Molson shutting off the taps
- Thread starter kappclark
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
boo boo
Well-Known Member
Shareholders won't http://bit.ly/u7fDN
What is up with yahoo news links?
They borked.
They borked.
Yeah, all I got was some add for Yahoo business or some crap....
Pluto035
Well-Known Member
Just google search for the name of the article. Yahoo doesn't seem to allow linking to their site.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
Molson retirees losing their free beer to cry in
TheStar.com | Canada | Molson retirees losing their free beer to cry in
KIM GOODYEAR FOR THE TORONTO STAR
Retired Molson employee Bill Bavis says lack of consultation is unfair.
Pensioners protest as their allotment of 864 brews a year will be cut to nothing
Jun 09, 2009 04:30 AM
Andrew Chung
STAFF REPORTER
If you sang that well-worn campfire song about the beer bottles on the wall, you'd have to start at 864.
That's the annual complimentary beer allotment for retirees from the Molson brewery in St. John's, Nfld., the same amount of free suds they received while still working.
But, without consulting them, Molson has decided to shut the tap.
Come Jan. 1, the allotment will be a dozen bottles a month, down from six dozen a month (or 72 dozen a year), and in five years, it will be zero. For current workers, who also get 72 dozen bottles a year, the allotment will drop to 52 dozen. No five-year cut-off is planned.
Retirees held a protest outside the brewery last Friday. They've demanded a meeting with top company officials and will get one within the next two weeks.
In Vancouver and Montreal, where the allotment is less than in St. John's, the unions have launched grievances. Vancouver's case goes to arbitration June 16.
"There was no consultation, we just received a letter that this is a done deal, which is totally unfair," said Bill Bavis, who retired six years ago after 32 years at Molson's in St. John's. "I think with the economic downturn they're trying to take advantage of us, as a way to cut retirees' benefits and justify it."
Molson says it is "standardizing" its complimentary beer policy, which was originally intended not only as a perk but also to allow workers to share their beer, thereby helping to market it.
"This was a decision made by management after reviewing a number of cost-cutting measures," said Molson vice-president Ferg Devins. "We strongly feel the benefits package for our employees and retirees is still very generous."
The measure, announced in a letter in early April, came just before parent company Molson Coors announced its net profit more than doubled in the first quarter compared to last year, to $75.7 million, and increased its dividend.
There are 2,400 Molson retirees in Canada. Their free beer costs the company about $1 million a year.
Critics say all they've done is alienate their workers. "This does nothing for production inside" the plants, said Greg Pretty, a director for the Fish, Food and Allied Workers union, which represents the St. John's employees. For the average retiree, it means the loss of the equivalent of about $1,300, he said.
TheStar.com | Canada | Molson retirees losing their free beer to cry in
Retired Molson employee Bill Bavis says lack of consultation is unfair.
Pensioners protest as their allotment of 864 brews a year will be cut to nothing
Jun 09, 2009 04:30 AM
Andrew Chung
STAFF REPORTER
If you sang that well-worn campfire song about the beer bottles on the wall, you'd have to start at 864.
That's the annual complimentary beer allotment for retirees from the Molson brewery in St. John's, Nfld., the same amount of free suds they received while still working.
But, without consulting them, Molson has decided to shut the tap.
Come Jan. 1, the allotment will be a dozen bottles a month, down from six dozen a month (or 72 dozen a year), and in five years, it will be zero. For current workers, who also get 72 dozen bottles a year, the allotment will drop to 52 dozen. No five-year cut-off is planned.
Retirees held a protest outside the brewery last Friday. They've demanded a meeting with top company officials and will get one within the next two weeks.
In Vancouver and Montreal, where the allotment is less than in St. John's, the unions have launched grievances. Vancouver's case goes to arbitration June 16.
"There was no consultation, we just received a letter that this is a done deal, which is totally unfair," said Bill Bavis, who retired six years ago after 32 years at Molson's in St. John's. "I think with the economic downturn they're trying to take advantage of us, as a way to cut retirees' benefits and justify it."
Molson says it is "standardizing" its complimentary beer policy, which was originally intended not only as a perk but also to allow workers to share their beer, thereby helping to market it.
"This was a decision made by management after reviewing a number of cost-cutting measures," said Molson vice-president Ferg Devins. "We strongly feel the benefits package for our employees and retirees is still very generous."
The measure, announced in a letter in early April, came just before parent company Molson Coors announced its net profit more than doubled in the first quarter compared to last year, to $75.7 million, and increased its dividend.
There are 2,400 Molson retirees in Canada. Their free beer costs the company about $1 million a year.
