Best thing since sliced gourmet bread - Big Win for NYC Grocery Workers

Amy Traub

Best thing since sliced gourmet bread - Big Win for NYC Grocery Workers

Yesterday the City Council voted to override Mayor Bloomberg's veto of the Health Care Security Act a bill to ensure that grocery employees have access to health care through their jobs. The legislation requires any grocery store with more than 35 employees to contribute an amount equivalent to the prevailing health care expenditure in the industry-- about $2.50 per hour per employee-- towards their employees' health care. The legislation will bring new health care coverage to an estimated 6,000 workers.

The Act is a pilot program advancing a powerful vision of high-road economic development, which levels the playing field for businesses that provide decent wages and good health benefits to employees, while resisting efforts to compete on the basis of driving down wages and benefits.

While the bill is often discussed in the context of big box discount retailers like Wal-Mart, which is trying to gain a foothold in the city, high-end groceries like Whole Foods and The Garden of Eden that are already operating in New York City also cut corners on the health care needs of their employees. The Act recognizes that when these corporations fail to provide affordable health benefits, many of their employees are forced to go on Medicaid or use other state-sponsored programs to get health care for themselves and their families. The public is thus subsidizing the cost-cutting measures of these employers even as it becomes harder for companies that do provide benefits to compete.

The Health Care Security Act puts an end to that subsidy in at least one industry. Let's hope more are on the way.

Amy Traub: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 10:17 AM, Oct 12, 2005 in Health Care
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (6)

Comments

Thanks for linking to that Ant-Walmart ad! I know the activists who made it. Is it still being run on NY1?

I'm not sure if that ad is still running on NY1, but I did just see an ad for the new documentary about Wal-Mart: "The High Cost of Low Price" It looks really powerful. Check out http://www.walmartmovie.com/

The Albany Times Union reports that a spokesperson for WalMart called the new law:

"nothing more than a hidden tax that will force New Yorkers to pay more money for their groceries."

Translation: we're going to pass the cost on to our customers rather than eating it out of our ample profits.

Maybe instead of blaming the government, and by extension the workers who would dare to want health insurance, WalMart should be blamed--and shamed--for so cavalierly assuming that the cost of health insurance must be paid either by workers, consumers, or the government, but never by them.

Posted by: why not roll back profits? | October 13, 2005 11:58 AM

Here Here "why not"-- I totally agree.

But how do we enforce that? It runs counter to so many assumptions of the American system.

Read more about this at
http://haloscan.com/tb/momandpopnyc/112929181477835762

Mom and Pop NYC-- the blog arm of Neighborhood Retail Alliance
Can be found at http://momandpopnyc.blogspot.com/

It is a great resource and a great blog.

grassrootsy: "how do we enforce that?"

Having a union at WalMart would help. Easier said than done, I know, and obviously a lot of people in the labor movement have figured out that unionizing WalMart is a defining challenge.

The distribution of wealth and resources in the economy, which is what we're really talking about when we talk about who's responsibility it is to pay for healthcare, is determined by power, pure and simple. Contrary to market dogma, it's not a law of nature that gains in productivity must be passed on to shareholders. We've seen that when insiders decide they want to take shareholders for a ride and then walk away with their money as the stock crashes, they can use their power and strategic position to do that. Workers can claim a larger share of the wealth they produce when they organize and use their power and strategic position, by going on strike or using the political process to pass laws redistributing wealth.

Posted by: why not roll back profits? | October 14, 2005 12:40 PM