Union members reject American Crystal contract a third time
June 23, 2012 at 1:34 pm in Grand Forks Herald
With 82 percent of Bakery Workers union members voting, 63 percent voted against the contract. The labor dispute has been ongoing since July 31 when members first voted on the contract. Since then, about 1,300 workers have been locked out and management has hired temporary replacement workers.
Continue Reading
I am now convinced the level of intelligence of these former ACSC workers is less than I had hoped. I believe Minnesota extending the unemployment insurance doomed this vote. Those receiving checks could care less about their “brothers and sisters” in North Dakota receiving nothing.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
217 
28
Political affiliations aside . . . .
Simple economics indicated there is a qualified workforce willing to work under the conditions ACS offered.
The replacement workers accepted the terms and conditions offered by ACS as better than other employers who had positions were offering, and chose ACS as their employer of choice.
I’m the most liberal man on the face of the earth and I think union leadership made a big mistake that way too many people are going to suffer from.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
178 
20
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
24 
146
Jeff H, ACS will improve it’s workforce if it does not rehire hardened militant union members. They can now select motivated workers! Unions destroyed the automobile industry and have damaged the US education system. Enough is enough!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
151 
23
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
119
Again, must preface this with the fact I am the most liberal man in the world:
ND has the lowest unemployment rate in the nation which in effect means there are more jobs than people willing to do them. The economic effect of this is that wages and benefits must rise to entice workers to work for one company over another.
The fact ACS backfilled these positions so quickly suggests the terms and conditions being offered were attractive and better than other employers who were hiring people with the same skills.
Liberals like me forced employment laws on the nation that in many cases made corrupt unions unnecessary and leveled the playing field for workers in every industry.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
109 
12
So you are suggesting that the decision should be based on the financial results of one year? Based on that, the company should always bow down to the union and agree to each and every request that they make (until it costs more than the cost to replace them). Of course, that is your belief anyway.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
66 
9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
24 
102
Huh? You want to compare 17 years of farm support subsidies to 10 months of unenployment? If we were to add up all the unemployments payments as well as food stamp credits to the unemployed in ND and MN since 1995, I think that the amount of subsidy payments would pale in comparision.
Sorry, but when offered decent wages and benefits and when you turn them down expecting more, you don’t get to play the victim.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
110 
15
Jeff: wrong is wrong. The farmers should not be getting a subsidy and locked out workers who voted three times against returning to work should not get unemployment benefits. This is not rocket science.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
82 
25
There will be alot of the yes crossing the line now.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
165 
19
I think so to. I was hearing that before the vote. Well best of luck to them and good luck to you as well.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
135 
14
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
37 
88
So what’s your plan? Do you have a better one?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
83 
11
Starting over is better then waiting for something that may never happen. the union workers need to get their act together and acept the offer. The way I see it now there will be no other offer.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
93 
10
82 percent of what number?? That surely isn’t 82 percent of the 1300.. So what 16 people showed up?
No empathy.. None.. ACS get rid of the Union you can do it without them.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
174 
25
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
106
A contractor that doesn’t have Math skills. That would make for some interesting buildings. It’s mean to laugh but that is funny.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
71 
3
Its called being a S. A. But since you are so good in math skills, what does behind on the house payment by three months equal?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
67 
8
It equals not smart enough to go out and get another job in the state with the lowest unemployment rate in the nation.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
94 
10
I wish they would post a vote count for each factory.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
135 
10
The union would never publish any numbers or data. It is kind of like the voting process and tallying that takes place in the former Soviet union or China. The leaders tell and/or encourage a certain vote to the “party members” and make sure of the outcome they want. The members that are “dissidents” are harassed.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
82 
15
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
93
Thank goodness prior to the vote Riskey said the union “has plans in place” in case the vote went this way.
Any guesses as to what the “plans” might be?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
104 
9
I don’t think they’ve had any kind of a plan yet!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
103 
11
That’s the plan. You see the plan is to have no plan in case the plan changes then they don’t have to change their plans in order to follow the plan. It’s less complicated this way.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
24 
103
If so the union fell right into their hands. Why not agree to the contract and work from there?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
92 
9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
87
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
75
I’d like to know what was so wrong with the contract that the workers gave up a $2000 signing bonus and a years wages they will never get back.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
132 
14
Hmmmm, I don’t really understand your math. If 63% voted against it, that means 37% voted for it. You’re saying if you change the mind of 7%, it would pass?
63-7=56, 37+7=44
I still don’t understand how that is a passing vote?
Seems to me you would have to change the mind of 14% of the people.
