American Crystal: Union may vote soon on contract
November 21, 2012 at 2:33 pm in Grand Forks Herald
American Crystal Sugar management is expecting locked-out union workers to vote again on a labor contract in a little more than a week. In the past thre votes, including the one that led to the workers’ lockout Aug. 1, union members have voted overwhelmingly against the contract. Continue Reading
Wake me up when it’s over. Over a year & multiple votes. Why is ACS still required to deal with these people?
The open ended nature of the present law must be changed. This is simply silly. There is no legitimate reason for a labor dispute to go on this long. It does not help either party
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
183 
28
Yeah, right. The way I understand it, the workers that are employed now are permanently temporary until the locked out workers vote to abolish the union. Am I wrong on this?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
81 
12
“permanently temporary” seem to me there is a word for that.
No the temporary workers are just that temporary. By law these jobs belong permanently to the workers that were locked out. In North Dakota a right to work state some of the workers are non-union.When the locked out workers go back. They retain their permanent jobs. Even if it is 10 years from now. At that time, any positions that are left open, do to workers that have given up their jobs( retired, quit or just moved on) Can be filled by anyone the company wants to hire. This could include the temperary workers. But all new hires at that point are just that new hires.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
62 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
25 
144
A person doesn’t have to be part of the union or management negotiating team to understand any of this, all that’s required is the ability to read. Unfortunately, one of the union’s biggest missteps, was clinging to the belief that folks had no choice but to listen to the rhetoric they distributed. They failed to realize that not only was accurate information readily available, but that accurate information clearly illustrated how INaccurate what we heard from the union really was.
I’m sure the union has quite an extensive list of “what-ifs” by now, and somewhere near the top it has to say, “What if instead of misquotes, half-truths, taking things out of context, paraphrasing, etc. we had stuck to verifiable facts? What if instead of a propaganda-laden website, our website more closely resembled the company’s website….with actual documents, statements, names, dates, etc.?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
139 
17
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
103
“What it comes down to is the Union needed about 400 million dollars to throw away on this lock out. Unfortunately only big companys like crytal sugar can do that.”
That’s ridiculous….and you KNOW it.
The union HAS a website, we’ve seen it.
Since they HAVE the website, are you implying that sans the deep pockets of the company….they can’t put accurate information on the site instead of the propaganda-esque stuff they DO put up?
Does it “cost more” to scan an actual document? Is it “more expensive” to post a quote in its entirety? Is paraphrasing instead of posting someone’s actual words “more thrifty”?
Nonsense.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
91 
14
Now I am angry, this same union ruined hostess! I want my ding dongs, ho hos and twinkies!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
151 
19
Unfortunately not only is this the same Union it is also the same head negoiator (Steve bertelli) sent down from the international. I wonder if Hostess Brands use Crystal sugar. Maybe Steve bertelli bctgm was trying to shut down one of the buyers to put presure on Crystal sugar lol
.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
104 
14
I heard part of the Hostess story on the news. They talked to a couple of employees, one was a “Twinkie baker”, and the other was a “bun handler”. They both mentioned the concessions the union had already made, and those cuts did sound substantial.
However, (as it always seems to go), there was NO discussion whatsoever about what a “Twinkie baker” or a “bun handler” SHOULD reasonably expect when it comes to a compensation package. I think if they visited their local grocery store and actually compared their compensation to what the grocery store baker or bun handler earned, it would be quite an eye-opener for them.
Then again…perhaps not.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
107 
12
Thankfully someone will buy the Twinkie name and rights and they will live on. The same cannot be said for the respect the union had before this whole sad saga began.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
89 
13
True, but I think the union should be forced to keep the ding dongs trade mark. They could then be “The United Union of Ding Dongs”.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
96 
14
This completely disgusts me as well. They have been picketing outside of all grocery stores, Walmarts, etc. trying to get people to boycott the product, but yet they still have the nerve to want to go back? Why would you try to get people to not buy the products and in turn if you succeed possibly bankrupt them, yet now they are going to vote to go back? How could they even possibly walk back through the gates without being completely and utterly embarassed over their behavior? It also is the same union as Hostess and 18,500 people are going to be without a job because of greed!! A paycheck is better than NO paycheck. These people are just completely and utterly unbelievable!!!!!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
161 
22
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
20 
122
“I am sure the Union will go back for a paycheck. But at I highly dought any of them will support the sugar bill now or in the future. They dont like greed either.”
