We value: Our readers.
Our independence. Our region.
The power of real journalism.
We're reader supported.
Get our newsletter free.
Help pay for our reporting.
Analysis
  |  
Labour + Industry

Here’s How to Make Retail Jobs Better

In Sweden, retail jobs are still middle class. One change to labour laws could boost Canadian workers in the same way.

Sean OBrady 19 Jul 2021 | The Conversation

Sean O’Brady is an assistant professor of labour relations at McMaster University in Hamilton. This article originally appeared in the Conversation. Read the article here.

Grocery-store cashiers and other frontline retail workers have helped get us through the pandemic, but do we value them? Why are retail jobs middle class in Sweden, but low-wage work in Canada?

These were some of the questions I tried to answer over several years of published research on grocery-store workers in different countries.

My research has shown that in the late 1970s, Canadian grocery-store jobs were middle-class union jobs. Full-time hours were common, and Canada’s grocery-store workers were well paid by global standards for the industry.

Major grocery chains held oligopolies in their respective provinces and had considerable discretion in setting prices, focused more on quality and could use these aspects of their business strategy to justify high wages in the industry.

The opening of discount chains like Super Carnaval in Quebec in 1982 and megastores like the Real Canadian Superstore in 1979 forced traditional grocers to rethink their human resources strategies. In addition to making profit margins narrow, many of these new discounters — like Walmart, which entered Canada in 1994 — were non-union.

Wage cuts and work changes

The chains demanded that the unions work with them to lower labour costs and prevent them from losing money. Fearing what would happen to their members’ jobs if the chains went bankrupt (and some did), most of the unions worked with major grocers to cut wages and erode other key conditions set in collective agreements.

The result was a drastic reduction in the real wages of unionized workers from 1980 to 2016. Today, unionized retail workers start at the minimum wage, or just above it.

In Sweden, the wages of grocery-store workers in 1980 were good, but workers in some Canadian chains were better off. Like Canada, the Swedish grocery market was dominated by an oligopoly of players (until the early 2000s, when discounters like Netto and Lidl entered the market).

But unlike in Canada, working conditions did not erode with the rise of discount retailers in Sweden. In key areas, they improved.

Swedish wages for retail workers grew by over 50 per cent. Today, the starting salary in Sweden is just over C$20 an hour , but most workers earn more than this. The collective agreement ensures that they earn more than $31 an hour on evenings, and over $40 an hour on weekends. They also receive pay in addition to what’s stipulated in the collective agreement.

What’s more, Swedish workers have substantial scheduling protections, including one month’s notice for work schedules, strong rights to limit work performed on weekends and the right to be consulted on working hours. Swedish retail workers are also remarkably satisfied with their work.

In Canada, the most employees get is usually the right to a few days’ notice on their scheduled hours.

The Swedish secret

So why do Swedish retail workers have remarkably superior working conditions? In a nutshell, their labour laws strongly support what’s called sectoral bargaining.

Sectoral bargaining ensures every worker who works for a major retail chain in Sweden is covered by what’s called a sectoral bargaining agreement. This is a common agreement that stipulates working conditions for retail employees, and it applies across the entire sector. Unions bargain with the representatives of employers across the sector, not store by store.

Sectoral bargaining ends competition between stores on wages and other working conditions. In Canada, retail unions are always nervous that asking for high wages and significant improvements to other working conditions will hurt the profitability of their stores, which could lead to job loss.

Unions are forced to accept wage concessions to help their employers compete for low prices.

In Sweden, the opposite is true. Their retailers are not competing with each other by lowering labour costs. Grocers want all their competitors to offer the same working conditions. That’s because sectoral bargaining makes it harder for a non-union market entrant from gaining an unfair price advantage by operating with lower labour costs.

All-encompassing agreements

Employers want the union to organize workers and ensure that collective agreements are all-encompassing. Approximately 70 per cent of the Swedish workforce is unionized, more than double that of Canada.

Why is sectoral bargaining uncommon in Canada, and absent in retail?

Basically, our labour laws don’t support it.

Swedish unions work in solidarity to force firms to sign collective agreements. For example, when Toys “R” Us refused to sign a standard collective agreement in the mid-1990s, unionized workers in other industries blocked the company from operating in Sweden.

Transit unions instructed their workers to stop delivering goods to the company. Bank unions told their workers to stop processing financial transactions for the company.

In the end, the company had no choice but to sign the collective agreement. In fact, they turned these stores into a franchise operated by Scandinavians, since the American managers discovered that they did not understand how to operate in countries like Sweden.

Conflicts like this have set the stage for other retailers wishing to operate in the country. For example, Lidl, a German discount food retailer known for its anti-union stance throughout Europe, signed the collective agreement when entering the Swedish market in 2002.

Amazon has entered the Swedish market but has yet to open its own warehouses in the country. If it does, there’s little doubt the union will be successful in getting the company to sign a collective agreement.

Patchwork unionization

In Canada, the law encourages collective bargaining by store or chain. Sympathy actions aren’t part of the system. Among stores that are unionized, it’s not always by the same union.

The result is a fragmented system where working conditions diverge considerably. When unionized stores are operating under different collective agreements, their unions face immense pressure to compete with each other to lower labour costs and hence maintain poor working conditions.

The existence of non-union operators like Walmart and Dollarama make matters even worse. Many union officials argue that preserving modest privileges through collective bargaining is better than letting non-union chains dominate the industry, which would be considerably worse for workers.

Without providing Canada’s unions with legal supports to effectively extend workplace standards across all major chains, including Walmart and Dollarama, these workers will never win the conditions they deserve.

There are many benefits to supporting unionization in the grocery industry, including a wage scale, employee benefits and access to a voice for employees.

But if Canada wants to expand its middle class by substantially improving working conditions in sectors like retail, it must fundamentally reform its labour laws.

Sectoral bargaining is probably our best bet. In fact, we have long known that low-wage work is much rarer in countries where sectoral bargaining is encouraged and widespread.

We’ve had opportunities for such a reform in the past. We need to create new opportunities and show our frontline workers that we truly value them.The Conversation  [Tyee]

Read more: Labour + Industry

Share this article

The Tyee is supported by readers like you

Join us and grow independent media in Canada

Facts matter. Get The Tyee's in-depth journalism delivered to your inbox for free.

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Comments that violate guidelines risk being deleted, and violations may result in a temporary or permanent user ban. Maintain the spirit of good conversation to stay in the discussion.
*Please note The Tyee is not a forum for spreading misinformation about COVID-19, denying its existence or minimizing its risk to public health.

Do:

  • Be thoughtful about how your words may affect the communities you are addressing. Language matters
  • Challenge arguments, not commenters
  • Flag trolls and guideline violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity, learn from differences of opinion
  • Verify facts, debunk rumours, point out logical fallacies
  • Add context and background
  • Note typos and reporting blind spots
  • Stay on topic

Do not:

  • Use sexist, classist, racist, homophobic or transphobic language
  • Ridicule, misgender, bully, threaten, name call, troll or wish harm on others
  • Personally attack authors or contributors
  • Spread misinformation or perpetuate conspiracies
  • Libel, defame or publish falsehoods
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities
  • Post links without providing context

LATEST STORIES

The Barometer

Tyee Poll: Are You Concerned About Ticks?

Take this week's poll