63-14=49, 37+14=51
Maybe math isn’t your strong suit either?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
98 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
48
Try looking at it this way. 82 percent of 1300 workers is 1066 voting. 63 percent of 1066 is 672. Since it takes more than 650 (half of 1300) to be a majority, it means that in reality the no vote still won by 22 votes. Maybe if they try again in 6 months, they can make up that amount. But I doubt that the membership is at 1300 any longer and has not been that for quite a while. Any union worker that took a replacement job is no longer in the union or paying dues.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54 
10
That’s an easy one. Show us the letter.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
75 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
14
Guess again!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
3
You gotta love Minnesota, and the free money to people that refuse to work for a living!!!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
119 
18
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
31 
85
You would be dangerous if you knew what you were talking about. Corporate farms hire people, pay taxes, buy from local merchants and support the economy. Striking union workers do none of that. When only 50 percent of the American workers are paying income taxes, we have become a country of takers and not of makers any longer.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
83 
16
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
71
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
42
I’m guessing sentence structure isn’t your strong suit. Keep the posts coming though, it’s entertaining to read them and imagine someone reciting the words as you’ve written them down.
I like. Stopping a sentence and. Starting a new one for. No apparent reason.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
20
Does anyone know that if somebody doesn’t vote, that counts as a “no” vote?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
64 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
19 
68
they all deserve to lose all benefits and unemployment.
Quit paying the lazy bums.
I hope they all end up at Walmart begging to clean toilets.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
110 
25
There seems to be such a disparity in the views about how well the replacement workers are managing to operate the plants. On one side the union supporters point to fires, waste in storage totes and unhappy overworked managers. On the otherwside ACSC supporters point to the second highest sugar beet payment ever, a huge number of applicants for the jobs and the almost complete transition to local workers. This isn’t intended as a slight to union members but is a genuine question that I have; does the union believe that ACSC is going to change its offer and if so, why? If the Union doesn’t think ACSC will change its offer, why vote “no”? Also, if ACSC starts the next campaign with replacement workers does that change anything?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
102 
6
Good bye union hello new employees. ACS has enough money invested in replacement workers at this point that I don’t think they are even interested in having the union back so they can just go through this train wreck all over again in a few years
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
124 
12
On the StarTribune web page it indicates that 240 of the locked out workers have retired or quit; by quit I assume that means the have indicated they will not return. Has there been any indication how many union members have returned to work at ACSC? If the union’s leverage is experienced workers, at what point does that leverage disappear? For example, of the 1300 locked out workers 240 have retired or quit plus an additional number have returned to ACSC. Won’t at some point the number of workers who have not retired, quit or already returned reach the point where their impact just doesn’t matter? Is that 600, 500, 400 or what number?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
87 
5
The truth is the union never had any leverage, they just failed to tell their members that. The new employees are already doing a good enough job that it doesn’t matter how many of the former employees are left or want to go back to work.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
96 
12
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
13 
75
If you are a good hardworking person with a positive attitude towards your job why would you even need a union???
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
113 
14
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
31 
60
In early May (based on my memory), ACSC officials stated about 20 union employees had crossed and gone back to work.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
69 
4
What does the union have to lose with a no vote? They have already lost their jobs for 10 months. American crystal completed 1 campaign without them. American crystal hasn’t changed their offer. The members will see if american crystal is dead set on this offer in august. If american crystal is truly confident and happy with its replacement workforce they will take the 2012 crop in under their current workforce. If american crystal truly needs the union members they will change their tone quickly mid july and change their offer. Take on look around the country side and there is an end in sight for this lockout. American crystal has the data and slice rates to determine which workforce is needed for the 2012 crop.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
64 
18
@Ron
You and all the union people are singing the same song as last fall, ACSC can’t do it without us. Newsflash! They did, and they will again. ACSC will not change their offer because they don’t need to.
What does the union have to lose with a no vote?
More months of not having a job and money, unless you work in Minnesota, then they will pay you when you vote not to work.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
92 
17
If that is what the Union is betting on, they are betting on the wrong horse yet once again.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
62 
10
They keep betting on Zippy Chippy…the losingest horse on record. Everybody else knows he’s a loser but you can’t tell this bunch anything.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
2
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
26 
115
You are the kind of employee I’m sure Crystal or the growers don’t want back anyway. Keep voting “no”.
Union employees that realize that they value a good paycheck and the job they were doing will return. This kind of attrition will insure that only the hardcore “no” voting union members are left. There never will be a “yes” vote. Many of staunch union members are well known in the area as “unemployable” due to poor work habits and poor work attitudes.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
90 
18
That’s right, give the finger to the company that overpaid you for your services in the first place. I’m sure the “replacement” workers are enjoying your pay and are more than happy to pay only 17% for their health insurance. We shall now begin calling them “permanent workers.” I bet you have lots of toys you purchased with that huge hourly wage. I guess you could always start selling those things. You’d rather vote no and continue without a job and try to obtain pity from everyone, while getting truckloads of food and wares, than swallow what little bit of pride you have left and GET ANOTHER JOB! People quit feeling sorry for you after the first rejection of the unions offer, let alone the second. What’s sad is some of these “locked out” people have children, and they are the ones suffering most. They’re being riduculed and are feeling the affects as much as anyone. Go find yourselves different jobs and pay a portion of your health insurance like the rest of the working class. Stop acting like spoiled little brats who were given too much in the first place and can’t handle “reality” in the work place. You gave the finger to ACS twice now. Cut your losses and move on.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
99 
16
Bob, all I said is it is up to american crystal to change their offer. The union clearly does not like what american crystal has brought to the table so far. If american crystal decides to process the 2012 crop (a hell of a crop) without changing the offer the union will no longer exist. If management does not have confidence in their current workforce they will change their tune and the union members will be back in august. I don’t know where I ever indicated that american crystal could not move on without the union. They have the numbers and data. They know the the crop for 2012 and they will decide who they need to handle the 2012 crop.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
62 
17
You didn’t say it Ron, but you implied that if ACSC looks at the data, they will have to settle this because their new work force will not be able to process a record crop.
