Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Lowell Sun)   Market Basket: We're gonna lay you rioting assholes off on Sunday if you don't start working. Market Basket CEO: Ignore them, we're *not* going to lay you off on Sunday...well not this Sunday at least   (lowellsun.com) divider line 41
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

1471 clicks; posted to Business » on 08 Aug 2014 at 12:49 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-08 10:38:03 AM  
this is just getting out of hand and sliding quickly into territory where the AGs will get involved
 
2014-08-08 10:45:27 AM  
I'm now fascinated by this story.  It's just so incredible to me that customers give a crap about who owns their supermarket - I have 3 within 10 minutes of y house and I don't know who the managers are, even.

At this point, it's like watching a slow-motion business train wreck.  I know it's not my business and it doesn't really have anything to do with me, but I just... can't.. look... away...
 
2014-08-08 10:52:05 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: I'm now fascinated by this story.  It's just so incredible to me that customers give a crap about who owns their supermarket - I have 3 within 10 minutes of y house and I don't know who the managers are, even.

At this point, it's like watching a slow-motion business train wreck.  I know it's not my business and it doesn't really have anything to do with me, but I just... can't.. look... away...


I don't think *anyone* really knows who their supermarket's manager is, let alone the CEO. That said, this family has had a public family feud for decades. I didn't realize just how much of a following this chain had until this whole fiasco unfolded, and should they survive this and Artie T gets his job back, I'm probably not the only one who will go shopping in there at least once in the weeks after things stabalize.

This is great marketing in showing to a wider swath of people how *great* MB was under ATD, and at the same time is a great grassroots swell against craptastic business practices across the spectrum from customers to workers to managers. That's probably the most fascinating thing is that it's a smaller microcosm of the larger wealth problem in this country. It's the top 1% against, literally, everyone else.
 
2014-08-08 11:44:12 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: I'm now fascinated by this story.  It's just so incredible to me that customers give a crap about who owns their supermarket - I have 3 within 10 minutes of y house and I don't know who the managers are, even.


So much this. I've heard of boycotts because of the sh*tty ways corporations treat their employees or because of political rhetoric (*cough*Chick-fil-A*cough*) but never people boycotting because they give a sh*t about who's CEO. Hell, I hadn't even heard of Market Basket until my sister took me to one in April (she lives in Cambridge and is quite frugal), and hadn't given them another thought since. I probably couldn't tell you anything about my local supermarkets, aside from Price Chopper being partly employee-owned and Big Y being...um...closer to me. Or at least requiring me to walk through a less-sh*tty neighborhood.
 
2014-08-08 12:36:38 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: I'm now fascinated by this story.  It's just so incredible to me that customers give a crap about who owns their supermarket - I have 3 within 10 minutes of y house and I don't know who the managers are, even.

At this point, it's like watching a slow-motion business train wreck.  I know it's not my business and it doesn't really have anything to do with me, but I just... can't.. look... away...


It's really more of a reaction to WHY Artie T was given the boot. Board of directors wanted to raise prices and cut benefits, and found a relative with a grudge to be their willing puppet. I'm willing to bet that the family feud is Artie S's fault, considering how eager he was to screw over every damn employee in the company in order to make a quick buck and stick it to the person who dared to actually deserve inheriting the company (pathetic people can't STAND people who are a good example, it subconsciously reminds them of their own failings, but they're never self-aware enough to realize that's why they're upset).
 
2014-08-08 12:45:54 PM  

Saborlas: I'm willing to bet that the family feud is Artie S's fault


from what I've read, yes. He was the one that filed suit in 1990 against Artie T's father for screwing Artie S's side of the family out of the business (they had like 5% share of the company) The court ruled in Artie S's favor and his side of the family got 50.5%

so yeah, he's been a money-grubbing shiat for 25 years now.
 
2014-08-08 01:09:37 PM  
Today's major Market Basket revelation:

Nothing.
 
2014-08-08 01:14:42 PM  
What I want to know is when these stock-holding family board members are going to realize they were handed a line by Stupidman, have made a massive blunder backing Stupidman, and are going to shiatcan this farkwit and welcome back Terrificman with open arms and profuse apologies, or are they so farking brain-damaged they should be harvested for organs before even that option ceases to be viable?

Also, who's the shiathead judge who awarded this lot controlling interest back in the preceding generation's bickerfest and why hasn't someone dug up some dirt on that transaction?
 
