FT.com (Financial Times), May 26, 2006, Friday

Copyright 2006
The Financial Times Ltd
All Rights Reserved
FT.com

26 May 2006 Friday 8:11:40 PM GMT


HEADLINE: Tesco moving into Southland union battlefield

BYLINE: Jonathan Birchall in New York

BODY:
Tesco's decision to launch its planned US stores in "Southland" the sprawling suburbs of Los Angeles takes it directly into one of the most bitterly contested labour relations battlefields in the country.
Two years ago southern California was the setting for a four-month strike by members of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW), called in response to moves by the big three US supermarkets Kroger, Albertson's and Safeway to reduce benefits.
The supermarkets argued that the cuts were necessary to stave off competition from Wal-Mart, the strongly anti-union retailer that is trying to expand into the lucrative Southland market.
The strike damaged the supermarkets, although the UFCW eventually agreed to a weaker contract.
The UFCW has subsequently been in the forefront of a drive to block Wal-Mart's expansion into the area, financing local politicians who have engaged the retailer in "site fights", struggles that have slowed down or blocked the retailer's push into LA.
Nationally, the UFCW has abandoned attempts to organise Wal-Mart's workers and is focusing on a political campaign against the retailer that has been supported by some unionised supermarkets, including the US unit of Ahold.
Nelson Lichtenstein, who teaches labour history at the University of California, says Tesco's plans for a network of non-union stores in southern California could present a new "under the radar" challenge for the UFCW.
"They [the unions] are so focused on Wal-Mart that they could find themselves behind the curve on Tesco," says Mr Lichtenstein.
Tesco is also likely to be encouraged by the failure of the UFCW to make inroads into other growing non-union stores, such as Whole Foods Market and Trader Joe's, who both have strong presences in the Los Angeles area. And it is also aware of the bitter relationship that existed between the UFCW and J Sainsbury, which operated the Shaw's chain in the north-east US between 1987 and 2004.
In 2002 Sainsbury also sought to reduce employee benefits, sparking a battle that led to the arrest of union organisers. Sainsbury subsequently sold Shaw's to Albertson's.
US labour advocates argue that European employers have often failed to live up to the labour relations reputations they have established at home when it comes to the US and are ready to take advantage of a legal regime that is more favourable to employers than to union organising efforts.
"There is a general impression that corporations in Europe are more ...respectful of workers' organising rights. But they come to the US and act as if it is their birthday," says Lance Compa, a labour rights expert at Cornell University.
Mr Compa this month published a report on First Student, the yellow school bus operator that is part of the UK's First Group, which accused it of "an unrelenting campaign" of interference in union organising efforts, which it argued was in breach of international labour rights standards.
First Student says all its actions have been legal but Mr Compa argues that the tactics of "union avoidance" by the UK-owned group breach the right of workers to "free association".
His First Student report cites company statements that stop short of warning of retaliation for voting for a union which would be illegal but say that the company cannot predict the impact of union recognition on current benefits.
Bruce Raynor, general president of the UniteHere union, says his union's recent campaign to organise warehouse workers at H&M, the Swedish-owned retailer, demonstrated US unions could use a company's reputation to apply pressure.
But in spite of Unite's success with about 200 H&M warehouse workers, union representation in the retail sector remains the exception, rather than the rule.
For Tesco that is likely to be a big factor in interpreting its human rights policy, which states that "employees have the right to freedom of association".