I disagree with that asessment. The new employees have done better than anyone thought they could and are getting better trained all the time. Contrary to what the former employees have been told by the union and believed, these are not highly skilled positions, ACSC took people off the street and made the factories run.
Did they run as smoothly as they have in the past? Probably not, but smoothly enough to get the job done.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
80 
17
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
17 
45
Yes Gayle, Strom will be back. There will be less of them, and you can bet that by Christmas, Strom will be mostly gone.
It takes time to train a new workforce. But, they are energetic!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
46 
13
Yes you are right bob they processed a 2011 crop that was very average with a very mild winter. The mild winter allows transystems to transport the beets to the factories with little delay. In the 2012 crop they will be facing a large yield. Like I stated before if they are truley happy with the replacement workforce american crystal will take on 2012 with all forces charging straight ahead and the union members have nothing to fight for.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
61 
12
Tundra beast, you keep responding to “corporate farmers” as though that is all crystal involves. News flash, some of us are little tiny family farms. My husband farms a whopping 600 acres. We have struggled to raise our 6 children on that. We have always been self pay when it comes to healthcare, as we have a child with an auto immune disorder involving his thyroid and can’t afford the outrageous price of a family policy ( 18,000 a year) and the employees of the co-op choose to whine about their increase? And you choose to agree? What reality are all of you living in?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
110 
11
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
25 
83
If that is what the union has been telling you, chalk that up as another lie in the long list of union misinformation that comes from their propaganda machine. I know many growers and management personnel. There is no such edict from the Board or management. Interesting to note, a neighbor hired a union member during last falls beet harvest. That person was enlightened to learn how many lies he had been told by the union. Including that one.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
75 
16
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
61
Ummm news flash again Gary , you may not realize this but some of the board members are small family farmers, not huge plantations. We have never been threatened to keep our mouths shut, our board members don’t threaten us, they don’t have union mentality. As I enjoyed dinner with a board member and his family last weekend, in my home, I didn’t feel the tiniest bit threatened at all.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
5
I have a question. How many of the 2,800 share holders actually farm their shares?
From what I’ve been lead to believe, only 750 share holders are active in farming their shares. The rest put their shares out for lease. I am also lead to believe, you cant buy shares if you don’t farm them. If you don’t farm the shares. Can the coop buy those share back? In a since, be quite or loose your shares.
Like or Dislike:
7 
9
Getting dislikes on a question. Imagine that.
Like or Dislike:
6 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
46
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
43
Coporate farms is construct developed by certain groups with an ax to grind to dehumanize the vast majority of farmers. They do this knowing that people will tend to think that this refers to the ADM, Cargill or some other large agribusiness. I used to hear these same people say that farmers need to start acting more like businesses and now when they do by incoprorating in order to take advantage of the same laws that businesses do, they call them “corporate farmers”. Fact is, farmers and small businessmen alike have incorporated for very good legal reasons. This does not make either of them the large impersonal entities that many are trying to say they are. It is disturbing that many union workers do not grasp this, but when you allow others to do your thinking for you while you merely regurgitate what they say, it is not too surprising.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53 
9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
17 
50
So when the union votes it is not the union dictating how the members are represented but when the farmers meet and vote to support the corporate leadership, they are letting 3 people decide the issue for them.
Why should anyone support you when you are this dishonest in you presentations.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53 
9
This never gets old Gary, you have to see this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lE3sZG_yxf0&context=C4491fe0ADvjVQa1PpcFOYMXVeeD4Ou8G-Dmdr5RmoX91oBEwmARE=
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
0
Scole – I am wondering, is the guy in the video drunk or on drugs? It appears that way.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
5
Unfortunately I think this is Marky Mark sober. I am not sure the elevator goes all the way to the top.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30 
4
15 farmer board members have the final say in all matters. If they and the growers don’t like the direction of the company, out goes the CEO and changes are made. Except for a grower in Drayton and one from Ada, the growers are in near complete support of the board and management regarding what has transpired. They value the good work of many of the former union employees but are tired of how a “union shop” is run. They don’t run their farms the “union way” and didn’t like the inefficiencies in their company due to the restrictions placed by the Union.
