A year into American Crystal lockout, common ground remains elusive
July 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm in Grand Forks Herald
After a yearlong standoff, American Crystal Sugar Co. and its locked-out un-ion workers both say there’s little more they can give to facilitate the dispute’s end. Continue Reading
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
27 
118
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
15 
70
It’s still more than the 2%/year they got in the last contract
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
43 
9
“This is hardly a huge raise when you factor in the increased healthcare costs employees would be incurring.”
And if we were to compare the existing pay scale(s) and the existing healthcare contributions to what similar positions elsewhere in the area offer, how do the numbers stack up Paul?
Complaining about paltry raises and having to pay SOMETHING for healthcare is silly when you consider how out of line the compensation packages have been.
But, having gone back and forth with you in the past….I realize being objective is something you have difficulty with.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
9
The raises are a set dollar amount for each of the tiers, so it does matter where you are in the tier on what percent your raise is. The company added $0.37 to the raise in year one and $0.19 to the raise in year 2 for ALL tiers to help offset the health expense. This constant dollar amount becomes a higher percentage with a lower salary.
For Tier 2, the salary increase percentages range from 17.9% (at $15.11/hr) to 13.0% (at $20.86/hr). For Tier 1, the salary increase percentages range from 16.3% (at $15.10/hr) to…. I don’t know the lowest salary, but it would be 22.4% at $11.00/hr. At Tier 3, the salary increase percentages range from 14.2% at $20.86/hr to….. I don’t know the highest salary, but it goes down from there. It would be 12.57% at $23.55/hr.
Previously, the 17% increase was for an average employee and included a $2000 signing bonus. It would be curious how the 17% increase got into today’s story. Reading the story, it isn’t clear that that was a quote or came from ACSC.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
78 
5
I’d disagree that the healthcare out-of-pocket expenses are going to more than double. Today they are $1950 for a family. WIth the new plan they are $4800, but ACSC is providing $1350 into an HSA for each employee (with a family plan), so the net out of pocket expenses goes to $3450. This is an increase of $1500 or a 77% increase. A 77% increase isn’t more than doubling.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
76 
11
The union likely had their most senior member work those numbers instead of their most qualified member.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
107 
17
Also, don’t forget that under family coverage when 1 family member reaches their individual deductible then all their claims are paid at 100%. Not to mention that routine preventative care such as physicals, well baby checks, immunizations, mammograms, pap smears, eye exams, etc are all covered at 100% from the start.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
4
When are the union workers going to realize that it is over? Their union did them no favors and who lnows what they may have been promised to help break the union? They keep arguing about seniority which they really do not have to start with. If Riskey was a good leader then why does he not act on a grievance that the union would have won hands down? It was not even over contract language but state labor law, which had to be explained to Riskey. Makes one wonder who union management really works for? Maybe they were promised a nice retirement to help break the union. Since any type of agreement like this would not be on paper if there was an agreement why would ACS honor it? Where would union management complain to?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
69 
22
Continuing with your conspiracy theory, ACSC also most have bribed the union members to re-elect Riskey.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
10
I say “Too bad, so sad.” I haven’t received a raise in 2 years.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
95 
16
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
24 
62
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
23 
76
How do you know what “class” I am in?
“So because you have not gotten a raise in two years no one else is suppose to?” Why are they supposed to? What an odd thing to say.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
46
I always thought raises were earned. I didn’t know you were just supposed to get one.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
It isn’t about the salary or the raises. They union is choosing to fight for things that reduce the efficiency of the operation. Seniority. Free healthcare (but it sounds like the union has given on that).
We should want these workers to be well paid. That is a good thing. We should want a strong middle-class. That doesn’t mean the union ALWAYS gets everything they ask for. In my opinion, ACSC needs to move to a health plan where the patients bear some of the costs (like they are proposing). They also need to change the seniority rules so that the company can be run as efficiently as possible. This raises the total pool of $$$s to be shared with the employees.
If you haven’t gotten a raise in two years, maybe you should look for other opportunities. Just because you haven’t doesn’t mean that others shouldn’t.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
50 
6
I have no reason to look elsewhere. I have a great job. We accepted no raises (and no employer contributions to retirement, for that matter) so that one of my colleagues would not have to be laid off. I gladly accepted those terms, because I think it’s better for everyone to receive a paycheck than not. It’s too bad these union employees, or at least the union leaders, don’t think the same way.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54 
12
Good for you. I’m happy that you have a job you like. You apparently trust and believe in your employer. At my employer, we also had “shared sacrifice” so that no one was laid off. In my case it was a signficant cut in pay in 2009. We also had reduced hours (with reduced pay) instead of layoffs.