Nobody is being fooled by statements like that any more. If there’s a lack of support for the sugar program among union employees, then WHEN exactly did that lack of support begin?
If we did some Googling, would we find web pages aplenty detailing the union’s disgust with the sugar program and the greed it represents…..that predated the lockout?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
70 
22
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
17 
91
OK, don’t you find it he the least bit interesting that ACS hasn’t recieved more pressure? There certainly are alot more Democratic politicains with strong labor ties that could have put more heat on ACS if the company were truly offering workers the raw end of the deal. Dayton came up last year to make an appearance and then vanished. I’ve seen the letters and they are just that, letters to encourage the end of the dispute, nothing more. Your union messed up bigtime and labor supporters aren’t even standing behind you. I said it in the begining, the BCTGM led all the locals to the chop shop to try make national progess. Your best interests were not in mind. It sounds like you are finally realizing this and are going to re-vote.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
106 
12
OK, do you think the letters you mentioned weren’t “bought”?
Seriously?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
68 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
25 
69
Be careful when you bash the sugar program and farm bill. Increasing imports is seldom the way to prosperity and independence. Do you look forward to the day when we MUST import most of our sugar like we import most of our crude oil now? Once the sugar industry is gone, it won’t be coming back.
Also, you can easily find a list of registered pesticides that can be used on U.S. grown crops. What pesticides are used in growing Brazilian sugar? Does Brazil have an FDA? Can you imaging the lack of enforcement? I prefer U.S. grown grapes over Chilean grapes. I will even pay extra.
U.S. agriculture would be phenominally successful on a level playing field. Fair trade is the answer. Free trade in our food is the equivalent to unilateral disarmament in the military. I’m glad Reagan didn’t try to win the cold war by surrendering our military.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
100 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
63
My family doesn’t eat spare parts in their Thanksgiving dinner. Sugar, however, was enjoyed by all (in moderation with pie and ice cream) at our house today. I much prefer my family eat food produced in the U.S. because I know what our farmer’s have to go through to get that food to market. I am quite certain that everything we served today was produced in the USA and I give thanks for that.
Like I said before, fair trade is the answer. Our trading partners should be held to the same standards as the American farmer. What good does it do to have food quality standards if no one is inspecting the imports? Fix that first, please. I’m not protectionist, I just want reasonable standards for what my family eats. Country of origin labeling would be a nice step.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
87 
6
Stores sure seem to be selling alot more crystal sugar than any other brand lately. Walmart shelf was picked almost clean, waiting on restocking.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
140 
17
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
98
It goes on sale several times every year, especially around the holiday baking seasons. Always has. Consumers are drawn in to save money on one product and then buy others. It’s called marketing. What exactly are you trying to say, OK? This is some new tactic of American Crystal’s? It is the retailer that makes the ads. They realize the Crystal brand still has consumer appeal. Perhaps even more now than before, thanks to the union keeping ACSC on the front page.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
77 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
50
It is, and it is when I stock up for the year on flour and sugar for baking etc.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
43 
2
It’s at the store’s discretion as to when and what price to put sugar on sale. Just the same as any other item in stores that goes on sale.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
4
I think I’ll buy more non union products that are made in America whenever I can after this.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
6
I do not see any reference to recent union activity when I look on http://www.acsccontracttalks.com/
Did the language ever exist? Would ACS remove the post? Why?
I am hopeful that the union stays out. They have made too many blunders that show their dark side. Hate letters from kids, picketing residences, confederate flags, monkeys on a noose, drunk-dialing management and posting it on youtube, keying cars, factory sabotage, ect. The BCTGM is rotten to the core. Riskey and his sick friends should go away.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
129 
15
I found the language. I had to “refresh” the ACS page. Apparently my computer hasn’t been restarted in a month and held the old page in it’s cache.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
7
Factories are operating better now than when the union was there.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
139 
17
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
17 
87
Last I heard, MinnDak has not released a payment estimate for the 2012 crop. Your $20 figure is an exaggerated figure from the 2011 crop. I will agree that it cost ACS millions to switch to replacement labor for last year’s crop.
