BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 104|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 104
Author: Steinberg (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE LABOR & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMM : 5-2, 03/09/11
AYES: Lieu, DeSaulnier, Leno, Padilla, Yee
NOES: Wyland, Runner
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-3, 03/17/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Emmerson, Runner
SUBJECT : Labor representatives: elections
SOURCE : United Farm Workers
DIGEST : This bill permits agricultural employees, as an
alternative procedure, to select their labor
representatives by submitting a petition to the
Agricultural Labor Relations Board (ALRB) accompanied by
representation cards signed by a majority of the bargaining
unit. This bill also extends existing prohibitions and
penalties to employers who engage in unfair labor practices
with regard to a majority signup election.
ANALYSIS : Existing law provides for a secret ballot
election process for agricultural workers where a petition
has been submitted, as specified, asking for the
opportunity for workers to decide whether to select a
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
2
particular union as their collective bargaining
representative. Specifically, the law:
1.Allows for the filing of a petition that is signed by a
majority of the current employees in a collective
bargaining unit, or accompanied with cards signed by a
majority of the current employees in a collective
bargaining unit, with the ALRB to seek representatives to
collectively bargain for the employees in the bargaining
unit. The petition must allege the following:
A. That the number of employees of the employer named
in the petition is not less than 50 percent of the
employer's peak agricultural employment for the
current calendar year.
B. That a valid election has not been conducted among
the agricultural employees of the employer named in
the petition within 12 months immediately preceding
the filing of the petition.
C. That no labor organization is currently certified
as the exclusive collective bargaining representatives
for the employees of the employer named in the
petition.
D. That the petition is not barred by an existing
collective bargaining agreement.
Upon receiving the signed petition, the ALRB must
investigate the petition immediately. If the ALRB finds
that the petition is accurate, then it must hold an
election by secret ballot within seven days of the filing
of the petition. The ALRB must print ballots that list
the labor organization or organizations that seek to
represent the employees, as well as a "no labor
organizations" voting option. Whoever receives 50
percent plus one of the votes cast shall win the
election. Run-offs, if necessary, must take place.
1.Defines a number of activities of employers, employees,
and/or interested parties as improper interference with
the election process, generally known as unfair labor
practices.
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
3
2.Allows the ALRB hold hearings to decide if any unfair
labor practices took place, and if it finds such actions
took place, the ALRB must issue a cease and desist order
and also take affirmative action, which can include
reinstatement with or without back pay, and making an
employee whole, where appropriate, for loss of pay.
This bill:
1. Creates an alternative procedure to the secret ballot
election, the majority signup election, which would
allow employees of a collective bargaining unit to
select their representative for collective bargaining
by submitting a petition that alleges the following:
A. That the number of employees currently employed by
the employer named in the petition is not less than 50
percent of the employer's peak agricultural employment
for the current calendar year.
B. That a valid election has not been conducted among
the agricultural employees of the employer named in
the petition within the 12 months immediately
preceding the filing of the petition.
C. That no labor organization is currently certified
as the exclusive collective-bargaining representatives
of the employees of the employer named in the
petition.
D. That the petition is not barred by an existing
collective bargaining agreement.
1. Requires that the petition must be accompanied with
representation cards signed by more than 50 percent of
the currently employed employees in the bargaining
unit. These cards must be issued by the ALRB upon the
request of a labor organization, and the regional
boards are required to maintain a record of the labor
organizations that request the issuance of cards and
make such records available to any person.
2. The representation cards must include sufficient
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
4
space for the name of the labor organization, the name
of the agricultural employer, the employee's name,
address and phone number, the name of the employee's
foreperson, the employee's crew number, the signature
of the person witnessing the employee that signed the
card, and the date that the card was signed.
3. Provides that a representative card is considered
valid if the card includes the name of the labor
organization, the employee's name, and the employee's
signature, and that a labor organization may fill out
all of the information on the representation card,
except the signature.
4. Requires the ALRB to keep the information on the
cards confidential.
5. Requires that the labor representative submitting the
petition must also personally serve the employer with
the petition the same day the ALRB receives it. The
employer then has 48 hours to respond to the petition
and personally serve the labor organization with the
petition the same day the ALRB receives it.
6. The employer response must include a complete and
accurate list of all of the employees in the bargaining
unit. For each day that the employer fails to provide
a completely and timely response, the ALRB must access
a fine of up to $10,000.
7. Requires ALRB, upon receipt of a petition for
"majority signup election," to immediately commence an
investigation. Within five days of receipt of the
petition, ALRB shall make an administrative
determination whether the petition requirements have
been met and the labor organization has submitted the
requisite number of representation cards by comparing
the names on the cards to the names on the list
submitted by the employer.
8. Specifies that if ALRB determines that the labor
organization has submitted the requisite number of
representation cards and met other requirements, it
shall immediately certify the labor organization as the
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
5
exclusive bargaining representative. If ALRB
determines that the labor organization has not
submitted the requisite number of cards, it shall grant
the labor organization 30 days to submit additional
representation cards.
9. States that an employer's duty to bargain with the
labor organization begins immediately after a labor
organization is certified.
10. Provides that within five days after the board
certifies a labor organization through a majority
signup election, any person may file with the board a
petition objecting to the certification on one or more
of the following grounds:
A. Allegations in the majority signup petition were
false;
B. The board improperly determined the geographical
scope of the bargaining unit;
C. The majority signup election was conducted
improperly;
D. Improper conduct affected the results of the
majority signup election.
