Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Bankers Squeeze Burger King, and Tomato Pickers Lose

By Sam Pizzigati, Too Much: A Commentary on Excess and Inequality. Posted December 3, 2007.


Florida tomato pickers started a protest march last week at the Miami office of investment bank colossus Goldman Sachs. For good reason.
Advertisement

Hundreds of migrant farmworkers marched through Miami this past Friday to protest a Florida tomato grower maneuver that will cut some tomato picker wages by 40 percent.

The growers are refusing to honor deals the state's top farmworker group has cut with McDonald's and Taco Bell to pay pickers a penny a pound more for the tomatoes they pick -- over the course of workdays that often last 12 hours.

Fast-food chains just happen to be the biggest market for Florida's tomatoes. But one fast-food giant -- Burger King -- has resisted the penny-per-pound wage increase, and that resistance, says food industry analyst Eric Schlosser, "has encouraged tomato growers to cancel the deals already struck with Taco Bell and McDonald's."

Why is Burger King so up in arms against upping farmworker wages a penny a pound?

Here's a hint: The farmworkers started their nine-mile protest march Friday at the Miami office of Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street investment banking colossus whose top power suits will shortly be divvying up somewhere between $17 and $22 billion in annual bonuses.

How are Wall Street's power suits making all those billions? They certainly, of course, don't pick tomatoes -- or even flip burgers. They flip companies. And that flipping, maybe more than any other single factor, is driving the battle over pennies currently raging in Florida's tomato fields.

The flipping at Burger King, the nation's second-largest fast-food chain, has been going on for some time now, ever since 1967 when Pillsbury bought the then 13-year-old Burger King  from the company's two independent founders.

But the Burger King flipping wouldn't become particularly frenetic until nearly two dozen years later. In 1989, Grand Met, a British company, bought out Pillsbury. Just eight years later, Grand Met merged with the Guinness beverage company to create a totally new corporation that became known as Diageo.

This new company knew something about selling beer, but next to nothing about burgers. By 2002, Burger King had become a basket case, with central headquarters and the chain's franchisees at each others' throats.

That's when three American big-money powers -- Wall Street's Goldman Sachs, the Boston-based Bain Capital Group, and the Fort Worth-based Texas Pacific Group -- partnered to shell out $1.5 billion to take the distressed Burger King off Diageo's hands.

Actually, the three partners did a good bit more borrowing than shelling. Only $325 million of the Burger King sale price came from the partners' own pockets. They borrowed the rest. That's standard operating procedure in today's big-time private equity deals.

Firms like Goldman, Texas Pacific, and Bain, typically buy up a hurting corporate property with borrowed money, then tap the company's operating cash flow -- fast food companies do generate plenty of cash -- to pay off the resulting debt.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: workplace, taco bell, exploitation, immoleekee workers, burger king

Sam Pizzigati is the editor of the online weekly Too Much, and an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
thank you
Posted by: walldodger1969 on Dec 4, 2007 4:58 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My blood pressure was low till I read that above, Now it is up, way up. The problem is,no one but the tomato workers will give a F#@k. Not the government, not the rich. No one, cause they know we can't do a damn thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

State's Right to Work laws
Posted by: luzmejor on Dec 5, 2007 10:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From google listings I found this. The law seems innocuous, but employers have money and money buys everything, including uneven justice.

Right-to-work laws

State laws that make it illegal for labor unions and employers to enter into contracts that provide for a business to employ only union members in the jobs covered by the contract. One typical version of a right-to-work law reads “No person may be denied employment, and employers may not be denied the right to employ any person, because of that person's membership or non-membership in any labor organization.” Labor union leaders typically seek the repeal of right-to-work laws because much lower percentages of workers choose to join unions and pay dues in states where such laws are in effect. Defenders of right-to-work laws tend to argue that workers who refuse to join unions mainly do so because they just do not value the collective bargaining services that unions perform and/or because they disagree with the political causes that unions support with their dues money. Opponents of right-to-work laws tend to see refusal to join a union mainly as attempting to be a free rider who enjoys the very real benefits of union representation without having to pay his fair share of the cost. About 20 US states have some version of such a law presently in effect.

A Glossary of Political Economy Terms copyright © 1994-2005 Paul M. Johnson

Department of Political Science, 7080 Haley Center, Auburn University, Auburn, AL 36849

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: State's Right to Work laws Posted by: lindalee
Migrant farm workers: the smartest people in America?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 8, 2007 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is incredibly heartening to see working-class people put the dots together in this fashion. The rest of the protestors - the anti-war protestors and the global warming protestors, for example - need to take the same angle.

However, it gets even thicker. Look at Goldman Sach's major shareholders:

Marisco Capital, Barclays UK, State Street Corporation, The Vanguard Group, Fidelity, Wellington, Deutsch Bank, etc. The concentration of corporate power here is immense. These banks are also the primary shareholders in oil, coal, the corporate media, pharmaceuticals, weapons manufacturers, retail stores, and so on. (For example, look at the major WalMart shareholders).

Everywhere you look, the penny shaving is in action - save a few pennies by moving manufacturing and to some desperate Third World country and environmental rules, where protesting tomato pickers can be shot by government police? Sure - and the President and Congress will rush to curry favor by pushing the necessary legislation through. Want to avoid taxes by assigning all profits to some Cayman Islands corporate branch? You can count on Congress to look the other way.

Want to guess whose employees are the biggest donors to the Presidential race? For Hillary, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup are all in her top four. For Obama, Goldman Sachs is his top donor, followed by Lehman Brothers. The campaign chests of ach of these two are three times as large as their nearest Democratic competitors. The same is true for the Republicans - Goldman Sachs is the #1 donor for Mitt Romney. See www.opensecrets.org for more.

The fact is that most campaign money for the big spenders in this election comes from banks, the corporations they control, and the lobbyists that they hire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» very good point Posted by: thelostsailor
» right, but Posted by: Coleman
» that is the grim truth isn't it Posted by: thelostsailor
Since Burger King is so pinched...
Posted by: browsercat on Dec 8, 2007 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...send the CEO a penny. He has 25,000,000 [minus the one I sent him the other day] pennies to find in Burger King's budget to fund the extra penny for workers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WOW!! I never eat there but
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN on Dec 8, 2007 9:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This sounds like a whopper of a problem.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I 2nd Connecting the Dots
Posted by: Gravitas on Dec 8, 2007 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Above was a great comment. Glad to see farm workers connecting the dots; something the average person is too busy watching Dancing with the Stars to do!

Why doesn't somebody fund people to start healthy, socially responsible, "fast" food? Instead of a chain, they could be independently operated, but still part of a network to benefit from advertising and bulk purchases. And then when myself and the rest of my nutritionally savy, earth friendly fat friends eat there, Schlosser and Spurlock can stop exploiting our naturally abundant bodies to promote their cause. We need less whining and more solutions.

p.s. For a minute there, I thought I was going to have to boycott Guiness. Thank God I don't have to give up my monthly wee pint! More than once a month and it gives me headaches!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Goldman is into a lot worse
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Dec 8, 2007 11:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Beating up on farm workers? How about rigging the stock and commodities markets? These guys are into far worse things that ultimately pick the general public's pockets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right, but... Posted by: Coleman
X pat
Posted by: davy on Dec 9, 2007 12:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How very American.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And why the fuck are Schumer and Hillary kissing Wall Street's and Sachs's ass ?!?!?
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 10, 2007 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So much for the Democrats being the party of the people ! Time to vote independent and that should apply to NYers too for all the MISrepresentation they're getting these days. And don't forget the NAFTA extension that's being supported by both parties !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]