Agriculture Groups File Suit to Delay NY Law Granting Farmworkers Right to Organize
The lawsuit claimed the new law isn't clear about who has the right to organize, and conflicts with federal law.
December 30, 2019 at 05:56 PM
5 minute read
A state law approved in New York this year to give farmworkers the right to organize was challenged in federal court Monday by a coalition of dairy and vegetable farmers, who asked that the measure be put on hold before it's set to take effect Wednesday.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, claimed the new law isn't clear about who has the right to organize, and conflicts with federal law.
It was filed by the Northeast Dairy Producers Association and the New York State Vegetable Growers Association, two trade groups representing their respective agricultural industries. They claimed they've been asking the state for months to clarify the law, to no avail.
John Dickinson, a dairy farmer from Washington County who represents NEDPA, said they're planning to comply with the law, but need to delay its effective date until they know more.
"The lack of guidance the dairy community is receiving is causing unnecessary stress on farms, agri-businesses, and families across the state," Dickinson said. "We have every intention of abiding with this law, but our farms and employees are struggling with implementation due to unclear and conflicting definitions as it is currently written."
The coalition of farmers is represented on the challenge by attorneys with Michael Best & Friedrich in Wisconsin and former New York Attorney General Dennis Vacco, who's now a partner at Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman in Buffalo.
The lawsuit claimed the new law's definition of who's considered a "farm laborer" could be interpreted to include supervisors, farm owners, and family members of farm owners. That would make them eligible to engage in collective bargaining, the suit said.
That would put those individuals in an impossible situation, according to the challenge. Supervisors, owners, and family members could be labeled as employees allowed to organize, but also be barred from influencing bargaining activities.
"This creates an unworkable Catch 22, imposing on farms an obligation to engage in conduct that would violate other provisions of the Act and thereby creating conflicting prohibitions that cannot be reconciled," the lawsuit said.
The groups also claimed that the National Labor Relations Act, a federal law regarding the right to organize, precludes states from adopting legislation that would allow supervisors to engage in collective bargaining. That means the law is preempted by federal statute, the suit said.
Farmers can't simply decide, as a result, that individuals in a supervisory capacity won't be involved in collective bargaining, the groups claimed.
If they decide that supervisors, owners, and family members shouldn't be classified as farm laborers, and therefore would be excluded from certain rights under the law, such as hour restrictions and overtime pay, they could face civil penalties or criminal charges.
"The balance of equities and public interest weigh in favor of injunctive relief to ensure the Act strikes a proper and fair balance of improving workers' conditions with the rights of Plaintiffs and their member farms to operate their business without running afoul of the Act," the suit said.
The new law does more than provide farmworkers with the option to organize. It also mandates that they be paid overtime when they work more than 60 hours a week, which wasn't required under the previous law. One day of rest will also be guaranteed each week.
The law also gives farmworkers access to workers' compensation, without a payroll threshold, and unemployment benefits. Employers will be precluded from firing or failing to reinstate a farmworker who files a claim for injuries they incurred on the job.
Brian Reeves, a vegetable farmer from Onondaga County who's the president of the NYSVGA, said it's seeking to have the law paused until the Legislature can amend the statute to sort out any confusion about who's covered as a farm laborer, and who's not.
"We have been working for months in a constructive manner to bring clarity and fairness to a law that had significant problems due to ambiguity and unfairness to employees and farm families across New York," Reeves said.
"Today, we are simply seeking a temporary pause to the implementation of this law, to avoid harm to our farms and our employees, while the governor and Legislature correct the ambiguities," he continued.
A spokeswoman from the state Department of Labor, a target of the lawsuit, said the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation, but hailed the new law.
"While we won't comment on pending litigation, we can say that this administration feels very strongly that the constitutional principles of equity, fairness and due process should apply to everyone," the spokeswoman said.
"The Farm Laborers Fair Labor Practices Act protects farm worker rights and ensures every farm worker benefits from the basic labor protections and rights that all other workers in our state enjoy," she continued.
The new law is set to take effect on Jan. 1.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Major Drug Companies Agree to Pay $49.1 Million to 50 States, Territories
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250