La Opinion
Victory Keith
Correspondent of the Opinion
6/13/02

SACRAMENTO, California. -- A law that would allow farm workers to unionize themselves and obtain just contracts was approved yesterday by the Assembly Labor Committee.

SB 1736 authored by Senate Pro-Tem, John Burton (Democrat, San Francisco), would create an amendment to the Calif. Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975 (ALRB), forcing growers to sign a contract with the farm workers union if they refuse to do so through the use of a neutral binding arbitration process.

If after 90 days an agreement is not reached by both parties, this proposal provides the ability to bring in a neutral third party mediator.

The proposal then provides for a binding mediation process. If an agreement is not reached after 30 days--what is know as binding arbitration would be implimented--where both must accept the conditions of the outside mediator.

"For years, various employers have refused to give what is just to its workers, and thousands have been forced to live without fair wages, decent working conditions and medical insurances for their families", said Arturo Rodriguez, president of the United Farm Workers (UFW), to the Opinion.

The Agricultural Labor Relations Act was created to protect the rights of farm workers to orgainize and to engage in union activities.

However, in 1980, under Governor George Deukmeijan, the law virtually was suspended, when he eliminated essential funding and personal, said Rodriguez.

"The growers were protected by the governor", added Rodriguez.

The reality is from 1975, workers voted to be reprersented by the UFW at 428 farms, but only 185 have signed contracts.

Jose Castrate has worked at Picsweet Mushrooms Farms, in Ventura County since 1972. In 1975, the workers voted to be represented by the UFW. They received a contract in 1980 after holding a strike.

"The negotiations were difficult, but people were very content and satisfied for several years", said Castrate.

In 1987 the company changed ownership to the current one. Since then, they been refusing to sign a contract with the workers and the only pay increase, according to Castrate, was a two cents increase.

"We are requesting very little... we want respect, medical insurance for our children, a pension plan, just wages. They are making money, but it does not matter to them that our families are suffering. This is the reason we need a law that forces them to sit at the same table and negotiate with us".

Those that are against the proposal say that the arbitration law would forever remove the possibility of the collective bargaining process. They add that the existing law is good and that if there are "some provisions that are failing", we must work each of those provisions independently.

"This proposal creates a disadvantage for the farmers and gives to the unions more power to go on strike and to put whole harvests in danger. Why are you going punish eighty four thousand farmers? ", said Shirley Batchman, of California Citrus Mutual.

"There are two or three employers that have not negotiated contracts with the UFW and this says to me that they (UFW) are not good negotiators.They don't know how to say yes to the contracts we are handing them", said Mike Webb, Western Growest Association spokesman.

"Some employers have refused to speak with us! We have given them sufficient time to negotiate in good faith, but it is obvious that they are not going it to do, unless the law supports our rights", said Rodriguez.

This proposal has a force allied in its corner; the Latino caucus,with its historic 22 members, most of which come from families who have worked in the fields.

"This is a new day and things have changed. The demographics show that we have representation at the capitol. We are no longer we are a unrepresented voice, but instead we are a political force ", concluded Rodriguez.

SB 1736 now goes to the plenary session of the Assembly, where it will be discussed in the next weeks.

Copyright: La Opinion