Adamek & Dessert, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board

Good Law
178 Cal. App. 3d 970·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2717·224 Cal. Rptr. 366
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 1986No. D002985; No. D003006California3,863 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Staniforth, J.

The petitions for review filed by Adamek & Dessert, Inc. and the United Farm Workers of America, AFL-CIO have been reviewed and considered by Acting Presiding Justice Staniforth, and Justices Wiener and Work. The petitions are denied. (See Tex-Cal Land Management, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 335 [ 156 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 595 P.2d 579 ].) Although we are authorized by law to summarily deny the petitions without explanation, we elect not to do so in this case. (See Holtville Farms, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd. (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 388 [ 214 Cal.Rptr. 241 ].) We believe it will be helpful to set forth our reasons for the court’s summary dismissals. We propose, inter alia, to articulate the reasons why the Board cannot average the number of employees on the payroll preceding the election, thus to insure compliance with Labor Code 1 section 1156.3 in the future.

This cause involves petitions for review of an Agricultural Labor Relations Board (hereafter ALRB or Board) decision finding that Adamek & Dessert, Inc. (hereafter Adamek) had refused to bargain with the United Farm Workers (hereafter UFW). Petitions have been filed by both Adamek…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.