WinCo: worker-owned grocery chain pays benefits, pensions, living wages, lower prices than Walmart

reply to post by ForteanOrg


We should get a wage that we could live comfortably off of, and have money left to invest in our own recreation and retirement plan. Dental and health would be affordable without having to buy into the scam of insurance. I kinda doubt that it's capatalism at fault, I think it is more along the lines of the monopolization of industries that our politicians all have heavy investments in and ties to. Conflicts of interest is now rampant, and it's a cancerous disease.

Good for those workers! Businesses like that can save American jobs and help to dig the nation out of it`s hole a bit.
Direct control of production by workers should increase quality because everyone has a stake in the final sale and profit taking.

reply to post by dominicus


You know some people may view Winco as socialism at work. But, employee owned and operated business is the only possibly way to sustain our broken economy at this point. Capitalism as an exclusive economic model will fail the people in whole and generally only benefit a few. While both provide value, the real value at Walmart isn't the average worker, but the consumer who supports slave wages.

19 States now have passed legislation allowing what is referred to as a Public Benefit Corporation. www.lexology.com...

This type of corporate structure is ideal for anyone wishing to make an impact on the communities they live in. Where profit is no longer the main goal and taking care of the needs of the people who's needs are served by the corporation is the focus.

I shop almost exclusively at Winco because I am always treated well and receive the best deal on my groceries. The quality of their produce and meat is excellent. I am please to give my business to a company that takes care of their employees and where the employees participate.

reply to post by dominicus



Good for WinCo but...

...what if your celebrated ...\"worker-owned grocery chain that pays benefits, pensions, living wages\"...

...is determined to be a success because it doesn\'t hire enough of the royalty-like entitled negros and gay\'/lesbos?

What then?

Originally posted by ForteanOrg

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Former CEO and some senior employees buy the store and it makes profit for them and their employees--capitalism. I fail to see any anarchy involved.

We probably see what we want to see. However, let me explain why I believe that a company that is set up by the workers themselves and that pays only fair wages - while striving for the best and most affordable products - is an anarchistic system in my opinion.

Anarchism comes in a number of flavours. But it is safe to say that even moderate anarchistic systems involve reduction of the influence of private owners. Anarchists know that all wealth has been created and is created by the mutual efforts of ALL, and hence everything is owned equally by anybody, including the inheritance of our forefathers. In an anarchy anybody can take what he or she wants if there is plenty. And there will be plenty if all simply contribute reasonably, each using his or her specific talents.

Capitalism, on the other hand, tries to increase the influence of private owners. It is an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit. Note: for THEIR profit, not that of everybody else.

So: in an anarchy we will see cooperations that try to distribute wealth evenly to all. From what I read here, that's exactly what the folks at WinCo try to do. They are anarchists in my book.

Were they capitalists, we would see underpayed workers and rich owners. That's NOT what they do.

Hence my opinion.

Of course Capitalism protects the private owners, however, unlike the monocled and top-hat wearing stereotype off a propaganda flyer, the owners can be individuals, families, groups of like minded individuals, or the workers themselves. When investment and intellectual property is protected, then more people strive to make something. When one has ownership, one works harder to make it work.

That is the wonder of a free market, capitalist society--anyone can own a business in any format that they please or works for them. The workers of WInnCo are not socialists, they are a group of capitalists working together.

Originally posted by DYepes
While I do respect and admire the business model, this business will not take over Wal-Mart if it maintains the same exact business model, not even in thirty years. I would like to point out marketing is a big factor in cost. If it is true that prices are on average lower than Wal-Mart, it is probably due to the fact that Wal-Mart puts their ads in every form of media you can possibly be exposed to. Nearly every channel you watch will run a Wal-Mart ad. Most magazines will have a page with their name on it every month. The newspapers and many almot every station available in your market will also run ads. I do not see a company like WinCo being able to compete on that level of marketing without raising prices. WinCo is primarily a grocery chain. Wal-Mart was always primarily a general merchandise store.

If I cant buy TV's, car accessories, vacuum cleaners, furniture, baby clothes, toys, and gardening supplies in one stop, that will probably have an effect on consumer visits.

Yes, I do work at Wal-Mart, but I would gladly do my groceries at WinCo if they ever make it out to Florida in my lifetime. Until then, I can do my groceries at Wal-Mart while my car is having tires installed and an oil change, while the boys are getting a haircut, the wife can get her nails done, and I can buy me something new from the electronics. It is really hard to beat an honest to God one stop shop with good prices.

Yes, because instead of actually knowing the world and stretch your legs you can go to one place, do everything at once and then get back home to enjoy some football. Hurray to life...