2014-08-08 01:19:54 PM  

Larva Lump: What I want to know is when these stock-holding family board members are going to realize they were handed a line by Stupidman, have made a massive blunder backing Stupidman, and are going to shiatcan this farkwit and welcome back Terrificman with open arms and profuse apologies, or are they so farking brain-damaged they should be harvested for organs before even that option ceases to be viable?

Also, who's the shiathead judge who awarded this lot controlling interest back in the preceding generation's bickerfest and why hasn't someone dug up some dirt on that transaction?


It's really not about being stupid at this point.  One side of the family loathes the other side of the family.  Rationality tends to go out the window in family squabbles.
 
2014-08-08 01:28:52 PM  

Larva Lump: What I want to know is when these stock-holding family board members are going to realize they were handed a line by Stupidman, have made a massive blunder backing Stupidman, and are going to shiatcan this farkwit and welcome back Terrificman with open arms and profuse apologies, or are they so farking brain-damaged they should be harvested for organs before even that option ceases to be viable?

Also, who's the shiathead judge who awarded this lot controlling interest back in the preceding generation's bickerfest and why hasn't someone dug up some dirt on that transaction?


images.tvrage.com
 
2014-08-08 01:37:00 PM  

Larva Lump: What I want to know is when these stock-holding family board members are going to realize they were handed a line by Stupidman, have made a massive blunder backing Stupidman, and are going to shiatcan this farkwit and welcome back Terrificman with open arms and profuse apologies, or are they so farking brain-damaged they should be harvested for organs before even that option ceases to be viable?


That would require admitting they were wrong, the egos involved make that a difficult proposition. Far better for them to burn it all down than  admit to a mistake.
 
2014-08-08 01:39:26 PM  

somedude210: Benevolent Misanthrope: I'm now fascinated by this story.  It's just so incredible to me that customers give a crap about who owns their supermarket - I have 3 within 10 minutes of y house and I don't know who the managers are, even.

At this point, it's like watching a slow-motion business train wreck.  I know it's not my business and it doesn't really have anything to do with me, but I just... can't.. look... away...

I don't think *anyone* really knows who their supermarket's manager is, let alone the CEO. That said, this family has had a public family feud for decades. I didn't realize just how much of a following this chain had until this whole fiasco unfolded, and should they survive this and Artie T gets his job back, I'm probably not the only one who will go shopping in there at least once in the weeks after things stabalize.

This is great marketing in showing to a wider swath of people how *great* MB was under ATD, and at the same time is a great grassroots swell against craptastic business practices across the spectrum from customers to workers to managers. That's probably the most fascinating thing is that it's a smaller microcosm of the larger wealth problem in this country. It's the top 1% against, literally, everyone else.


There was a great grocery store by my house until the shopping center it was in got sold to a residential developer who built a mid rise. I knew who the manager was. He was always out on the floor talking to employees and customers. He would ask you how your visit was and if there was anything he could to help. I would often see him stocking shelves, mopping up spills or bagging groceries. He was the reason the store had loyal customers and long term employees. All the employees' name tags had some like  "valued employee for X years" and 10 and 20+ was not uncommon.

Many people in the neighborhood was sad to see it go.
 
2014-08-08 01:46:43 PM  
Wow give good pay, benifits and a decent work environment and you will get loyal workers, they should put that in a book for future MBAs.
Last year my job was being cheap saying that they were going to deduct an hour and a half to account for lunch and breaks, so everyone would have to come in a half hour early or leave a half hour late. There was pretty much a collective FU from every site around the country and I had four people at my site tell me and the boss friday would be their last day. I take an hour for lunch a day and thats it other than taking a pee. I guess the company didnt expect the feedback they got and backed off the hour and a half.
 
2014-08-08 01:48:26 PM  
You know, I didnt think this had much weight, but

Store managers have said sales are off by up to 92 to 95 percent.

SOMEBODY up top has got to be feeling that, not to mention all the spoiling inventory that they payed for
 
2014-08-08 01:56:19 PM  

somedude210: this is just getting out of hand and sliding quickly into territory where the AGs will get involved


For what?

The customers of the company have decided that they don't like the way the current owners are managing the company and have thus taken their business elsewhere.  Now the company can't make payroll and the shortfall's got to be addressed.  They decided to address it by firing the part timers.

It is unfortunate, but not illegal.
 
2014-08-08 01:58:32 PM  

JustGetItRight: somedude210: this is just getting out of hand and sliding quickly into territory where the AGs will get involved

For what?

The customers of the company have decided that they don't like the way the current owners are managing the company and have thus taken their business elsewhere.  Now the company can't make payroll and the shortfall's got to be addressed.  They decided to address it by firing the part timers.

It is unfortunate, but not illegal.


Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.
 
2014-08-08 02:12:31 PM  

max_pooper: Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.


That would be, yes but depending on the state's laws it might be something that must be resolved through civil action by the employees.

What I can't believe is that the owners are willing to burn an extremely profitable business to the ground over a family spat.  At this point, it may already be too late to save.
 
2014-08-08 02:14:21 PM  

DaStompa: You know, I didnt think this had much weight, but

Store managers have said sales are off by up to 92 to 95 percent.

SOMEBODY up top has got to be feeling that, not to mention all the spoiling inventory that they payed for


They really don't have any perishable inventory at this point. Part of the dispute is that there's a massive disruption of the stores' supply chain. Arthur T was paying all suppliers up front in cash. After the CEO swap, one of the new guys wanted to switch them onto 30 or 60 day payment terms. Not all that uncommon for a large, multi-state supplier, but a logistical nightmare for a bunch of smaller suppliers. Imagine a company that does, say $25,000 in sales to Market Basket. All of a sudden, they're not getting that $25,000 to meet payroll for a month or two. Now factor that in by dozens of local supply companies that Market Basket uses and you see the problem.Better to sell everything to the other stores that are paying you up front than reserve some product for a company that doesn't want to pay you for 2 months.
 
2014-08-08 02:18:52 PM  

JustGetItRight: max_pooper: Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.

That would be, yes but depending on the state's laws it might be something that must be resolved through civil action by the employees.

What I can't believe is that the owners are willing to burn an extremely profitable business to the ground over a family spat.  At this point, it may already be too late to save.


This, this right here.  Customers like me, and the employees of MB are still boycotting, but I really feel like it is too late to save the company.  If Artie T came back, that would be one thing, but I'm pretty sure that if that were a possibility, it would have happened already in the form of Artie S's half of the family accepting ATD's offer.  Since that hasn't happened, combined with the news yesterday that there was a new offer in from another chain (probably Hannaford's), I think we will see Market Basket get absorbed by that chain at a very low price.  ASD would rather get rid of it, even if it means less money than it could have, as long as he can shove it in ATD's face.
 
2014-08-08 02:25:29 PM  
Wow. Who needs soap operas?
 
2014-08-08 02:38:27 PM  

StopDaddy: Wow. Who needs soap operas?


Life is more twisted and dramatic than any fiction.
 
2014-08-08 03:04:56 PM  
The CEO's don't want to lay off the employees. They are cutting peoples hours to 0 in an attempt to avoid paying unemployment benefits.

State of N.H. already gave them a big FU, said that's a layoff and they will pay. If you call NH Unemployment Services (800-610-5255) the first thing you hear is a special announcement for Market Basket employees.
 
2014-08-08 03:05:51 PM  
Is this what "Going Galt" looks like?
 
2014-08-08 03:22:05 PM  

max_pooper: Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.


that. Last i heard, they had withheld paychecks this week and won't pay the workers for hours worked until this is sorted....or the AG gets involved, whichever.
 
2014-08-08 03:24:43 PM  

JustGetItRight: That would be, yes but depending on the state's laws it might be something that must be resolved through civil action by the employees.


In MA, failing to pay workers their pay can result in paying them 3x what they're owed (I believe, don't quote me though)

Also, the AGs of NH and MA gave Market Basket a warning a couple of weeks ago when the workers really started walking off the job, that they are monitoring the situation closely. Kinda a public "don't do stupid shiat, morons" shot at the Board
 
2014-08-08 03:35:15 PM  

somedude210: JustGetItRight: That would be, yes but depending on the state's laws it might be something that must be resolved through civil action by the employees.

In MA, failing to pay workers their pay can result in paying them 3x what they're owed (I believe, don't quote me though)

Also, the AGs of NH and MA gave Market Basket a warning a couple of weeks ago when the workers really started walking off the job, that they are monitoring the situation closely. Kinda a public "don't do stupid shiat, morons" shot at the Board


So not paying employees for work performed is going to cost 3 times what it would be to just pay them what they are owed? I'm not a CEO with an MBA but even I can see how that is just pissing money away.

Costs will be even more after attorneys' fees.
 
2014-08-08 03:36:00 PM  

nyseattitude: The CEO's don't want to lay off the employees. They are cutting peoples hours to 0 in an attempt to avoid paying unemployment benefits.

State of N.H. already gave them a big FU, said that's a layoff and they will pay. If you call NH Unemployment Services (800-610-5255) the first thing you hear is a special announcement for Market Basket employees.


