NFO-206 (AV10708) US Farm Report: Collective Bargaining

The Communications Committee of the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce in cooperation with K.R.O.C television presents comment a weekly public affairs program Collective Bargaining for farmers is the subject of this afternoon's show each of the four major farm organizations is represented on today's panel representing the Grange is CJ Davis field assistant to the master of the national drain on behalf of the Minnesota Farmers Union is Cy Carpenter executive secretary for the Minnesota Farmers Union the Farm Bureau spokesman is Walter Prigge past president of the Olmsted County Farm Bureau and speaking for the NFO is Erhard Pfingsten vice president of the national farmers organization our moderator is mr. Wendell Maltby executive vice president of the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce mr. Maltby collective bargaining for farmers has become a controversial subject in recent years in the news have been things such as the dumping of milk the killing of hogs we've seen violence we've seen family pitted against family in some instances and so the same afternoon we think this subject of collective bargaining for farmers is one that should be of interest to our viewers and of interest all of us here on the panel I'd like to open the panel by addressing the same question to each of our four panelists and that is in general what's the view of your organization on collective bargaining for farmers what are your goals and objectives and what do you see are going to be the results of the efforts that are underway now toward collective bargaining and I think we'll start with today with Mr. Davis mr. Maltby the National Green feels that it is quite necessary for farmers generally to understand that they must have bargaining power in in this present day and age and under existing economic circumstances the problem of course is how do you get collective bargaining power in the face of overproduction you might say so we feel that it will involve not a single barrel approach but a multiple approach to the situation we all have to work on a commodity by commodity basis with each commodity working out its own bargaining program in accordance with the amount that is on hand the potential production and this sort of thing of course we're very much in favor of present cooperatives and the work that they're doing we think that this should be expanded to the extent that it is possible to do so and we feel that it's very important we're very frank to confess that as you have said it is not only controversial but it is also a very complex problem this is why it's controversial but we feel it with goodwill among all of our organizations and people and certainly this is not just a problem for farmers alone we would like all of our friends and the cities and the towns to understand that they have a great stake in farm economics and I'm sure that the very fact that your organization the Chamber of Commerce is taking a great hand in trying to bring farmers and city people together so that each of us can understand the other's problems better is an indication that we are moving closer together and that we are have at least recognized the problem and are beginning to make some steps towards solving it fine thank you mr. Davis mr. carpenter representing the Minnesota Farmers Union what are your organization's views on this subject Thank You mr. Maltby first I'd like to express our appreciation and applaud your organization for promoting this type of a public service to provide better understanding and not only of collective bargaining but of some of the discussion and problems of agriculture with that said I'd like to say that farmers union is a family farm organization the purpose of farmers union is to improve the income and the standard of living or family farmers and I say this at the start because whether it's collective bargaining or whatever it might be we're interested in promoting a measure such as this if it will benefit the income and the standard of living of the family farmer we think it's necessary to recognize that there are numerous problems that are related and correlated with collective bargaining for example the tax loss write-off that business abuses agriculture with the corporate invasion on the land ownership and the provision of providing their own source of supply and we mentioned these at the start to point out that unless some of these are considered in connection with collective bargaining that there may be no family farms left to to carry on or to benefit from now this is not to minimize collective bargaining rather to put it in its proper perspective we think that it is vitally necessary it is not new it has been considered a matter of fact farmers union has worked not only with the idea but with programs in in collective bargaining for at least 30 years and it has its ups and downs in public acceptance and the public consideration it is a vital part and this needs to be understood by the public of our free enterprise system the other segments of our business and the economy have prospered much as a result of beneficial and successful collective bargaining the farmer has not because he has not had this similar position and his result our rural economy has lagged our production has outstripped industry and business but our economy has lagged now today the chances perhaps are better there's more interest just rises and falls or is it more interest the activity you're carrying on here today in illustrates this there's more consideration and of the need of a rural community by the metropolitan community because some of their problems are compounded by the deterioration of a rural community and probably the focal point now is the introduction of the Mondale bill for a specific act dealing with agricultural or collective bargaining we're very pleased that Senator Mondale has introduced this bill because we believe this will will now bring it in a perspective where it can be considered and some specifics worked out as well as a better understanding we feel that the public must understand this and that the mechanics of bargaining to be successful must be worked out in other words we must have a a bargaining pattern that's workable