Would you agree that if ACS payments surpass MinnDak, then the BCTGM should leave the sugar refining industry?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
73 
7
Big difference between Crystal, Minn-dak.. Crystal has 5 factories, more piling sites to haul from and maintain. Minn-dak is just one factory, much fewer piling sites. Their fixed costs is lower due to maintaining fewer properties than Crystal. If Crystal originally had larger factories, 4 instead of 5 to process same tons per day, they would be in same range.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
8
The vote, if it happens, is the unions way of trying to keep what few members it has left from crossing over. There are several who have crossed and several more who are enertaining the thought. Maybe this will be the beginning of some type of closure to this drawn out labor dispute….. one way or the other.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
92 
11
Serious Question: do you think the impetuous for the vote is coming from the top or the bottom? Why vote now? Nothing on the ACS side has changed. There is no face saving concession.
I wonder if the specter of permanent replacement finally sunk in.
Without any insider information I just get the feel this might be the members giving the leadership an ultimatum.
I have zero objective evidence to base this on
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
60 
11
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
16 
88
“Its like the 19 century is coming back around. Making workers compete for lower wages until wages hit rock bottom.”
So if we were to take a peek at the classifieds and see what’s available in the employment section, would we find an ad from ACS offering up lower wages than a typical prospective applicant would get elsewhere? Did any of the contract offers, (including the final offer), offer wages lower than the typical employee would get elsewhere?
Nope.
And even if they did, how many times have we heard from the union that NONE of this is about wages?
How many versions of what this IS allegedly all about have we heard now? It certainly seems like whenever something is brought up and summarily shot down, then something else is offered up as the real issue. When THAT gets shot down, then it’s replaced. The cycle has repeated itself umpteen times….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
64 
11
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
51
“My point is these workers are not rich.”
Who said they’re rich? The point a lot of other folks are making, is that they seem to have a skewed point of view when it comes to a reasonable set of expectations. I’ve said it repeatedly….stop talking about the concessions you’ve made or are being asked TO make, and take a look around.
Your remark about these people not being rich makes it seem as if you’re *capable* of comparing things…i.e. “rich” meaning someone has a lot of something in comparison to someone else.
So use those same “comparing abilities” and view the offer(s) with a fresh set of eyes. Are the offer(s) what you WANT? Probably not. Are the offer(s) then automatically “unfair”?
Nope.
As for your tidbit about the electricians, here’s a little tidbit for you: Do you suppose the retention of replacement workers is attributable at all to the fact that these positions are listed as temporary? If you think turnover is some feather in the union’s cap and represents how valuable/irreplaceable/etc. they are, then lobby to have the law re-written so that it’s possible for companies to hire permanent replacements immediately. Let’s see how that affects turnover numbers.
You DO want fair and accurate data to refer to and post…right?
Or….do you prefer to stick with the current set of rules that will naturally skew the numbers in favor of the union’s position?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
55 
8
Your post states: “They [ACSC] will not change their minds even if it means bankruptcy. You can’t compete with that.” That statement isn’t logical. While I am certain that ACSC is acting with the intent of increasing its bottom line, the idea that it is willing to destroy itself in the process is not credible. ACSC measured the cost of replacement workers in terms of additional compensation and lost productivity and determined that cost was acceptable. For over a year the Union has been banking on the hope that running the processing facilities with replacement workers would not be sustainable. That analysis was apparently wrong.