Like or Dislike:
6 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
37
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
13 
69
Btw, of the 600 acres only 90 is beet stock. I have worked in the food and alcohol service industry for many years( so I could work straight evening shift and avoid the cost of child care) and continue to provide child care for my grandchildren so their parents can avoid the expense. I would like to point out that most of my clientele for 20+ years were,in fact, acs employees who could afford to eat out 4-5 nights a week, on average, and drink while they where there. As a “plantation owner” (sarcasm intended) we plan a date night every six months . That’s what we can afford. So, let’s blame all the farmers for not giving enough? I understand wanting your employers standard of living shared. My husband and I are among those employers. He has a second job and I do a minimum 60 hour week. Wanna share now? The executives at crystal are not your employers. We small farmers are.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
102 
9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
21 
75
As time goes by, more and more union members will become ex-union members and once again be working at the factories as replacement workers. The worst thing that could happen now is for the union to accept the ACS offer. The Fed law would then force ACS to take the union back and the same old crap would start over. Unions succeed only where they can show improvement for both the employer and employee. Most today cannot do that. I cannot afford to buy a new car made by some person attaching two screws for $75,000 per year when I live on less than 1/3 of that. Unions are one of the prime reason that so many jobs have been sent overseas. More right-to-work laws is the only hope to bring any of them back to the US.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
85 
18
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
69
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
17 
55
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
43
I believe the record payments the growers received had a lot more to do with large crops and high sugar prices than the union.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
57 
11
Gary-
Many things go into the lower beet payment for this year compared to the prior year:
~11MM ton vs ~9MMton
Mild winter (increased pile losses)
Below average growing year (higher molasses loss, more disease)
In short, there was less sugar in the beets this year than last year. I would expect that if the crop continues down the path it is heading now, and we get an “average” winter, you’ll see the beet payment increase accordingly, with or without the Union in the factories.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
39
OK…do you have the data on the cossette sugar incoming as well as the cossette purity? I doubt that you do.
They were lower, thus a below average crop.
I hate to break it to you, but the Union isn’t as efficient as you think. For decades, managers and supervisors have had to correct the Union’s shortcoming and short cuts due to their inability (mostly due to promoting by seniority). They are there for the check, not for the betterment of the company.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
9 
32
@ok, where do you get this $13 a ton number from?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
25
ok….What was your job at the factory? And did you like working there?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
0
Ok,
Have you studied the SEC report or only pulled one number from it? The $137M change is in part due to the change in inventory levels. Those levels are listed. You can also easily get the same SEC report from a year ago and do comparisons. I’ve done this. Some of the $137M increase is due to the replacement workers and their training and extra costs. Some is due to extra security requirements. Some is do to the fact the processing season started later this year (because of a smaller crop) so they had produced less sugar by the 6 month timeframe and therefore had smaller processed sugar inventories AND they also had carried over larger than normal inventories becuase of last years bumper crop.
Then look at MinDak. Why did their payments go UP with a smaller crop and with lower midwest refined sugar pricing in this year rather compared to last year. Could it be they have a different marketting model? Do they pre-sell more sugar at the previous year’s rate. How exactly did they achieve a $72 payment?
Of course, it is easier to cherry-pick a few numbers, do some calculations and spew nonsense on how much this is costing the farmers with the hope that someone will not only believe you, but do something about.
The sad thing is you are leading a bunch of union workers to have false hope. The farmers do understand what is going on. They are businessmen and businesswomen who run million dollar business (not making millions of dollars, but dealing with millions to put in a crop and hopefully get that plus some more back at the end of the year).
They also no not to throw good money after bad. It doesn’t matter what last year’s losses are. They are in the past. The question is what is the best way to go forward. The answer for now is either the union with the “final contract” or the replacement workers. BTW: Federal law requires them to keep the “final contract” on the table. That is probably the only reason that offer hasn’t been reduced.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38 
4
Crystal has been consistantly lower than Minn-Dak over the course of history due to a combination of efficiencies and how they set their price.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
4
And do you know the price of the seed?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
20
Save your breath Gayle. You had your chance to return to work at ACSC. A word from you may have helped get this thing passed. But instead of taking our advice you decided to follow the leader. Now…you can live with the consequences. The sad part is so will the 37% that wanted to go back to work. Your beloved union will suffer the most for this. They get weaker every day this thing drags out. But you can’t see that because you are looking at this from the inside.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
4
Are you looking for molasses purity or molasses loss (acutal) or molasses loss on FBB (fresh beet basis)? All of these tell a different story based on the crop, storage conditions and factory performance. Some factories are able to handle the non-sugar loading better than others, thus a higher molasses loss. When, for example this year, the beets are in a less than desireable condition, soda ash needs to be added to combat the high juice hardness. Now, if you recall your PT training provided by the company, every pound of soda ash pulls a pound of sugar with it, thus increasing the molasses purity.
So, molasses purity is not an accurate measure of factory performance.
Due to company rules, I cannot and will not give you sugar loss data. Sorry.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
22 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
49
The growers have deemed it acceptable, Greg. If it wasn’t, this would have been over long ago.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
9 
34
Yes, acceptable. They know what’s at stake here.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
36 
7
It’s always fascinating to me when someone “breaks down the numbers” but fails to break down the OTHER numbers.
