Bruce J. Janigian
Chairman, Agricultural Labor Relations Board
The greatest challenge facing the Agricultural Labor Relations Board continues to be consistently improving its performance in the face of diminishing resources and a dramatically changing farm labor environment.
In previous articles in Labor Management Decisions (Fall 1991 and Winter-Spring 1993), I outlined some of the board's strategies not only to meet public expectations, but to surpass and exceed them. Throughout this period and until the present, we have found opportunities in adversity and motivation through circumstances demanding the best from each of us.
As a result, disbursements making aggrieved parties whole have increased nearly tenfold over the past two years and are greater today than at any other time in the board's history. For the first time, the monetary relief provided exceeds the amount of the board's budget. Similarly, the processing time for an election petition to result in a board certification is faster today than ever before - now averaging just 18 days. From 1975 to 1990, it took more than ten times that long. Most amazing of all is that these results have occurred with a staff only 20 percent as large as at its peak in 1979.
These and other dramatic results did not just happen. We identified problems, developed solutions, and made effective changes to our procedures and operations. We were guided throughout by a philosophy that proactive dispute avoidance, or resolution at its earliest stages, is far better than an exhaustive litigious process, which rewards only legal counsel at the expense of both management and labor. We were guided also by the reality that justice delayed is justice denied. This is especially true for migrant and seasonal workers who cannot wait years for just compensation following an unfair labor practice.
Examples of recent changes include combining liability and compliance proceedings into a single hearing, saving literally years of litigation and appeals, and associated expenses in nearly every case. They include simultaneous processing of challenged ballots and election objections, which drastically speeds up our certification process. They include the elimination of unnecessary legal briefs and numerous other modifications that speed up resolutions at every stage without sacrificing quality or accuracy.
When we have had to absorb drastic budget reductions, we did so in a manner preserving, as best we could, our field offices and our operations. We gave up headquarters office space and staff and procured computers and software so that those who remained could work smarter and more efficiently. We cross-trained counsel and staff for functions previously performed, in some cases, by three or four individuals. We utilized GAIN (Greater Avenues for Independence Network) workers for field offices and supplemented headquarters staff with student interns. We even requested that the governor maintain two vacancies on the board so that we could have salary savings to cover operating expenses.
With a spirit of cooperation, the board has functioned at a quorum of three members since 1992. Board members have made themselves available on a continuous basis, seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year. They also have unhesitatingly picked up many administrative and operational functions previously delegated to staff, while surrendering personal secretaries and other perquisites of office.
When the board was targeted in a vexatious lawsuit, the Attorney General's Office said, in effect, that the board could represent itself. The board, however, had previously given up its own litigator. Using outside counsel on an interim basis, we had to split an administrative law judge position in two, gaining a highly qualified, former deputy attorney general, as well as an experienced administrative law judge sitting on an as-needed basis.
This lawsuit stemmed from changing conditions in the fields, which called into question the jurisdictional boundaries of the ALRB in relation to the National Labor Relations Board. Dramatically increased use of farm labor contractors, field packing operations, and leased farming arrangements have complicated what was previously a well-defined separation between the domains of the respective boards.
Another complex issue recently addressed by the board was the years-long table grape boycott of the United Farm Workers. Like many politically charged issues dealt with by the board, all matters have been handled judiciously with the highest ethical standards and conduct, and have demonstrated the kind of expertise and specialized knowledge that are uniformly relied upon by reviewing courts in California and the nation.
To meet the challenges posed by a dynamic farm employment environment, and to continue to operate as proactively as possible, the board is expanding its outreach and educational activities. With assistance from the governor's Task Force on Quality Government, we have developed an innovative and exciting approach to educating both farm laborers and growers about their rights and responsibilities under the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (ALRA). Called the Pioneer Project, it will be the first extensive outreach program undertaken by this agency in over a decade.
The simple reality is that many disputes are attributable to public ignorance of rights and responsibilities. For example, the right of workers to engage in concerted protected activity exists whenever workers act together to seek improvements in their working conditions, pay, or benefits. This right exists wholly apart from any union activity or union presence, and it is generally unknown among farm workers and their employers. Without greater public awareness, there will be little observance or assertion of these legal protections.
Existing ALRB educational programs have been limited to participating in the few farm worker programs established by other federal or state agencies, an approach that has not afforded much concentration on matters specific to the ALRA. The need for a cooperative, coordinated approach to worker outreach is apparent at many levels. For example, when a farm worker is discharged, he or she generally appears at an Employment Development Department (EDD) field office to apply for unemployment benefits. Since qualification for unemployment benefits depends on the circumstances surrounding the employee's separation from employment, EDD representatives ask questions about the reasons for discharge. Yet because the Unemployment Compensation Act makes no mention of retaliatory discharges, EDD intake workers do not normally think to refer possible victims of discrimination to this agency to pursue their remedies. If the discharge clearly was in violation of the ALRA, the farm worker should be informed of his or her right to pursue immediate reinstatement through the ALRB, rather than simply being added to the unemployment insurance rolls. Failure to do so adds to federal and state administrative costs, constitutes a tax on all California employers, and adds to workforce instability.
The Pioneer Project will establish a partnership of cooperation and support among farm labor and employer groups. It will make presentations in rural communities on a posted and widely publicized schedule to reach migrant labor camps, ranches, local law enforcement agencies, and grower co-ops and associations. It will produce multilingual audio and audiovisual presentations that will be made available for statewide listening and viewing through local foreign language stations and distribution through organizations interested in agricultural labor issues.
While we are pursuing outreach, we are also continuing a comprehensive review of our regulations. Besides changing some housekeeping details to move our processes along more smoothly, we have embarked on substantive revisions. We believe that some kinds of disputes that continually arise can be eliminated by clarification of existing rules. We have codified procedures for calculating peak agricultural employment for the purposes of determining when there is a representative complement of employees in an agricultural workplace; we have drafted a detailed procedure for handling representation petitions in the face of unfair labor practices that could affect either the employees' free choice or the existence of a valid question concerning representation. We have also codified our rules concerning access, and we have set forth a procedural scheme for dealing with access violations.
As part of the regulatory process, the board has conducted public hearings throughout the state and has heard extensive comment by worker and grower representatives. The great amount of interest evinced by both farm workers and employer groups in our regulatory reform has been extremely encouraging. It demonstrates the continuing importance of this board, which next year marks its twentieth anniversary. We believe our efforts to improve and expedite board operations, our outreach to farm workers and employers concerning their respective rights and responsibilities, and our ongoing efforts to depoliticize the board and increase credibility with the public we serve demonstrate how we are continuing to earn California's trust.
Back to: Contents | LMD Main Page | APMP Home