Posted by: Jordan on: July 7, 2009
See’s Candy, per their website “are well known and loved throughout the West where the company was founded in 1921. See’s is headquartered in South San Francisco, California.”
On June 19th, the San Francisco Examiner posted an article called “See’s Candies vacates Union Square“. According to the article, the See’s Candy kiosk “was not providing all of the same benefits for domestic partners that it does for spouses.” It also states that See’s decided not to change it’s policy to comply with the city, and thus vacated.
Today, EQCA posted, on their “Ripple Effect” blog, an article called “Candy company chooses closure over equality“. Seeing this, I decided to investigate.
I contacted See’s, using their Customer Service phone number listed on their site. That number is 800-895-7337. You push 3, then a rep will pick up. I requested to speak with someone about the closure of the store in Union Square. DianeJessica picked up. She said they had a press release from the CEO prepared, and asked me if I’d like to have her read it. I asked her to please do so, and e-mail it to me. The statement is as follows:
See’s Candies was mentioned in an article in the San Francisco Examiner written by Katie Worth that was published on June 19, 2009. We first learned of the article on Monday June 22nd. The article is factually untrue and the inaccuracies are being addressed with the Examiner to solicit a retraction. For years See’s Candies has provided domestic partner benefits including health insurance, with some of these benefits negotiated in labor agreements with unions representing See’s workers. These benefits continue to be offered today to union and non-union employees of See’s. Recently, our Union Square location lease was taken over by the City of San Francisco who has additional requirements for benefits beyond those offered by See’s. As any change to the benefits offered would require opening all related union contracts for negotiation, and the added benefits required were relatively minor and not consistent with our overall benefit plan, See’s attempted to seek a compromise with the City on its required benefit package. Unable to agree, and not wishing to renegotiate the union benefits offered to a single store in San Francisco, we elected to not renew our Union Square lease when it expired. See’s was not “evicted”, and we do offer health and welfare coverage for domestic partners on the same basis as for spouses. The allegations in the article were not discussed with See’s prior to the article being run.
We hope this story will soon be retracted. Thank you for your interest in See’s Candies.
Diane Ihrig (ackreply@sees.com)
See’s Candies
Consumer Affairs Department
Notice near the end, “on the same basis as for spouses“.
Wanting to know more about what exactly the requirements were from the city of San Francisco, I called the city’s 311 phone number (415.701.2311, if you’re outside SF like I am). I was told that the department that handles this is the San Francisco Office of Labor Standards Enforcement. Their phone number is 415.554.6235. This goes directly to a voicemail, so I left my phone number requesting a call back.
Just because I’m like that, I also found the number for Donna Levitt, this department’s Division Manager. That number is 415.554.6239, but I did not leave her a message. Other department contact numbers are here.
Seth Fowler, on Twitter, notes that See’s own website does not mention anything about Sexual Orientation on their Careers page. See below:
See’s Candies is dedicated to providing a positive work environment where each individual is challenged to achieve their best. As an Equal Opportunity Employer, we welcome applications from qualified candidates without regard to race, gender, ethnicity, disability, or religious preference.
I responded to Diane’s e-mail and asked her to provide me with a direct contact number, so I could ask further questions about their policy on LGBT non-discrimination. I am waiting for a response.
July 13, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Thank you for this discussion. See’s has updated their Web site to include sexual orientation, but still no retraction from The Examiner and no explanation from See’s about why, if they’re so compliant, why they are not in compliance.