Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Agricultural Labor Relations Board reports settlements, administrative orders and multiple court cases
Loading...
Summary
At its May 28 meeting the Agricultural Labor Relations Board heard reports on recent settlements involving farmworkers, three administrative orders tied to Wonderful Nurseries LLC, and ongoing federal and state litigation including motions and tentative hearing dates.
Executive Secretary Santiago Villagomez told the Agricultural Labor Relations Board on May 28 that staff have closed several complaints, the board issued three administrative orders involving Wonderful Nurseries LLC, and multiple related court cases remain pending in state and federal courts.
Why it matters: Several of the matters reported — including federal litigation and motions for preliminary injunctions — could affect how the Agricultural Labor Relations Act is applied to union organizing and employer conduct in California agriculture.
Villagomez reported three categories of business: complaints settled since the last meeting, administrative orders the board issued in mid-May, and pending matters. He said complaints resolved since the prior meeting included a Brimway Enterprises Inc. matter (case number 2023CE018VIS, commodity: lettuce, Kern County) for which the general counsel’s office filed a motion to take the case off calendar on May 23, and a Redwood Empire Vineyard Management, Inc. matter (grapes, Sonoma County) for which a motion to take off calendar was also received May 23.
Villagomez summarized three administrative orders involving Wonderful Nurseries LLC: administrative order 2025-02 (granting in part and denying in part special permission to appeal a hearing examiner’s ruling on attorney-client privilege and attorney work product), administrative order 2025-03 (granting special permission to appeal an investigative hearing examiner’s order regarding a petition to revoke notice in lieu of subpoena), and administrative order 2025-04-P (a presidential order denying Maria Esther Gutierrez’s application for special permission to appeal an interim investigative hearing examiner order and denying in part a petition to revoke a subpoena). All three orders cite case number 2024RM002 and were reported as posted on the board’s website under legal searches: administrative orders.
On pending matters, Villagomez said briefing in CYMA Orchids Corporation (case number 2023CE-016SAL) is complete, with exceptions to the underlying administrative decision filed April 29 and a reply filed May 13.
General Counsel Julia Montgomery provided settlement details staff had reached since the last meeting. She said a worker who filed a charge against Edwin Bridal Dairy alleged retaliation and will receive $2,035 in lost wages as part of a settlement that also includes standard noticing remedies and supervisor training. Montgomery said a Brimway Enterprises settlement will result in $9,441 in lost wages to a lettuce harvester and standard remedies and training.
Montgomery also described a settlement with Redwood Empire Vineyard Management. She said vineyard workers claimed they had been retaliated against for affiliation with the nonprofit North Bay Jobs with Justice and that employment agreements contained language stating workers could be fired for trying to negotiate wages. The settlement, Montgomery said, provides $33,548 to workers, offers reinstatement, requires the company to rescind the contract language at issue, and includes notice and supervisor training. Montgomery said a press conference related to that settlement was scheduled for 4:30 p.m. in Healdsburg and that Regional Director Yacine Del Luna would attend on behalf of the board.
Montgomery and Villagomez also summarized litigation developments. In Wonderful Nurseries LLC v. ALRB (federal and state filings), motions to intervene filed by the United Farm Workers and by individual employees were decided on the papers; the court gave intervenors 14 days to file an amended complaint. Villagomez said the board’s motion to dismiss the individual employees’ complaint will be due July 7; the board’s reply in related briefing would be due June 6 if certain filings had been made. He said a hearing on the board’s motion to dismiss in that matter was tentatively scheduled for Aug. 18.
Montgomery reported that in Olive Hill Greenhouses and Western Growers Association v. ALRB, plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in late April and the matter was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. That court issued an order to show cause on consolidating related cases; a tentative hearing on the preliminary injunction was set for June 2 and the board’s response (a motion to dismiss) was due June 9. Montgomery said the hearing on the motion to dismiss is technically set for Aug. 4 but may be moved to Aug. 18 to align with the Wonderful Nurseries schedule.
Chair Hassan thanked staff for issuing the three administrative orders in short succession: "Thanks to our team here who worked to get those 3 orders out," she said.
Discussion vs. decisions: board members asked no follow-up questions during the public portion of the meeting. Villagomez and Montgomery presented information and cited filing dates, case numbers and hearing schedules; the meeting did not record any new board votes on these matters during the session.
The board will continue to post related filings and orders on its website; several deadlines and tentative hearing dates affecting consolidation and motions remain pending in federal and state courts.
