Commentary

Provision added to regulatory reform bill would undermine farmworker unions

Farmworkers

As has been common with bills drafted by this General Assembly, the title of HB593 does not adequately describe its contents.  The “Act to Amend Certain Environmental, Natural Resources, and 3 Other Laws” deals with wide ranging subjects, including storm water, erosion, reptiles, and mopeds.  A late addition, Section 17, adds unions to the mix.

Section 17 seeks to modify North Carolina’s Right to Work law, more accurately described as “the right to work for less.”  This law allows workers who don’t pay union dues to benefit from a contract negotiated with the employer.  The General Assembly amended the right to work law during the 2013-14 legislative session, voiding agreements that condition the purchase of agricultural products on the union status of that producer.  That amendment aimed squarely at interfering with the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC)’s highly successful model of organizing tripartite agreements between farmworkers, growers, and the companies that purchase agricultural products.

The Indy wrote yesterday about the GA’s past meddling with FLOC:

In 2013, the legislature passed the sweeping Regulatory Reform Act, called House Bill 74, which stripped farmworkers of the ability to llectively bargain and barred corporations from putting pressure on the farms they get their products from to ensure fair labor standards. If HB 74 had passed a decade earlier, says Justin Flores of the Farm Labor Organizing Committee, the FLOC wouldn’t have been able to reach a collective bargaining agreement with the NCGA.

“What this General Assembly did, including Senator Jackson,” says N.C. AFL-CIO secretary-treasurer MaryBe McMillan, “was make farmworkers even more vulnerable by limiting their ability to come together and create these supply-chain agreements so they could get corporations to put power on growers to make sure farmworkers are paid decent wages and treated fairly.”

Now the General Assembly wants to step into private agreements between growers and farmworkers in settlement of litigation.  Section 17 would prevent agreements whereby a grower recognizes an employee union as part of a negotiation between the parties to a lawsuit.  It is unclear why growers would want their hands tied in such a way that they could not bargain freely to resolve litigation in a way that they consider to be beneficial to their interests.

Check Also

Trump administration rule change would stymie workers’ suits against employers

“The Future of Work.” It sounds so promising, ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

A troubled charter school in the Rowan County town of East Spencer has turned to a man with a checke [...]

Nearly half of the female students at UNC-Chapel Hill have experienced some form of sexual assault b [...]

Despite concerns, Treasurer Dale Folwell maintains state investments in much-criticized company that [...]

If you only look at the unemployment rate and the stock market, you probably think most families are [...]

When the journalist Michael Kinsley wrote in 1984 that a gaffe “is when a politician tells the truth [...]

Tonight's Democratic presidential debate will be dominated by two urgent issues: the House of R [...]

Supporters of public education fight back against empty promises of state’s school privatization mov [...]

Survey of hold-out states indicates the Medicaid expansion debate has entered a new phase Across the [...]