Related Links
Ag board dismisses 3 UFW charges
Union complained that E&J Gallo officials helped anti-union campaign leading up to vote
Published: Tuesday, October 9, 2007 at 3:49 a.m.
Last Modified: Monday, October 8, 2007 at 9:00 p.m.
The United Farm Workers has suffered another setback in the union's effort to represent North Coast vineyard workers.
Investigators for the state Agricultural Labor Relations Board on Friday dismissed three of the four charges the UFW lodged against E&J Gallo shortly after workers voted to oust the union from the company's Healdsburg winery.
In the June election, 125 Gallo workers voted to decertify the UFW and 95 voted to retain union representation. Twelve votes were contested and uncounted.
The UFW has represented Gallo workers since the historic 1994 vote that brought the union into Sonoma County's premium wine industry for the first time. Today about 300 of the workers who tend Gallo's 3,200 acres of Sonoma County vineyards are represented by the UFW, by far its largest contract on the North Coast.
But the UFW's grip on the hearts and minds of vineyard workers in Sonoma County is showing signs of slipping.
Some anti-union workers complain the union takes 2 percent of their salary but gives them little in return. Many say they have never met anyone from the UFW.
Following the Gallo vote, a second group of workers also chose to oust the UFW. Thirty-nine workers at Richard's Grove and Saralee's Vineyard Inc. in Windsor voted to reject the union, while just six voted to keep it.
If both votes are upheld, the UFW in Sonoma County would be reduced to a few dozen workers with perhaps 100 total on the North Coast, according to Press Democrat estimates. The UFW does not provide member statistics.
UFW supporters warn that the ejection of the union would result in a return to the days when low wages, little job security and poor treatment of workers by employers were commonplace.
In an effort to block the results of the Gallo vote, the UFW charged that Gallo officials indirectly aided the anti-union campaign and thwarted the union's efforts to contact workers.
Investigators for the state Agricultural Labor Relations Board investigated the UFW's claims and dismissed three of the four charges on Friday.
The three dismissed charges all alleged that Gallo supervisors or agents participated in or supported the decertification petition.
In one example, the union claimed that an anti-union activist, Roberto Parra, was acting as an agent of Gallo because he was allowed to campaign against the union during work hours on a company four-wheeler.
But ALRB investigators noted that Parra in one instance was passing out fliers during his break time. The ALRB also found the UFW failed to provide witnesses to bolster claims that Gallo officials sanctioned or supported Parra's actions. Two other similar charges were also dismissed for lack of evidence.
A fourth complaint -- that Gallo failed to provide the UFW with the addresses of some workers as required -- will be allowed to move forward, according to Fred Capuyan, regional director of the ALRB.
The UFW provided enough information to demonstrate that it did not receive some workers' addresses from Gallo as required by law.
However, this does not mean the fourth charge has been upheld, only that it can move forward as a formal ALRB complaint entitled to a hearing before the board, Capuyan said.
The UFW must still demonstrate that the failure to provide the addresses disadvantaged the union enough to merit overturning the election results, Capuyan said.
UFW officials said they were unaware of the dismissals and could not comment.
You can reach Staff Writer Kevin McCallum at 521-5207 or kevin.mccallum@pressdemocrat.com.
All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Comments are currently unavailable on this article