Labor law information by Anthony Raimondo

The goal of this article is to provide employers with current labor and employment law information. The contents should neither be interpreted as, nor construed as legal advice or opinion. The reader should consult with Anthony Raimondo at McCormick Barstow LLP in Fresno, at (559)433-1300 for individual responses to questions or concerns regarding any given situation.

DAIRY CASE LIMITS THE SCOPE OF MANDATORY MEDIATION

By Anthony P. Raimondo

In 2004, a landmark amendment to the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA) established mandatory mediation in California.  Historically, labor relations law in agriculture and other industries has had as a bedrock principle that neither a union nor an employer can be forced to agree to a labor contract.  The parties must bargain in good faith to try to reach an agreement, but are entitled to bargain hard and to stand firm on their positions in negotiations.  Each party has tools that it can use to pressure the other party to agree, such as strikes and lockouts, but neither side can be forced into a contract.  Mandatory mediation changed this. 

Mandatory mediation compels the parties to a labor contract negotiation to participate in a process known in labor relations as interest arbitration. In interest arbitration, the employer and the union argue their respective positions on the contract to an arbitrator, and the arbitrator decides what the contract terms will be.  Interest arbitration has been used by unions and employers when the parties agree that they want to avoid a strike or lockout, but cannot agree on contract terms.  However, participation in interest arbitration has always been voluntary. 

Under the mandatory mediation law, a union or an employer can file a petition to force the other party into interest arbitration if the parties have been negotiating for more than six months without reaching a contract.  If an agricultural employer employed or engaged 25 or more agricultural employees during any calendar week in the 12 months preceding the filing of the petition, then it is subject to the mandatory mediation obligation.  An employer that never reached the 25 employee threshold cannot be forced into interest arbitration. 

In Frank Pinheiro Dairy (2010) 36 ALRB No. 1, the ALRB examined whether an employer must maintain the 25 employee threshold for a full calendar week, or whether a single day with 25 or more employees will trigger application of the law.  WUD group legal counsel Anthony Raimondo successfully argued that the law should be limited to those who maintained a complement of 25 or more employees for a full calendar week, and the ALRB rejected the union position that an employer is subject to mandatory mediation if it had 25 or more employees on any single calendar day.  This result limits the scope of the mandatory mediation law, and creates a bright line for employers to know whether or not a contract can be forced on them against their will.   

The goal of this article is to provide employers with current labor and employment law information. The contents should not be interpreted or construed as legal advice or opinion. For individual responses to questions or concerns regarding any given situation, the reader should consult with Anthony Raimondo at McCormick Barstow LLP in Fresno, at (559)433-1300