Smithfield Packing Co.: Boston City Council rushed to judgment
As we celebrated Constitution Day on Sept. 17, and reflected on the Bill of Rights and our constitutional guarantees, it is with great pride that we as a free people can separate ourselves from current and past tyrannical dictators and nations which denied and continue to deny their citizens the right to face their accusers.
Sadly, the Boston City Council, representing a city steeped in American history, broached this inviolate principle when it summarily passed a resolution on Aug. 1, 2007, requesting that the city review its purchasing of all products processed by Smithfield Packing Co., located in Tar Heel, N.C. It advised the city to suspend its purchases because of alleged abuses against its employees until the company allows the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) to organize its workers. The council further urged all supermarkets within the city of Boston to suspend their purchases as well.
It’s unfortunate that the City Council did not exercise its duty or due diligence in inviting Smithfield Packing Co. to testify on its behalf or minimally seek a written response so a defense could be mounted against such egregious accusations surrounding the treatment of its 5,200 employees. As a result of the City Council’s call for an immediate boycott of Smithfield’s food products, the employees and the businesses that depend on the sales of these products to earn a living are placed in jeopardy.
If the City Council had bothered to hear both sides of the story, instead of the one-sided accusations made by the UFCW and its proprietary public relations arm, Smithfield Justice, it would have learned that on July 13, 2007, more than 3,000 Smithfield employees delivered signed letters to UFCW President Joe Hansen demanding they be given the chance to vote in a secret ballot election — a democratic right the UFCW opposes, despite the fact that the federal National Labor Relations Board would conduct the election. Smithfield endorses the secret ballot election and has even offered to pay half the costs of an independent observer to oversee the process. Perhaps UFCW’s reluctance to adhere to basic democratic principles is because Tar Heel employees have twice voted against union representation — once in 1994, and a second time in 1997. If the Boston City Council had taken the time, they would have learned that Smithfield Foods has successfully worked with several unions, including Teamsters, Laborers — and the UFCW. Indeed, fully 57 percent of all Smithfield employees working at other plants have union representation.
Recently, the Municipal and County Association of Bladen County, where the Tar Heel plant is located, and the World Conference of Mayors, led by civil rights leader Johnny Ford, have expressed their support for a secret ballot election to resolve the issue of unionization at Smithfield Packing Co. All the company wants from the Boston City Council is a fair hearing on behalf of its employees and the community it serves.
Dennis R. Pittman
Director of Corporate Communications
Smithfield Packing Co.
Tar Heel, N.C.