and enforceable and we don't have the time to go into detail but there are several basics I think we need to mention and the public needs to consider first the producer the family farm producer must have a voice it must be an equal voice if he's going to bargain the processor must be must bargain there must be some method of forcing him to bargain there must be a a means of negotiation so that there can't be a deliberate stalemate or boycott there must be a method of regulating production not only of the farmers production but outside sources that could be used to weaken the position of the family farmers in all of these must be enforceable by law now we think the Mondale Act will cause a a better discussion and understanding of this it also points out that some commodities will require a different approach to bargaining than others and that one further note on the Mondale bill I think it's important it brings into the whole realm of discussion the position of the consumer this is necessary because his position needs to be considered it also is necessary from his position as a voter and quite often in the past a one voice or the other has worked to the disparity or the disadvantage of the farmer by flaunting the consumer and talking about unnecessarily high costs of food or whatever the consumer gets food cheaper than he ever did before but he is susceptible to this kind of propaganda and if he is a part of a bargaining effort and understands and has a representative there we think this is helpful and is necessary we think that the Mondale Bill also was helpful in that it brought out some of the opposition and more and and and opposition is expected this is mostly from those who benefit most in profit from the low priced products of agriculture I think you bring out two interesting points here that maybe we can come back to a little bit or one or two there I think you're interested in discussing with you a little bit more mister Frankston your national farmers organization has probably gained more press coverage in recent years in this collective bargaining situation than have most of the other organizations and I'm very interested in your views on this subject of collective bargaining for farmers in your organization's views well our organization of course started as a protest group during the days when the farmers were depending and for that matter still are to great extent on the government to get their prices for them our political power was declining so fast we had 30 percent of the votes on the farm when we started getting farm programs that did give us pretty good prices by the time that we had protested a number of years we had fallen to 12% of the votes out there and now we're down below 6% so about 10 years ago the leaders of the NFO started studying the situation why the farmers aren't getting a price and of course started to build a National Organization for the sole purpose of getting the farmers of price through their own efforts by pricing their production selling it on contract at least a year ahead and then produce for that contract so I'd say on the national basis definitely the NFO was the leader in collective bargaining at the time when we started the term collective bargaining for agriculture for that much bargaining power for agriculture had he had not even been heard of so we're building a National Organization for this very purpose certainly the co-ops and other local groups have made valiant efforts to get the farmers a price but since our processors or our buyers so the the final outlets have become national in scope where they're able to bypass any area any market any individual it got to the point of course where such efforts couldn't do any great amount of good anymore so we decided it had to be a national organization it had to be an organization dealing in all commodities bringing them all up in relative balance because if you took one commodity didn't do anything for the others you'd have first of all of shifting from one commodity and to the other price we're good in one bad in the other and then of course it had as it was also the tendency to have one group working against the other you had the livestock man and get man against the grain farmer the grain farmer against the livestock man small farmer against big farmer the east against the Midwest and the west against all of them so it's about the way it went so this is why it has to be an organization dealing in all commodities so the NFO has now built a national organization we're in 45 states now in a very short time we will cover all of the continental united states for this purpose of bringing farmers together to use the bargaining power that they have and of course the only power that they do have is the product itself so it has to be used as every business and every industry does the farmers remained an individual in the market while the entire rest of the economy has modernized organized consolidated and merged so the farmer in order to get a fair price is going to have to get bargaining power and he can do it only through organization to where he can have the same kind of influence on the market that the National buyers have and of course this has to be handled by a national organization the point of control has been mentioned here and there to any organization that's going to do this job of collective bargaining is going to have to look after the whole problem so the program of the NFO is the basic step first you got to get the farmers together to anything until you've done that you're you're whistling in the dark talking about bargaining until you have the organization's second place to price our own product on the basis of what it costs to produce and then sell the con- on contract at least the year ahead and then enforce your prices with the control of the sale of your production supply the market with all that it can use at all times at a full fair price but no more than that then if there's anything left beyond that in for domestic markets channel that into world markets or secondary markets take the discount or if you have to on that but don't let the last pound that you produce set the price on the very first pound and this is exactly what has been happening and failing to be able to move it then of course isolate it