BRATTLEBORO — Co-op Workers Want Union. Workers unionize at the Brattleboro Food Co-op. Co-op board will not recognize union. Union files papers with NLRB for Co-op vote. All front page stories in newspapers.
Where are the stories about those who oppose unionization? The stories of those who have not been asked their opinion, or how about those who have felt intimidation by coworkers or have endured the hostile environment that some of the workers now feel that they are working in?
Where are those stories? In the Letters to the Editor, or on page four, totally butchered so that not all information is out there for the public. That is where they are.
Are people (shareholders, community, shoppers, fellow coworkers) asking the right questions? Do they know what to ask? How often do they ask questions directly to those workers opposing unionization, and not just those in favor of it?
How often are they asking the board why they are leaving it to the individual workers, as they should, instead of telling them to recognize unionization? [Editor's note: The co-op board has declined any substantive comment on this issue, despite our offering multiple opportunities for at least two stories in the past five weeks.]
How would unionization affect the workers, shareholders, shoppers, and the community services that the Co-op provides? Who is asking these questions?
We have been approached by a few co-workers and one reporter. Other than that, we have contacted another reporter, put out information for other coworkers, and have been there for those who have muscled up the courage to ask questions.
Maybe there is just no news in being anti-union or wanting to put all the information out there for individuals to make an informed decision. All the information seen out there is biased, except for the words of a few brave souls who are passionate enough about the co-op to defend the board decisions and express their distaste for bad or missing information.
How about those who share stories about being cornered by coworkers to sign a petition to bring unionization to a vote, later to find out it was used to try to convince the board to accept unionization?
And, speaking of petitions, what about the issue of getting the public involved by having people sign a petition to strong-arm the board of directors into accepting unionization without the consent of all employees of the co-op?
Information on managers' salaries at the co-op is being posted, and discussed, on iBrattleboro.com. According to some individuals, some of the managers at the Co-op don't earn what they make. Did anyone mention that the union's primary industry is K-12 education? What does that have to do with the price of tofu?
But enough kale smoothie slinging: there has been a lot of it, most unjust and seemingly vindictive.
* * *
It is understood that a select few employees have had bad experiences with management. As much as no one wants to hear that, or read that, such experiences will happen. Some outcomes are better than others, and no one's stint in a job is totally perfect.
Certain individuals in authoritative positions are being targeted by a small group of individuals inside the pro-union group. It is more than evident and overtly obvious. You might even call it a transparent attempt to remove them entirely from the Co-op.
* * *
What are some impacts on the employees if the Co-op unionizes?
• Employees who fall under the “substitute” categories - those who do not have regular shifts and, therefore, do not bring home a regular paycheck - will not be eligible to vote for unionization. These individuals will not be required to pay union dues.
• Another ploy unions have used in the past to bring favor to regular employees: the use of substitutes, which takes work (pay) away from those who maintain regular work hours. Down the road, will the word “substitute” be as obsolete as the words “individual voice”?
• As soon as the collective bargaining agreement gets signed, your voice is part of a group. You are less likely to be heard as an individual. And let's not talk about having to pay dues so that an individual's voice is heard.
• Those who do not want union representation will be forced into unionizing if it is voted for. No union, no job. Vermont is not a right-to-work state: there is no choice. If the workers are unhappy with the union, then oh well. The laws are in favor of the union once the collective bargaining agreement is signed. The union is there to stay.
* * *
Shareholders could also feel the impact of unionization. After all, when a shareholder is putting in hours at the Co-op, they are doing work that could be done by an employee. This could be money being taken out of a worker's paycheck. Maybe the chances to put in member hours for a discount at the register will be cut back.
Will people be more inclined to shop elsewhere for better prices? Maybe, maybe not. There is a very passionate customer base in this area geared toward working together, and a shareholder base who is very much co-op minded. Looking at how co-ops elsewhere price their shares, an $80 one-time shareholder payment is reasonable.
But will the extra costs incurred by unionization be reflected in an increase? Will the prices of goods show an increase? As employees of the Co-op, we already hear complaints about prices.
The Co-op's profits get reinvested in the business or put back into the community. Does anyone know how the community will be affected? How many individuals realize that the Co-op works with the USDA to bring the Healthy Snacks programs to local schools? On one recent morning, an individual who works at a local food pantry wanted to relay a huge thanks to the Co-op for making donations.
Next time you are at the Co-op, take a look at the thank-you cards at the Shareholder Services Desk. And those are the ones you do see. There are plenty more in supervisors' offices or posted in back rooms.
How about family activities like the snack-and-a-movie Fridays? The Co-op also employs individuals who teach nutrition at local schools, teach cooking classes, and help with fundraising for programs like food kitchens and after-school activities. Will these services be in danger of being reduced?
* * *
Let's talk about the board of directors, whose actions have been a bone of major contention with the shareholders and community, the result of one-sided reporting, misleading headlines, ignored objective information, and animosity-driven individuals.
Just as shareholders vote on issues with the Co-op, like the new building and who serves on the board, why not let the employees make a decision? Is giving employees more of a voice not what the community is upset about?
Forcing the board to recognize the union is taking away the voices of those who want the chance to vote democratically. Those in favor of unionizing are upset that they are being forced to put this issue to a democratic vote by secret ballot. But in essence, organizers were trying to force all employees to unionize, taking away other individuals' right to a vote. Shame on them for encouraging hypocrisy.
The final stages of this democratic process will cost the Co-op money in the form of a consultant if this should go to the collective bargaining table. That is true.
Could that be avoided? Hell, yes. Just look at our co-op neighbors to the south. Did anyone consider that maybe those stores recognized their respective union efforts because they were in worse positions financially than the Brattleboro Food Co-op? Those co-ops might have had a majority who approved of unionization (done without coercion and harassment).
We have a new building now that is state of the art and will house us for a very long time. It did cost a lot of money. Maybe the Brattleboro Food Co-op cannot really afford this at this time.
The board is very receptive to the happiness of its employees. This is evident in their decision to let the individual employees vote on unionizing and not let the decision of a group of employees, some whose outlook on management is jaded, force others into this decision. This is a democratic process that has so many people unjustifiably upset with the board.
* * *
It is necessary for the employees to make an educated decision looking at all sides of this issue. This has not been done.
It has been brought to the attention of some of the pro-union staff that there should be a devil's advocate on both sides to explore the pros and cons of unionization. This has not been done.
It has been suggested to the community to look at all sides. This has not been done.
If this letter has upset fellow employees and the community, or makes individuals think more about this time-consuming, one-sided media-butchered subject, then our job has been done.
Let's get it over with and get on to more important subjects, like voting in the next presidential election.
Did we mention that is a democratic and a secret-ballot vote?
Just sayin'.