[saturn_656]

The only reason the LCBO does so well is because they sell products at prices grossly inflated over cost and competition against them has been effectively banned.

That's it. Give them a monopoly on cigarette sales too and profits will be through the bloody roof.

[Lemmy]

If my aunt had nuts she'd be my uncle. The only reason the Bank of Montreal is so profitable is blah, blah, blah, but if they didn't blah, blah, blah, they wouldn't be. How about let's deal with realities instead of what ifs?

[saturn_656]

Lemmy Lemmy:

If my aunt had nuts she'd be my uncle. The only reason the Bank of Montreal is so profitable is blah, blah, blah, but if they didn't blah, blah, blah, they wouldn't be. How about let's deal with realities instead of what ifs?

Did anything I say not reflect reality professor?

[raydan]

Lemmy Lemmy:

raydan raydan:

You're way more of a union cheer-leader than I'm a union basher, Lemmy.

That's funny because, in my professional world, I'm considered fairly anti-union. Only here, where there's constant ignorance about unions, am I considered a union cheer-leader.

I'm far from an expert but open-minded enough to see that it's a necessity in some cases. I've worked in places that had a union but didn't need one and others that didn't have one but needed it. Another funny thing here is that you have a lot of people getting a job in a company that is notorious for hiring a lot a part-time workers, then complaining about it... like me complaining about having to wear a suit and tie when I started working in a Credit Union.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

why shouldn't the employees be paid on MRPL like they are in the private sector?

Every retail employee besides LCBO staff aren't all paid using the same forumula. Not even close.

Lemmy Lemmy:

The government isn't broke. That's conservative horseshit. And even if it were, that's got nothing to do with the LC, which is extremely profitable.

Ontario can't pay it's bills without going further into debt. That's broke. You have to take into consideration the state of finances in Ontario.

Lemmy Lemmy:

Given the revenues that the employer is raking in, it absolutely is reasonable and realistic. You're always talking about how businesses should pay out to their employees when they're doing well but should expect to get concessions from labour when they're not. The LC is a perfect example of a company doing very well. The employees ought to share in that success. MRPL, Ricky, way she fucking goes.

Small wage increase? Sure....but all these other demands about part-time/full-time....that's unrealistic. You don't staff your stores based on profits, you staff your stores on what best serves the customer.

Lemmy, you may tell us that you're considered anti-union which if you ask me, is total horseshit.

With that said, you have always been a union cheerleader so you don't need to tell us, we know what side of the fence you're on. Very, very rarely have you come out on side with any business or government when it comes to union labour so save your typing and wave those pom-poms!

[raydan]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Given the revenues that the employer is raking in, it absolutely is reasonable and realistic. You're always talking about how businesses should pay out to their employees when they're doing well but should expect to get concessions from labour when they're not. The LC is a perfect example of a company doing very well. The employees ought to share in that success. MRPL, Ricky, way she fucking goes.

I understand that, but a good percentage of the price of booze is really a tax in disguise.

The same would happen if the government got into the cigarette business and decided to sell them all themselves. How much of the price of cigarettes is taxes?

[herbie]

What world do you guys live in?
There's not a single item in the private liquor stores in BC that costs less than it does in the LCB. Beer's $5 more. Bottles are $5-$10 more. The wine selection sucks shit. The workers make minimum wage or barely over.
People go there because it's one block closer than the LCB, open til 11 and the staff are lax with ID, shoplifting and calling the cops because you're stumbling about pissed and harassing the customers for change and cigarettes.
They're so knowledgeable about the product they'll agree with you that Grape Duck is a good table wine for your Chamber of Commerce meeting.
And the usual squawk - they're just protecting their overpaid jobs... well DUH they'd have to be retarded to go along with half pay and no benefits, wouldn't they? The ONLY reason you talk like that is because it's not YOUR job, and you've got this delusion of capitalist theory that you might save a whole nickel.

[Lemmy]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Lemmy Lemmy:

If my aunt had nuts she'd be my uncle. The only reason the Bank of Montreal is so profitable is blah, blah, blah, but if they didn't blah, blah, blah, they wouldn't be. How about let's deal with realities instead of what ifs?

