Excerpts from Independent state judge’s ruling:
• Growers gave Silvia Lopez $20,000 for decert
• Lopez’s ‘virtual sabbatical’ to get rid of the UFW
• Gerawan let Lopez block roads to sign petitions
After six months of sworn testimony from 130 witnesses, an independent state administrative judge issued a 192-page decision (http://bit.ly/1W6E8PG) concluding that “the unlawful actions” of a major statewide grower association, Gerawan Farming and decertification petitioner Silvia Lopez “created an environment which would have made it impossible for true employee choice when it [came] time to vote” on whether to get rid of the United Farm Workers (Pages 186-187). Agricultural Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge Mark R. Soble, citing “the employer’s unlawful support and assistance,” set aside the Nov. 5, 2013 Gerawan decertification election and dismissed the decertification petition. (Page 187)
The following are excerpts with corresponding page numbers from the “ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW” section of Judge Soble’s ruling (starting at Page 168). (Capitalizations are the judge’s emphasis.)
• “IN OCTOBER 2013, THE CALIFORNIA FRESH FRUIT ASSOCIATION AND BARRY BEDWELL GAVE TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS TO PETITIONER SILVIA LOPEZ TO SUPPORT THE DECERTIFICATION EFFORT” (Page 169)
“The direct financial support from Barry Bedwell and the California Fresh Fruit Association to Petitioner Silvia Lopez is undisputed. Barry Bedwell and the California Fresh Fruit Association, an association of agricultural employers, later gave twenty thousand dollars to Petitioner Silvia Lopez to support the decertification effort. Silvia’s legal team allowed her to knowingly accept twenty thousand dollars from an association of agricultural employers, one of which Gerawan itself was a dues-paying member, to pay for buses, food and t-shirts.” (Pages 169-170)
California Labor Code section 1155.4 makes it “unlawful for any agricultural employer or association of agricultural employers…to pay, lend, or deliver, any money or other thing of value to…any representative of any of his agricultural employees [and] any employee or group or committee of employees of such employer in excess of their normal compensation for the purpose of causing such employee or group or committee directly or indirectly to influence any other employees in the exercise of the right to organize and bargain collectively…” (Page 170)
• “FROM AUGUST 12, 2013 TO OCTOBER 20, 2013, GERAWAN GAVE SILVIA LOPEZ A ‘VIRTUAL SABBATICAL’ TO FACILITATE CIRCULATION OF THE DECERTIFICATION PETITIONS” (Page 172)
“…it is undisputed that, for the ten week period from August 12, 2013 to October 20, 2013 [when the decertification was being pushed], Lopez only worked an average of 8.3 hours per week, when other workers were working fifty hour weeks. During this time, Lopez was a visible and regular presence on company property collecting signatures.” (Page 172)
“But when the UFW requested the company to allow three or four workers to leave early to attend a negotiation session, the request was denied.” (Page 173)
• “WHEN THE PETITIONER WAS ALMOST OUT OF TIME TO COLLECT NEEDED SIGNATURES BEFORE THE 2013 PEAK SEASON ENDED, THE COMPANY ALLOWED HER TO PHYSICALLY BLOCK THE COMPANY ENTRANCES AND TO COLLECT ONE THOUSAND SIGNATURES DURING WORK HOURS THAT DAY” (Page 173)
“Due to the impending winter season, Silvia Lopez and her legal team knew that they had a limited amount of time to collect signatures in 2013 before it was no longer a time of ‘peak’ agricultural employment [when a decertification petition could be submitted]. Rather than waiting until spring 2014, Silvia Lopez, her son-in-law, and other key signature gatherers set up a plan to physically block company entrances, with their personal cars, ladders and a flimsy colored ribbon that was used to mark trees…” (Pages 173-174)
“Perhaps the pro-UFW workers should have asked for permission to have a whole special day to collect signatures because, indeed, that is what the decertification group received.” (Page 175)
• “GERAWAN ALLOWED PRO-DECERTIFICATION WORKERS TO CIRCULATE A PETITION DURING WORK HOURS, BUT DID NOT ALLOW PRO-UFW WORKERS TO DO SO” (Page 180)
“…pro-UFW workers requested permission from their crew bosses to circulate pro-UFW petitions during work time, and…the foremen rejected those requests.” (Page 180)
– end –
Full decision @ http://bit.ly/1W6E8PG