WASHINGTON– The Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration is reviewing contracts involving pork producers to ensure their compliance with the requirements in the 2008 farm bill.
The 2008 farm bill established new conditions for swine contracts under the Packers and Stockyards Act. These requirements went into effect June 18, 2008.
The bill amended the Packers and Stockyard Act to require that swine contracts allow swine growers to cancel growing or production contracts for up to three days after signing, or any date specified in the contract or growing arrangement.
In addition, it includes a disclosure statement on the first page that clearly states whether additional large capital investments may be required of the grower during the term of the contract and allows growers to opt out of arbitration provisions before entering a contract.
The administration is increasing its audits of swine production contracts to ensure their compliance with the farm bill requirements. The agency is seeking civil penalties of up to $11,000 per violation when they find that swine contractors have not complied.
For additional information, contact Jay Johnson, Grain Inspection, from Packer and Stockyards Administration Midwestern Regional Office, at 515-323-2579.
Related Links:
Alan Guebert – And this little piggy squealed … Alan Guebert – The GIPSA watchdog better bite
I will believe it when I see it. There are so many ways that these packers get out of any penalty of following the law that they flout it. They continued to flout the changes of the use of arbitration in poultry contracts after that went into affect. The only thing that will change these people are real penalties enforced and to this date I don’t know any of the big guys who have had to pay. Of course when they are paying people in Congress and high powered Supreme Court related K Street law firms, it isn’t hard to see why.
We have the best government money can buy and these meat packers have been buying it for some time. When Congress does act to correct the problems as in this type of legislation where courts have consistently bent over backwards to make rulings that protect packers, there is just hasn’t been enforcement. The poor family farmer has to take the economic damage and the packers cry when sued that they are just making food cheaper for consumers. We have judges who buy this crap and let them off. Some of our federal judges aren’t any better than the politicians who put them there.
Good luck, Jay Johnson, but news reports of what you are going to do are no substitute for actually doing it. You have to put a little more than that into the bucket to even get enough for a swallow.
Tom