Monday, December 1, 2025
Page 1
Fifth District C.A. Files Opinion-for-Publication Embracing Half-Century of Precedential Cases
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Fifth District Court of Appeal has issued an opinion which it certified for publication notwithstanding its proclamation that the outcome is ordained in light of unchallenged case law going back a half century.
Justice Rosendo Peña Jr. authored the opinion, filed Tuesday. It grants a petition for a writ of mandate ordering the Kern Superior Court to vacate a preliminary injunction enjoining administrative proceedings brought by the United Farmworkers of America (“UFW”). The union sought to be certified as the exclusive bargaining representative for laborers at Wonderful Nurseries, known for its pistachios and other agricultural products.
Wonderful petitioned for injunctive relief, alleging that a 2023 statute, Labor Code §1156.37, authorizing certification by the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, is unconstitutional. Relief was granted by Kern Superior Court Judge Bernard C. Barmann Jr.
Peña wrote:
“Wonderful filed this petition notwithstanding approximately 50 years of unbroken precedent finding an employer may not directly challenge a union certification decision in court except in extraordinarily and exceedingly rare circumstances, which Wonderful does not meaningfully attempt to show are present here. Rather, if the employer believes a union has been inappropriately certified as a bargaining representative, its remedy is to refuse to bargain with it. In the normal course of business, claims are then brought against the employer for unfair labor practices.”
He continued:
“In the context of an unfair labor practice proceeding, the employer can contest the validity of the certification. This procedure has been upheld not only by the courts of this state interpreting California’s Alatorre-Zenovich-Dunlap-Berman Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975 (…ALRA…)…but by federal courts interpreting the National Labor Relations Act (…NLRA …) on which the ALRA is modeled.”
The justice went on to say:
“Courts have long held there is no direct review of union certification decisions under the NLRA or the ALRA.”
He reiterated:
“[D]ecades of precedent from this court, other California courts, and federal courts interpreting an analogous statute show an employer may not challenge a union certification decision outside of an unfair labor practices proceeding, except in unusual circumstances.”
Rejecting Wonderful’s contention that it was not challenging a certification decision but, rather, the constitutionality of §1156.37, Peña said:
“[B]ut it is doing so by challenging the certification of the UFW as the bargaining representative for its employees. Were it otherwise, Wonderful would likely lack standing, although that is not a question that we need to reach here.
“Moreover, it is plainly apparent from the petition that Wonderful is challenging the specific decision to certify the UFW as the bargaining representative for its workers.”
Under California Rules of Court, rule 8.1105, a Court of Appeal opinion is to be certified for publication only if it “[e]stablishes a new rule of law” or meets one of eight other criteria not readily apparent in connection with Tuesday’s decision nor pointed to by Peña.
The case is Wonderful Nurseries, LLC, v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board (United Farm Workers of America), F088515.
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company