Beat me to it.  This isn't Market Basket saying, "no we don't want to lay any people off."  It's Market basket saying, "we don't want you working, but we also don't want to pay you unemployment benefits."

It sounds like the managers are trying to be the good guys by actually laying people off, so they can collect unemployment.  Or they're trying to stick it to Market Basket.  Or maybe even both.

According to Massachusetts state law, a reduction in normal hours of more than 1/3 is usually enough to receive unemployment.
 
2014-08-08 03:58:27 PM  

rugman11: nyseattitude: The CEO's don't want to lay off the employees. They are cutting peoples hours to 0 in an attempt to avoid paying unemployment benefits.

State of N.H. already gave them a big FU, said that's a layoff and they will pay. If you call NH Unemployment Services (800-610-5255) the first thing you hear is a special announcement for Market Basket employees.

Beat me to it.  This isn't Market Basket saying, "no we don't want to lay any people off."  It's Market basket saying, "we don't want you working, but we also don't want to pay you unemployment benefits."

It sounds like the managers are trying to be the good guys by actually laying people off, so they can collect unemployment.  Or they're trying to stick it to Market Basket.  Or maybe even both.

According to Massachusetts state law, a reduction in normal hours of more than 1/3 is usually enough to receive unemployment.


Man, can you imagine this happening in a state with weaker labor laws? I sure as hell can't.
 
2014-08-08 04:04:51 PM  
home.earthlink.net

No?
 
2014-08-08 04:20:35 PM  

RoyFokker'sGhost: DaStompa: You know, I didnt think this had much weight, but

Store managers have said sales are off by up to 92 to 95 percent.

SOMEBODY up top has got to be feeling that, not to mention all the spoiling inventory that they payed for

They really don't have any perishable inventory at this point. Part of the dispute is that there's a massive disruption of the stores' supply chain. Arthur T was paying all suppliers up front in cash. After the CEO swap, one of the new guys wanted to switch them onto 30 or 60 day payment terms. Not all that uncommon for a large, multi-state supplier, but a logistical nightmare for a bunch of smaller suppliers. Imagine a company that does, say $25,000 in sales to Market Basket. All of a sudden, they're not getting that $25,000 to meet payroll for a month or two. Now factor that in by dozens of local supply companies that Market Basket uses and you see the problem.Better to sell everything to the other stores that are paying you up front than reserve some product for a company that doesn't want to pay you for 2 months.


I hadn't heard that one yet.  That's just awesome.  Though you have to wonder how those supplies actually exist if they use 100% of what they get on a weekly basis and don't bank anything for future expenditures.  (Seriously, how do you fail business planning so hard that you don't know that's not how you do business plans?)
 
2014-08-08 05:12:07 PM  

FriarReb98: RoyFokker'sGhost: DaStompa: You know, I didnt think this had much weight, but

Store managers have said sales are off by up to 92 to 95 percent.

SOMEBODY up top has got to be feeling that, not to mention all the spoiling inventory that they payed for

They really don't have any perishable inventory at this point. Part of the dispute is that there's a massive disruption of the stores' supply chain. Arthur T was paying all suppliers up front in cash. After the CEO swap, one of the new guys wanted to switch them onto 30 or 60 day payment terms. Not all that uncommon for a large, multi-state supplier, but a logistical nightmare for a bunch of smaller suppliers. Imagine a company that does, say $25,000 in sales to Market Basket. All of a sudden, they're not getting that $25,000 to meet payroll for a month or two. Now factor that in by dozens of local supply companies that Market Basket uses and you see the problem.Better to sell everything to the other stores that are paying you up front than reserve some product for a company that doesn't want to pay you for 2 months.

I hadn't heard that one yet.  That's just awesome.  Though you have to wonder how those supplies actually exist if they use 100% of what they get on a weekly basis and don't bank anything for future expenditures.  (Seriously, how do you fail business planning so hard that you don't know that's not how you do business plans?)


Well, there's a difference between perishable goods like produce, dairy, meat, etc.; and non-perishable like plastic bags for the store, utensils, storage containers, Twinkies, etc. The article says that one of the stores in question is just starting to run out of plastic bags for shoppers, so after a month, they're running out of non-perishable consumables. The perishable stuff comes in much more frequently, usually; like every day or every other day for some items. Meats & fish usually come from local suppliers and aren't shipped in bulk, usually only a few days worth of sales in order to maintain freshness. Produce like fruits & vegetables have a longer shelf life than meats so they get shipped in maybe once a week. Fruits are also shipped in a less 'ripened' state to make them last even longer.

