If Motts Is A “Victory”, I’d Hate To See What A Defeat Looks Like

by | Sep 17, 2010 | Unionized Company

Recently workers at Mott’s applesauce plant in Williamson NY declared victory over the parent company Dr. Pepper Snapple Group. To hear unions tell the story you’d think workers at Motts won a great contract after a hard-fought battle with a corporate giant. Of course unions always pretend they win after a strike (after all, who would want to continue to pay dues to a “loser” union?) But what really happened? Motts was asking for union concessions that would lower workers pay by around $3,000 per year across the board and lower other benefits of the job due to the poor economy. These workers were making $21 per hour in a community where the average wage was $14 per hour. Workers were out on strike for 114 days. If you figure all they lost was 8 hours pay per day that is 912 lost hours of work (most of them also lost overtime hours and other pay, but we’ll keep it simple). At an average rate of $21 per hour the average striking employee lost a little more than $19,000. But they “won” the strike, right? Not exactly. Motts did not achieve its initial bargaining objective of getting wage rates in line with the market, and that is what the RWDSU is touting as a win. But in order to settle the strike the RWDSU agreed to a 3-year wage freeze (plus a 2-tier wage system that over time will allow Motts to achieve its initial bargaining objectives anyway). They also agreed that workers would pay for 20% of their healthcare contributions. That means that the average worker in that unit won’t be back to EVEN for 7 years or more. They say there is no such thing as a moral victory, but that is about the only way you could describe this as a victory. It would be very interesting to know what the walk-away point for Motts was as negotiations broke down, but you have to think that the RWDSU could have gotten this same deal without a strike. It would have been a hard pill to swallow, no doubt. The RWDSU argued that the wage cuts were unfair because the Dr. Pepper/Snapple Group – who owns the Motts plant – was profitable, which is like saying it’s not fair that you have to wear a coat in Canada because it is warm in Florida. But if the union really had the best interests of these employees at heart they would have gotten the deal done without a strike. The Motts workers should think long and hard about the union leadership that led them out on a strike in these economic times only to win a moral victory. Workers considering union claims about how collective bargaining protects union members and preserves job security should take a long hard look at this case before they start paying their hard earned money to a union for so-called “representation”.

INK Newsletter

APPROACHABILITY MINUTE

GET OUR RETENTION TOOLKIT

PUBLICATIONS

Archives

Categories