The Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers marketing board believes it has found a compromise to an imposed regulation that would have gutted grower contract protection.
Why it matters: Farmers had contract security of two years previously, but new regulations would have taken that to none and processors could have dropped growers whenever they wished.
The matter was the biggest concern for farmers when the Ontario Processing Vegetable Growers members recently met for their annual meeting in London, Ont.
Board chair Suzanne Van Bommel said that the board has heard the concerns of growers after Regulation 440 was released last fall. The board took the concern to the Ontario Farm Products Marketing Commissions (OFPMC), which is imposing new bylaws on the organization. OFPMC Chair Jim Clark said at the meeting that the commissions, which regulates marketing boards in the province, agrees with the change.
Read Also
Ontario’s agri-food sector sets sights on future with Agri-Food 2050 initiative
The first-ever Agri Food 2050, a one-day industry event dedicated to envisioning the future of food and farming in Ontario,…
“I know that changes to term contracts immediately caused some concern to the industry,” he said. “I have made it clear we are open to alternative solutions.”
Van Bommel said the contract security changes in Regulation 440, the government regulation that sets out how the OPVG will be run, were a surprise.
Here’s how the regulations worked:
- In previous regulations, a processor could terminate a grower with cause for a food safety or production issue for example. The grower could appeal that to a local board and the board decided whether it was just cause to remove the grower.
- If the issue was because of a business relationship issue, the processor had to give the grower two crop years notice that they wouldn’t renew a contract.
The new regulation said:
- A processor could terminate without cause immediately, starting next December.
- “That’s when we started to hear a great deal from growers etcetera, and they said ‘whoa’,” says Van Bommel.
Van Bommel says the OFPMC heard from processors that having a local grower group in charge of whether cause was just wasn’t fair. There was also a concern that it was difficult to establish cause based on the grower board guidelines. There was also concern that two years was too long to try to terminate a grower.
The vegetable growers offered a compromise that it would adjust its own regulations to make cause for grower termination more exact and that the time before termination would be moved to one year.
Clark says the commission has accepted that compromise, but despite questions from growers he couldn’t say when it would be in effect.
What’s the bottom line for growers?
Van Bommel says she expects the revised contract security language will be through the government process before next December, which was the original timeline for the use of the clause by processors, so growers shouldn’t be subject to the language that most concerned them.
