Sunday, December 13, 2015

Our View: Don’t muck up Cirrus Aircraft agreement

Maybe they were just looking to bluster, on the record, for labor interests and on behalf of a major political supporter.

And maybe nothing will come of the proposal from Duluth City Councilors Joel Sipress and Sharla Gardner to add a provision, at the last minute, to a development agreement with Cirrus, requiring the airplane manufacturer to submit future labor disputes to binding arbitration.

Maybe. All of Duluth certainly can hope so. Because, right now, Sipress’ and Gardner’s proposal, a clear moment of politically motivated government overreach, is threatening to scuttle a deal for the construction of a $10.5 million Cirrus finishing facility here in Duluth and the promise of 150 badly needed, good-paying, family-supporting manufacturing jobs.

Cirrus’ very future in Duluth, and the 600 or so jobs it already provides, may even be in jeopardy because of the proposal — a requirement that really isn’t up to local politicians or local government to attempt to dictate.

“These matters are subject to the jurisdiction of the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board),” an attorney representing Cirrus, Bill Burns, said after Sipress and Gardner made their proposal at the City Council’s agenda-setting session on Thursday, according to News Tribune coverage. “It is my own opinion that this is not an appropriate place for the city to tread. I don’t think anyone would say I’m anything other than an ongoing supporter of organized labor. If and when issues arise at Cirrus they should be dealt with appropriately, and they will be. … As a citizen of Duluth, I think it’s a bad idea for the community. And certainly from the standpoint of Cirrus, they’re not prepared to accept those as restrictions, and we feel they’re inappropriate.”

Burns’ stern words can echo in the ears of city councilors Monday evening when they’re expected to consider and vote on the development agreement. The amendment from Sipress and Gardner can be left out. It can be rejected in Duluth just as a similar provision was rejected in St. Paul during the last legislative session.

Not only is Sipress’ and Gardner’s labor requirement inappropriate overreach, it’s completely unnecessary. Cirrus already has a grievance process in place to handle worker disputes. The company doesn’t need additional mediation or arbitration rules, its vice president of administration, Bill King, said in July.

It certainly doesn’t need city councilors or others in government trying to tell it how to run its business.

This development agreement is too important to muck up. It helps assure Cirrus’ growth and success in Duluth — as opposed to somewhere else.

Source:  http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/opinion

No comments:

Post a Comment