
The major supermarket chains' main argument of four years ago has yet to come to fruition.
By
Abigail Goldman
Times Staff Writer
April 12, 2007
Back in 2003 when a major grocery strike loomed in Southern California,
the biggest unionized supermarkets insisted that they had to hold the
line on workers' pay and benefits.
Their rationale: Wal-Mart
was about to storm California with low prices and low wages, and
supermarkets said they needed to stay competitive.
But the storm never came.
Now, with the prospect of another grocery strike at hand, some workers
are accusing the big chains of crying wolf.
"They can't use Wal-Mart
as an excuse," said Sharlette
Villacorta, 35, a
veteran clerk who manages the deli at an
Albertsons in
Los Feliz.
"Wal-Mart is not
affecting their bottom line."
Talks are to resume Monday between the grocers and the United Food and
Commercial Workers on the contract that expired March 5 but has been
extended twice.
Negotiations broke off April 4, but both sides have since signaled a
desire to keep negotiating. A strike could occur as soon as next week,
but is not considered imminent.
As promised, Wal-Mart in
recent years opened some Supercenters,
built distribution facilities and fought neighborhood and labor
activists for the right open more. But it hardly stirred the Southland
grocery scene.
In all, Wal-Mart has
garnered less than 1% of the grocery dollars spent in Southern
California and 3% across the state.
That hasn't stopped the big grocery chains, from continuing to warn of
the threat of Wal-Mart's
low-cost model.
"Wal-Mart served a
useful purpose for the chains," said Harley
Shaiken, an economist and
UC Berkeley professor
who specializes in labor issues. "Wal-Mart
was the 800 pound gorilla at the bargaining table in 2003.
"In 2007, it's the 80 pound gorilla," he added. "It's still a presence,
it will be an important factor, but it's obviously moving slower than
projected."
Albertsons,
Vons and
Kroger, the parent
company of Ralphs,
control more than 50% of the grocery market in Southern California.
Including Stater
Bros. and
Ralphs sister company
Food 4 Less, the big unionized grocery chains control about two thirds
of the market.
Wal-Mart kicked off the
scramble in 2002, when it pledged to build 40
Supercenters across the state within six years.
The supermarkets argued that their higher wage and benefit costs would
make them unable to compete with the low-cost,
non-unionzed discount chain.
To date, Wal-Mart has
opened 22 California Supercenters,
which combine mass merchandise and a full supermarket in a building that
can be the size of two Home Depot stores. Nine
Supercenters are under construction and nine
others have been approved by cities.
A dozen more Supercenters
are awaiting local approval, the company said.
Wal-Mart said its pace
in California isn't slower than the company expected, although it
acknowledges facing more litigation and a more organized opposition than
elsewhere.
But analysts said that what's been built and promised so far is probably
on the low end of Wal-Mart's
hopes for tapping into the rich California market with the
chain's most-profitable
format.
Different regions throughout the state slowed the company's plans with
strident public opposition, anti-big box zoning ordinances, high real
estate prices or the tough labor market, analysts said.
At the same time, opponents across the country stepped up their
criticism of the nonunion
Wal-Mart's wages and
benefits. Sales growth has slowed and the company last year said it
would rein in the fast-paced domestic expansion that fueled the
company's tremendous growth.
But Wal-Mart's slower
expansion through California doesn't negate the issues it raises for the
supermarket companies in the state and around the country, said Mark
Husson, an analyst with
HSBC in New York.
Upping the ante for the
local negotiations, the contracts in Southern California become a
template for the rest of the nation,
Husson said.
"Wal-Mart is still out
there, it hasn't gone away, it's just that the impact over the last
three years hasn't been as bad as some feared in Southern California,"
Husson said. "But in the
rest of the country, it's been every bit as bad as we thought."
Wal-Mart, which has 204
stores in California and employs nearly 71,000 people across the state,
lists its average full-time hourly wage in California as $10.77.
But that figure does not break out pay among grocery employees and does
not include part-timers who make up at least 25% of the workforce — all
of which makes comparison to the UFCW
contract difficult.
A new food clerk at a union grocery store starts at $8.90 an hour and
maxes out at $15.10.
Veteran food clerks, who as a result of the 2003 strike and lockout are
on a different pay and benefit scale, can make as much as $17.90 an
hour.
In a recent conference call with reporters, the grocers expanded the
list of threats to their competitiveness, citing
nonunion sellers
including Target, Whole Foods, Trader
Joe's and Tesco,
the British food seller that has announced plans to expand on the West
Coast.
But Wal-Mart was singled out for special notice.
"Wal-Mart sells almost twice the amount of food and grocery items as the
grocery store chains," said Ralph's president, David
Hirz. "With nearly 200
locations in California and plans for 40 Supercenters and expanded space
at regular stores, competition is going to get even tougher in the next
few years."
Wal-Mart will post $85 billion in grocery sales this year,
Husson estimated, while
next nearest competitor Kroger
should post $66 billion in sales.
"These are national companies," said
Adena Tessler,
Rogers Group, a Century City public relations firm hired by the three
major chains to speak about the contract talks. "They compete with
Wal-Mart across the nation and that affects their bottom line
everywhere."