Originally posted by NavyDoc
The workers of WInnCo are not socialists, they are a group of capitalists working together.

edit on 14-8-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

i lolled
youre trying awfully hard to avoid calling this what it is
its working..... so it cant be that dirty S word ive been told is absolutely loathsome..... you know the one..... its the work of the devil..... nonono ive been told capitalism is good and works period.....and socialism is evil and doesnt work period...... therefor this must be capitalism...... just give me a few minutes while i twist and contort these ideas in my head for a while and come up with some half baked explanation of how socialism IS capitalism

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by NavyDoc
The workers of WInnCo are not socialists, they are a group of capitalists working together.

edit on 14-8-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

i lolled
youre trying awfully hard to avoid calling this what it is
its working..... so it cant be that dirty S word ive been told is absolutely loathsome..... you know the one..... its the work of the devil..... nonono ive been told capitalism is good and works period.....and socialism is evil and doesnt work period...... therefor this must be capitalism...... just give me a few minutes while i twist and contort these ideas in my head for a while and come up with some half baked explanation of how socialism IS capitalism

No, you are incorrect and don't understand capitalism. Capitalism can be an individual or a group. That it is a group effort does not make it socialist. I co-own a business with two other individuals. We raised investment capital, put in labor, and divide the profits. That we are a group, does not make it a socialist endevour.

In WinnCo, you have the raising of capitol, different pay and benefits based on the value you contribute to the company, stock, and a CEO and executive board. They produce a product for a profit. People get an hourly wage and nice benefits and there is a bonus structure, but not very employee has an equal share of the company. Some (especially the founders) own much larger shares than others. Some own no shares at all. How is this in any way, shape or form "socialist?"

reply to post by Malynn


Sounds like the Woodman's grocery chain. I remember going there once, but it wasn't quite clean.

I myself prefer Aldi's, a grocery chain that started from Germany.

They have great low πrices, and the food is amazing (though i dont recommend the canned string beans >xP).

In my area, we usually do our groceries at Piggly Wiggly or Pick N Save...Wally World rarely

reply to post by dominicus


It's very simple in my eyes, if you don't like Walmart then don't shop there. I refuse to shop there and they don't get a penny from me because of it. If more Americans acted that way then Walmart wouldn't be the super power they are today.

Originally posted by JameSimon


Yes, because instead of actually knowing the world and stretch your legs you can go to one place, do everything at once and then get back home to enjoy some football. Hurray to life...

So you are assuming I don't know the world because im not spending the entire day driving all over town to accomplish the same errands I can run in one to two hours at a single location? Interesting logic. As a matter of fact, by going to Wal-Mart to do all that I save quite a bit of time that I enjoy spending with my family. And honestly, I enjoy going there, because I know the PEOPLE there and its nice to speak with my friends. Its also the reason I love working at Wal-Mart, I love people. I love the daily interaction with hundreds of different people everyday and meeting new people. I have made many friends working at a Wal-Mart and other families to enjoy spending time with.

Am I upset because they don't pay me like someone who studied for years at a college or university and earn like a trained professional? NO! I am not an entitlement bum who believes a job that can literally be accomplished by any homeless person with no skills off the street should be paying to accommodate a luxury lifestyle. Me and my family live well from the income me and my girlfriend both make from Wal-Mart as hourly wage earners. If I wanted to earn $50,000 a year or bill 80 expensive and stressful hours a week in some professional occupation, I would go to college. I wont bitch about an unskilled hourly wage job not paying me enough to lease two cars, pay for a 120$ monthly phone bill per person, or have 7 different portable electronics(cell phone, tablet, laptop, gaming console, camera, mp3 player, gps etc...) for each family member. Honestly, I cannot even imagine why someone would even want to live that spoiled as a human being.

Me and mine are humble folk, we enjoy our days at the pool or beach, at a park, or visiting museums.

reply to post by dominicus


A.k.a ethics.

Originally posted by sirhumperdink

Originally posted by NavyDoc
The workers of WInnCo are not socialists, they are a group of capitalists working together.

edit on 14-8-2013 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)

i lolled
youre trying awfully hard to avoid calling this what it is
its working..... so it cant be that dirty S word ive been told is absolutely loathsome..... you know the one..... its the work of the devil..... nonono ive been told capitalism is good and works period.....and socialism is evil and doesnt work period...... therefor this must be capitalism...... just give me a few minutes while i twist and contort these ideas in my head for a while and come up with some half baked explanation of how socialism IS capitalism

The definitions of Socialism and Capitalism posted on blogs are always truncated. No definitions of Capitalism mention Money, which a capitalist system would always need to facilitate trade. Most (rhetorical) definitions of Socialism don't mention the State, which socialism needs to keep everything equal.

Maybe better definitions would be:
Capitalism-- each member of society makes all of his own decisions, including whom will advise him.
Socialism -- each member of society does what he is told is best for the society as a whole.

Capitalism is the system that society naturally becomes, in the absence of authority. Socialism presumes authority. Both systems assume cooperation to make everything livable.

Jane Jacobs called our bias towards socialism "the Plantation Paradigm" in that most people go outside of the household to work on real estate that is set aside specifically for work. The workplaces tend to be organized along hierarchical shapes similar to a plantation; composed of workers, overseers, and owners. Capitalism doesn't require this, the "Plantation Paradigm" has become the custom we are all raised into. An Anarcho-Capitalist or Minarchist system would work best when the units of industry are as small as possible, so as to give maximum flexibility to the efforts and decisions of the owner/worker/producers. For instance, a locally owned body shop could also make cookware or heating/AC conduits etc.

