Posted by: Jordan on: July 15, 2009
This just in:
Hello Jordan,
Please find a statement below from Brad Kinstler, President and CEO of See’s Candies, that was issued today:
See’s Candies has always offered excellent employee benefits and supported the communities in which we do business. In an effort to ensure equal benefits for domestic partners, the same as for spouses, we have begun discussions with our unions to address domestic partner benefits offered to See’s employees. We are also committing to equal domestic partner benefits for non-union employees covered by See’s benefit plans.
We currently have eight different union contracts, with either the union or See’s providing health and welfare, retirement benefits, and sick/medical leaves to employees of See’s based on Collective Bargaining Agreements entered into between See’s, the unions and our employees. The change to non-union benefits will be effective immediately and we are hopeful that the union benefits can be adjusted as needed in the near future. While the benefits offered differ somewhat in the various contracts and non-union plans, the most common changes needed center around Family Leave, Sick Leave and Bereavement for domestic partners as well as for spouses and other family members.
Our intent is to offer employee benefits with domestic partner coverage equivalent to benefits offered to spouses in all states in which See’s Candies has employees.
Best regards,
SarahSarah Siler
Account Supervisor
Murphy O’Brien Public Relations
Direct: (310) 586-7149
ssiler@murphyobrien.com
Hum. Okay, so it’s good that they want to try and fix the problem, right? But I guess this means that earlier statement, which included the following, was either a lie or incorrect?:
These benefits continue to be offered today to union and non-union employees of See’s.
Which is it? Did they offer non-union employees benefits, or didn’t they?
Also, who is this new contact, Sarah? Never heard from her before, but See’s was kind enough to give her my contact information. I’m going to e-mail back Sarah for a more complete answer.