The California Agricultural Labor Relations Act (CALRA), also referred to as the Labor Relations Act of Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agriculture 1975 , is a landmark law in energy US employment law enacted by the state of California which became law on June 4, 1975, and which set collective bargaining for farm workers in the state.
The purpose of this Act is to "ensure peace in agriculture by ensuring justice for all agricultural workers and stability in employment relations." The Act, part of the California Labor Code, explicitly encourages and protects "the right of agricultural employees to full freedom of association, self-regulation and the appointment of their own elected representatives, to negotiate their terms and conditions of employment, and to be free from interference the hands, restraint or coercion of employers, or their agents, in the appointment of such representatives or in self-organization or in other joint activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual assistance or protection. "
The law establishes official rules and regulations similar to the National Labor Relations Act, a federal law that formally protects the collective bargaining rights of the majority of American workers except agricultural and domestic workers. The California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) manages the Act. The ALRB has two functions: To perform, supervise, and approve representative election, and to investigate allegations of unfair practice (ULP) and seek recovery. Administrative judges and agency staff judge the majority of cases, with five Council members acting as the last referee.
Video California Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975
​​â € <â €
The right to collective bargaining for most hourly workers in the United States was first granted legal protection in 1933 by Section 7a of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA). Although NIRA did not specifically exclude farm workers from the protection of the Act, Roosevelt's government - which wished to win members of the country's Congress - argued that agricultural workers were not involved. When the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) came into force in 1935, it also specifically excluded agricultural workers under pressure from the "agricultural bloc" in Congress. Although a number of attempts were made in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s to organize peasants, these efforts were unsuccessful.
In August 1966, the National Agricultural Workers Association and the Organizing Committee of Agricultural Workers, two unrecognized and relatively small unions claiming to represent agricultural workers in California, merged to form an Organizing Committee of the Agricultural Workers Union (its predecessor organization to the Agricultural Workers Union). Adopting a pacifist philosophy in the face of violent reactions to its organizing efforts and engaging in strikes, hunger strikes, boycotts and secondary boycotts (including the highly successful Delano wine strike), parades, demonstrations, and up-to-date public relations campaigns, United Farm Workers (UFW) large numbers of farm workers became unions. In some cases, UFW even won recognition and contract negotiations.
Maps California Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975
Impetus for legal action
Bowl Salad Strike
A series of violent strikes and inter-union jurisdictions determine the political stage for ratification of the California Farm Labor Act. In 1969, UFW was on the verge of winning a four-year-old Delano wine strike. But when Delano's wine strike seems to be over, the International Brotherhood's efforts of team members to organize farm workers in the Salinas Valley in California lead to an expensive "Salad Bowl strike". The six thousand drivers and packing workers represented by Teamsters attacked on July 17, 1970, winning a contract on July 23 in which farmers give Timsters members, not UFWs, access to agriculture and the right to organize workers into unions. The secret talks between UFW and Teamsters led to an agreement to restore the jurisdiction of field workers to the union, but the agreement failed on August 23 and 7,000 UFW workers attacked Salinas Valley farmers. Violence, sporadic at first but increasingly widespread, began to occur in the fields. On December 4, federal marshals arrested and imprisoned ChÃÆ'¡vez. Two days later, a gang of anti-unions almost rioted when former Olympic gold medalist Rafer Johnson and Ethel Kennedy, widow of Senator Robert F. Kennedy killed visiting ChÃÆ'¡vez in jail. Both unions signed a new jurisdiction agreement reaffirming UFW's right to organize field workers,
Increasingly deteriorating acts of jurisdiction dispute
The Teamsters continued their dispute with UFW in December 1972, which caused wider disruptions in the country's agricultural industry, mass beatings, mass arrests, and widespread violence. Many planters signed contracts with Teamsters on April 15, and thousands of UFW members started working in the fields. Mass arrests imprisoned more than 1,700 UFW members by the end of July (some county jails have three times the number of detainees they are legally capable of holding), and UFW members accuse law enforcement officials of beating prisoners. Immediately set the battle between two unions to violence. "Flying Squad" from Teamsters began attacking UFW supporters in broad daylight in Coachella Valley. Violence worsened as disputes moved into Delano's vineyards. Seventy farm workers were attacked on July 31, a UFW breeder was shot on Aug. 3, five firebombs were thrown on UFW hammer on August 9, two UFW members were shot on Aug. 11, and a UFW official was shot dead on August 16. Finally, a temporary agreement was reached on 27 September 1973; The Teamsters again agreed to leave the jurisdiction over the field workers to UFW.
