ALRB staff report recent board decisions and pending appeals in multiple farm-labor cases

Executive Secretary Santiago Abiola Gomez and Chief Board Counsel Laura Heick summarized recent board decisions, pending enforcement requests and appeals, and federal litigation during the Agricultural Labor Relations Board's June 11 meeting.

Gomez said the board issued one decision since the May 28 meeting: 51 ALRB No. 2, in CYMA Orchids Corporation (case listed in the report as 2023-CED-016-SAL), issued June 2, in which the board affirmed an administrative law judge's grant of a motion for default judgment and recommended a remedial order.

Gomez listed three pending matters. He said Ocean Mist Farms has a pending enforcement request related to a regional director's subpoena and a board order (46 ALRB No. 5); that enforcement request was filed May 29. Gomez also summarized two applications for permission to special-appeal in United Farm Workers of America v. Monterey Mushrooms, LLC (filed June 9 and June 10): one concerns the general counsel's request for special permission to appeal an ALJ order denying a virtual hearing (response due June 16) and the other is the UFW's request for special permission to appeal an ALJ order regarding a motion to bifurcate (response due June 17). Gomez noted meeting materials are posted on the ALRB website under the meetings tab.

Heick gave the litigation report and described two federal matters the agency is tracking. In Nurseries v. ALME (docket reported as 1:24-cv-01601-KES-CDV), the board filed a reply on June 6 to interveners' filings; a hearing on the board's motion to dismiss is set for Aug. 18. The judge issued an order to show cause on whether to consolidate that case with a separate suit brought by Western Growers and All of the Greenhouses (docket reported as 1:25-cv-00577); responses to that order were filed on June 2 and the consolidation question remains pending. In the Western Growers/All of the Greenhouses matter, there was a preliminary-injunction hearing in Fresno in early June and the board filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on June 9.

Why it matters: The cases touch on procedural issues (virtual hearings and bifurcation) and enforcement tools (board orders and subpoenas) that affect how agricultural-labor disputes are adjudicated. Some federal litigation raises the prospect of consolidation and could affect timelines for motions such as the motion to dismiss scheduled for argument in August.

Meeting context and next steps: Gomez and Heick answered procedural questions and noted filings and response deadlines; no formal board vote or rulemaking occurred during this portion of the meeting. The board recessed into closed session at about 10:12 a.m. and returned at 12:35 p.m.

Ending: Gomez and Heick said they are available to answer questions and that meeting materials and case documents are posted on the ALRB website.