Skip to comments.Gerawan Farming Taking State-Forced Unionization Case to US Supreme Court
Posted on 04/18/2018 11:14:47 AM PDT by Sean_Anthony
Gerawan's employees do not want to be unionized by the UFW or forced into union servitude by the California ALRB
Surprising no one, on Nov. 27, the California Supreme Court upheld the dubious Mandatory Mediation and Conciliation law against Gerawan Farming. The California Supreme Court heard the Gerawan case last fall on whether the states attempting to force mandatory agricultural labor union contracts violates the constitutional safeguard of equal protection. Fresno-based peach grower Gerawan Farming is one of the largest agriculture employers in the state.
The serious wrangling with the United Farm Workers Labor Union and ALRB began again in October of 2012, when the union insisted that a multi-decades old collective bargaining agreement covering Gerawan workers be reactivated, and tried to invoke a 2002 law that empowers the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board to impose a union contract on the companys farm workers, and to deduct three percent of the 5,000 Gerawan employees paywithout their consent.
Does anyone wonder why growers (as well as manufacturers) go to places like Mexico or China?
yes, they want to maximize profits, but let’s not also forget our government at all levels often does things to push these people out.
The states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect labor unions. Post FDR era federal laws that protect labor unions are therefore unconstitutional imo.
From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, the United States v. Butler opinion points out that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate agriculture.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added]." United States v. Butler, 1936.
Regardless what FDRs state sovereignty-ignoring Supreme Court activist justices wanted everybody to think about scope of Congresss Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), FDR's justices evidently wrongly ignored that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified the already clear meaning of that clause. The states have never expressly constitutional delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate INTRAstate commerce.
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added]." -Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Just as the first numbered clauses in the federal Constitution clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, California constitution similarly clarifies that its legislative powers are vested in its state lawmakers, not non-elected bureaucrats.
"Federal Constitution Article I, Section 1: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."
"California Constitution ARTICLE 4 LEGISLATIVE, SECTION 1: The legislative power of this State is vested in the California Legislature which consists of the Senate and Assembly, but the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum."
So just like corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification federal lawmakers have wrongly front-ended federal legislative powers, arguably stolen state powers, with non-elected regulatory bureaucrats imo, federal lawmakers not only protecting their voting records by letting bureaucrats do their dirty legislative work for them, but also wrongly nullifying voting power with this practice, it seems that the California agricultural / labor bureaucrats are likewise an unconstitutional front-end for California's legislative powers under California's constitution.
And this gets us back to the federal Congress.
More specifically, regardless that the Founding States gave the feds the specific power to guarantee each state a republican form of government, the federal Congress is wrongly ignoring that non-elected California regulatory bureaucrats are wrongly nullifying voting power as much as federal regulatory bureaucrats do.
"Article IV, Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government [emphasis added], and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."
What a mess! Federal and state government corruption at all levels imo.
Patriots need to finish the job that they started when they elected Trump president.
More specifically, patriots now need to be making sure that there are plenty of Trump-supporting patriot candidates on the 2018 primary ballots. Patriot candidates must commit to doing their duty to guarantee each state a republican form of government.
Patriots then need to pink-slip career lawmakers by sending patriot candidate lawmakers to DC on election day.
And until the states wake up and repeal 17A, as evidenced by concerns about the integrity of the outcome of Alabama's and Pennsylvania's special elections, patriot candidates need to win elections by a large enough margin to compensate for possible deep state ballot box fraud, associated MSM scare tactics, and interference from people like Soros.
dictatorship is what the socialist democratic party is all about.
Only the elites should lead (and their offspring) and the non elites should just shut the **ck up and obey. actually they want the peasants on their knees, their ass in the air with their forehead firmly on terra firma. We will be going back to the aristocrats who do not have to obey the laws of the land (oh yeah, we are already there)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.