from the market so that it cannot be used to depress all of the prices so I'd say NFO is definitely the pioneer the leader in collective bargaining and when we started out we had a fight about everybody that there is on this there is real no real controversy if anyone will analyze that of course any change its ever been brought about has been considered controversial we're not very far from Lincoln's birthday today and I think we're probably in the most Christian nation on earth and there isn't a Christian in this nation that would say that slavery is right yet it was controversial at that time in the nation fought the biggest in the bloodiest war that's ever been fought over that very issue was one group trying to maintain that very thing today when we look back of it doesn't even make sense that anybody should ever ever objected so I think we're coming into that change now we're all groups and and most people are beginning to realize that if the farmers going to produce the food that the nation needs he's going to have to be paid for it just won't work those are interesting viewpoints and some interesting parallels you job mister Perigge the Farm Bureau is one of the older farm organizations as I recall what are your organization's views on this subject well thank you mr. Maltby Farm Bureau has been more active and for a longer time in the farm bargaining field and most people realize Farm Bureau has worked in marketing for about the past ten years and for the last seven years has actually been marketing products through its affiliate American Agricultural Marketing Associations we have begun primarily in fruits and vegetables because these commodities are produced in a more local area and are not affected with the tremendous problems which arise from from a commodity which is is produced on a nationwide basis and in 1968 the American Agricultural Marketing Association did market about one and a half billion dollars worth of agricultural products the Farm Bureau believes and feels the same as the NFO and the fact that these commodities are going to have to be contracted for in advance of the production season farmers have very little power left to to bargain for a a price after the the commodity has been produced and one of the problems that the farmers have had over the years is the fact that we have a tremendous ability to produce and we know very little or nothing about what dictates the market even I believe that if farmers are going to to control the market they're going to have to know what factors dictate what the market price is and become very well-educated in the market itself well good you know I hear I think what is a sort of an interesting agreement between the four of you here that there needs to be some sort of bargaining though the farmer has to have a bargaining power of some sort now mr. Pfingsten I think said that you need to have a national group to do this and as I am aware of your organizations you're all national in scope is there any reason why the four of you shouldn't get together if if really a national organization a collective effort of farmers is the thing that you need why can't the four of you get together and do this in a really unified front well mr. Maltby I'd like to take crack at that I've that were a little bit like the Catholics and the Protestants a little bit like the Republicans and the Democrats we all know where we want to go but we don't know just exactly which is the right road to get there and I think there's more involved really in it than that and that is the laws that you have under which collective bargaining can be done it is the capper-volstead Act and the capper-volstead Act does permit us as producers or farmers in one organization or one group to bargain collectively put the two together then you're right back under the under antitrust laws because then it comes Pope becomes collusion between those two groups and this is a reason why we felt we had to build a new organization now I'm not trying to shortchange any other organization by any means other organizations were set up to bring farmers other services this they did and they did well but there are so many things that have to be considered in connection with this that we had to build a new organization to do it I think the Sunkist decision by the Supreme Court recently brought this out very clearly where the Supreme Court took away from the Sunkist organization the exemption granted by virtue by from the antitrust laws by virtue of the capper-volstead Act they had 15% non producers as members in their organization this is why we don't let anybody into our organization except producers this is also why we don't get into business this becomes another conflicting area so we couldn't see it any other way that it was going to take a new organization and of course an organization for that purpose and that purpose only and that is the only program of the NFO while we do support farm legislation they have I think one of the very finest farm lobbyists by the way we have Harry Graham now the farmer lay of the Grange I respect him very much in our association with the Grange in cooperation as well as other organizations but we do watch farm programs we do everything that we can on that level and we think it'd be a catastrophe to pull the programs out from under farmers until they are ready to do their own job so we are working in that field to to protect of course beyond maybe your tune it you can let mr. carpenter mr. Davis do any comment on the question why not lying together yes make the comment that I think mr. Prigge and mr. Pfingsten I think we're all in agreement as has already been said on the basics but there are many many things involved for example as a nation we're deeply involved in various programs but chiefly programs well I perhaps shouldn't say chiefly governmental programs because there are many charitable institution church groups and so forth that are engaged in trying to help alleviate hunger throughout the the world and and this enters into the problem because I mean I may be getting a little far afield but the point is that these things all have to be considered and I doubt that we can sit here in the richest nation in the world on an already available supply and an almost unlimited production