Court sides with fruit farm in fight with workers union
Source: AP
BY SUDHIN THANAWALA AND SCOTT SMITH
FRESNO, Calif. (AP) -- A California appeals court sided with one of the largest fruit farms in the nation, ruling that a law allowing the state to order unions and farming companies to reach binding contracts was unconstitutional.
Labor activists say the mandatory mediation and conciliation law is a key to helping farm workers improve working conditions.
However, the 5th District Court of Appeal said Thursday it does not clearly state the standards that the contracts are supposed to achieve.
The ruling came in a fight between Gerawan Farming and the United Farm Workers, the union launched by Cesar Chavez. The union won the right to represent Gerawan workers in 1992, but the two sides did not agree to a contract.
FULL story at link.
Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_FARM_LABOR_FIGHT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-15-18-52-01
= new reply since forum marked as read
I hate that
we are seeing how Taft-Hartley is being used to undermine the 50+ majority.
We are seeing how a corporation is not recognizing the democratic rule of representation
And we are seeing how when people like this owner(s) and others think that corporations are people to my friends (Mitt Romney) think they can have it both ways to fit there collective need whenever they want to--------------that's not how it works .
Hang in UFW, perseverance will win with strengthen in numbers
This goes to the heart of the Taft-Hartley Act and the Wagner Act:
State and federal laws work in tandem on most cases-------
it used in all disputes when it comes to a negotiations from a laborer in a field picking fruit all the way up to Engineers working at manufacturer.
Any corporations from a farmer to a corporations can do whatever they can to use this act:
"Taft-Hartley Labor Act, 1947, passed by the U.S. Congress, officially known as the Labor-Management Relations Act. Sponsored by Senator Robert Alphonso Taft and Representative Fred Allan Hartley, the act qualified or amended much of the National Labor Relations (Wagner) Act of 1935, the federal law regulating labor relations of enterprises engaged in interstate commerce, and it nullified parts of the Federal Anti-Injunction (Norris-LaGuardia) Act of 1932. The act established control of labor disputes on a new basis by enlarging the National Labor Relations Board and providing that the union or the employer must, before terminating a collective-bargaining agreement, serve notice on the other party and on a government mediation service. The government was empowered to obtain an 80-day injunction against any strike that it deemed a peril to national health or safety. The act also prohibited jurisdictional strikes (dispute between two unions over which should act as the bargaining agent for the employees) and secondary boycotts (boycott against an already organized company doing business with another company that a union is trying to organize), declared that it did not extend protection to workers on wildcat strikes, outlawed the closed shop, and permitted the union shop only on a vote of a majority of the employees. Most of the collective-bargaining provisions were retained, with the extra provision that a union before using the facilities of the National Labor Relations Board must file with the U.S. Dept. of Labor financial reports and affidavits that union officers are not Communists. The act also forbade unions to contribute to political campaigns. Although President Truman vetoed the act, it was passed over his veto. Federal courts have upheld major provisions of the act with the exception of the clauses about political expenditures. Attempts to repeal it have been unsuccessful, but the Landrum-Griffin Act (1959) amended some features of the Taft-Hartley Labor Act."
http://www.infoplease.com/encyclopedia/business/taft-hartley-labor-act.html
