In May 1896, local newspaper The Hamilton Herald told of a growing resentment and concern from Blantyre shopkeepers about the emerging dominance of The Co-Operative Society.
The Blantyre merchants suggested that the place was becoming “Overridden with Co-Operation”, affecting their businesses. That spring and summer there was a lot of quiet talk going on and felt that the Co-operative society were now encroaching on local business. A boot repair shop opens, the Co-op opens one too. A new promising butchers open. The Co-op opens one too and now there was talk of a Co-operative bakery coming.
That year, there were two Co-operative stores in Blantyre. The Blantyre Co-operative store and the Stonefield Independent Co-operative store. The former had a membership of 480 people at the time, the last quarter paying a dividend of 3s and 4d per £. The latter had a membership of 273 people and despite the lower membership was paying a higher divided of 3s 9d per £. It was thought the Independent store was making a bigger percentage through trade on their bakery, which may have been one of the reasons why the Blantyre Co-Operative were considering building their bakery at Auchinraith.
There were many people who didn’t believe in the dividend, thinking it pushed up prices, only to pay something out later. A pointless task, when if they only lowered prices to the lowest possible in the first place, things would be more affordable and drive competition by comparison with the normal merchants of Blantyre.
There was even talk of boycotting the Co-op dairies in support of Blantyre shopkeepers who absolutely dependent on trade for their own living. Looking back on all of this, if Co-Operation was a true, meaningful venture, it should not have been throwing local people out of employment and perhaps had more sympathy for those around them, struggling to compete.
The most prominent complaint about Blantyre being over-ridden with Co-operation was however in the late 1970s. Blantyre folk, Community Council and Councillors overwhelmingly voted for Asda to come to Blantyre, much to the great upset of the Co-Op who were beaten in their pitch. Newspaper stories of the time suggested the Co-Op had been given its time in Blantyre and could do little for residents as the 1980s approached.
As an observation today, a question still lingers….. The Co-op in my opinion as a place to shop is incredibly expensive, yet they do still give something back to individuals and the community via their dividend and funding. The question is, as it was then….is having an annual dividend a false economy for everyday shoppers? Would be interested in your thoughts.
AI imagines the scene in 1896.
On social media, the following comments were provided by readers:
Anne Gilmour Callaghan I think most of Blantyre , back in the day , worked for the co-op at some point. While still at school doing deliveries or on leaving school for a full time job. It was a sad day when it closed. I enjoyed my time there.
Jacqueline Galliford Thomas Loved shopping in the Co-op as a young child with my Nanna back in the 60’s. I remember the strong smell of 99 fresh loose packet tea every time I went in. What about the green shield stamps too?
Joseph O’Rourke They gave out an orange coloured plastic coin that may have been how the divvy was paid out ?
Alan Glen Isn’t it just the same thing as Clubcard / Nectar or Loyalty card discounts? Spend money to get something back? Incredible idea at that time tho…. Very clever use of collective buying power.
Alastair Dobell The big difference though is that profit was distributed as dividend that would have gone to shareholders in a conventional business. The members effectively owned the co-op.
Andy Semple My grandmother and some of her sisters worked for the Blantyre co-op at one time or another. It was closely linked to the Labour Party and still is. I think in more recent decades the co-op has lost sight of its working class roots and now caters more for the middle class virtue signallers.
Brian Weaver Co-operatives may look expensive to shoppers today when we can buy online at incredibly low prices, but in 1896, things were different. People in Blantyre were poor and the Co-op ensured that those people could buy the things they needed at a price they could afford, and by paying a dividend, the profit was retained in Blantyre to be spent again. Because it was based in Blantyre, it also employed local people, trained apprentices and yet offered good working conditions. Amazon may offer you bargains, but do they provide your community with jobs and apprenticeships?
Maureen Skeffington Chalmers what we now call community wealth building. Keeping profits local.
Wullie Clarkin The co-op in my humble opinion was a great thing for people in Blantyre, I worked as a milk boy .aged 11 till 15 then full time boy – then at 17 they put me through my driving test , and worked for another 10 years, the public could get milk-bread – cakes – pie’s sausage rolls on ( tic) till the next week , it was a great thing for many people who lived day to day ! There was not much money around that time , so this was great for the working class , Blantyre co-op . 10 out of 10.
Joe Sneddon I agree Wullie , coop had everything, they had you from the cradle to the grave , even a dance hall.
Carol King The co/op back in the day excellent for all the reasons – it was ethical and owned by the members who got rewarded for shopping and then the co had big buying power! – but it is expensive now.
John Daly Those dividends represent about 17% discount. That’s HUGE!! That would be on top of the relatively low prices they could charge because of their buying power. No wonder they were attracting folk.
Alastair Dobell I was brought up in Kirkcaldy, so a different co-op. But I still remember my mother’s co-op number – 2657 as it was ingrained in my brain to alway quote that number and get the handwritten paper receipt to prove it. Looking back, that dividend money was a form of saving for the working class. I remember one payment was used to buy school shoes – we were so dependent on that divvy! A little story though. When we were very young my mother took us three kids (all under 5) into the local co-op. The shop had a dinner set on display. My older brother knocked part of it over and broke some expensive crockery. The store manager was not in the least sympathetic and demanded payment for the breakages. Mum could not afford it, so had to agree to make weekly payments to cover the damage. Looking back, I understand the reasoning, but don’t think any big retailer would pursue a young mum over an accidental breakage by a pre-school child, especially one that claims charitable intentions.