Organic Valley bans raw milk sellers- Time for a boycott?

[Katy]

Quote:
So are you saying the cooperative would lets its members suffer rather than respond to the consumers? Hummmmmmm

My brain is tired after being in a surgery waiting room all day today. I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to twist my statement around to say.

The cooperative is trying to protect the members who are doing as their contract says.....the ones who aren't doing what they promised to do by signing the contract are the ones who need to decide what route they going to take....leave the coop and sell whatever amount of raw milk they want to or go back and do as the contract states. They have control over what they decide to do. The coop is not making them suffer....their own actions are. Consumers will still have the right to buy raw milk.....they may just have to find another dairyman to buy it from.

I don't know why you continue to defend people willing to cheat their fellow coop members....which is what they are doing. I'd say they're lucky the coop is even giving them the option of staying a part of the coop. I think not abiding by their contract they could have made the decision to revoke their membership and really leave them high and dry.

 

[Reinbeau]

Katy, how are they cheating their fellow members? The coop isn't buying all of their milk anyways. What are they supposed to do with the excess, throw it out? They should get rid of cows so they don't produce as much? Why can't they make money on the product they're producing? I understand they signed onto this, but when it goes wrong, and they need to still feed their own families, and the milk isn't being sold by the coop, what are they supposed to do with it?

 

[Katy]

Quote:
Farming is a life of ups and down, supply and demand. You have to adjust every year what you're producing...whether it's planting less or more of a grain or selling off or adding to your herd. So yes, they might have to sell off some cows until things get going again.....just like we have to adjust what kind of crops we plant or if we're going to have to sell off a few head of cows. They can make money on their product, but what about their contract.....does that not mean anything? If they don't want to live up to the contract, fine, but leave the coop then. They want the best of both worlds....the security they get with the coop behind them, and the freedom to do what they want.

I don't now if cheating is exactly the right word I want, but it's the closest I could come......not being fair? Is that better? I would think others could be selling off farm too, but chose not to and to stick by their contract. I'm quite certain they're more than happy to keep taking the bonuses and dividends when the cooperative pays them out.

 

[Wifezilla]

They can make money on their product, but what about their contract.....does that not mean anything?

The contract appears to be unfair to me. Especially since it hadn't been enforced in previous years. About half of the people do not want that clause enforced. Neither do I. To blindly stick to a contract while ignoring reality isn't supporting small family farms like they claim to want to do. It is a contradiction.​

 

[ChooksChick]

It's too bad my ban won't hurt them...I buy raw from a fellow around here.

 

[dancingbear]

Quote:
Been there, on both sides, sometimes as patient, sometimes as family of patient. I hope everything went well, and hope your loved one has a speedy recovery. I hope you can get some rest, I know how waiting like that wears you out. People who haven't been there might not understand, but I sure do! Good luck to you.

Quote:
After your rested up and feel better...maybe you can explain what harm is actually done by members selling raw milk to people who are more than likely, not going to buy pasteurized milk. What exactly, does that take away from other coop members? What is being taken from them? It doesn't change how much milk they sell. Or what price they get. If they are being cheated, what, exactly, are they being cheated out of?

The requirement does not make sense. To keep it as part of the contract makes no sense. When a thing makes no sense, the reasonable thing to do is to change it, not penalize people and insist on keeping it, just because it's there.

In KY, there's a law, that as far as I know, is still on the books. It's illegal, in KY, to carry ice cream in your pocket.
That's because, long ago, horse thieves would get horses to quietly follow them, using ice cream as a lure. Eveidently, horses love it.

Flash forward to now, downtown Louisville, perhaps, some guy or gal with their hands full, kids in tow, sticks a wrapped ice cream bar in a shirt pocket while wiping little hands or some such-that person could be arrested for carrying ice cream in their pocket. It's not likely, but it could happen, I've heard of more ridiculous things happening.

It's not strictly analogous to the OV situation, just an example of something that's no longer useful (or in some cases, never was useful) being enforced, "just because".

 

[Mattemma]

If there is a contract that raw sellers signed that said no selling raw then it is within the rights of OV to make a stink. It is to bad sellers just can't sell to OV and to customers direct. I guess if I were a seller I would try to increase my raw milk consumer base,and that way I would not need OV at all.

If the law permitted it I am sure OV would sell raw products too.

I have not had raw milk or cheese but I would try it if I could get some locally.I think Ohio bans it. A little variety is good. There is risk of infection with all foods.Shoot,the lettuce I get for my dd sometimes has e coli notices.Nasty.Just because raw milk it not heated does not mean you will die from drinking a batch.You could die from your lettuce or spinach or peanut butter....you get the idea.Life is a constant risk.

We live in a system that is supposed to allow choice to consumers.Allow the choice and the govt. should just oversee and test batches of products to ensure no harmful germs.Shoot,the companies should do the testing if they really cared.But even if you do you can't catch everything.

 

[Katy]

Quote:
The contract appears to be unfair to me. Especially since it hadn't been enforced in previous years. About half of the people do not want that clause enforced. Neither do I. To blindly stick to a contract while ignoring reality isn't supporting small family farms like they claim to want to do. It is a contradiction.

Unless you are a dairy farmer under contract to OV the contract is none of your business. No one put a gun to their head and made them sign it....in fact I would venture to guess they thought it was great to be part of the coop when they signed on and have that safety net behind them.

It is not a contridiction.....the cooperative is supporting their membership of family farmers....they are not supporting the ones who want to ignore the rules.....and it's not some bigwig off in the city that made that ruling....it's the farmers themselves....a majority of them. I'm sure they are free to form their own raw milk cooperative if they so choose.

 

[Katy]

Quote:
The choice is still there for the public.....just not thru a member of that cooperative.

 

[JamieOV]

Quote:
Reinbeau, Organic Valley does, in fact, buy 100% of a member's milk and the farmer gets paid for all of it. The business model that the cooperative uses is farmers get paid their target price first, then whatever money is left over goes back into developing the business. If there's not much left over then we make the best of it on the business end, but the important thing is the farmer got paid a stable and fair price first. You can find more information on this concept on our farmer-member website, farmers.coop: http://www.farmers.coop/farmers-wanted/about-cropp/the-y-in-the-road/ The article is detailed, but it is a good explanation of the history behind our pay structure of farmers first, business second. It's written by George Siemon, who was one of our founding farmers 22 years ago, and now CEO.