Did anything I say not reflect reality professor?

No, you were right on the mark. So what's your point then?

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Lemmy, you may tell us that you're considered anti-union which if you ask me, is total horseshit.

With that said, you have always been a union cheerleader so you don't need to tell us, we know what side of the fence you're on. Very, very rarely have you come out on side with any business or government when it comes to union labour so save your typing and wave those pom-poms!

I come out on the side of unions because it's the anti-union side that always gets it wrong on CKA. When the pro-union side gets it wrong, I'll call them out too. It just doesn't seem to happen that way around here. If you anti-union guys would start saying anything remotely correct, I wouldn't have anything to call you out over it.

[bootlegga]

Ahh, reminds me of those days when the ALCB could hold the province hostage because they had a monopoly on liquor sales...privatization put and end to that.

Now we have people earning crappy wages, better booze selection, more stores open longer hours and higher prices!

Privatization, while it has its benefits, also has its drawbacks.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

I come out on the side of unions because it's the anti-union side that always gets it wrong on CKA. When the pro-union side gets it wrong, I'll call them out too. It just doesn't seem to happen that way around here. If you anti-union guys would start saying anything remotely correct, I wouldn't have anything to call you out over it.

You jumped in and directed a post to me without me saying anything incorrect. CUPE looking to get guaranteed hours for their part-time staff. Anyone with an ounce of retail experience knows that.

You jumped in with the typical union stance "what's better for the economy, full time or part time jobs?" mantra.

The truth is, you often jump into posts to defend unions with the guise of being anti-union. You're not fooling anyone.

[peck420]

Higher prices is almost always guaranteed when switching from a single provider to multi provider system.

No single provider, in the multi provider system, will come remotely close to the volume levels required to keep prices as low as a single provider set up...just for starters.

That being said, my favourite liquor retailer is world's better then anything ALCB ever offered. As a non drinker myself, they have never steered me wrong in providing for my guests...no comment on the competency of the old ALCB employees in my area.

[andyt]

MY experience is the opposite. I drink/buy very little, but when I want advice I head to the govt store. The private stores are usually small, attached to a pub and staffed by one person who knows diddly squat about the product, but then they don't have much selection anyway. The gov store always has a manager, or whatever they are, on hand to ask for advice - you don't have to bother the clerks who are busy ringing up the booze. I don't doubt there are specialty private stores that have good stuff and knowledge, but I wouldn't know where they are. Not near my place, anyway.

[Lemmy]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You jumped in and directed a post to me without me saying anything incorrect. CUPE looking to get guaranteed hours for their part-time staff. Anyone with an ounce of retail experience knows that.

Huh? What did I say about guaranteed hours?

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

You jumped in with the typical union stance "what's better for the economy, full time or part time jobs?" mantra.

Well, what's better then? I didn't answer the question, I only asked it.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

The truth is, you often jump into posts to defend unions with the guise of being anti-union. You're not fooling anyone.

I don't defend unions from anything other than incorrect anti-union rhetoric. I didn't defend the union when I negotiated for the Upper Grand Board in their talks with OSSTF. I didn't defend unions when I published a recent paper on the CAW's role in the collapse of the Oshawa auto industry. Or the paper I published on the rise of temporary services agencies and how they were borne out of union greed. But keep those blinders on, Champ.

[OnTheIce]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Huh? What did I say about guaranteed hours?

You didn't say anything. CUPE did.

Lemmy Lemmy:

Well, what's better then? I didn't answer the question, I only asked it.

Obviously full-time jobs are better, but the reality is, the majority of retail staff are part-time and that's consistent within the sector.

Lemmy Lemmy:

I don't defend unions from anything other than incorrect anti-union rhetoric. I didn't defend the union when I negotiated for the Upper Grand Board in their talks with OSSTF. I didn't defend unions when I published a recent paper on the CAW's role in the collapse of the Oshawa auto industry. Or the paper I published on the rise of temporary services agencies and how they were borne out of union greed.
But keep those blinders on, Champ.

Well, your pro-union cheerleading on here sure don't speak to your true feelings, if that is actually the case.