SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) – A California Agricultural Labor Relations Board judge has ruled the nation’s largest grower of peaches and plums bargained in bad faith during 2013 negotiations with a farmworkers’ union, and must give nearly four years back pay to its employees.
The ruling was a strong rebuke to Gerawan Farming, which has been waging a pitched court battle with the labor board since 2013. It’s also seen as a boost to the United Farm Workers’ claim to represent Gerawan’s workers, and reaffirmed that employees of labor contractors – which Gerawan sought to exclude from negotiations – are part of the union.
The labor board will decide whether to accept the ruling within 60 days.
According to its website, Gerawan Farming is family-owned and operated by Ray, Mike and Dan Gerawan. Its corporate office is in Fresno, and the company operates several processing plants in California’s Central Valley. It has nearly twice as many acres in production, about 12,000, as its nearest competitor, according to growingproduce.com.
In 1992, the labor board certified UFW as the exclusive bargaining representative for Gerawan employees, but no contract was negotiated for about 20 years. The legal fracas started in 2012, after the UFW and Gerawan began discussions on a new contract. When negotiations failed, the UFW invoked its right to a mediator under state law.
The mediator issued a contract in November 2013 that called for wage increases retroactive to July 2013, additional vacation days, and for 3 percent of wages to be paid as union dues. Gerawan responded by launching a campaign to defeat the union, giving employees who favored breaking from the union time off to gather signatures, according to court records.
Employees held an election on whether to decertify the union in November 2013, but the ballots were impounded by the labor board and never counted. In 2016, the labor board upheld a ruling that Gerawan interfered with the election and nullified the vote.
Meanwhile, Gerawan, along with employee Lupe Garcia, questioned the validity of the mandatory mediation law in Gerawan Farming v ARLB. In May 2015, California’s Fifth Appellate District found the law was unconstitutional. An appeal before the California State Supreme Court is still pending.
The issues in the current decision – severed from the previous case – involve whether Gerawan engaged in bad faith while negotiating a collective bargaining agreement with the UFW, and whether it violated the law during negotiations by insisting that any agreement it reached would not apply to its contracted farm laborers.
In an April 14 ruling, the labor board Administrative Law Judge William Schmidt found Gerawan had done both.
Gerawan, Schmidt wrote, “engaged in a time-consuming charade while repeatedly suggesting an ‘election’ to its employees. When a group of employees finally took the hint, and acted, respondent’s managers and supervisors jumped in to lend considerable support to the decertification effort. Meanwhile, respondent announced pay raises to employees whenever it suited its anti-union campaign without regard to the legally mandated duty to bargain with the employees’ representative.”
Schmidt noted Gerawan and the UFW met 14 times for 2-3 hours in the first half of 2013, and a continual point of contention was Gerawan’s demand to include a “right to work” clause in the contract so workers could opt out of the union. No UFW-negotiated contract had ever contained such a clause. And the raises, Schmidt wrote, were Gerawan’s way of “virtually thumbing its nose at the duty to bargain.”
Armando Elenes, third vice president of the UFW, said in a phone interview that the judge made it very clear what has been going on.
“The judge basically said that Gerawan never intended to reach an agreement,” Elenes said. “There were all these other proposals they were making as well, like trying to get the union to put up a multi-million-dollar bond.”
Schmidt ruled that Gerawan must stop engaging in collective bargaining with the UFW with no intention of reaching an agreement, refusing to bargain with the UFW regarding wages, hours and other terms, and interfering with employees’ rights to collectively bargain.
The company must repay its employees for the losses they suffered as a result of the failure to bargain, submit all payroll records, timecards, Social Security payments and other personnel records to the labor board, and grant labor-board agents access to work sites and more.
Elenes said it was a victory for the UFW and the workers, particularly because Gerawan must repay the employees and that the judge found contracted laborers are union workers. He said the UFW has a list of employees owed and how to contact them.
Meanwhile, Elenes said the UFW had been told oral arguments in the Supreme Court case over mandatory mediation will take place within months.
“There’s a bunch of different cases, but this particular case is focused on unfair labor practices regarding bad-faith negotiating,” he said.
Gerawan is represented by David Schwarz of Irell & Manella in Los Angeles, who did not return a voicemail seeking comment by press time.
more recommended stories
- Antifa: A Look at the Antifascist Movement Confronting White Supremacists in the Streets
This is a rush transcript. Copy.
- Bree Newsome: Charlottesville is Latest Chapter in Long U.S. History of White Supremacist Terror
This is a rush transcript. Copy.
- Sanders Responds to Trump Press Conference
Tuesday, August 15, 2017 BURLINGTON, Vt.,.
- Bernie Sanders Tells Big Pharma: Stop Making Americans Pay Twice
While both political parties have denounced.
- Civil Asset Forfeiture Is Not Policing The USA
In America you’re innocent until proven.
- Ethics Watchdog Files Complaint Against Wasserman Schultz
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic.
- Big-name union supporters speak out with vote less than two days away
CANTON, MS (Mississippi News Now) –.
- Maine Governor Begs Feds to “Bring the Hammer Down” on His Own State
Gov. Paul LePage is doing it.
- Senate Committee Votes to Continue Protections for Medical Marijuana States
A vote was taken at the.
- Court Rules Against Politician Who Banned Access to Her Facebook Page
Facebook page of Virginia county politician.