So, 30 or 60 day billing makes sense when you're a large chain that deals with huge suppliers, like getting direct shipments from Foster Farms, Tyson, Purdue, Harris Ranch, etc. Of the two CEOs now, only Thornton has experience as a CEO of a grocery chain: Alberstons from 2001-2006. And even then, she downsized and shut down 165 stores and laid off 20% of it's managerial staff. Gooch was so bad, he managed to make Radio Shack even worse than it was despite downsizing. So, you're talking about two highly paid CEOs infamous for downsizing and neither of them know how to deal with local suppliers.
 
2014-08-08 05:34:29 PM  
Man, they're really determined to run that brand/business flaming into the ground.
 
2014-08-08 06:12:36 PM  
Just saw an update on the local news:
The BoD sent an offer to ATD.  They say he and his managers can come back to work in order to get business going again.  The catch is that he won't be CEO and will not be in charge in any way whatsoever.  Now the BoD is saying "Well, we sent ATD an offer to fix this and he hasn't answered yet.  Ball's in his court"
 
2014-08-08 06:24:16 PM  
What's the UN good for again?
 
2014-08-08 06:29:03 PM  

Larva Lump: What's the UN good for again?


With Respect to Market Basket- and many other things- absolutely nothing.
 
2014-08-08 07:11:06 PM  

NeoCortex42: Just saw an update on the local news:
The BoD sent an offer to ATD.  They say he and his managers can come back to work in order to get business going again.  The catch is that he won't be CEO and will not be in charge in any way whatsoever.  Now the BoD is saying "Well, we sent ATD an offer to fix this and he hasn't answered yet.  Ball's in his court"


So basically it's what the Republicans did on immigration before they went on recess.

If you are "in charge" but have no authority to do anything, you're not really in charge.  What a stupid offer.
 
2014-08-08 07:37:07 PM  
dfenstrate

Larva Lump: What's the UN good for again?

With Respect to Market Basket- and many other things- absolutely nothing.


Exactly. Not even trying for negotiation or arbitration or anything.

Wait a sec. How long did Cyprus take to calm down?
 
2014-08-08 08:12:29 PM  

NeoCortex42: Just saw an update on the local news:
The BoD sent an offer to ATD.  They say he and his managers can come back to work in order to get business going again.  The catch is that he won't be CEO and will not be in charge in any way whatsoever.  Now the BoD is saying "Well, we sent ATD an offer to fix this and he hasn't answered yet.  Ball's in his court"


I'm sure in their little minds the two seconds they gave him to respond to the request they left on his work email counts as "he hasn't answered yet."
 
2014-08-08 08:46:28 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: rugman11: nyseattitude: The CEO's don't want to lay off the employees. They are cutting peoples hours to 0 in an attempt to avoid paying unemployment benefits.

State of N.H. already gave them a big FU, said that's a layoff and they will pay. If you call NH Unemployment Services (800-610-5255) the first thing you hear is a special announcement for Market Basket employees.

Beat me to it.  This isn't Market Basket saying, "no we don't want to lay any people off."  It's Market basket saying, "we don't want you working, but we also don't want to pay you unemployment benefits."

It sounds like the managers are trying to be the good guys by actually laying people off, so they can collect unemployment.  Or they're trying to stick it to Market Basket.  Or maybe even both.

According to Massachusetts state law, a reduction in normal hours of more than 1/3 is usually enough to receive unemployment.

Man, can you imagine this happening in a state with weaker labor laws? I sure as hell can't.


Companies do it all the time in weak labor law states. It just doesn't make the news.
 
2014-08-08 11:36:45 PM  

max_pooper: JustGetItRight: somedude210: this is just getting out of hand and sliding quickly into territory where the AGs will get involved

For what?

The customers of the company have decided that they don't like the way the current owners are managing the company and have thus taken their business elsewhere.  Now the company can't make payroll and the shortfall's got to be addressed.  They decided to address it by firing the part timers.

It is unfortunate, but not illegal.

Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.


Would you point me to the law you are reffing to?
 
2014-08-09 12:27:53 AM  

CMYK and PMS: max_pooper: JustGetItRight: somedude210: this is just getting out of hand and sliding quickly into territory where the AGs will get involved

For what?

The customers of the company have decided that they don't like the way the current owners are managing the company and have thus taken their business elsewhere.  Now the company can't make payroll and the shortfall's got to be addressed.  They decided to address it by firing the part timers.

It is unfortunate, but not illegal.

Is the company still not paying employees for work performed and unused vacation days? If so, that is definitely illegal.

Would you point me to the law you are reffing to?


Massachusetts Weekly Payment of Wages Law
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report