The new agreement did not last long. On November 7, just 41 days later, Teamsters union said it would not refuse a signed contract. But UFW now has too few resources and membership to do many things. UFW deployed its best strategic weapon, boycott, and continues to encourage a national boycott of wine, wine and lettuce. The Teamsters repeated their promise to enforce their contract in November.
At the end of 1974, many observers concluded that UFW is no longer a viable force. These are called small attacks, against the court order to stop the precautions, and continue to encourage their national boycott. But in July, was forced to end the washing in some vineyards near Delano. The Teamsters do not have a better position to win the battle. It had opened a large organization in March 1974 and set up a regional local farm in June, but the effort was in chaos in November. However, newspaper columnists began to wonder in June whether UFW had the capacity to fight, and in February 1975 had concluded that the union had no future.
Modesto march and encouragement for legislation
The ongoing battle between Timsters and UFW and its effect on UFW's organizational feasibility led to CÃÆ'Â Â © sar ChÃÆ'¡vez to seriously consider legal reform as a solution to its union problem. ChÃÆ'¡vez has rejected legislative solutions in the past by stating that a truly successful union movement must be built from the ground up rather than relying on top-down activities. But ChÃÆ'¡vez began reconsidering this stance given the attacks by The Teamsters. In addition, the time seems right for the legislative program: Jerry Brown, a loyal supporter of UFW, was elected Governor of California in November 1974. Brown even hired LeRoy Chatfield, a former UFW high-level staff, as one of his top aides.
Once at the office, however, Brown's support for UFW cooled. UFW knows it must make a strong political show to encourage Brown and the California State Legislature to act.
UFW considers more mass precautions, more rallies, and more boycotts, but unions fear that it has lost the support of agricultural workers and the general public and that such events will show the weakness of the union and not its strength. Instead, UFW settled on a 110 mile (180 km) march by a small group of UFW leaders from San Francisco to E & amp; J Gallo Winery in Modesto. The committee envisioned a small but dramatic march that did not require many participants. Only a few hundred demonstrators left San Francisco on February 22, 1975. But more than 15,000 people joined them on the way by the time they reached Modesto on 1 March.
Spectacular and spectacular success from Modesto march garnered significant media attention, and proved that UFW is still supported by agricultural workers.
Legislative History of CALRA
Modesto's dramatic successes advance the farm labor movement in California. Governor Brown quickly began pushing for labor law reform. Growing resistance never arises, as many entrepreneurs are reluctant to continue the war against UFW. "The wine boycott scares the peasants, all of us," said one big farmer, and the businessman did not want another UFW boycott.
Previous legislative efforts
Some earlier attempts to enact legislation protecting collective bargaining rights for agricultural workers had emerged in California between 1969 and 1975, but all failed. CÃÆ' Â © sar ChÃÆ'¡vez briefly supported the labor law reform in California in April 1969, and Conservative Republican State Senator George Murphy had sponsored a Republican-supported bill and farmers that same year to guarantee the right to organize, impose election of secret ballot, and restrict the right to strike and engage in boycotts. But the Murphy bill, as well as a less stringent bill in the Assembly, died. Murphy introduced a stricter bill in 1970, but it also failed.
The first positive sign for labor law reform came in 1971. A large peasant association agreed to support a law which gave farmers union recognition in January 1971. The State Senate narrowly approved the draft law that was opposed by UFW, but the Assembly it kills the gauge. Based on support for farmers in the State Senate, farmers support the size of the ballot, Proposition 22, which will guarantee the right to organize but place severe restrictions on the right to strike, boycotts and picket. Then-California Attorney General Jerry Brown sued for Proposition 22 to be removed from voting amid allegations of signature fraud on approved applications, violations of child labor law (six-year-old child allegedly paid to collect signatures), and bribes. Size down to beat.
The next legislative push came in 1973. The Federation of Agriculture Bureaus of America, the country's largest farmers' association and representatives of many California farmers, proposed to amend the National Labor Relations Act to allow agricultural workers to organize. The change caused California Governor Ronald Reagan to introduce a bill in California state legislature that would allow agricultural field workers to union under secret ballot elections and ban secondary boycotts. But the State Assembly did not pass the bill. However, California's Foreign Minister, Jerry Brown - stated that "bloody civil war" existed in Central Valley - out for a legislative solution in August 1973. Brown, an old labor lawyer who had met with CÃ © sar ChÃÆ'¡vez in the year 1968 and long support UFW and help introduce UFW leaders to Hollywood stars, directors, and studio chiefs to help unions win critical support in the entertainment industry.
