A Woolworths employee leaked a management information sheet which was posted in the staff room, sparking a major backlash from workers.
The factsheet outlines how Woolworths makes a net profit of 3.6 cents on every dollar spent in store in the 2022-23 financial year.
However, the factsheet does not highlight that Woolworths’ overall net profit increased by 4.6 per cent to $1.62 billion over the same period.
The anonymous worker said the information sheet was released because staff resentment towards their employer had increased.
It follows a Senate inquiry earlier this month in which the profit margins of Woolworths and Coles were scrutinized, with the two major supermarkets accused of price gouging.
Additionally, last week Woolworths was fined $1.2 million for failing to pay furlough payments to 1,200 former workers.
“I work for Woolies, and they put this in the dining room because we all felt ripped off,” the employee said.
“They put it here to assure us that they are not as rich as we think.
“Like we’re falling for this shit.” To say they only make 3.6 cents on the dollar, what a joke.
A Woolworths spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia the factsheet was based on its submission to the Senate inquiry into supermarket prices, held earlier this month.
“This has been shared with our team, media and stakeholders, detailing the costs for every dollar spent in our Australian food business.”
Woolworths told its employees in a catering memo (pictured) that it earns just 3.6 cents for every dollar spent in store.
At the Senate inquiry, Woolworths CEO Brad Banducci and Coles boss Leah Weckert said the sector remained competitive despite the size of their duopoly.
Mr Banducci was threatened with a six-month prison sentence or a $5,000 fine for contempt of the Senate after repeatedly failing to answer a somewhat pointed question about Woolworths’ profitability.
The supermarket boss has been asked to disclose Woolworths’ return on equity, a measure of company profitability that generally indicates how efficiently profits are generated.
Instead, the chief executive told the committee that Woolworths was focused on ROI and total shareholder return metrics, not return on equity.
“We measure return on investment, which we think is the right way to measure the profitability of a company,” he said.
Inquiry chair and Greens senator Nick McKim warned Mr Banducci that failure to answer the question directly could land him in contempt of the Senate.
Woolworths CEO Brad Banducci has dodged questions over Woolworths’ return on equity disclosure.
Such a charge carries a fine of up to $5,000 and a possible prison sentence of six months.
The failure to disclose the response led the inquiry to suspend its hearing for several minutes.
Although the chief executive avoided being scorned, Mr Banducci could not provide the full figure, saying he would take the matter on notice.
“I don’t focus on that, it’s not the numbers that drive our industry. The way our industry should be evaluated is total return on investment and total return on investment to shareholders,” he said.
“If it helps the committee move forward, I don’t know that number.”
The profit margins of major supermarkets came under scrutiny during the investigation.
Senator McKim accused Mr Banducci of cherry-picking the supermarket’s profit data.
“Honestly, I’m not interested in your spin or your bulls***. This is a Senate investigation. Answer the question,” he said.
“You used this market domination to put pressure on your suppliers, including farmers, to force lower wages, to compromise staff safety and to impose predatory prices on your customers.”
The CEOs of Woolworths and Coles have been asked about the rising cost of supermarket products.
While Coles and Woolworths account for almost two-thirds of Australia’s food sector, both executives said the sector remained competitive, thanks to the arrival of other major players such as Aldi, Costco and Amazon.
Mr Banducci had previously denied Woolworths had price gouged at the checkout.
“I respectfully submit that this is an incredibly competitive market and that is good for consumers.”
Ms Weckert said Coles welcomed increased competition, while admitting the supermarket had let its suppliers down, following allegations the company was undervaluing the wholesale value of products.
This follows previous allegations at the inquiry that supermarket giants were paying primary producers for products at prices well below market value.
“Complaints have been made about the way we interact with our suppliers. We recognize that we do not always get things right, but all of our procedures are aimed at ensuring fair and long-lasting relationships,” she said.
“We recognize some of the concerns raised by the agricultural sector, particularly the horticultural sector, regarding price transparency.”
Ms Weckert said the supermarket could do a better job in terms of pricing and discounts.
“We have worked in good faith with suppliers to ensure they are paid fairly and, in a large number of cases, this has resulted in higher prices for customers,” she said.
“There’s no bad intent here, but we could certainly implement it better, and we’re striving to hold ourselves to a higher standard of accountability on this.”
A review of the voluntary food and grocery code of conduct, which governs relationships between supermarkets and suppliers, has recommended making it mandatory, with significant financial penalties for violations.
dailymail us
