IBJNews

Union accuses Marsh of unfair labor practices

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

United Food and Commercial Workers Local 700 said Thursday that it filed unfair labor practice charges against Marsh Supermarkets.

The union is accusing the grocery chain of using illegal interrogation practices and unlawfully terminating a worker for exercising his right to organize a union. The UFCW filed its charges with the National Labor Relations Board

“Workers will not stand for these unfair labor standards,” UFCW Local 700 President Joe Chorpenning said in a prepared statement. “Marsh Supermarkets must realize that the [employees] are the backbone of the company.”

The charges follow attempts by Marsh workers to deliver a petition to company headquarters signed by more than 5,000 people asking executives to meet with them about “the future direction of the company,” the union said.

The union alleges the coalition was met by security and was ordered off the company’s property. Marsh headquarters are at 333 S. Franklin Road on the east side of Indianapolis.

A spokeswoman for Marsh did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment on the charges.

Marsh operates 100 stores in Indiana and Ohio. Florida-based Sun Capital Partners acquired the chain in 2008.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Its All about the MONEY -The Unions MONEY
    And filing unfair labor practices is the norm for unions in campaigns. Thats their way of saying they are sticking up for the little guy. Its just a ruse to get a palce organized so they can collect UNION DUES.
  • UFCW GREED
    UFCW is first and foremost intersted in collecting Union Dues, and making sure everyone pays them. They will run your company out of business and their Fat Cats still get paid.

    Unions make up 8 out of every 100 workers now. Why have they lost 60% of their membership? Stealing members pensions, going to prison, running companys out of business or out of the country....

    The only unions growing are government workers. WOW- Anyone had a good expereince with a government worker lately? Let alont ur Taxes!!!

    When a union wins, they usually get a horrible contarct the first or second time around. WHY-Cause to get what they want, contarct language that the company collects dues and sends to the union, and that everyone pays dues, they give up what employees want------Its the same old story, Unon gets their $$$$, workers get screwed---and all you here is "Next" contract will get what we promised you. Right!

    Its your decision---but dont come crying when you dont get better, and you could get worse (thats why they call it negotiations)-Hey even if you get the same, you lose, caus eyour paying dues to get the same!

    • Good luck
      be careful what you wish for March employees, remember Cub Foods they(the union)came in told employees what ever they wanted to hear and was voted in! Almost one year to the day they came in Cubs closed and during that year I was paying more union dues than my full time iron working husband was and I was a part time cashier. Had no problem keeping my job for 5 years till the union came in but I was better off for it afterwards(snicker,snicker)
    • Talk about truth
      Its real as far as I know . Hell I signed it! And I think what they are refering to as far as signatures is customers and community folks Todd. I have seen folks with those petitions all over the city , I even saw them down at the country music expo last month. But ,on a different note , why shouldn't the people who work at Marsh have some kinda of say in what happens to them? The company is freakin for sale and these folks are just kinda holding their breath and waiting for whats next. I shop in Greenwood and I can tell you the people in my Marsh say that the corporation that owns them now has really put the squeeze on them the employees. Question is who is gonna buy them and how many stores will they buy??
    • Truth in numbers
      UFCW hires people to picket companies, wonder how many signatures are of actual, current employees.
    • What?
      I would say if the employees are that unhappy then they should seek employment somewhere else. There are plenty of people willing to take their place and be glad to have a job.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

    2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

    3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

    4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

    5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).

    ADVERTISEMENT