Post-Vote Debrief

Coop members considered this proposal at two General Meetings. At the March 2024 General Meeting, the General Coordinators first presented this proposal. Members expressed confusion and concern: they pointed out that the text of the proposal is confusingly written, does not clearly delineate the roles of the Personnel Committee and General Coordinators, and does not address the problems that led to the Personnel Committee’s current dysfunction. Members asked whether the General Coordinators consulted other staff while developing the proposal, and the General Coordinators said they did not. Members also asked why Coop staff are not unionized and why the General Coordinators want to handpick the members tasked with resolving complaints against General Coordinators. The General Coordinators said they would take members’ feedback into account and bring a revised proposal to the floor at the next GM.

At the April 2024 General Meeting, the General Coordinators presented an identical proposal that did not address the questions or concerns members raised a month prior. During question and discussion periods, members reiterated their concern about having the General Coordinators personally select the members responsible for disciplinary oversight of the General Coordinators. Coop members also expressed their confusion about what exactly the General Coordinators were proposing and what their proposal would mean for the Personnel Committee. Both the General Coordinators and a number of members in support of the proposal expressed that members in attendance at the meeting “did not have access to all the facts” but urged everyone to nevertheless vote in favor.

Unsurprisingly, a majority of members present at the April General Meeting voted against the proposal. The vote itself was chaotic: because there were not enough paper ballots, the Chair Committee asked members to vote by a show of hands. Three individual members of the Chair Committee counted the vote twice each. All six counts found more votes against than in favor of the proposal, though the exact vote tallies differed. The Chair Committee ended the meeting by imploring “whoever is in charge of printing the ballots” to please print enough ballots next time!

The Coop needs confidential HR and personnel policies that give Coop staff avenues for recourse and redress in the event of management wrongdoing. Such policies should benefit from members’ input and oversight. We welcome future proposals that provide a safer and more welcoming work environment for Coop staff while affirming our Coop’s commitment to being a democratic, member-owned and member-run cooperative.

Our position

To pass a targeted boycott of Israeli goods at the Coop, members need to vote on a proposal outlining that policy. This should be a straightforward democratic process, but since October 2023 (and in the 2012 and 2016 campaigns), General Coordinators have either actively stepped in to obstruct our vote from happening, or leveraged Coop bureaucracy toward the same end. General Coordinators unduly wield a huge amount of power, but members’ decisions at General Meetings direct the Board, management, staff, and members.

This proposal—put forth by the General Coordinators—concentrates even more executive power in the hands of the General Coordinators by granting the GCs unprecedented control over the very policies that are supposed to 1) oversee them and 2) be separately determined by members. In other words, a total capture of power. The labor practice and union-busting implications for Coop paid staff is especially alarming.

We recommend voting NO.

Submission Details

Text (from April 2024 agenda)

The General Coordinators (GCs) propose:

  1. The GCs shall be solely responsible for all personnel-related matters, including but not limited to the employee handbook, benefits, salaries and wages, hirings, and terminations, for all staff supervised by the General Coordinators or the General Manager.
  2. Role of the Personnel Committee
    1. The Personnel Committee, in collaboration with the General Coordinator team:
      1. shall be solely responsible for all personnel-related matters, including but not limited to the General Coordinator Handbook, benefits, and salaries;
      2. shall have the authority to hire General Coordinators and decide General Coordinator and General Manager salaries;
      3. shall present a General Manager candidate for approval at a General Meeting.
    2. The Personnel Committee, in collaboration with the GC responsible for HR and/or General Manager, shall have the authority to take disciplinary actions, in accordance with the Complaint and Grievance Policy and the Employee Handbook, up to and including termination, against General Coordinators and the General Manager.
  3. Personnel policies shall be the sole purview of the General Manager, General Coordinator Team, and/or the Personnel Committee. Those entities have the sole authority to bring these matters to the General Meeting.
  4. Once approved, the above motions shall replace all other GM-approved motions on these matters.

This proposal is based on the following considerations. These considerations must be formally entered in the minutes of this meeting:

  1. The creation of the Personnel Committee was approved by the Board of Directors during several General Meetings in 1981.
  2. The Board of Directors, through the General Meeting, entrusted all personnel matters to the General Coordinators for employees reporting to them in December 1995 and February 2002;
  3. The General Coordinators regularly seek the review and input of policies contained in the employee handbook from National Cooperative Grocers recommended employment lawyers;