Critics say all they've done is alienate their workers. "This does nothing for production inside" the plants, said Greg Pretty, a director for the Fish, Food and Allied Workers union, which represents the St. John's employees. For the average retiree, it means the loss of the equivalent of about $1,300, he said.
Edcculus
Well-Known Member
Ha, they should have been thankful that Molson was giving out free beer for all those years. How can they even be justified to complain about this? What a bunch of babies. I like how they call free beer for retirees "benifets".
ShortSnoutBrewing
Kwanesum Chinook Illahee
I'm with Edcculus on this. I don't get free wine and have to pay the same price distributors pay. That goes for everyone in the company, GM/Winemaker on down.
**** they have to complain to try to get their free beer though. I know I would. If you just take their decision and accept it you surely don't get free beer. Might as well complain and hope you get some more free beer.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
If you were in their shoes, almost all of you would be pissed. It sucks though, but in these dire times, it could 1 million bucks a year in free beer for people who do not work any longer or laying some folks off.
Companies that don't do the long term math on pensions & benefits costs end up like GM and Chrysler.
Companies that don't do the long term math on pensions & benefits costs end up like GM and Chrysler.
That sucks! I think I'll boycott Molson now! Oh wait, I already don't buy their beer.
"For the average retiree, it means the loss of the equivalent of about $1,300,"...
Is Molson really that expensive?
"For the average retiree, it means the loss of the equivalent of about $1,300,"...
Is Molson really that expensive?
Yeah, the same company who posts double the profits from a year ago. No, I understand where you are coming from, but it will def seem an arrogant move at this time. They should maybe drop the annual amount a bit but grandfather the people already retired so that they will receive their beer until they die. That way they can cut costs now and in the future as well. Dropping them completely in 5 years is some major hurt to some of these guys I'm sure.
OP
OP
kappclark
Well-Known Member
Thx EdWort for posting the story ... weird abt the yahoo news links.
I think they are a bunch of crybabies, and should come to HBT to see how to improve on their beer ! Looks like Molson has some vision for future liabilities.
I think they are a bunch of crybabies, and should come to HBT to see how to improve on their beer ! Looks like Molson has some vision for future liabilities.
It was a benefit that was promised to them. No different than saying you have discounted health insurance and then pulling it later on.
I can understand them having to cut the amount they give out, but totally phasing it out is a bit *****ey. Especially in a situation where profits have gone up.
I can understand them having to cut the amount they give out, but totally phasing it out is a bit *****ey. Especially in a situation where profits have gone up.
boo boo
Well-Known Member
Look at it this way.
If you had a benifit taken away that was part of a collective agreement between the union and management for retirees, would you say ah well it was good while it lasted?
And if the same company then had record profits, decided to give a bonus to management and then raise stockholders dividends 20%.
Looks like a crappy deal to me.
We can see the ones who cry that they shouldn't be protesting and they were lucky to have it at all, must be management or other non union people.
If you had a benifit taken away that was part of a collective agreement between the union and management for retirees, would you say ah well it was good while it lasted?
And if the same company then had record profits, decided to give a bonus to management and then raise stockholders dividends 20%.
Looks like a crappy deal to me.
We can see the ones who cry that they shouldn't be protesting and they were lucky to have it at all, must be management or other non union people.
They say it is a million dollars in savings, but do the math thats $0.50 a beer to brew in 50,000 gallon batches? BS!BS!BS!
With extract and lots of hops bought by the ounce it cost me $0.50 per beer, so not a chance it costs them that much unless they are overnight shipping them 2-3 bottles a day.
It does seem like a strange retirement benefit, but after I've worked for 40-50 years and stop working I don't want to receive less and less until I die.
With extract and lots of hops bought by the ounce it cost me $0.50 per beer, so not a chance it costs them that much unless they are overnight shipping them 2-3 bottles a day.
It does seem like a strange retirement benefit, but after I've worked for 40-50 years and stop working I don't want to receive less and less until I die.
remilard
Well-Known Member
I think the last thing you want to do is nickel and dime people. Cut their medical benefits and at least the cost benefit justifies the outrage.
Big breweries buy back dated beer. Just start giving them that.
Big breweries buy back dated beer. Just start giving them that.
Mr. Nice Guy
Well-Known Member
Yeah what does a promise mean anyways, the bottom line is more important.
And then ya'll wanna hate on them for getting free beer!
And then ya'll wanna hate on them for getting free beer!
I think the employees are justified to be angry.
I expect when I retire some day beer will be one of my biggest living expenses. It'd be nice to have a company offset some of that for me.
I'm all in favor of single payer beer care.
I expect when I retire some day beer will be one of my biggest living expenses. It'd be nice to have a company offset some of that for me.
