Vlasic Farms, Inc., v. PA Labor Relations Board: PA Supreme Court Allows Mushroom Workers to Unionize

IMMIGRANTS & EMPLOYMENT

Immigrants' Employment Rights and Remedies

VLASIC FARMS, INC., V. PA LABOR RELATIONS BOARD: PA SUPREME COURT ALLOWS MUSHROOM WORKERS TO UNIONIZE
Immigrants' Rights Update, Vol. 15, No. 5, Aug. 31, 2001

Holding that the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB) had jurisdiction over an unfair labor practice charge filed by mushroom workers, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has found that mushroom harvesters are not "agricultural laborers" excluded from the protections of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Act of 1937 (PLRA).

After the Comité de Trabajadores de Campbell Fresh (Campbell Fresh was later bought by Vlasic Farms, Inc.) filed a representation petition with the PLRB, the union filed an unfair labor practice charge alleging the employer had threatened to close the production facility if the workers elected to form a union and also had promised employees that it would establish an in-house grievance committee if they withdrew their petition for representation. The employer, in turn, challenged the PLRB's jurisdiction over the charge, claiming that mushroom workers are agricultural laborers and, therefore, prohibited from organizing into a union, since agricultural workers are excluded from the provisions of the PLRA. Because it has consistently distinguished mushroom workers from agricultural laborers, the PLRB found it did have jurisdiction and that the employer had engaged in several unfair labor practices. The employer filed an appeal to the Commonwealth Court and subsequently to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The supreme court's decision in Vlasic Farms, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, issued on July 25, 2001, affirmed the lower court's decision, which found that the PLRA was modeled after the version of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA) that existed prior to 1947, under which mushroom workers were not considered to be agricultural laborers because mushroom production was classified as a horticultural activity. The trial court noted that while Congress expanded the definition of "agricultural" laborers in 1947 to include mushroom workers, the Pennsylvania legislature has not made such an amendment to the PLRA. In amending the NLRA, Congress borrowed the definition of "agriculture" found in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), which defines "agriculture" as "the production, and cultivation, growing and harvesting of any agricultural or horticultural commodities." See, 29 U.S.C. § 203(f). However, the Pennsylvania General Assembly was unsuccessful in its attempt to modify the PLRA in 1969, and thus the court found that mushroom workers were protected by the PLRA. The court further rejected the employer's reliance on other Pennsylvania statutes that have interpreted "agricultural labor" to include mushroom workers, such as the Seasonal Farm Labor Act of 1978 and the unemployment compensation statute.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that the lower court granted the proper deference owed to the PLRB in its own reasonable and long-standing interpretation of the statute and that it was inappropriate for the courts to follow a different interpretation until the General Assembly amends the PLRA.

The Comité de Trabajadores was represented by the Friends of Farmworkers, Inc., in Pennsylvania, and the AFL-CIO filed as amicus curiae on their behalf.

Vlasic Farms, Inc., v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PA Sup. Ct. July 25, 2001), No. 59 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1999, 2001 Pa. LEXIS 1598.