Let’s assume the workers at ACS had been compensated ALL ALONG at the same level similar qualifications would have earned them elsewhere. Not just the wage per hour, but the entire compensation package. How many dollars per hour/week/month/year would THAT have saved ACS? If you don’t want to discuss it in terms of what it would have SAVED the company, then simply flip it and figure out what the contract(s) have COST the company.
By all means, break down those numbers and post ‘em up.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
49 
6
The union voted itself out of existence. My “vote” is that along with anything to do with the sacred symbol and nickname, the Harald does not publish any article dealing with either until something substantive happens.
Both stories have overstayed their welcome.
Like TJ said: lets talk about kids and drugs and who is to blame for their deaths (the kid, the dealer, the parents, society)?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
14
I should have stayed in the TC’s and gone to the Foster The People concert at the Target Center on Friday night. What was I thinking Fly?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
6
Is their a reason you keep spelling the Herald wrong? At first I thought you just miss keyed it. But it keeps happening.
Like or Dislike:
12 
16
A number of posts reference corporate greed and question whether corporations have the consumers’ best interests in mind. Without a doubt corporations have their shareholders’ interests in mind and seek to maximize profit; in the case of ACSC it is the member growers. But that doesn’t mean that union has anyone other than its own members’ interests in mind. If you believe the union has sugar consumers’ interests in mind you are crazy; the union wants to maximize “profit” (wages) and the interests of its members. Not having a dog in the fight, as long as both parties profit, I don’t care if one side gets more than the other. The fact that ACSC has had so many applications in a part of the country with extremely low unemployment implies to me the contract mist be “profitable” for workers. Similarly, while I am certain the majority of individual teachers have their students’ interest in mind, teachers’ unions clearly place teacher compensation and benefit before students; its the purpose of the union.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
65 
9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
42
Yep. A 13% pay increase and a $2000 signing bonus. I can see how “gouged” these workers would be if they had accepted the contract.
No wait…. this is just the fake contract (for 5 years) to give ACSC “control” and then they will “gouge them” for sure 5 years from now.
No wait….. it is about health care costs.
No wait….. it isn’t about health care costs.
No wait…. it is about the seniority.
No wait….. it is about safety.
No wait…… I give up. I don’t know what they want. Don’t think they do either. All they really want is “to win” or to “not lose” or at the very least for the evil management to lose.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
84 
11
Well said Mike.
I REALLY wish the union had launched a website of their own when this all began that wasn’t full to the rafters with nothing but nonsense and propaganda.
I wish the site contained things like accurate information, a set of well-defined goals, links to union contacts for members to communicate with directly, a FAQ page (or pages) with details in the contract members may have questions about, a page for members to submit suggestions, etc., the list goes on and on.
The union’s completely intentional decision to NOT go that route is something members SHOULD be asking questions about. How members are supposed to make informed decisions based upon the misinformation, misquotes, paraphrasing, taking things out of context, etc. they’ve been provided with is also a question that needs answering.
Good luck getting any answers though. Just pay the dues and memorize the rhetoric….the “leadership” has your best interest in mind and will handle everything….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
7
The Diamond Walnut strike lasted nearly 14 years (1991-2005). Once it was settled the union leadership claimed it had all been worth it. Even then they couldn’t give up the union rhetoric and be honest with their members. By the time they settled their dispute union membership had other jobs or retired.
The Fiji gold miners that have been on strike for 20 plus years still meet on Friday nights to strategize. They were fired from their jobs but they still claim they are on strike. They had some legitimate beefs with the owners of the mines. Their company provided living conditions were deplorable and they were paid a pittance by wealthy Australian and New Zealand mine owners.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
5
That is what frustrates some of us on the sidelines, even if we don’t have any direct involvement (BTW: I do have relatives that are locked out and relatives that are growers). There seems to be a strong desire on the union side to limit the sharing of information.
I’ve heard the story about the union meeting last summer where one worker ask for clarification on what was in the contract proposal. A folding chair came flying from the back of the room, over his head and bounced off the wall next to him. That is how that conversation ended. Is the story true? Can’t prove it, but it would match with the unions consistent pattern of trying to increase confusion rather than share information and clarify items.
It paints the picture that their position must be very weak if they have to rely on confusion and fear to keep their own members in check.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
16 
27
Tundra, your comment suggesting that “this wouldn’t have worked like this if it wasn’t for so much of the country having such high unemployment” is applicable to the country as a whole, but in my opinion does not apply to this particular situation. Unemployment rates in the Red River Valley are about as low as they ever go. There is an endless list of employment ads in local newspapers. In the last six months three businesses have closed in Grand Forks and cited lack of employees as a significant reason; Taco Bell on 32nd, Denny’s on 32nd and Mi Mexico on Washington. While the three restaurants that closed do not require employees with the same level of skill as ACSC, it does indicate that there are not excess employees on the market in the Red River Valley. Yes, there is a recession nationally, but ACSC found local replacement workers because of the compensation package, not because jobs are hard to find in the Valley.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
5 
19
Cute…You dislike a simple question….But nobody can giv a straight answer……What a sorry lot..