Brown's public support and his path to the (widely anticipated) governor had prompted ChÃÆ'¡vez to make a stronger push for labor law reform in 1974. ChÃÆ'¡vez and John F. Henning, Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the California Labor Federation (agency AFL-CIO, wrote a bill and Chicano lawmaker Richard Alatorre (D-Los Angeles) introduced the bill, but Governor Ronald Reagan led the opposition that killed the bill.
Passage
The election of Jerry Brown as governor significantly increased the probability of passing legislation in 1975. Two of the 26 paragraphs of Brown's inaugural speech were devoted to the need for agricultural labor legislation, Chief Justice Leo T. McCarthy voiced his support for the law.
The bill that eventually became CALRA was introduced in both the state legislative chambers on April 10, 1975. UFW Top Dolores Huerta staff members acted as lobbyists for agricultural union heads. With McCarthy, some farmers, and UFW behind the bill, the main State Senate committee approved the bill on 7 May. Major unions (including The Teamsters), arguing that a card check rather than a secret ballot vote should be the preferred method of the bill. resolving trade union disputes, against the bill. Nevertheless, the main Assembly committee approved it on May 12, despite attempts by some members of Teamster to intimidate legislators against the bill. The opposition was denied by UFW, which staged a rally to support the bill, and an agreement was reached on May 19 with a compromise law.
However, at that time, the deadline for issuing bills from his native room had passed, and Governor Brown was forced to call a special session of the legislature to pass the agricultural labor law. A Senate committee approved the bill on May 21, with the Senate fully passing the bill on May 26, two Assembly committees reporting the bill on May 27, and the Assembly passed the bill and handed it to Governor Brown for signature on 29 May. It takes 50 calendar days to pass the bill. Governor Brown signed the law into law on June 4, 1975.
Structure of the Act
The law defines agriculture to include agriculture (which includes cultivation and cultivation of land, milk production, cultivation, growth, and harvest of agricultural or horticultural commodities, raising livestock, bees, complementary animals, or poultry and/or forestry or logging operations) and includes all activities related to or in conjunction with agriculture (such as preparation for markets, transportation, or storage). Employees are defined in the Act, but the definition does not include anyone involved in construction, painting, building repairs, or relocation operations not related to cultivation land preparation.
The law establishes five members of the Council on Agricultural Labor Relations (ALRB), whose five-year term is staggered so that the term of one member ends on 1 January each year. The ALRB shall issue a written report of its activities to the Governor and the Legislature annually, may establish an officer or office and delegate all or any part of his or her authority to such an extent on a required basis, and have the authority of investigation, subpoena and enforcement..
This law defines unfair labor practices for employers and unions. Section 1154 (d) of the Act prohibits strikes (including recognition strikes) by workers who have not chosen the organization as their labor representatives through procedures outlined by the Act, but protect secondary precautions and publicity only if the union is a bargain- bids that have been endorsed by representatives or have not lost election in the workplace in the last 12 months and only if publicity or precaution does not encourage others to engage in strikes. Section 1154.5 explicitly prohibits hot cargo agreements. The law also requires a bargain in good faith.
The law outlines procedures similar to the National Labor Relations Act to select a representative labor organization. Only secret vote votes are allowed. The Council has the right to determine the correct bargaining unit, and elections are only triggered when a petition signed by the majority of workers is currently presented. There are several bars to hold elections (including the existence of existing certified labor organizations, elections held and lost within the previous 12 months, and elections held but no contracts were held within the previous 12 months).
To encourage the implementation of collective bargaining agreements, the Act (as amended) provides for the declaration of deadlock, mediation and a mandatory 30-day conciliation and binding, review of mediator reports, and court review of binding mediation. The law contains "make-whole" remedies for bad bargains meant to encourage employers to negotiate in good faith. Under this provision, the ALRB may "take affirmative action including... making all employees, when the Council considers such assistance appropriate, for loss of payment due to the employer's refusal to bid".
Implementation
Governor Brown nominated the first five members of the ALRB (a Catholic bishop, a peasant, member of the La Raza Unida Party, former UFW official and former Teamster lawyer) on June 23, 1975, just 18 days after the signing of the Act became law.. ALRB has an initial budget of $ 1.5 million ($ 6.46 million in adjusted 2009 inflation dollars).
