Democrats Want To Subsidize Labor Battles

20110729_american_crystal_2_33

After a bill to expand North Dakota’s unemployment benefits to locked out American Crystal Sugar workers failed during the special legislative session held in late 2011, Democrats vowed to introduce it in the regular session.

That bill, SB2224, has been introduced. If passed, the law would continue to deny unemployment benefits to striking workers but would allow them for a worker who “has been locked out by that individual’s employer and prevented from working for that employer.”

It’s good that the law doesn’t apply to striking employees, but applying it to locked out workers is no better. The taxpayers ought not be asked to subsidize these labor disputes at all, and the American Crystal dispute is a good example of why.

The ACS workers may as well be on strike after consistently rejecting one contract after another from American Crystal. The union even filed a grievance with the National Labor Relations Board which backfired after the NLRB conclude that it was the union, and not ACS, who wasn’t negotiating in good faith.

The union tried to draw a line in the sand with ACS, and it hasn’t worked. As of right now, it appears as though the workers will never be going back to work at ACS, but that was their choice. The union workers voted to reject the contracts.

The taxpayers needn’t pay for their decision.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • Lianne

    Another incremental step on the way to cradle to grave take over by the government. If this passes, just watch, next session they will try to expand on this bill.
    It is my hope that we have enough legislators with restraint who will defeat this bill.
    Everyone better write to their senators. My senator is one of the most conservative in the state. For that, I am thankful.

    • $8194357

      10X
      death by a 1000 ideological cuts.
      Slow and over time the host culture will bleed to death..

    • $8194357

      How do you fight an ideology that has been taking stealth forms and indoctrinating generations of sheople? Biblical Truth is all I have found..

      http://www.helium.com/items/1921860-what-are-communist-values

      http://english.qstheory.cn/culture/201109/t20110924_112464.htm

      http://www.beaufortobserver.net/pageimages/STORMSummation.pdf

      Core values and communism……

      That is why the discussion about the essence of communism is still very much alive. It is topical because we still really don’t understand what communism was, and because of efforts to use one interpretation or other of the past for current purposes. Every attempt to objectively examine the totalitarian past fails immediately if it’s not based on clarifying the concepts that are being worked with and if ideologies, including their historical background, are not separated from the practice of them. Ideologies must also be separated from those who – rightly or not – called themselves their implementers. In the case of communism it is therefore important to separate its ideology, as it was gradually created in the environment of west-European philosophy and mainly its most in-depth Marxist version, from the practices of the political regime that arose in Russia after 1917. Whether this Leninist-Stalinist political model was in fact carried out according to Marx’s philosophy, or whether it had completely different roots, is to be examined only after the aforementioned is thoroughly clarified. Preconceived judgment that already knows the “answer” has nothing to do with science and testifies to ideological prejudice, or even to the blindness of a persons thinking

  • Yogibare

    Do I recall correctly that the Labor union members voted to reject the ACS offer?
    Twice? Then ACS told them it would hire other workers since the offer was turned down and there would be no contract in force; thus no work agreement. This is the union doing.
    The State does not need to subsidize bad behavior. The union rejected the work offer.

  • tony_o2

    One of the requirements to collect unemployment is that you must be actively seeking employment in your profession. If they find out that you turned down a job in your profession, you lose your benefits.

    If Bob the builder turned down a job because the employer offered him $20/hr and he wanted $30/hr, he would lose his benefits. ACS offered the workers X and they turned down the contract because they wanted X+Y. Why should they be given special treatment? They turned down the work, they should not get unemployment.

Top