Like or Dislike:
7 
11
Yes my good friend….ACSC hired Strom Engineering to bring in workers to replace the locked out employees. Some of these individuals worked at other sugar factories in the US and had some experience. Many of them had never worked in a factory before. They came from different parts of the country. Now with the approaching harvest the cycle is going to repeat itself again but this time many of the workers will be locals.
I know you don’t like this but the union needs to realize the company has the upperhand and they aren’t backing down. It’s foolish to think otherwise. Now please be careful when you are driving.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
3
Thank you…Then my original point was valid. Crystal wouldn’t have been able to pull this for long had it not been for an abundance of workers from out of the region…..
You do know that my primary position is that I do support unions in generallllBut I’d like to see a conclusion so that we can move on to other subjects…….Just imagine a world without a consistent reminder of Crystal or the Sioux name game…….After this long it’s almost hard to imagine isn’t it?
Like or Dislike:
8 
12
Hey…I just want my old life back…but those days are over.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
2
I guess they need to change their “We Want to Work for You” banner to say”We Want to Work for You but Only on OUR Terms”"
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
63 
9
ACS logo gear! http://www.ptemb.com/clients/acs/
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
39
Paul-
Rest easy, we got it.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27 
7
If the union would have allowed the random drug testing, I would believe that the insurance payments for the company would have decreased and possibly would eliminate the need for the employees to pay part of the insurance premium. Why would random drug testing be such a big problem for the union employees?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
13 
40
Your paranoia about the drug testing proves how hopeless a position the union is in.EVERY
utility company, trucking company and business with at-risk type jobs has required drug testing for some and not for others. This “important” negotiating point would cost needless testing costs for employees who might be exposed to a possible paper cut. If this is why you opposed the company offer, your ignorance and mistrust tells me you deserve to be out of work. How pathetically sad that you feel so strongly and are so completely misguided.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
52 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
38
Why get involved in something that is the company’s responsibility? Why not just focus on issues that pertain to the union?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
49 
5
I think you should become a share holder ok, then you can tell management to take a drug test.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
5
I’m saying you shouldn’t have to randomly test any employees. The law tells us otherwise with certain job types. If ACS wasn’t a union shop, they could pick the employees they need to have in the group. Since the union rules the roost, they blanketed the contract to require testing. There’s nothing vindictive about it and no reason to include clerical staff and most management in the requirement. If there are a few management in jobs at risk, they include them in the test group without justifying it to you and me or the union leadership. Oh, and contractors in at-risk jobs should have their own drug testing policies. It’s just business, not personal.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38 
5
You completely missed the point of his post.. The key words there are ‘at risk type jobs’.
I test for those jobs as well, but no I don’t test the office staff. Honestly I wouldn’t have to either as I work with them every day and would be able to tell if they were on something.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
3
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
32
Most of your comment has been asked and answered, especially the part about the law not requiring pencil-pusher to be tested. I believe the contractor issue has also been answered. Good for you, Gayle Lund. You can fight every one of these things from the outside and live to be 90 without ever stepping foot on ACS property again. Stand firm, dear. You are winning the battle.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
6
My point is, the union should be concerned about which union employees should or shouldn’t be tested and no one else. Insisting on management being included is just plain union stubbornness. If you want to stay locked out over stuff like this, you should be happy because you are winning.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
36 
7
I love how the union wants to ALL BE EQUAL when it comes to things they DON’T want in the contract, like drug testing. Yet, now that management is stepping up to the plate and saying they want healthcare equal across the board, then it is NOT OKAY according to the union because that’s NOT what they want. Gimme, gimme, gimme is the name of the game for the union, but not at all give, give, give. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
6
A bigger deal to me, inmyhonestopinion, is that drug testing is still a talking point for union employees. Who cares? Who cares that the company thinks the boss is worth $2 million? If I’m bleeding from an artery, why am I nagging about my hangnail and tennis elbow? Why not focus on what’s really important? Can I work with a 15% pay raise and a couple hundred dollar a month hit on my family health insurance? The answer is, NO, they can’t and will not settle. This will go on for years. Quick question: will the next beet campaign be easier or harder than the last one? You are correct, sir.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27 
5
I would agree to be drug tested eveyday if asked. I am not the problem. My guess is, if you dont want to be drug tested, you have a problem.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
2
The company started its drug testing policy this winter. Yes, that means that management is tested randomly along with replacement workers.
This began when the replacement workers were brought in…since they are working under the basic language not accepted by the Union three times now.
So, random drug testing is an ACS policy.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
Then drug testing shouldn’t be an issue. The Union excepted the health care, capped at a percentage equel to what is offered. So if health care goes up, all the increases are shared. We can move on to the companys next issue. Seniority, all big companys post internally before looking externally. Management positions are already posted this way. All the small probems are now solved. We can go back to work. Seems simple to me.
