Wildberry faced pushback from store owners who demanded adherence to their established rules, a stance reported by the bazaar press service in coverage titled To Climb. The publicly stated stance highlighted tensions between corporate directives and the expectations of shop owners who operate the network of outlets. In this framing, the core issue extended beyond immediate labor actions to questions about governance, contract terms, and how changes are communicated and implemented across a nationwide retail platform.
Concerns about customer focus were central to the decision by unionized workers to pause or limit certain activities. Strikes were framed not as a wholesale rejection of the business but as a protest aimed at preserving service quality and ensuring stable interactions with customers. The leadership of Wildberry reiterated that the problem was not salaries but the broader process that would follow if the remaining disputed points were applied without addressing customer experience and operational clarity. According to an official statement from Wildberry representatives, salaries were and continued to be paid on a daily basis, and there were no existing restrictions that would justify a sudden downturn in service levels. The message stressed that advancing the full list of demanded changes could jeopardize the level of customer care that shoppers expect in every outlet. The company stressed that the plan for resolving the dispute would need to balance worker needs with the practical realities of daily operations and customer relations.
Earlier today, Wildberry’s leadership had considered attending discussions in the State Duma regarding the all-Russian strike. According to sources close to the matter, the decision was made not to attend the session, and a notice arrived just moments before leaders were scheduled to appear. The decision to abstain from the meeting reflected strategic considerations about how to communicate with lawmakers while managing the employee actions on the ground. Afterward, lawmakers proceeded with proceedings and signaled an intention to advance legislation that would restrict the ability of companies to unilateral modify contracts. This development was interpreted by observers as a potential shield for workers while clarifying the bounds of corporate flexibility in contract governance. The broader implication was that regulators were moving toward stronger protections for employees in the retail sector, even as businesses weighed the impact on operations and long-term planning.
Today’s events mark a decision point in the ongoing labor actions affecting Wildberry’s collection points across the country. The strike activity spread across multiple regions, including the Far East, where the morning hours opened with reports of staffing pauses and coordinated demonstrations. In the Urals, residents expressed solidarity with business owners, signaling a nationwide pattern of support and concern about how the dispute would be resolved without harming everyday customer service. Analysts noted that while protests underscored discontent within the workforce, the practical outcome for shoppers depended on how quickly both sides could reach a durable agreement that preserves service quality while addressing wage and contract concerns. The situation remained fluid, with updates anticipated on how the proposed regulatory steps might influence ongoing negotiations and the pace of operational normalcy across Wildberry’s retail footprint. [citation]
In summary, the episodes reflect a broader question about how retail networks balance employee welfare with the commitments they owe to customers. The discussions at the national level, the immediate responses from Wildberry, and the regional displays of support all point to a critical moment for the company’s governance model, its relationship with outlet owners, and the future dynamics of labor relations within large consumer networks. Observers expect further statements and possibly a continued cadence of consultations as both sides seek a workable path forward that safeguards service levels while honoring legitimate worker demands. [citation]