That said, what impact does/should your situation have on the ACSC situation. You seem to imply that, since you haven’t had a pay increase, then others shouldn’t either. BTW: There IS a nice pay increase in the ACSC final offer…. even after considering the health insurance cost impact. So I do think it is a fair contract.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
7
“You seem to imply that, since you haven’t had a pay increase, then others shouldn’t either.”
Show me where I said that. You can’t.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
36 
2
D7,
I said that you IMPLIED that, not that you said that. You wrote: “I say “Too bad, so sad.” I haven’t received a raise in 2 years.”
What was the reason for you to share that you hadn’t got a raise in 2 years? I assumed you were implying that the locked out workers should be happy with little to no increase, Obviously I was wrong, so what WERE you trying to say. Please be explicit.
Like or Dislike:
4 
5
The Herald may have finally turned on the union. These are Riskey quotes that the Herald chose to include in this article:
Referring to the union’s most recent proposals, “We don’t really want to get into the details,”
Referring to the 63%, “I believe that’s a really resounding vote yet,”
“You can’t say it isn’t tough for them” That one is particularly nasty, as it has Riskey referring to his fellow union members as “them.” If I were a lockout, that would hurt. Being as Riskey is still getting paid, he really isn’t one of “them.”
Riskey closes with “Everything comes to an end,” It comes off as weak and sad. The Herald used to do this to ACS, but now it is the union’s turn.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
93 
7
Good point Oofda, Riskey used the word “them”, not “us”………he is not part of them, apparently he is not suffering, but they are. I thought a union was about sticking toghether, shared sacrifice for the good of the union as a whole………….. unless you’re in the union leadership, then the members suffer for the good of the leadership.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
In summary, the union is fine with the pay and benefits but it wants to be in control of the operation of the factories. Well said GF Herald, well said. Riskey did a great job of revealing how unfair and horrible this contract is.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
72 
7
“Everything Comes to an End.”
Yep it sure does.. But I don’t think it will end the way you think it will Mr. Riskey.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
71 
8
This could also be said about the great benefits package the union members were receiving. As well as the power the union had over the company. Mr. Riskey should take a moment to think about that.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
61 
6
“If you want to make enemies, try to change something.” –Woodrow Wilson.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
11
It’s hard to believe that the lockout started 1 year ago today. Never thought it would go that long.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
27
I’m a LOT more objective about this than you are Paul.
Posts you’ve made have been corrected….how many times now? I know Mike has called you out more than once, and I have as well. The reason you’ve been corrected, is due to your lack of objectivity. You see a statement/quote/document/situation and your LACK of objectivity causes you to (try to) twist it into something you’d like it to be….rather than what it actually is. Exactly how many times have you corrected my posts? Think hard. You might not like something I’ve said, but have you corrected it? Why not?
Unfortunately, a lot of folks that *want* to believe the same kinds of things you *want* to believe have chosen to rely on the misinformation you’ve posted, rather than educating themselves.
Hearsay, misquotes, misinformation, etc. are a BIG part of the reason this is still going on.
Congrats.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
6
Found this description in the herald job postings , After reading I’m confused. Are they talking about Temp workers or the trainees?
At the core of American Crystal is the experience and aptitude of a workforce that extends beyond the Company. Guided by their insights and resourcefulness, we continue to find new ways to persevere and triumph through substantial challenges and significant opportunities.
Transforming a raw vegetable such as sugarbeets into pure natural sugar takes more than plants and machines; it takes roll-up-the shirt-sleeve, fresh thinking problem solvers. It takes the kind of work that goes on every day at American Crystal.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
1
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
23
Once again Ron….you’re wrong. Myself and others have corrected incorrect information posted by people like Paul. I’m not talking about opinions Ron…I’m talking about INFORMATION. The union HASN’T stepped up and explained things or corrected things when the lies, misquotes, and misinformation have been spread around. And PULEEZE don’t play it off by asserting that they’re perhaps not aware the misinformation is out there. They SAY nothing and DO nothing, because the more the people buy into what they say, the better chance they have at furthering their agenda.
As for this:
“You are so pro american crystal…”
I’ll reply by saying what I’ve told you several times before. ACS has gone above and beyond when it comes to sharing information. Letters and scans of other documents are on the website we can all take a look at. Can you say THAT about the union? Nope. Why? Because they know it wouldn’t work out well for them. It’s pretty easy to research and analyze information, when the entity SUPPLYING the information takes ownership of what they distribute BY putting it down on paper, or posting it on a website and inviting everyone in for a peek.
