brief in a case challenging an ALRB ruling which upheld an administrative law judge’s decision that a 2013 petition by a group of Gerawan workers to oust the UFW union was tainted by what the ALJ deemed to be unlawful speech by the employer. The Order found the results of the decertification election held in November 2013 to be invalid. The brief argued, and the court agreed, that Dan Gerawan’s statements supporting the workers who petitioned the government for a decertification election and for the right to have their ballots counted were protected by the First Amendment’s right to free speech, as well as other First Amendment related arguments. In a unanimous 138-page opinion, the Fifth District Court of Appeal vacated the ALRB’s decision to dismiss the decertification petition and set aside the election of the workers and directed the Board to tally the workers’ ballots that it ordered impounded over four years earlier. Five years after that decertification election, Gerawan‘s employees’ ballots were finally counted, with the result being a resounding vote to oust the union. Environmental Litigation Western Growers does not only engage in employment and labor cases; we have advocated on behalf of members in water and other environmental litigation as well. We are engaged in numerous contentious legal battles to defend water quality control board waivers of discharge requirements for irrigated agricultural operations. For example,Western Growers, along with the California Farm Bureau Federation and Grower-Shipper associations, has intervened in several cases filed by Monterey Coastkeeper and other environmental advocates against the State Water Resources Control Board. In two of these cases, Monterey Coastkeeper challenged the order issued by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board waiving the discharge requirements for irrigated ag operations in the region. As interveners, we were able to secure a partial win on behalf of the industry. Western Growers has also intervened in yet another case brought by Monterey Coastkeeper, this one challenging the Eastern San Joaquin Watershed discharge permit, which is just getting underway. Last September, Western Growers and a coalition of agricultural associations filed a writ petition challenging the California Fish and Game Commission’s decision to grant candidacy status to four subspecies of bumble bees under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). The petition contends that insects are not eligible for listing under CESA. Importantly, the California Attorney
General’s Office and the California Office of Administrative Law and Department of Fish and Wildlife, also separately concluded that insects cannot be listed. The environmental groups petitioning for listing the species are asking for changes to a number of agricultural activities to protect the bumble bees. They want: · Grazing reduced, which could lead to increased wildfire risk; · Pesticide and herbicide use restricted; · Limits put on where honeybee hives can be placed, which will reduce the available food for honeybees; and · Restrictions placed on the use of bumble bees for commercial pollination. Since honeybees are responsible for nearly half of California’s agricultural production (both directly and indirectly), placing restrictions on their access to forage, is likely to have broad adverse impacts throughout California’s agricultural economy. The listing is also unnecessary, as farmers have made significant investments in efforts to improve habitat for pollinators, such as planting hedgerows to provide habitat and implementing best management practices to reduce impacts from pesticide use. If the listing is allowed to stand, you can
be sure that the floodgates to list additional insects will quickly open up. Unlike the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which carefully vets petitions to list and regularly rejects those petitions as being without merit, the California Fish and Game Commission grants the vast majority of petitions to list that it receives. administrative agency decisions listing or banning important crop protection tools. Recently,Western Growers joined industry partners in a bid to petition the California Supreme Court to review the Office of Environmental Health & Hazard Assessment’s (“OEHHA”) decision to list trizines (including herbicides atrazine, propazine and simazine) under Proposition 65 without adhering to regulatory requirements. The California Court of Appeal had upheld OEHHA’s findings. The California Supreme Court ultimately denied review in the case. This is just a sampling of the advocacy on the legal front that Western Growers is conducting on behalf of the fresh produce industry. I hope you were already aware of Western Growers’ commitment to legal advocacy, but if you weren’t, I hope you are encouraged by WG’s commitment to you—our members. Western Growers has also appeared as amicus in multiple cases challenging
32 Western Grower & Shipper | www.wga.com MARCH | APRIL 2020
Made with FlippingBook Publishing Software