I've been trying to do more research on the whole grocery store strike here in California. Most notably, exactly what the financial burdens on the employees are. Yesterday when going into a pavilions, when the strikers asked me "what would it take to get you not to shop here" I simply replied, "I pay for my health insurance". To which they supplied "so do we". As I continued to walk by I cough a "why do they keep saying [we don't pay for health insurance]" and a "well, we'll all go on welfare and see how they like it."

I'm now attempting to do research, because according to what I've read, seen on TV, and heard: The stores want to start charging employees $5 a month for health insurance. That's $60 a year. I will note at this point that I pay over $90 a month for my insurance, and the plan they have has significantly higher coverage than mine does.

Speaking with someone who used to be in a union at my work, he had indicated that employees told him that there was much more money at stake. Stating that the increase the stores wanted to impose would require employees to pay 100% of the health care benefits, not to mention other benefits...

Being that these two amounts are obviously worlds apart, I decided to do a little research and try to find numbers that represented how much the unions were saying these increases would cost. I started with a website which represents the unions: http://www.ufcw.com/. After searching though several of the pages on this site, and much more on other sites, one thing became obvious. The unions are NOT publicly saying just how much more this would cost their employees. The only numbers I've seen quoted by the unions are that the stores have had a 91% increase in profits recent years, and that 70,000 union members are on strike...

Needless to say, if you can't admit how much more the stores are asking, but the stores can, whom are we supposed to believe? If the only financial estimates are given by the stores at $5 a month, then I have to assume these values are correct. The unions don't even seem to be willing to make a rough estimate, even an undershot or overshot... Also, according to what the news and stores are saying, employees are not paying anything for health insurance, yet protesters claim they are. If the unions can't make a statement saying "we already pay $x a month for health insurance" or "x% of the total cost" then how is someone supposed to believe what you're saying? Seems like the unions are trying to make a huge claim about this, while they are not willing to back anything they say up with actual numbers.

So, at this point it's safe for me to say with certainty: Store employees are mainly protesting over a $60 a year increase in health insurance. Their health insurance, by the way, is one of the best available for hourly employees. My insurance costs me over $1000 a year, and it goes up significantly every year. Also, as a result of medical issues in accordance with my coverage, I owe over $10,000 in medical fees, for portions of medical treatments not covered by my insurance...


Bottom line: Don't support the unions. They are trying to use the public to their advantage, but when it boils down to it, they give absolutely no indication of just how much this will cost the employees. They are lying to the general public for a mere $60 a year... A value around 7% of what you pay normally every year...

DON'T SUPPORT UNIONS, THEY ARE OPENLY MISSLEADING YOU TO THEIR OWN ADVANTAGE! AND THEIR MEMBERS WILL OPENLY FLAT OUT LIE TO YOU IF YOU SAY ANYTHING TO THEM!!!!!!!!!!!