You’ve implied a few times now about the information ACS posts being perhaps dishonest or incorrect. I’ve invited you several times to take a look at it…pick out some stuff you find that IS dishonest or incorrect….and post it up. You still haven’t. Why?
On the other hand, you seem to be sticking up for Paul, (and others like him), that have posted incorrect information….and have gotten called out on it. Why?
Sorry Ron, everything I posted (at Paul) isn’t doesn’t apply to me. I asked him to post up some examples of things I posted that “needed correcting”, and how many things has he posted so far?
We can all have different opinions Ron, that’s fine. I just think it’s absolutely RIDICULOUS that you IMPLY that the information ACS posts *might* not be true or accurate, but you then DEFEND someone that ABSOLUTELY HAS posted things that are untrue or inaccurate….because you happen to agree with his point of view.
Do you think you’re objective?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
3
Scott, I have my bias but yet I listen to people who have a different point of view. I also have my own original thoughts. This is what seperates myself from you. You cannot admit your bias and do not have an original thought! All you do is regurgitate other peoples posts to try and paint them as a bad guy.
Like or Dislike:
6 
13
If I’m not listening to what other people say or post Ron, then WHAT in the world is it that I’m replying to?
And if I reply to something, does that not indicate I have an original thought? What would any of my replies consist of if I didn’t have any “original thoughts”?
And….you still haven’t posted any of the alleged inaccuracies you feel are prevalent in the ACS information, NOR have you explained why you stick up for people that post stuff that IS inaccurate and has been PROVEN to be inaccurate.
So, long story short, you needn’t “confess” your bias….it’s apparent.
In all of the things I’ve posted Ron, do you suppose ANY of it has resulted in any locked-out workers making the decision to trust what I say and not actually read the contract offers and understand them? Hardly. I’ve INVITED them to do so. What course of action do you suppose at least SOME of the locked-out workers choose to take when one of their own posts stuff that isn’t accurate? They *want* to buy into it Ron. How does it “help” when folks like you DEFEND the person posting the inaccurate information?
It’s ridiculous that you accuse me of not having an “original thought”. You’re so anti-company and pro-union that’s its apparently impossible for you to recognize the damage that can be done when the union’s rhetoric is spread around unchecked. After ALL of this time, there are STILL plenty of workers that either haven’t read the offer(s), or don’t understand them.
Which is just what the union wants.
The letter from the union to the employees that TJ posted made me want to hurl. It started off with “Brothers and Sisters….” and rolled downhill from there. I’d give them some credit if at some point they’d sit down and pen a letter that also began with “Brothers and Sisters…”, but continued on with something like, “it has come to our attention that many of you are spreading false information about the offers and what has gone on since the lock-out began, and we would like to set the record straight…”
But THAT ain’t gonna happen.
Like or Dislike:
16 
4
Why do you get to decide what is fair for an entire group of people and then demonize them because you do not agree?
Like or Dislike:
6 
12
“Why do you get to decide what is fair for an entire group of people and then demonize them because you do not agree?”
More Ron logic.
For the record Ron, (and for the unmpteenth time), how does anyone make any determination in any situation about what “fair” is? If they feel something they’ve been offered is “unfair”…fine. They “feel” it’s unfair.
But why aren’t the majority of onlookers ALSO convinced that what they’ve been offered is unfair? Is it perhaps because having NOT lived under the umbrella of a contract they might have a *slightly* more realistic, (or at the very least different), idea about what constitutes “fair”?
I particularly like that you’ve included the word “demonize” in your description of what I’ve done. YOU take me to task for calling out a union worker for circulating nonsense, (and proving it), while at the same time YOU imply that the company *might* be saying things that aren’t accurate….but you don’t bother to prove your point.
Who’s MORE guilty of “demonizing” Ron?
Lastly, (since you probably missed it the couple of other times I mentioned it), the reason I posted on the ACS situation in the first place, was because a relative was among those locked-out. Immediately following the lock-out, this person posted some “facts” on one of the social media sites that I KNEW were incorrect. A day or so went by, and nobody corrected the posts made. More appeared actually.
A couple of questions Ron:
1) WHERE do you suppose this person GOT the inaccurate information?
2) WHY do you suppose it wasn’t corrected? Its not as if this VERY popular social media site is a big secret that other union members and reps aren’t aware of.
