His second comment was followed by an ad hominem attack which I removed because it was false and childish. Still, I leave the semi-relevant claims he made up because, as I previously said, they lead to interesting information. Enjoy.

Voting control on the UFW’s web of nonprofits is consolidated in few hands, primarily Cesar Chavez’s family members. This is not technically illegal, but it is generally frowned upon by watchdog groups.

You should take a look at the Bakersfield Californian series from 2004 as well. According to that series, the UFW’s political work isn’t always focused on
improving the workplace. In California’s 2001-2002 legislative session, less than half of the bills lobbied by the UFW had anything to do with labor.
The UFW paid its consultant lobbyists $336,000 during that legislative session.

“They know it’s wrong. They know they can’t stand public scrutiny on it, they’re dealing with very large sums of money. The quality of whoever’s running it and whoever’s on the board should be scrutinized. They have to be beyond reproach.” (James Lorenz, an Oakland attorney and longtime UFW observer. He founded California Rural Legal Assistance in 1966. (Reported in the Bakersfield Californian May 9, 2004)

Look at how many workers have voted to get rid of the UFW after living under the “benefits” of a UFW contract. Last year, the UFW touted the signing of its Gallo contract, but this year the workers voted out the union, and some were quoted as saying that they did not get their money’s worth for the mandatory dues.

In fact, the moves taken by the UFW to put Guy Chaddock out of business occurred after the workers fought for 2 years to get rid of the union. When Chaddock went under, Bakersfield TV station KGET quoted worker Veronica Cobian, who said “We think it was the union that did this.” By the way, Chaddock was growing and meeting targets for local hiring set forth in its public financing arrangement until the union came in, after which the health of the company declined, as did the size of the workforce.

From 1993 to 1995 the union promoted a boycott of Safeway for selling table grapes and strawberries, while the UFW pension plan had $340,000
invested in Safeway! During the same period, the UFW invested hundreds of thousands of farm worker dollars in companies that make the pesticides that the UFW claimed were a threat to worker health! The UFW pension plan has also invested in companies like Nike and Wal-
Mart, who are hardly friendly to workers.

PBS produced a documentary that included an interview with Francisco Alcazar, a strawberry worker targeted and blacklisted by the UFW because he spokde out agains the union.

In 2001, over a hundred farm workers lost their jobs at Coastal Berry Company when the UFW demanded that the company fire them after they objected to mandatory UFW dues. According to the workers, the UFW never told them that that they had the right to object to the amount of the dues. In 2004, the UFW agreed to pay $105,000 to the workers to settle the case.

As you know, I am clearly on a side of these issues that opposes the union. I have spared you my anecdotal evidence about the union’s corruption, because I do not expect to believe. But that does not change the fact that the UFW lies to the workers, spends their money on things that they may not want, and ignores their needs once the contract is signed and the dues money comes in. Everything in this post is verifiable by independent sources. The UFW has twice been found by the ALRB to have failed to comply with rules requiring the union to disclose and account for how dues dollars are spent.

Don’t believe me blindly, but don’t believe the union blindly just because of the memory of Cesar Chavez. If you look into it, you will find that this union is not what it appears to be. Despite what I do for a living, I will be the first to admit that there are good unions out there that are committed to representation of their members, the UFW is just not one of them.