Lost in Translation?

Jean’s Address to the Community

Jean Quan’s electronic newsletter dated October 6, 2007, said

”FARMER JOES MEDIATION: As reported in the local media our office, Mayor Dellums, Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, and Congresswoman Barbara Lee are working jointly to bring both sides together in the Farmer Joe’s dispute. The management and union have never met face to face for direct discussion. To establish a cooling off period, we asked the United Food and Commercial Workers to call off their boycott; they ended picketing 2 weeks ago. We now expect to meet with both sides this week — a small but important step we should all encourage.” 

The Facts

The local media carried this story in both the Contra Costa Times and the Oakland Tribune on 9/21/07. It talks about the “confrontational approach” the UCFW local 5 took towards trying to unionize Farmer Joe’s. The union’s picketing and harassment forced Farmer Joe’s to file a charge against Local 5 with the NLRB, case #32-CP-490, on 7/19/07. The NLRB found the case had merit and filed a complaint against UFCW local 5. A federal hearing was scheduled for October 10, 2007 against the union for unfair labor practices. On September 10, 2007, the NLRB reported UFCW local 5 executed an informal settlement agreement to cease all picketing and publicly acknowledge they would refrain from illegal activity. Then on September 19, UFCW local 5 picketed in front of the store despite their settlement agreement. The NLRB is currently deciding how to proceed, considering the union’s latest bad faith demonstration.The MacArthur Metro’s lead story this month “Update at Union Activity at Farmer Joe’s,” said

“Misinformation on this dispute abounds and continues to be propagated. To be clear, the issue is not whether to unionize. It is also not about an unwillingness to sit down and work out the differences. The primary point of contention between Farmer Joe’s and the Union, one that has persisted since the opening of the second store, is about how to formally survey the employees’ views on representation. 

On September 14, 2007 Mayor Dellums wrote a letter to Ron J. Lind, UFCW Local 5 and the Tams of Farmer Joe’s. In that letter, he wrote,

“As Public Officials we (Mayor Dellums, Congress Member Barbara Lee, State Assembly Member Sandre Swanson, Councilmember Jean Quan) all stand firmly in favor of small local business enterprise and are keenly aware that such enterprises contribute greatly to the development of Oakland’s unique neighborhoods. At the same time, we are also in support of the rights of workers to freely organize.” 

The Tams petitioned the NLRB to conduct a vote to determine if in fact the employees wanted union representation. The request was dismissed August 3, 2007, citing “there is no evidence that it (the UFCW) has ever demanded that the Employer (Farmer Joe’s) recognize it (the UFCW) as the majority representative of its employees.” The MacArthur Metro elaborated,

”For the purposes of collective bargaining, an employee representative must be designated for an NLRB vote to be held. The UFCW persists with their request for a card check to determine if Local 5 represents a majority of the employees. The Tams maintain the card check violates their employees’ personal privacy rights and will not turn over the polling process to the UFCW.” 

It is noteworthy that the UFCW’s latest bad faith demonstration took place after their receipt of this letter from our public officials requesting a “cooling off period be established.”

30 Days

UFCW Local 5 is not at the store for 30 days, harassing everybody. According to this article that ran in the Contra Costa times on Septmber 21, 2007, “There should be a cooling off period to ensure that all parties are working towards an atmosphere where negotiations can be constructive,” Paul Rose, spokesman for Mayor Ron Dellums’ office said. “In a statement, the union said attempts to unionize stores that serve ethnic communities, including Farmer Joe’s and Super Mercado Market, have failed because of its common ‘confrontational approach.’” Ya think?So, let me get this straight. We’re supposed to be “cooling off” after UFCW local 5 called for a boycott at Farmer Joe’s, attempting to break their bottom line when that grocery has been the best thing for this neighborhood in a long, long time. The union harassed, threatened, and lied to the store and the whole community for the last 8 months. In other words, we were attacked, but now we’re supposed to act like everything is cool. Umm, sure. The article goes on to say, “The union will employ a new strategy to convince stores that a partnership would be of mutual interest to the store owners, employees and the community. There will be no picketing, boycotting or leafleting at the Fruitvale store during the cooling off period.”But I guess it’s okay for the union to leave this button up on their web site’s home page. It’s still clickable and urges UFCW members to wander over to store and rally every Friday yelling, “Boycott this place” at Farmer Joe’s shoppers. And I guess it is still okay to for them get on this blog and leave harassing comments I have to delete. I guess really what’s okay is what has always been okay with the UFCW – lies, threats, and harassment.Richard Cowan from Jean Quan’s office is quoted in the article that he hopes “the union uses the cooling-off period to win community support.” Win community support? Does Richard assume the community can be bought off with cheap trinkets? Maybe Halloween candy. Or perhaps he thinks the community has a bad memory or maybe did not experience first hand what the union did day after day. The truth is the community did. They lived through it, supporting the store every step of the way. I wish I could say the same for Richard and Jean. Since I don’t think either of them have seen the real ugliness of the day-to-day harassment, I’m posting some video.This video is a professional UFCW local 5 organizer on his typical day at Farmer Joe’s. The security guard asks the organizer to step away from the entrance because he is attempting to block shoppers from entering the store. The security guard says the organizer’s actions are “going to lead to confrontation.” The organizer replies, “It doesn’t matter.” At one point, the person shooting the video asks the organizer what the zip code is. He doesn’t know. He has no idea. He comes from out of town to disrupt our neighborhood. The organizer says that the man shooting this film hates Mexicans. Sometimes he would harass and threaten shoppers to the point we would call the police. When the police arrived, he would tell them we hated Mexicans and we were racists. He would tell the police we threatened and harassed him. All the statements were common lies the organizer used in his day-to-day rhetoric. In the video, he yells, “Boycott. Boycott. Boycott. Support workers’ rights” and yet his union has never asked for representation of a single employee at the store or there would have been an NLRB election. According to the NLRB, Farmer Joes’s petition for an election was dismissed because “Although Local 5’s actions appear to be part of its attempt to organize the Employer’s employees, there is no evidence that it has ever demanded that the Employer recognize it as a majority representative of its employees.”

UPDATES:

10/3/2007 The union’s boycott button was removed today from their web site’s home page, but this is still on their dues refund page. I can’t decide if they’re deliberately being ornery or their web developer needs to be fired, or both.Then this appeared on their news pages. ”Local 5 President Ron Lind stated ‘the union is prepared to meet any time and any place to resolve the issues that effect Farmer Joe’s Worker’s and the community.’” Excuse me? Issues that affect the community? You and your hommies are the ones driving from San Jose to Oakland to cause the ruckus over here. You are “The Issue.”

WTF, Local 5?

This article came out in the Contra Costa Times today. And I quote:

Last month, the Tams filed a complaint against the union with the National Labor Relations Board, charging it with illegal picketing. They contended that the union has picketed more than 30 days without petitioning the NLRB to become a collective bargaining representative for the stores’ employees.“The union has been picketing and boycotting to force us to unionize,” said Diana Tam.The case was scheduled for a hearing before the NLRB but the union agreed on a settlement to not picket.“We agreed to something we weren’t doing anyway,” said union spokesman Mike Henneberry. “We’re not picketing, we’re leafleting.”

WTF, dude? You agreed to something you weren’t doing? Since when? Merriam-Webster defines picket as “a person posted by a labor organization at a place of work affected by a strike; also: a person posted for a demonstration or protest.” AND you had an agreement with the NLRB to NOT picket. Yet here ya are Wednesday doing the big nasty in front of the store standing right next to the UFCW local 5 organizer with the bullhorn.My suggestion to you is to go buy yourself a dictionary, or at least a little integrity.