UFW Gaining, Teamsters Do Their Worst

By Michael Castleman

The United Farm Workers (UFW) have scored substantial, though not overwhelming, victories over the Teamsters in the first month of union elections among California's 250,000 farmworkers.

Before the elections, the UFW held 12 contracts covering 7,000 workers, while the Teamsters held 375 contracts with 50,000 workers. With elections held at only about 20 percent of the state's ranches at this writing, the UFW has won 40 elections covering 6300 workers, and the Teamsters have scored 31 victories covering 5400 workers.

While these figures may seem roughly equal at first glance, the UFW is actually making significant gains. The union has already more than tripled its number of contracts, from 12 to 40. The UFW has overturned more than 30 Teamster contracts, but the Teamsters have not overturned a single Farm Worker's contract. In fact, on UFW-contracted ranches, the elections have resulted in an overwhelming vote of confidence in the UFW. At UFW-contracted Inter-Harvest, the nation's largest lettuce grower, the UFW routed the Teamsters 1167 to 28. At Pick D'Rite [sic] [Pik'd Rite] strawberry farm, a longtime UFW ranch, the union shut out the Teamsters 197-0.

The election process itself has become mired in a confusing tangle of lawsuits by growers and the Teamsters, challenging the constitutionality of the Agricultural Labor Relations Act—under which the elections are being conducted.

Growers have challenged the act's controversial "access rule," which allows organizers from unions to talk to fieldworkers on growers' lands during scheduled breaks and lunch. The UFW contends that this rule is crucial to a free election because a large proportion of farmworkers live in labor camps on growers' land. A UFW organizer commented, "If we can't get in to talk to the workers, the growers can control most of the information the workers hear." Growers maintain that the access rule violates their private property rights.

Growers won an injunction against the access rule by suing in a rural court sympathetic to agribusiness. But the California Supreme Court reversed that ruling, temporarily reinstating the access provision pending a full hearing (as yet unscheduled).

However, the UFW has charged that even under the access rule, their organizers have been arrested, harrassed. and threatened by armed vigilantes while Teamster organizers are allowed free access to ranches. These charges have been corroborated by a security guard at Gallo Winery who declared: "I was told [that] . . . UFW organizers were to be harrassed. The Company was determined to keep UFW organizers away from workers whenever possible without letting state officials know. Company officials refer to the UFW as 'the enemy.' Teamster organizers have free and open access to Gallo property."

In another legal maneuver, the Teamsters brought a suit requesting that over 150 ranches in the Salinas Valley Western Growers' Association be declared one bargaining unit, and asking for one valley-wide election, instead of ranch-by-ranch elections. There were two reasons for this strategy. First, the Teamsters hoped to force the UFW to spread its organizing forces too thin to be really effective. Second, they hoped to delay announcement of the outcome of the Salinas elections by asking that the ballots be impounded pending a decision on their suit. Salinas has long been an area of UFW strength. The Teamsters hoped to tie up the early Salinas elections in court and thus prevent the expected UFW victories there from generating a ripple effect of UFW victories around the state. The Teamster suit has been dismissed, and so far the UFW has won 17 of 24 Salinas ranches, or about 70 percent.

However, UFW election victories do not mean an immediate end to the grape and lettuce boycotts. The UFW must still hammer out contracts on the new ranches it has won, which could take months. Meanwhile, the UFW is asking its supporters to continue boycotting all grapes and head lettuce that do not carry the UFW label.

The Gallo Winery election, nationally important because of the UFW-sponsored Gallo wine boycott, is still undecided, despite enthusiastic Teamster claims of victory. Currently, the Teamsters lead 223 to 131, but the UFW has challenged 197 of these votes. Depending on how the election board rules, the election could still go either way, and informed observers expect it to be close. Most challenged votes concern UFW-supported Gallo strikers whom the company did not allow to vote, despite a provision in the Agricultural Labor Relations Act which specifically grants voting privileges to strikers. Hearings on the Gallo election are scheduled to begin October 6.

The UFW is challenging several elections because of grower intimidation. On one ranch, foremen lied to workers that election day would also be the day the Immigration Service would check their work documents. Workers who are in the U.S. illegally (many brought in by growers as scabs) did not show up to vote for fear of deportation.

The UFW also charges that the Teamsters have submitted forged authorization cards. A union must have 20 percent of the workers sign cards in order to appear on the ballot. Presumably, a worker who signs a card stating his or her preference for a certain union will also vote for that union. The Teamsters got on the ballot at both Inter-Harvest and [Pik'd Rite], but scored far below 20 per cent in the elections: under five percent at Inter, and not a single vote at [Pik'd Rite].

Nonetheless, despite harrassment, unfair labor practices, and legal ploys, the United Farm Workers Union is winning the right to represent a substantial proportion of California's field laborers.