Like or Dislike:
15 
9
If random drug testing is a problem to some it may be that that thy are users. I agree that it should be for all, not just union. And it should be company policy, not something for a union contract.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
10
Bill: It has to be in the contract or you can’t require it. Your opinion seems reasonable, but is it worth a no vote? I used to administer an employee program. I handed out the paperwork, etc. I wasn’t part of the test group, the nurse administering the test wasn’t. Not one employee seemed to care that I wasn’t part of a test group. They were truckers and I was a pencil pusher. Again, random drug testing is a safety issue, nothing personal. There seems to be no common sense with this union leadership. I think 63% is as close as it will ever be. We could be still chatting here in 10 years. Seriously!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
40 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
9 
34
Gayle: you think every employee should be subject to the same drug testing rules, the union agrees with you, but the law and virtually every business in the U.S. disagrees with you. On the other hand, you’ve found another career path. I sincerely hope you are happier than at ACS, sincerely. You think ACS threw you under the bus. I think your inability to adapt to the new world caused you to dive under the bus. Seriously, though, I completely disagree with you but look forward to hearing good news about your future.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
4
i think most people will agree that you were thrown under the bus ….but by your own union!!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
21
You can’t soar like an Eagle when you hang out with Turkeys.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
5
A 10% cap on what? The deductible? So instead of a $2400 deductible you want a $240 one. What a worthless crock of BS. That’s not accepting the companies heatlh care plan. If you belive that is reasonable then you might as well continue to stand on the curb and watch other more productive workers do what could have been your job.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
4
I believe the cap is to keep the company from raising health care to 100 % of the cost to the employee. The contract left this as an open option. So a 10% raise is employee premiums. The Union simply whats the company to cap how much health care cost to the employee is raised. 10% is suggested, so over 5 years the company could raise health care premium costs to the employee by 50%. A fair counter would be to limit the percent of total cost. I believe the emplyee share is 17% of total cost.
Like or Dislike:
5 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
19
Gayle, when you just use a blanket “the union wanted a 10% cap” statement then all I can do is guess at what the 10% was for. If you want an informed debate over the topic, the more specifics you can give the better. If you don’t know the specifics then maybe you shouldn’t throw the statement out there to start with.
Like or Dislike:
10 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
38
I’ve asked this about a hundred times before Jack, and it hasn’t been answered yet. Perhaps you’d like to give it a go.
Let’s say we all agree that the union’s desired contract is “the way to go”. Let’s say we all agree that everyone should be in on the action BECAUSE it’s “the way to go”.
What happens when EVERYONE in the working world gets in on the action Jack? Does that change the game a bit? Does the cost of EVERYTHING go up, or does it stay the same? If we discover that the costs of everything go up, (and as a result we’ve essentially gained nothing), do we revert back to the “old system” again in which “certain special people” are in on the action, while others are not?
Who do we weed out to join the ranks of the undeserving? How do we choose who IS included in the “special situation”?
The only way the numbers work Jack, is if someone gets to be in on it, and someone else, (actually several others), get to “foot the bill” so to speak.
No dodging the question…just answer. If we look around the job market, we can determine fairly easily what a given job is worth. We can do this by making some simple comparisons. So if we arrived at a number for what a typical ACS job is worth, and then we looked at the number the union WANTS it to be worth….the numbers will be quite a ways apart. For example the union’s figure will be 20, 30, 40, 50%, (or more), higher.
Now since you’re so concerned about the plight of the working man, do the math and try to imagine what would happen if everyone in the working world was, (in your words), “kissed”,
Do the numbers work Jack? Or are you on a soapbox berating big corporations and shouting support for the little guy simply so YOU can benefit, while someone else *conveniently* gets to make up the difference?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
7
Scott…this is the “angle” concerning the unions, and liberalism in general, that no one wants to talk about… where do the resources you want for your group come from? Lets be honest…the reality is that no one on the recieving side truly cares about the “where”, all they care about is that they are the one recieving said resources. Had a discussion with a union guy concerning his union…and he literally told me that he didn’t care where the money came from or if anyone else got their share. All he cared about was that his retirement was guarenteed. PRetty self centered if you ask me. I won’t imply this is the case with all union folks, but the comments were very telling if you ask me. Fact remains, if you are recieving more than the job is truly worth, at some point the balance will need to be re-attained…and when that point is reached, those on the recieving end are usually quite bothered by it. Our society is riddled with this mindset and its going to be very difficult to undo the damage.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
4
What the h***l part of AMERICAN CAPITALISM don’t you get?
You don’t sell something for what it’s worth, You sell it for what you can get!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
0
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
9 
36
I don’t have any issue with the union getting 10% more than the average market rate. There are always some places that will pay more…. some that would pay less. If they can get it, good for them. If they can’t get ACSC to pay what they want and they hold press conferences and Journey’s for Justice and 200 mile caravans to get me to help them get more pay….. there is no guarantee that just becuase it is OK with me for them to make more than average, that I’m going to actively help them get more than average.
And as I’ve said before…. when they hold onto old concepts that drive down the total efficiency of the company, this results in less money being available. If they really wanted to have more than the market average, they should embrace changes that will improve profitability.