I'm all in favor of single payer beer care.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
I'm sure they are using retail prices. I bet it costs them less than $0.20 a bottle to provide this benefit which at 72 dozen a year equals less than $180 a year per retiree, so it is pretty petty.
Edcculus
Well-Known Member
When you put it that way, I do see your point.
Mr. Nice Guy
Well-Known Member
You know, some of you here I wouldn't do a beer trade with.
You might get your beer and decide not to send me mine, you know, profits and all...
You might get your beer and decide not to send me mine, you know, profits and all...
EvilTOJ
Well-Known Member
Since you're not a paying member I wouldn't trade with you anyways. I don't see how that has to do with this discussion?
Halaster
Well-Known Member
I had a neighbor 15 years ago that worked for a distributor and he was able to buy Corona from them for .20 a bottle.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
Yep, I figured so. I can brew craft beer for 13 cents per 12 oz. serving due to bulk buying of malt and hops, and propagating yeast (that's 11# malt, 1 oz. hops, and liquid yeast). With Molsen's scale, I'm sure that number is much lower, but you need to add the bottle, label and cap.
Now I am not doing a fully burdened cost analysis, just the simple raw materials to point out they are using retail prices to come up with their numbers.
I'm surprised they don't allow the retires to purchase the beer at cost with an retiree discount program.
ChickenSoop
Well-Known Member
After taking up home brewing, I have to think - who in the world even wants free commercial generic beer, the same beer, the same (lacking) taste, month after month, year after year, until death. Gross.
No thanks. Brew your own for added quality. You pay for what you get and free Molson beer states it all.
No thanks. Brew your own for added quality. You pay for what you get and free Molson beer states it all.
Mr. Nice Guy
Well-Known Member
Since you're not a paying member I wouldn't trade with you anyways. I don't see how that has to do with this discussion?
I'm just making the point that I'd be scared to trade with peope who think it is ok to go back on a promise. If you promise someone beer, you shoud give it to them.
What does paying for membership have to do with trading beer anyways? I understand if it is part of the rules, but besides that I see no reason why not.
EDIT: Sorry if I'm a little bit rude, I just get really mad when I read stuff like this. To me ones word means a lot, and I must admit my view on things like that are a little extreme.
slimer
Well-Known Member
It's in Canadian Dollars, isn't it? So that equals what $7 US?
EdWort
Well-Known Member
ShortSnoutBrewing
Kwanesum Chinook Illahee
But it wasn't a promise, it was a term & condition of a contract. A contract that is probably a fluid document and can be changed at the discretion of Molson. They decided to exercise that right.
And Ed, you're right if it were me in their shoes I'd be bitching too probably. But I'm not so nener nener! I have to pay for my booze.
EdWort
Well-Known Member
It has more to do with safety than anything else. I do not trade or accept beers from anonymous folks on the Interweb. It's not that it could be perfectly legit, but accepting something from a complete stranger to ingest without ever knowing if they are who they say they are is pretty risky IMHO.
Supporting members have registered with the forum and have paid membership dues. They are known entities with real names & addresses. Many of them have built quite a community reputation. All of those facts go into whether or not do decide to accept or send a beer.
It's not hard rule, but I lean towards the side of caution when dealing with folks on the InterWeb.
Mr. Nice Guy
Well-Known Member
Ed,
I agree, I'd be a little scared to try some random persons homebrew. It woud be like taking your kids trick or treating in an unfamiliar neighborhood.
I do have to say, I have done over 100 trades on a rock and gem forum. (I mine rocks and sell them for a living, the forum is just for fun though)
In the 100+ trades, I have never had a problem or gotten screwed over. I have gotten every box too, none were lost or stolen.
I have traded with a whole bunch of people who registered at that forum just to pm me for a trade, the trades were all awesome.
Kilted Brewer,
What are you a lawyer? I'm just kidding but you do have a point. I'm just talking about the "basics" here. The peope that worked there were told that they would get something and the company went back on it. I find that wrong.
A contract has two sides, the workers fulfilled their obligation, why shouldn't the company reciprocate?
I agree, I'd be a little scared to try some random persons homebrew. It woud be like taking your kids trick or treating in an unfamiliar neighborhood.
I do have to say, I have done over 100 trades on a rock and gem forum. (I mine rocks and sell them for a living, the forum is just for fun though)
In the 100+ trades, I have never had a problem or gotten screwed over. I have gotten every box too, none were lost or stolen.
I have traded with a whole bunch of people who registered at that forum just to pm me for a trade, the trades were all awesome.
Kilted Brewer,
What are you a lawyer? I'm just kidding but you do have a point. I'm just talking about the "basics" here. The peope that worked there were told that they would get something and the company went back on it. I find that wrong.
A contract has two sides, the workers fulfilled their obligation, why shouldn't the company reciprocate?