Large businesses will always be socialistic. The workers would essentially need review all of the managerial activity in order to know what was fair treatment and wages-- which is obviously a huge demand of time on the workers. So ultimately the workers defer to the commands of the managers and defacto socialism is done. Big business is more socialist than capitalist and always has been.

Winco is capitalist in the sense of voluntary behavior and non governmental ownership, but it is socialist in the mechanics of is day to day administration.

Walmart bought out Asda over here in the uk ,They try to muscle in on every town

Originally posted by dominicus

WinCo: worker-owned grocery chain that pays benefits, pensions, living wages -- and has lower prices than WalMart

boingboing.net

WinCo is a midwestern chain of worker-owned stores that consistently underprice WalMart, while still paying a living wage to their staff and decent prices to their suppliers. Their secret appears to be a smaller selection of goods, sourced directly from factories -- but surely the fact that they're not extracting billions in profits for a family of rapacious plutocrats also helps keep prices low.

Burt Flickinger III, a reputable grocery store analyst, called them "Walmart's worst nightmare."

(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 13-8-2013 by dominicus because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-8-2013 by dominicus because: (no reason given)

Pay attention corporatists, corporate goons, and apologists-- this is the future.

When people have incentive to build up the company they work for, they will bust their butts to do it.

Treat your workers like they don't matter, and that's how they'll treat you.


Sometimes cooperation works far better than competition.

reply to post by dominicus


Worker-owned grocery stores??? THAT'S COMMUNISM!!! Something must be done about it. It's just plain unAmerican.

I live on the west coast and shop at WinCo's all I can for my groceries. Yes, indeed, their prices are better. In particular, their produce is well priced and is of good quality. They also sell coffee for $6/pound.

I used to have a family-run market, where I used to live. Their produce prices were 1/2 to 1/3 of the Safeway/Vons across the street. Where is the economy of scale for Safeway and such companies? They're making money, hand over fist.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
Of course Capitalism protects the private owners, however, unlike the monocled and top-hat wearing stereotype off a propaganda flyer, the owners can be individuals, families, groups of like minded individuals, or the workers themselves. When investment and intellectual property is protected, then more people strive to make something. When one has ownership, one works harder to make it work.

Say that you are right and ownership indeed makes one work harder. Then indeed we should have anarchy as soon as possible, as in an anarchy, with few exceptions, everything is owned by everybody. They are all owners!

But mentioning ownership as an incentive to work harder - that seems to suggest that most people are lazy and need such an incentive. I beg to differ. A healthy person likes to contribute to society. He strives for mastery, that is his true purpose: recognition by his peers, attributing to the general good. However, with few exceptions, most people hate doing dull chores. Hence, dull work should be done by machines, they seem to like it. And if dull chores can not be done by machines, let's spread the hours that are required evenly over all, so that we all are motivated to eliminate these dull chores using some creative invention - most dull chores can be done by anybody, after all. We should strive to do what we do best: be creative, think out new plans, discover new things, socialise, enjoy each others company, educate ourselves, gaze at the stars and think out a plan how to get there. That, indeed, is also "work", but it matches our true purpose much better than turning a nut every 4 secons whilst standing next to a conveyer belt..

You also mention intellectual property. In an anarchy there is no intellectual property - good ideas are welcomed and implemented, free for all to use. If somebody has a good idea, no "investment" is necessary either: he simply needs to tell the people what his idea is, and if they see benefit in implementing it, they will. If the invention works, it is owned by all, as it should be. And the inventor gets his reward: recognition by his peers, being seen as the master he is in his field.

In an anarchy you still have cooperations: groups of specialists that make something or provide a service to all. But the lawyer would have the very same access to the (impressive) facilities of the anarchist society as the carpenter would, a doctor would own exactly the same - again with the exception of some personal belongings - as the president of a cooperation or a severely disabled person that can only contribute his good will and very little else.

I must admit that what Winco does is but a drop on a very hot plate. But it's a drop, more will follow and eventually anarchy will prevail. We are born that way: not to be slaves, but to be free.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I think it's great if you can get to one. I wouldn't mind Costco or Winco at all for an option. Unfortunately, I don't live on the West Coast for Winco and Costco just doesn't compare on any level for scale yet... I was a little shocked to see the comparisons, actually.

Maps of Winco-Foods, Walmart, Costco, and Sam's Club. A final Summary Map has a location count in the side margin, although icons don't saturate the map the same way on that display.

It's incredible to see just how Walmart has captured nearly the whole market in places.

But isn't Sam's still Walmart?

reply to post by Telos


Is Sam's still Walmart? Yes and No. It's a weird sort of partnership they have there. I mean it. There are some places where the Sam's Distribution Center and Walmart Distribution center share fence lines, literally. Yet, they may as well sit 10 miles away for anything where there may be need to communicate between the two of them. I'd been down into the DC's in Arkansas a couple times running from Bentonville to others and carrying freight for both on the same truck but worlds apart for people I dealt with and right down to policies and how things worked on different sides of the fence.

Yet.. Yeah, one is basically Walmart's wholesale warehouse division (Costco type) and then Walmart stores which everyone on Earth knows and has one nearby or soon will..lol