The
Herald-Sun article earlier this week that challenged the impasse between our
Trader Representatives and QVM management has gained a big reaction. For many traders
it highlights some of the issues with our current trader representative structure.
The sad
thing is that most traders don’t know much about the intent or actions of their
representatives.
An article on this website earlier in the week talked about stopping the blame game
because essentially it just wastes time. Wasting time doesn’t make sense,
unless you want to stop proceedings altogether and some of our Trader
Representatives don’t seem to hide from that intent, although it is certainly
not a mainstream trader view.
Long term Trader
Representative Jenny Pyke has often said that traders should not be burdened
with the task of analysing complex market matters and it is true that not many
traders have the time, resources or training to contribute. There have been
many attempts over the last decade to create a trader structure that could
contribute at all levels in a debate, including a Trader Association, although
for various reasons those attempts have failed. The latest attempt to put
trader matters in the hands of a union has raised many objections, including whether
it is appropriate for a union to represent a business or group of businesses.
The current
trader representative structure was proposed by a group of traders and its
intent was fine. It was to broaden trader involvement through regular aisle
meetings that would perform a dual purpose of informing traders (information
down) and giving traders a voice (information up). Those meetings have not
happened, which has led to speculation that they were never really intended in
the first place. That is a shame because the adding of resources created by greater
trader involvement, and a bit more input from Trader Representatives, may have
just created a worthwhile alternative to stone-walling or hand balling our
issues to someone else.
Of course
there needs to be some mutual respect here and this is where we struggle.
Traders need to accept that some aspects of market planning demand expertise
from, well .... experts. Management need to understand that some aspects of market
planning require signing off by those on the ground. This is not rocket science
although there is always going to be someone who wants more control over
proceedings than others are prepared to give. Sometimes the complex structure
we have at QVM - Traders, Management, and CoM – is the culprit. Productive face
to face discussion and the ability to reach a deal is often the victim with
structures like that.
All traders
want is real improvements, both long and short term, that will enable us to
profit from new consumer attitudes and practices, and address the predatory
competition we are facing from many outside sources.
Some of our
key Trader Representatives want things left as they are, and that is not good.
Maybe Traders need to be part of a different revolution –one that replaces old
style thinking with focused action - action that looks to the future not the
past - action that embraces our entrepreneurial roots and looks for solutions
rather than withdrawing from discussion, building walls, or at best hand-balling
our problems to others.
By Greg Smith