But, for the sake of discussion, let’s assume you are correct and “[t]hey [ACSC] will not change their minds even if it means bankruptcy. You can’t compete with that.” Certainly the Union would have been able to reach the same conclusion as you have that ACSC is willing to go to the point of bankruptcy. If that is the case the Union seems to be on the same path to self-destruction by continuing to hold out despite knowing that ACSC will go bankrupt before acquiescing. “ . . . Charge for the guns’ he said: Into the valley of Death Rode the six hundred.”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
67 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
89
It would be more likely that Mr. Berg would have to say “I am sorry but U.S. labor laws require us to bring the monkey-hanging, drunk-dialing, car-keying, saboteurs back into our factories.” My hunch is that Mr. Berg (and the shareholders) would postpone this union vote for the rest of time if labor law would allow it.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
97 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
18 
75
I don’t feel like it’s name calling when these things actually happened. Not only did they happen, but it is common knowledge that the offenders are union leadership. With the exception of sabotage, these incidences were published with names in regional newpapers. I suppose that I could substitute the descriptions with the actual names. Monkey-hanger is Dan Dumas, drunk-dialer is Mark Fromke, car-keyer’s name escapes me but he is an officer in the Moorhead union, and saboteurs were numerous. BCTGM isn’t just a few trouble makers, BCTGM is rotten to the core.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
91 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
11 
74
You mad, bro?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
60 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
11 
80
OK, your posts make me sad. In my opinion your posts are based on envy and jealousy. Although the Union has stated since the very beginning of this dispute that wages are not an issue, your posts continually reference your perception of the shareholders (farmers) wealth and Berg’s salary. If wages are not an issue the wealth of the shareholders and the salary of the ACSC CEO are not relevant. The Union made a very poor decision when it conceded compensation and chose to dig its heals in on the seniority issue. While the general public may have been willing to provide the Union with support in a dispute over compensation, most people view seniority as one of the negative aspects of Unions; seniority may or may not be a negative, but the public perception is that seniority promotes mediocrity and protects some undeserving employees. Your posts make me sad because they reflect a growing voice in this country that believes the success of others somehow hurts them and that working hard to become wealthy should be viewed with contempt.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
91 
8
It wont matter either way, all workers in the factories now are staying regardless of vote outcome. even if they do accept, it will be union working alongside non union workers that will refuse the union.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
4
The shareholders meeting has already transpired…… try again.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
57 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
16 
34
ok, so he makes a boat load of money. The board determines he is worth that much to the company and they determine what the line workers are worth to the company. A worker will get paid what his skill set will bring. A good worker will be compensated better than a poor worker, except in a union shop where the bad worker gets overcompensated to the detriment of the quality employee. I don’t know if Berg should be paid what he is paid but it isn’t my decision as I am not on the board.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
77 
10
I think an interesting question is at what point the will the Union have lost enough members to retirement or other jobs that it no longer becomes relevant. My suspicion is that any Union positions that are not filled with returning Union workers will be filled with people who are currently working in the facilities. The people currently working in the facilities are unlikely to want to pay Union dues if seniority is eliminated because the dues will not be purchasing much if anything in addition to what they already are receive. The implication is that the Union will have little or no future bargaining power because a much smaller number of workers would be likely to follow Union direction including the threat of a strike. For example, in a future labor dispute if Union is reduced to 500 dues paying workers and those who don’t pay dues decide to continue working, ACSC will need fewer replacement workers than it did this time around. I wonder if the Union management has already determined that they have crossed that line and as a result see little or no value in agreeing to the existing offer. Perhaps the call for a new vote is a push from local Union members who have decided enough is enough and that they would rather return to work than continue to fight a battle that may have already been lost.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
73 
6
i think the timing of this vote has everythimg to do with this same unions 5000-6000 members voting themselves out of a job at hostess. their ranks are thinning and they are trying to salvage something. these 1300 hundred are no longer pawns but suddenly are needed..
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
77 
6
Trumka will need some fresh sheep to sheer so HE does not end up with a pay cut, since BCTGM will be without the dues of the hostess workers.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
67 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
58
Saynotoacsc, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Saynotoacsc, you’re no Jack Kennedy.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
10
I’m afraid that, until we have 25% unemployment in the Red River Valley, these union employees will turn this offer down. I’m also afraid that 25% unemployment is coming. This is really, really sad.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
46 
12
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
12 
49
So where’s the logic in that? Sounds like “no” votes are being cast to *make a point* more than anything else. I wonder what these attempts at saving face will net these workers in the long run…
Frequent union-poster Paul probably summed it up the best when he declared months ago that, “This contract will never be signed as it is written.”
Even with all that has transpired, some folks think that voting no is the only option….simply because doing otherwise will force them to admit a whole bunch of things they don’t want to admit.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
10
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
11 
39
I guess we see things differently. One of us is very wrong. I hope it’s me.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
2
A petition drive originated in EGF to force a vote. The Minnesotans have barely tasted what their North Dakotan brethren have been going through since the beginning of this. They hold all the cards, I believe there are more members on the east side of the river than the west. The vote will pass.
Hot debate. What do you think?
