. They obviously have a chip on their shoulder about something. If you don't like a union that's fine, but they do have a purpose.

rock:
Are you referring to the Woodman's employee's or the union employee's? These are not negative comments just facts of what has transpired.

Question: Why do most anti-union post's always cut down the workers as if they are lazy or drunk or they don't deserve the pay they get for the work they do? Shouldn't we be glad that a neighbor or anyone for that matter be successful and have a good life? Just curious as to why all the negativity. I suppose if your an owner or corporate manager it makes sense. I always like the people who decide what is a fair wage and/or benefit. I always want to know what they do. my 2 cents, good bye

I am someone that knows both sides of this. I have been monitoring all the postings. There are only bits and pieces that are correct. Let me state a few facts that I know for sure:
1. Phil has built several new stores and he does not make the decision to have a union or not. The employees that are hired make that decision and they chose not to have unions.
2. The union does not want the weekend only people or the supervisors, which both pay union dues, to have a right to vote. That is around 300 of the 900 people in the union.
3. The union, not only making money off of the member’s dues, also has sold personal information to credit card companies.
4. The union also gets a salary which the Woodman’s members partially pay for, at approximately $73,000 a year.
5. When members try to contact the union with a grievance, the phones do not get answered nor do they contact the employee back.

What did the union do for the $1.3 million dollars that they were paid by the Woodman’s members?
I know these items to be true because I have spoken with an employee that has been with Woodman’s for over 10 years.

Stu and sluggo hit the nail on the head. YOU are the union. All the posts' here are irrlevant. The only thing that matters is the local union members and what is right for you.

If you don't take the time and effort to get the facts so you are not misled, then shame on you.

If you are not happy with your representation then it is up to you to do something about it.

No excuses. The union is you and you get out of it what you put into it.

Solidarity to all.

I am a union construction worker and danged happy to be one. We recruit non-union people. Most make half of wages we do for doing the same work. When jobs come out for bid, union and non-union contractors are within thousand dollars of each other on million dollar projects. With that being said, when non-union contractors get the jobs they are making tremendous profits at the workers expense. I disagree with the opinions that this is just a Woodman’s issue. All unions should support one another. Those people are your friends, your neighbors, your family. I don’t want to see them lose out. I would like to hear where the anti-union Woodman posters work. No need to name your employer, just tell me what type of job you have.

-Stu

RedBedHead: I highly doubt that loosing a union at Woodman's would hurt the local chain in the long run. While brothers and sisters speak "solidarity"; I do not find that mentality throughout the community. I regularly see UAW members supporting non-union facilities such as Wal-Mart and those same members are wearing and using products produced overseas. In my opinion, unions have lost the focus that originally made them great. Today, many members look at what they can get today rather than the bigger picture. The downfall of not only the union, but labor in general for the USA. Best of luck to those members at Woodman's as they make their choice.

I know that management can have nothing to do with influencing the votes, but I have a gut feeling Phil Woodman doesn't want the union anymore. In the last 10 years, he hasn't built a single store with a union. Just something to think about.

momof5, I said that because I know for a fact 2 of the people that are weighing in on this subject ARE GM employees. I am not saying unions are bad, I am simply stating that I would like to hear the story from people involved, not outsiders who feel they have to weigh in just because they are union members. That's all. I hope that the Woodman's employees get the best deal that they can, with or without the union. Thank you and have a great day.

you are probably right MajorMojo. i would guess most of the pro-union posters are GM employees, or should i say UAW employees. scarred to work without the protection of the union that has kept many an undeserving soul in employment. unions are not a bad thing. but those that abuse fair wages(and we know who that is) need to be re-called! woodman employees should have the right for a vote, not just now but annualy.