To sum up YOUR point of view, it seems like the company’s information ought to *automatically* be viewed with suspicion and disregarded even though you haven’t proven it….BUT….anything pro-union that gets posted is *automatically* granted an “accuracy-Mulligan”. In other words, it doesn’t HAVE TO be accurate, the fact that it’s in opposition to the company’s point of view is enough.
Like or Dislike:
13 
3
Only the union members can decide what is a fair offer, scott. Last time I checked you don’t get a vote.
Like or Dislike:
0 
4
“Only the union members can decide what is a fair offer, scott. Last time I checked you don’t get a vote.”
You’re *kind of* making my point Ron. If the contracts up until now have been out of line with reality, THEN…..how does someone voting make an accurate or realistic determination about whether or not the current offer is “fair”? What sort of “tools” have they been equipped with in order to make such a determination?
You’ve even posted in the past that perhaps management allowed the situation to get a bit out of control. So….what to do? Correct the situation? How does one do that while STILL making an offer that’s “fair”, when the group of people the offer is being made to consider cuts “unfair”?
How many times have rational, clear-thinking adults posted details about the contract on these message boards and explained, (by making comparisons), that these offers are “fair”, if the word “fair” means EXACTLY what the word “fair” traditionally means….and isn’t instead some “feeling” a person has?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
How am I suppose to answer those questions? I do not know anything about that situation let alone your relative! You should ask your relative, he is the one you should be asking. Btw I never said everything the company posts is innacurate. I just stated there is a bias.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
“How am I suppose to answer those questions? I do not know anything about that situation let alone your relative! You should ask your relative”
I asked you Ron, because I wanted you to use your fertile imagination. Let’s try it again:
It’s around contract vote time, and a person that’s about to vote, (or has recently voted), is coming into the situation armed with “information”. Given that the letters to employees and offers made to the employees are posted on the ACS contract talks site for us to read, then the question becomes WHERE did this person GET their INACCURATE information? It WASN’T from the company Ron.
Who could it be? Who would benefit from distributing inaccurate nonsense? Who would benefit if they noticed the FURTHER spreading of inaccurate nonsense on a social media site? Why not, (upon noticing the inaccuracies), reply with some ACCURATE information and set the record straight?
Why Ron?
(It’s okay if you don’t want to reply here *in public*. But at least stop the kidding and admit it to yourself.)
“I don’t know where your relative would have gotten the inaccurate information. You would have to ask them….”
Classic.
You KNOW where it came from Ron.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Not sure why I can’t reply to this post directly, so here goes:
“D7,I said that you IMPLIED that, not that you said that. You wrote: “I say “Too bad, so sad.” I haven’t received a raise in 2 years.” What was the reason for you to share that you hadn’t got a raise in 2 years? I assumed you were implying that the locked out workers should be happy with little to no increase, Obviously I was wrong, so what WERE you trying to say. Please be explicit.”
Well, that’s what happens when you assume. The old saying certainly seems true in this case. I was implying that with the economy the way it is that people should be thankful to have jobs, not expect blanket raises “just because,” then throw a huff and walk out when you don’t get your way. It’s pretty clear that the the Crystal employees were not thankful to have jobs, and they expected Crystal to suffer greatly. Crystal called their bluff, and the workers didn’t even have a pair of threes in their hands. Again, too bad so sad.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
Scott, I don’t know anything about your relative and where he got his information.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Yes you do Ron.
The incorrect information came from either:
A) The company
or…
B) The union
(Hint: it wasn’t the company.)
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Please correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that if the union could prove the company is lying about anything during this lock out that would constitute “bargaining in bad faith”.
This would then allow union members such things as back pay, fines for the company, and so on.
So what would the motivation be for the company to be anything less than 100% open and honest?
The union on the other hand would has the legal right to be as dishonest with its members as it wishes.
http://www.1-888-no-union.com/
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
“Please correct me if I am wrong but it is my understanding that if the union could prove the company is lying about anything…..”
If they COULD, they would. But instead of proving anything, they choose the other path and “imply” things.
Unfortunately, tactics like that are still at least partially effective because even though when someone calls their bluff and challenges them to post something from the website for example, and then disprove it….the challenge goes unanswered. However, NOT stepping up to the plate and accepting the challenge certainly doesn’t mean they’re going to man-up and admit they’ve got nothin’….they’ll instead leave the original accusation or pseudo-provocative statement hanging out there in the hope that someone will read it and regurgitate it to others…..
Like or Dislike:
1 
0