Maluchnik stands up for Carver County workers

There’s a dispute brewing over the use of out-of-state temporary workers at the Mills Fleet Farm site in Carver.  Mills received a total of $3 million in subsidies and loan guarantees from the City of Carver and Carver County for the project.  The Tax Increment Financing agreement between Mills and the City of Carver only calls for Mills to be required to hire 1 full-time equivalent, even though there are an estimated 1,000 unemployed construction workers in Carver County.

Carver County Commissioner Randy Maluchnik has stepped up pressure on Mills over the last week, taking to the airwaves to point out the ample availability of local workers to do the work at the site.

See more on this story from KSTP-TV here.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “Maluchnik stands up for Carver County workers”

  1. The Star Tribune has a story on this, and it turns out that a sub contractor hired a few temporary workers to fill a gap in thier work force. These workers were paid through a temp agency, and were even further removed from anything that Mills would have any knowledge about. It’s high time we stopped taking political dictation from union thugs, and look before we leap. This flap had nothing to do with the management fo Mills Fleet Farm. I would suggest that our councilman owes Mills an apology.

    I wonder if Randy will have the courage to scold the unions for their picketing and calling for boycotts of Mills Fleet Farm stores. The store that’s coming to the area will provide jobs and increase our local tax base, which will bring more tax revenue to our schools. It seems Randy only wants to represent union workers in the district, and not the rest of our labor force. I expect more from him than shilling for the unions.

    • Mills serves as its own general contractor, so it is responsible for the subcontractors it hires. When a company is receiving million of dollars in subsidies to locate in an area, it needs to be responsible to the people of that community. That said, it appears that the TIF agreement with Mills probably could have been a little more tightly constructed to protect local workers during the construction phase of the project. Local officials are on the hook for that one.

      I think we should leave inflammatory language like “thugs” aside. The unions are looking out for their interests, just as Mills was when it threatened to kill the project over the Carver Planning Commission’s recommendation not to change a sign ordinance. Politics ain’t bean bag, and there’s hard nosed folks on every side of every issue.

      http://www.chaskaherald.com/view/full_story/13438302/article-Carver-Council-signs-off-on-ordinance

      • So you are a shill for the unions as well, eh? Figures. Have you even read the Star Tribune story on this? No one has done anything wrong here. Sub contractors hire thier own workers under their own rules. Come on, you know that. Every company runs it’s business as it sees fit. We hire subs to do a job, not tell them who they can use to get it done. The responsibility it to get a job done. That’s it. And in this case the contractor needed a few temps and went to a temp labor company, and this temp agency paid minimum wage. So a temp agency working for a sub contractor, working for Mills building services used minimum wage workers for a few temp jobs. How is MIlls even supposed to know about that, let alone dictate that it’s not allowed? This is beyond ridiculous.

        • I’m not shilling for the union. I don’t support a boycott. I will agree that the union has made it seem as if the scope of the temp labor in question here was larger than it actually was, assuming that the Star Tribune story is correct on the particulars.

          Mills, though, certainly has the ability to dictate what its subcontractors do. They own the land, it’s their project. To suggest that they can’t put conditions on their subcontractors is absurd.

  2. Actually, in constructions contracting, you do not normally put conditions on the labor that can be used. Sub-contrcators bit on a job, with lots of parameters applied, but I don’t often see a sub-contract clausee that states who you can use for a labor pool. Just because a sub normally uses union labor, that doesn’t mean they are always going to in jam. I did come down to MIlls in lakeville to see for mysel, what kind of nonsense the union was up to, but the store didn’t keep any of the leaflets.

    I have to side with Mills on this issue. I’ll even side with te sub-contractor. It’s not anyone’s business who they use for manual labor, especially temporary positions. Wea re talking two FTE’s for 3 weeks. It’s nothing, in the grand scheme. The unions actions are lame here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: