Skip to content
Sign up free
News

Farm workers might be forced to unionize under new California law

By Chris Hinyub

2-minute read

The state Legislature has passed a bill that would encourage the unionization of farm workers by circumventing secret ballot elections with a new “card check” system. Former Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed two previous attempts to undermine secret ballot elections for private sector employees confronted with the choice of joining a union, but supporters expect Governor Brown to sign the measure. Opponents say the law will spell the demise of the tried-and-true secret balloting procedure.

Senate Bill 104 passed on a 51-25 party-line vote Monday. If you ask the author of SB 104, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), he will tell you that the new law would cut down on intimidation during on-site elections. Opponents say just the opposite will be the case.  The new rules might bolster a coercive atmosphere for employees who would have to make a public choice to sign state-issued representation cards.

What's even more worrisome is that unions who opt for the card check method can completely avoid elections for union certification altogether by taking advantage of a few interesting technicalities in the law. Steinberg, a former lawyer for the California State Employees Association will not qualify these concerns. According to Steinberg's office, “SB 104 does not eliminate the secret ballot — it just adds the new option to the secret ballot process.”

Here's how card check elections operate:

Unions who wish to hold an election disburse representation cards to employees they wish to recruit. As per the law, the union in question is not required to disclose to the employee that their signature indicates a vote for unionization. After a majority of the cards are signed for a particular employer (51 percent), all employees are then required to join the union. Cards can be signed up to one year in advance.

To make things even easier on these employees, the new law would allow labor organizations to fill out all of the information on the representation card, minus the signature, of course. “Discrepancies” between an employee's name on his card and the one found on the employer's list can now be “ignored” by the labor board.  Additionaly, critics of the card check law point out that it fails to impose the same harsh penalties on unions as it does on employers for acts of intimidation.

Some argue that if the public had analyzed this piece of legislation more closely, it might not have made it through the lower house. It took a sleight of hand to sneak the Senate-approved measure around some traditional hurdles in the Assembly last month when Speaker John Perez allowed an Assembly committee to hold a surprise hearing on the bill, because he suspended the public notice rule for legislative hearings. He then voted to pass it to the next committee.

Tags: News

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Get IVN’s Free Weekly Newsletter:Get IVN’s Free Newsletter

Nonpartisan Issues. Diverse Perspectives.

Check your inbox and click the link to confirm.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Farm workers might be forced to unionize under new California law

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us