CALRA entered into force on 28 August 1975. The draft law governing the operation of the Council and the election of secret ballot organizing was issued 10 days earlier but did not address the controversial issue of whether unions would have access to the workplace (eg, fields). The ALRB issued a regulation that gave the organizers access to the fields on 29 August, and UFW filed for the first union election under the Act on 1 September. But the federal district court ordered the Council to impose its workplace access rules on Sept. 3 - placing a halt for some vote counts in some elections. At the end of the first week of the election, UFW has won 22 bargaining units and Timsters 13, while farmers have accused UFW of unfair labor practices in several elections. The California Supreme Court lifted the ban on union organizers in the fields on September 18, and the ALRB issued its first formal ULP complaint (against two farmers) the next day.
The lack of experience of the Council and its agents, the numerous challenges of the courts over the new law, the number of elections held, and the many allegations of violations of the law caused significant delays in voting, counting and law enforcement.. A special panel of lawyers and investigators named by Governor Brown on October 4 to help alleviate deposit guarantees, and strengthen punishment for anyone found guilty of an ULP imposed on October 16 to help reduce the number of violations.
Legal impact
By the end of January 1976, the ALRB had received 604 election petitions, conducted 423 elections involving more than 50,000 workers (80 percent of election complaints submitted), received 988 ULP allegations, issued 254 citations for violation of the Act, and issued 27 decisions. Between 1975 and 1984, unions won 88 percent of all elections, but between 1984 and 2003 won less than 50 percent of the elections. In 1994, however, two-thirds of all elections have been held in the first three years of the Act, and since 1978 about half of all elections are election decree.
Despite the number of union elections, CALRA's effect on trade union membership is very different. Much of this evidence focuses on UFW, assumed to be the main beneficiary of the Act. Membership at UFW fell from a high of more than 70,000-60,000 in 1972 to a low level of 6,000-5,000 in 1974, but rose to only 18,000 in 1977. However, The Teamsters had over 55,000 members of agricultural workers in 1977. UFW is only had six major collective bargaining agreements in 1994 (one vegetable farmer, four citrus growers, one mushroom farmer, and a small number of nurseries). However, one study concluded that mass import and use of illegal immigrants - not a defect in CALRA - held off additional collective bargaining increases. Others concluded (based on anecdotal evidence) that the members of Timster had signed an agreement with perhaps as many as 375 peasants, holding the acquisition of membership for UFW. Others criticized ALRB for being politicized. Critics pointed to the change in the Council in 1980, when George Deukmejian, the new governor of the Republic of California, replaced the Brown council with allegedly pro-growth members, leading to low union confidence in the Council's impartiality and a severe decline in the number of election petitions brought before the council.
One positive result is the end of the jurisdictional war between UFW and Teamsters. UFW signed an agreement with Teamsters in March 1977 in which UFW agreed to attempt to regulate only those workers covered by CALRA, while the Teamsters agreed to organize all other agricultural workers. The deal also caused UFW to end a boycott of lettuce, wine and wine in February 1978. Why did the two unions sign the agreement? UFW officials claim that Teamster is on the verge of losing jurisdictional battles to 50,000 workers decided by the ALRB, but at least one press report indicates that the scandalous union wants to polish its public image.
It is also unclear whether CALRA has a beneficial effect on the California economy. One study concluded that the Act actually resulted in net economic losses: Higher prices were charged for production, income of agricultural workers and the value of land actually decreased. However, other analyzes have concluded that this economic impact is minimal compared to the poverty reduction that has occurred.
The "make-whole" Act provisions are also under scrutiny. Although the overall goal of provision is praiseworthy, it is said, the Council's decision has led to litigation that lasted for years and reduced the impact of each award.
Attempts on revision
A number of efforts to revise CALRA have been carried out over the years. The first significant effort came in 2000, when Democratic Governor Gray Davis vetoed efforts to extend CALRA's reach to stable stable stables at country horse racing tracks.
A major revision came into effect in 2002. The more break even in collective bargaining seems to frustrate the goals of CALRA. UFW supports two bills that will force arbitration and mediation binding on unions and employers if deadlocks are declared. The law passed state legislature in August 2002, and Governor Davis signed them into law in October. Farmers filed a lawsuit in state court to have an unconstitutional amendment, but the country's appeals court upheld the revision in 2006.
Other attempts to revise the law in 2007 were also unsuccessful. UFW supported a bill that would allow the card to check unions, arguing that a large majority of workers signed union authorization cards but were then intimidated to vote against unions during the election process. The farmers argue that UFW is deceiving or intimidating workers to sign union authorization cards, and that secret ballot reveals the true feelings of workers. But the bill did not pass either room.
See also
- US labor law
References
Further reading
External links
- California Agricultural Labor Board (ALRB)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments