Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

    This is a local Dayton Ohio potato chip maker. I noticed in other web searches that they have had labor issues. This time only 4 people walked out on strike, others continue to work. Can't find any other info.

    Mikesell’s brings replacement workers in during strike
    Dayton potato chip producer Mikesell’s is hiring replacement workers to replace about four workers striking the company, the company said Tuesday.
    Four of the bargaining unit’s 14 members are on strike while the others remain on the job, the company said.
    “We are on strike because the company refuses to offer a fair, reasonable contract for these guys to come back to work,” said Alan Weeks, business representative for Teamsters Local 957. “It’s been eight years since the last contract expired, and they haven’t had a raise or any improvements on the last contract since 2012.”
    Tension between potato chip producer and its union goes back nearly a decade. In March 2018, the NLRB backed a federal judge’s order that Mikesell’s pay nearly $240,000 in backpay to union drivers and warehouse workers.
    https://www.daytondailynews.com/news...jq8vVyIaAby8O/

  • #2
    Re: Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

    OK , I got Questions about this...there had to have been (or should have been) a strike authorization vote to
    give the union negotiators more power during contract talks. Without a strike authorization , Local 957 would not have
    backed a strike. So , some of the 10 who scabbed and crossed the line must have voted to authorize a strike.

    Also the back pay the union members received in the NLRB ruling, 240,000 equals over 17,000 per member.
    Yet some of these members crossed a picket line to scab work. Bunch of bullsh*t.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

      Originally posted by x475 View Post
      OK , I got Questions about this...there had to have been (or should have been) a strike authorization vote to
      give the union negotiators more power during contract talks. Without a strike authorization , Local 957 would not have
      backed a strike. So , some of the 10 who scabbed and crossed the line must have voted to authorize a strike.

      Also the back pay the union members received in the NLRB ruling, 240,000 equals over 17,000 per member.
      Yet some of these members crossed a picket line to scab work. Bunch of bullsh*t.
      I would think when agreement is reached.....the agreement should involve termination of all who crossed the line.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

        Originally posted by x475 View Post
        OK , I got Questions about this...there had to have been (or should have been) a strike authorization vote to
        give the union negotiators more power during contract talks. Without a strike authorization , Local 957 would not have
        backed a strike. So , some of the 10 who scabbed and crossed the line must have voted to authorize a strike.

        Also the back pay the union members received in the NLRB ruling, 240,000 equals over 17,000 per member.
        Yet some of these members crossed a picket line to scab work. Bunch of bullsh*t.
        Something isn't adding up with this story.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mikesell's potato chips labor issue

          A little more information about labor relations and the Teamsters working at Mikesells potato chips.

          Collective Bargaining: What is a Good-Faith Impasse?
          The Mikesell’s case began in 2012 and is still ongoing in 2019, with oral arguments for an appeal scheduled for February 2019. Mikesell’s Potato Chip Company was negotiating a new labor agreement with the Teamsters Local 957 for warehouse workers, and route and over-the-road drivers. Negotiations began in September 2012 for the warehouse employees’ contract expiring October 26, 2012 and the drivers’ contract expiring November 17, 2012. There were three major issues to negotiate – healthcare, pensions and commissions for route sales drivers. The Teamsters were the exclusive collective-bargaining representative for the employees.
          Mikesell’s had lost $5.5 million in the prior four years. The company was still experiencing financial difficulty when union contract negotiations began. The employer’s goal during negotiations was to reduce operating expenses, while the union believed its members had already conceded too much over the past years to help the company survive and wanted lost wages and benefits restored.
          https://blog.unionproof.com/collecti...faith-impasse/

          Comment

          Working...
          X