H.179 would eliminate item pricing in food stores in the Commonwealth. Eliminating item pricing will have an adverse affect on consumers as well as threaten good quality full time jobs and reduce the hours of part time workers that could threaten their health and pension benefits.

H. 179 – An Act Relative to Consumer Protection: Puts supermarkets and retailers under the same law. The bill essentially allows for all retailers to be exempt from the current item pricing law if they pay a waiver to the state and install non-printing scanners - one every 5000 feet. The current food store law basically requires all items to be individually price marked with the correct price, unless the item falls into one of the exempt categories. There are several problems with this legislation.

Bad Public Policy: The state should not be selling waivers of consumer protection laws to the highest bidder. Laws concerning consumers, health and safety, or the environment are on the books to protect the public and should not to serve as goods that government can trade to raise revenues. It is bad public policy, even in poor fiscal times, for the state to even consider taking money from any entity willing to buy their way out of state regulations. Massachusetts laws should not be for sale.

This legislation attempts to merge food stores and retailers under the same law: In 2003, Attorney General Tom Reilly modified the item pricing regulations to allow retail stores (not including supermarkets) to stop item pricing if they install one self-service price check scanner every 5000 square feet. The new retail store item pricing regulations were instituted by the AG after a series of meetings were held with the interested parties. Legislation to cover food stores with these new regulations for food stores came shortly after the new non-retail pricing regulations went into effect. But the AG warned legislators not to use these new regulations to cover food stores (see attached letter). No adequate consideration was given of the impact the proposed regulatory changes contained in this bill would have on food stores as warned by the AG.

The language in the bill pertaining to “no job loss” is extremely vague: The provisions set forth will be next to impossible to manage and track, as well as be adequately enforced. Moreover, in the event that language “could” be agreed upon that wouldn’t adversely affect current employees; the union could never support any proposal that would lead to the elimination of future full time job opportunities.

Eliminating item pricing will cut jobs and benefits: Despite the claims of the supporters of this bill that there will be no negative impact on jobs, we’ve concluded that the passage of H.179 will have an adverse affect on current as well as future full time jobs and result in the loss of hours for part-time employees. Our analysis of the impact of the elimination of item pricing concluded that supermarkets would lose up to five full time jobs per store. Supermarkets today have approximately 75% of their work force as part-time and 25% as full time and in some cases a 80% to 20% full-time to part-time ratio. Supermarkets have adopted very strict scheduling practices in the effort of keeping labor costs low. Since there are a very limited amount of full time jobs in each department of the store, new full time opportunities are available mostly to fill retirements, terminations, etc. There are few, if any, newly created full time jobs.

The displacement of workers as a result of the elimination of item pricing will be:

• Employees demoted from full time to part-time will experience a substantial cut in wages, health benefits, and pension credits.

• As a result of employees demoted to part-time status, existing part-time employees will have their hours reduced to accommodate the influx of employees displaced by the elimination of item pricing.

• The reduction in hours could be especially detrimental because part-time employees need to work a certain amount of hours in able to afford the weekly premiums for health insurance.
  

• Furthermore, the full time jobs that were phased out with the elimination of item pricing will no longer be available for part-time employees or other potential people looking for full time job opportunities.

Unfortunately, supermarket workers are already facing an uncertain and ever changing future. New technologies are being developed and constantly tested that ultimately will eliminate additional job classifications in supermarkets.

Bad for Consumers: In stores where item-pricing is eliminated, consumers will no longer have the ability to pick up an item to see if the price is accurate. They will be forced to become “unpaid store clerks” by having to utilize the end aisle scanners and grease pencils and pricing their own items.

Consumers and workers have everything to lose and nothing to gain with the passage of this bill.

Tell your representative: Do not support H.179 or any other legislation that will eliminate item pricing in Massachusetts.

Download a sample letter to a state legislator

Find your State Representative and State Senator online