Upon receipt of a petition objecting to certification,
the board shall conduct a hearing to rule on the
petitioner's objections, and shall mail a notice of the
time and place of the hearing to the petitioner and the
labor organization whose certification is being
challenged. If the board finds at the hearing that any of
the allegations in the petition are true, the board shall
revoke the certification.
1. Prohibits the ALRB from considering a majority signup
election petition for the same employer until the board
determines if the petition should be certified unless
the second petition alleges the first petition was
filed because of the employer's unlawful involvement
with the labor organization that filed the first
petition. If the ALRB finds that the labor
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
6
organization that filed the first petition did so with
unlawful employer involvement, that labor organization
is prohibited from filing any further petitions for a
year and the second petition will be considered.
2. Extends existing prohibitions and penalties to
employers who engage in unfair labor practices.
3. Provides that if the ALRB finds willful or repeated
actions by the employer to interfere, restrain, or
coerce agricultural employees in their right to
self-organize and collectively bargain, or if an
employer is found to be discriminating against a member
of a labor organization in hiring or tenure of
employment, or to encourage or discourage membership in
any labor organization, the ALRB may impose a civil
penalty against that employer for $20,000 for each
violation.
This bill adds to this requirement that, should there
be any charges of discrimination or threats to
discharge an employee for belonging to or seeking to
belong to a labor organization, or any charges of an
employer trying to interfere, restrain, or coerce
agricultural employees in their right to self-organize
and collectively bargain, the ALRB must give those
charges priority of all other cases, except cases of
similar character.
Prior Legislation
SB 1474 (Steinberg) of 2010, as introduced, was very
similar to this bill. It was significantly amended in the
Assembly to address situations where agricultural employers
engaged in willful misconduct in labor representation
elections. SB 1474 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
SB 789 (Steinberg) of 2009, was very similar to this bill,
and was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger. His veto
message read, in part:
SB 789 sets in place a "majority signup election"
process for agricultural employees to select union
representation. This process fundamentally alters an
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
7
employee's right to a secret ballot election that
allows the employee to choose, in the privacy of the
voting booth without coercion or manipulation, whether
or not to be represented?. I cannot support this
alteration of the secret ballot process.
AB 2386 (Nunez) of 2008 would have authorized agricultural
employees to select collective bargaining representation
through a new "mediated election" process. This bill was
vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
SB 180 (Migden) of 2007 was almost identical to SB 789.
That legislation was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14
Fund
Alternative electionPotentially significant reduction in
cost General
procedure compared to current election procedure
Investigation of filings Unknown
new costs potentially in the
General
unfair labor practicesrange of $120 in the first year;
likely decreasing
in future years; unknown increase, if
any, in
penalty revenues
SUPPORT : (per Senate Labor and Industrial Relations
Committee analysis)
United Farm Workers (source)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No. 70
California Employment Lawyers Association
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
8
California Nurses Association
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California Teamsters Local 911
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
International Longshore & Warehouse Union Ship Clerks'
Association,
Local 34
International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace &
Agricultural Implement Workers of America
National Nurses Organizing Committee
Northern California District Council International
Longshore & Warehouse
Union
Southern California District Council of Laborers
Teamsters Local No. 481
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers Local Union
399
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, Industrial & Allied
Workers of America Local Union No. 166
The International Alliance of Theatrical State Employees
Local 80
United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local No. 324
United Food & Commercial Workers Western States Council
United Nurses Association of California/Union of Healthcare
Professionals
OPPOSITION : (per Senate Labor and Industrial Relations
Committee analysis)
Agricultural Council of California
Associated Builders and Contractors of California
California Association of Wine Grape Growers
California Chamber of Commerce
California Farm Bureau Federation
California Grocers Association
California Hotel & Lodging Association
California Independent Grocers Association
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
California Newspaper Publishers Association
California Restaurant Association
California Retailers Association
Greater San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce
National Right to Work Committee
Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
9
Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce
Redondo Beach Chamber of Commerce
San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce
Valley Industry and Commerce Association
Western Growers Association
Wine Institute
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : Proponents note that farm workers
are an unusually vulnerable workforce demographic in
California. Many farm workers are undocumented workers and
have few rights due to recent court decisions. Proponents
also state that many farm workers work in isolated areas,
making inspections for labor regulations difficult.
Proponents argue that these conditions present a strong
need for collective bargaining and a union presence, but
this has been blocked by employers through coercion,
anti-union pamphlets, and captive audience meetings prevent
fair elections from taking place. Proponents believe that
majority choice elections will allow California's farm
workers to truly and freely choose the best options for
their livelihood and their families' livelihood.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : Opponents argue that existing
law gives labor organizations many rights, including the
ability for labor organizations to enter a farmer's
property, and that existing remedies available to the ALRB
are sufficient. They also feel that majority choice
elections are not a real election, is fundamentally
undemocratic, opens workers up to intimidation from unions
in their homes, and that they deprive farm workers of a
proper debate on the pros and cons of unionization.
Opponents also state that the provisions for increased
civil penalties are excessive, possibly unconstitutional,
and an undue burden on businesses.
PQ:nl 3/18/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED
SB 104
Page
10
CONTINUED