Connect with us

Merge & Acquisition

Colorado Grocery Workers File Lawsuit Against Kroger and Albertsons Over No-Poach Agreements

Published

on

A class-action lawsuit has been filed against Kroger and Albertsons by the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 7 (UFCW Local 7), representing approximately 18,000 grocery workers in Colorado. The suit alleges that the two grocery giants violated state no-poach laws during the King Soopers worker strike in Denver in 2022, restricting worker mobility and impacting wages.

Filed on Wednesday, the lawsuit builds on earlier findings from Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, who in February filed an antitrust lawsuit against Kroger and Albertsons. Weiser’s lawsuit sought to block the proposed $24.6 billion merger between the two companies and demanded $1 million in civil penalties for violations of no-poach and non-solicitation agreements. These agreements allegedly prevented employees from transferring between the grocery chains, undermining job opportunities and wage negotiations.

The UFCW Local 7 lawsuit specifically seeks to recover lost wages and economic opportunities that workers might have achieved in the absence of the alleged illegal agreements. The lead plaintiff, Valarie Morgan, is a long-time grocery employee who was directly involved in contract negotiations during the 2021-2022 King Soopers strike. Morgan and other workers claim they were unfairly restricted due to the agreements allegedly struck between King Soopers, City Market, and Safeway parent companies.

Kroger and Albertsons have strongly denied these allegations, asserting that no such no-poach deals were made. However, the UFCW maintains that these agreements harmed workers by reducing their bargaining power and limiting career growth.

This lawsuit is part of a broader set of legal challenges Kroger and Albertsons are facing regarding their proposed merger. In addition to the Colorado case, similar legal battles are ongoing in Washington and Portland, Oregon. A ruling from Colorado’s courts on the state’s antitrust lawsuit is still pending, making this an ongoing and high-stakes issue for both companies.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link