Then again….. we keep being told this isn’t about the money……. but about corporate greed. When I google a definition of “greed”, it is “an excessive desire for wealth”. So it isn’t that the employees want more money….. it is that they want the company to keep less money. If that makes sense to anyone, please explain it to me.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
1
Ron, with the exception of a very recent union statement, the amount of compensation hasn’t been an issue. However, I doubt you would voluntarily increase the price of products you buy by an additional 10%, even though it wouldn’t be so wrong. I assume you’d prefer to pay market rate. Fair wages are market rate, not market rate plus 10%.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
0
Paying 10% higher wages “just cuz”, isn’t a very good business model.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
2
“(mndak and skilled positions elsewhere). I already posted the pay rates in a previous post you just choose to ignore the facts scott.”
I enjoyed your comparison…..especially its built-in *disclaimers* Ron. If I’m saying UNIONS typically want much higher pay than what’s offered elsewhere, then why would you compare the compensation at ACS with MinDak? Were the pay rates from MinDak you posted union wages?
If they were, then you WEREN’T comparing what I told you to compare.
Then we have your “skilled” disclaimer. If you’re automatically labeling any position at ACS you choose as “skilled”, then you’re ALSO not comparing what I told you to compare.
Here’s what I’ve asked you to do….several times now. Look at the qualifications for a typical ACS position that DOESN’T fall into what’s considered “skilled” by the job market in general. (This means Ron, that you can’t tag on the “skilled” label to any ACS job you choose to conveniently make your point.) Then find other NON-UNION jobs in the classifieds that list similar qualifications. See if your 10% number is in the ballpark.
It won’t be….unless you failed once again to understand.
To simplify:
1) Jobs at ACS, (or any other manufacturing/production facility), are not *automatically* “skilled” positions…no matter what you may think
and….
2) It makes no sense to think you’ve “proven” that the compensation package the union wants here isn’t out of line with the rest of the working world…..because you’ve compared their compensation to what some OTHER union members get.
Does that make any sense?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
8
Fmj40, Aug53: You two seem to be agreeing, but I might be missing something. It’s interesting that it’s often the other guy who’s greedy. You and I are not greedy, right? I worry that, over time, with each new negotiation, union contracts have tended to build into something unmanageable, unaffordable. If an employee was being paid fairly 30 years ago, inflation or cost of living increases should have taken care of that job description, FOREVER. Instead, better overtime, on-call pay, weekend stipends, family healthcare, etc., etc., etc. continued to pile on to many employee contracts. These contracts are taking giant steps backwards and many unions haven’t recognized that. Unions have their place, but, many are out of touch. It’s so sad that the victims are our relatives, friends and neighbors.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
4
Market rate are an average of the market. There are highs and lows. American crystal is and always has been paying the market rate! Compare their offers to minndak or renville.
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
11
Read my other post Ron. If you’re basing your argument that what THIS union wants for a compensation package isn’t out of line because you’ve compared it to what THAT union gets….you’re spinning your wheels.
You STILL don’t get it. A lot of folks are talking about unions “in general” Do some Googling and see if you can find out what percentage of workers are union and what percentage are not.
The ones that “are not” ought to be the ones you’re comparing the union compensation packages to…IF….the point you’re trying to make is that what they want isn’t out of line.
Grab the classifieds and start over.
Post your results.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
22
“Scott, you have a mite point.”
What’s a “mite point”?
“When I compare american crystal to its closest competitor mndak they stack up pretty even. ”
And you’re still not comparing what I’ve asked you to compare several times Ron.
“Since your so concerned about. American crystal please explain to me why american crysta and mn dak are both union shops?”
What is THAT supposed to mean? If they’re both union shops, that simply means that somewhere along the line someone made the decision to unionize. The REASON they made the decision to unionize is because minus a union contract Ron, those SAME JOBS would be compensated at a level that’s in line with with jobs elsewhere in the area that require similar qualifications.
In other words Ron, there’s the ‘just because” I’ve been talking about all along.
Minus a contract, the compensation for these jobs would be much less than it is. Have a cup of coffee and allow that to sink in before you post anything else.
This was just in the news….seems as if perhaps some folks are taking a look around and deciding that “organizing” isn’t necessarily the best way to go. I can’t help but wonder if situations like this one at ACS play a role. There are probably a lot of folks that don’t want their fate to be determined by a union and the stooge “leadership” that might very well be at the helm:
http://m.startribune.com/local/?id=160183225&c=y
Like or Dislike:
20 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
30
Nope, no premiums, they’re paying the same wages the union employeees would be getting for doing the same job classification.
I enjoy my coffee with a little cream and some Crystal sugar.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
5
Scott, The question is why would 2 factories in the same region find a need to unionize? 2 companies are not going to “inflate” wages just because. If the workers were getting a fair shake why would they unionize?
Like or Dislike:
7 
14
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
28
Ron,
This might be off-topic but, is there a reason you don’t “REPLY” to the message that are responding to, but rather just add your comments at the bottom? I’m just wondering because you are the only one on this blog that always does that. Just curious.
Like or Dislike:
12 
0
The world wide web is confusing man.. give him a break.
Like or Dislike:
8 
0