Members of the union for the Mott’s plant in Williamson have voted against a contract proposal that, if approved, could have ended the strike that last week exceeded 100 days.
The vote followed a meeting last week in Dallas, Texas between company officials and union officials from Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union Local No. 220 to discuss the “last, best and final” contract offer by Dr. Pepper Snapple, the parent company of Mott’s, which included pay reductions of $1.50 an hour and cuts to pension and health care plans.
“During the meeting, we identified several key issues that would potentially resolve the strike related to wages, pension, 401(k) employer match and a signing bonus,” said Chris Barnes, spokesperson for Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, in an e-mail. “If the union’s membership had approved the changes discussed in the meeting and submitted them to us in a proposal, we would have accepted the terms and the strike would be over.”
Barnes said he did not know the tally of how many voted for or against the proposal, but believed a large majority voted against it.
Michael LeBerth, president of the union and a Mott’s employee for 12 years, said the union is working on developing another proposal and declined to comment further.
Terms included in the proposal that was voted down were unchanged wages for three years, with a $1,000 signing bonus, and a stipulation that if an employee’s work classification was changed, the worker would have 30 days notice before being adjusted to the appropriate hourly wage, said Barnes.
Mike Bailey, of Gates, a 10-year employee at Mott’s, said he believed the proposal did not offer protection for the striking workers who had voiced their opposition to the contract.
“What really pushed me away from it was the job language,” he said. “I’ve got a bullseye on my back because I’ve been so vocal. I wouldn’t know what I’d bring home week to week.”
Barnes said he didn’t know of any protection for striking workers in the proposal or if that would have been a reason for them to vote against it.
Also in the proposal, pensions would be maintained for existing employees, and the 401(k) match by the company would be reduced from 5 to 2 percent. New employees would receive no pension and a 4-percent match on their 401(k). Health insurance premium costs would be split between the company and employee, 80 to 20 percent, and the company would offer a 50/50 split on annual premium increases in excess of 10 percent.