27 
25
gussy, I don’t understand your logic. If the east (MN) holds all the cards, wouldn’t the vote fail? The east has had unemployment benefits. I would define a “no” vote on the contract as a failed vote. Clear as mud? By the way, if you have a vote, please vote no on Dec. 1. The BCTGM is rotten to the core. A vote to de-certify is the only honorable option. That would be the ultimate justice for Bertelli, Froemke, Riskey, Dumas, Ripplinger, Nelson and the other union leaders that have shown such poor judgement.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
55 
8
The Minnesotans ran out of unemployment benefits, now they’re desperate. The vote will pass because of this. I do not have a vote, not a locked out employee. If they were still getting unemplyment this vote wouldn’t be happening.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47 
5
If that union had gotten what they wanted, there could be 25% unemployment in the valley within 5 years. Look what they did to Hostess, they don’t give up whining for more till a company is bankrupt and shuts down. They would have collapsed the entire region.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
8
“Look what they did to Hostess”
The situation at Hostess isn’t entirely the union’s fault, but I do find it absolutely hilarious that the union is blaming a lot of Hostess’s problems on the company not “modernizing”. Good grief, if Hostess HAD modernized/streamlined, how would that have been accomplished? Through things such as automation and increasing efficiency?
WHO would have been the strongest opponent of ANY attempt to shift product production/packaging/distribution away from the worker on the line….even if it WOULD result in increased productivity and decreased costs?
Nope, the union wasn’t Hostess’s only problem, but the union most certainly did “want to have their cake and it it too”.
(pun intended)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
5
Crap or get off the pot….This got old a long long time ago…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
11
interesting too, at hostess, that one union voting not to accept the contract doomed all the other unions willing to comprimise to keep their jobs. so ironic that these unions are victoms of their own rules.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
5
I didn’t realize until months into this that the Mn side was receiving unemployment and ND was not. What a formula for gridlock. There were even some Democrat legislators who wanted to extend the benefits (against the law), which would have extended a final vote on the final offer. You know, by nature, we’re all greedy and self-serving, but if I’m a ND employee, I’d never forget how the Mn side threw me under the bus.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
4
Seriously … the men that spent Thanksgiving Day griping and complaining about this should be ashamed of themselves.
Like or Dislike:
14 
8
Seriously….facts didn’t take the day off.
And just as seriously, a whole lot of folks you’re lumping into the group that “should be ashamed” have done nothing more than discuss the issue on these boards….which is what these boards are for.
Would you have felt better about the discussion if the ONLY thing that were different were the dates and times above the posts?
Like or Dislike:
13 
3
Yes
Like or Dislike:
3 
12
Seriously Scott, you don’t have all your facts straight anyway. Never have.
Like or Dislike:
7 
11
Ha ha ha ha ha! I can’t wait for his response. It will include how union workers think they are “special”.
Like or Dislike:
11 
6
Clearly, devilschild was suggesting a cease fire for a day of thanks. It’s a valid point. We could take that thought a step farther and spill way into the Christmas season. It’s hard for many of us, though with our season kicking off with black Friday and cyber Monday, etc. and less emphasis on the true meaning of Christmas. This might sound lame to quite a few of you, but I’d like to see the union employees prayerfully consider their options before voting on December 1st. What a meaningful Christmas present that would be.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
With all the activity outside of my local grocery stores I wouldn’t be surprised with another no vote.
Like or Dislike:
12 
2
So for the strangest reason, I know not why, while I am reading these posts I have Meatloaf’s song “paradise by dashboard light” stuck in my head….
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
Who’s counting the vote this time? That would be the best barometer in which way the vote will go.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
“Seriously Scott, you don’t have all your facts straight anyway. Never have.”
Not surprisingly, you apparently chose to not respond to what you disagreed with when I posted something in the past. And with this post, you didn’t either….why is that? By all means, find something I’ve posted that you feel is inaccurate and we can discuss it further.
“Ha ha ha ha ha! I can’t wait for his response. It will include how union workers think they are “special”.”
Sorry to disappoint you with my response to Gayle. But since YOU brought the “special” thing up, you wouldn’t want to give explaining the “special” thing a whirl….would you Ron? Every time I backed you into a corner on it before, you never could quite put a finger on it.
Care to try again?
Two jobs. Same level of education/skill/experience required to do the job. But, oddly enough….”worker A” earns considerably more than “worker B”.
Why? What makes his situation “special”?
Then something happens and “worker A” is asked to take a cut in pay and/or benefits. He still has a significantly better compensation package than “worker B”, but he thinks the situation is still “unfair” to him.
Why?
Ha ha ha….right back at you Ron. I can’t wait for YOUR response.
Like or Dislike:
8 
1