potential while 50% of the world is starving so this all has to come in my point being that collective bargaining our bargaining of any kind so far as the farm is concerned and and profit to the farmer and advantage to the farmer can only be done when the farmer are some entity has control of the supply and you can bargain from this standpoint so this appears to me aha perhaps one of the basic disagreements that we might have among us as organizations would be in who and how who's going to control the supply we will say production maybe we shouldn't use the word control maybe manage would be a better word because words are very important but how's this going to be done and how are we going to cake on hand an abundant supply of food and fiber to suit to provide for our domestic needs legitimate trade and export $4 PL 480 freedom from hunger foundation and all these various things it's it's a very involved thing we talk about collective bargaining we we have first to control our product and we believe that this is going to to take and I take that all agree perhaps on that legislation to what extent then we might get into some this room but I did want to open up this whole bag of tricks here you might save to show that it is a very complex problem well this is a interesting and mr. Cartman less you have something more to add to this brief oh yeah there's another question I'd like to get into I'm just very very I'd like to say that there is a lot more common agreement than there is generally recognized the division or differences of opinion are played up but we do feel that there is a lot of common ground and that where this common ground exists for voices sometimes are more effective than one and if we're talking about it means where we can all work together perhaps the legislative pattern is the best approach and as this broadcast is being viewed by the listeners we will be in Washington with representatives from 38 states or 38 counties in the state on our first client to provide better understanding of the bargaining bill good mentioning legislation and I think we only have a very brief amount of time to touch this question but I'd like to get your response there is in the Minnesota Legislature currently or there are several bills dealing with corporate farming putting imposing either some limits or restrictions of some sort on corporations owning farms and leads to a question that a hero asked quite often on that being what is a small farmer what is the family farm that we here defended so much how do you define this we do this few words I'll take a crack at it first first to- to and your question about corporate farming corporate farming as such that is if the farmer if the family farm many family farms are incorporated for various reasons and we see no we see no problem here it's the conglomerate corporations it's when you begin to get into the area as mr. Pfingsten has already mentioned you can have one company here are one financial institution furnishing the finance and and actually operating many the production distribution of many different products there's only is there any definition of a family farm that we can agree yes well I don't know whether we would agree but I thought I want I did want to bring out this since you mentioned the corporate farming it's the conglomerate type of corporation where they where they do business and and some other in some other business then they come in and buy a farm add it to the total corporate entity and and this is where the problems come in but a family farm is one where the family operates on its own capital or provides its own financing this is the Grange view where the family is fully employed and the number of other employees might be more or less a matter of question but then it can be any size for that matter as long as it's a single operation under a family group it can be incorporated but it is it is doing it producing a farm product the rest of you generally agree with this definition since we're very quickly on the on the specific bills before the state legislature they do provide that a corporation if the majority of the members are bonafide farmers that is they live on the farm and receive the majority of their income from the farm would be exempt from this regulation but it does heighten the point that I made earlier that this needs consideration if a corporate interest can come in here and provide their own source this would very much weak in your position bargaining fine I think at the beginning of the program mr. Davis you said that this subject of collective bargaining for farmers is a complex subject and I guess I've become more aware of that in the few minutes that we've had together here today and unfortunately we just scratched the surface of this subject we're very pleased that last Thursday we were able to have representatives or organizations on our agribusiness day program here in Rochester and we hope that we will continue to do this in future years and I want to extend the thanks to the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce to you four gentlemen for being with us on comment today nation of comment a weekly public affairs program presented by the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce in cooperation with Kay ROC television today's guests were CJ Davis field assistant to the master of the National Grange, Cy carpenter executive secretary for the Minnesota Farmers Union Walter Prigge past president of the Olmsted County Farm Bureau and Erhard Pfingsten vice president of the National Farmers Organization comment will be seen again next Sunday February 23rd at this same time thank you for being with us u.s. farm report has brought to you comment with the cooperation of the Rochester chamber of Congress Rochester Minnesota this program was made possible by members of the national farmers organization in this area invites you to tune in again next week at the same time for more facts on agriculture and rural America which is a gear wheel in our economy that produces a majority of our nation's new wealth the farm income pattern sets the true nation's prosperity level and the national farmers organization represents new thinking in a new generation of agricultural producers a brighter day for American agriculture