Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—Union sues Pennsylvania over state labor law’s carveout for agricultural workers, (Sep 22, 2026)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

“Winning this case will strengthen the rights of workers across the supply chain. This is necessary, and long overdue.”

A Pennsylvania union is asking a state appeals court to strike down a nearly 90-year-old statutory provision that excludes agricultural workers from the state's collective bargaining law, arguing that the exemption violates multiple provisions of the Pennsylvania Constitution and disproportionately harms Hispanic and immigrant farmworkers. The suit seeks an order declaring the exception unconstitutional, and enjoining state officials from enforcing it.

“Pennsylvania helped build the American labor movement, and we don’t leave workers behind. That’s exactly what this statute does. We’re filing this lawsuit to strike down the agricultural exception because it violates our state constitution, and because no one should have fewer rights simply because of where their work takes place,” said Wendell Young IV, President of UFCW Local 1776 KS. “Winning this case will strengthen the rights of workers across the supply chain. This is necessary, and long overdue.”

Petition filed. In a petition for review filed September 21 in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 1776 Keystone State, sued the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, the chairman, and a board member, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief invalidating the agricultural-worker exclusion in the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Act.

“Everywhere, agricultural workers deserve the same workplace protections as all other workers. By carving them out of the PLRA, Pennsylvania is treating its agricultural workers, the backbone of the state’s agricultural industry, as uniquely unworthy of protection,” said Hannah Wolf, FarmSTAND Senior Staff Attorney and counsel for UFCW 1776 in the challenge.

Excluded in 1937. Specifically, the lawsuit targets a provision of the 1937 statute that excludes "agricultural laborers" from the law's definition of employee, leaving them without statutory protections for organizing, collective bargaining, and unfair labor practice claims. According to the complaint, roughly 60,000 Pennsylvania agricultural workers are affected by the exclusion.

The union contends that the carveout is incompatible with the state legislature's stated purpose in enacting the PLRA, which was designed to protect workers' freedom of association and encourage collective bargaining. The complaint argues that agricultural laborers perform some of the most difficult and dangerous work yet remain excluded from protections available to nearly every other category of private-sector worker in the state.

In spite of its “bold declaration of policy,” the union states in the complaint, the law “arbitrarily strips the Commonwealth's agricultural workforce of these foundational protections.”

Constitutional claims. The lawsuit presents a broad constitutional challenge that relies on commonwealth constitutional law. First, the union alleges that the agricultural-worker exemption violates Article III, Section 32 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which prohibits special legislation regulating labor. According to the complaint, the exclusion grants the agricultural industry a unique benefit unavailable to employers in other sectors and lacks any rational relationship to the PLRA's purpose of addressing imbalances in bargaining power between workers and employers.

Second, the union alleges a violation of Article I, Section 26, Pennsylvania's equal protection provision. The complaint argues that agricultural workers are denied important statutory rights enjoyed by similarly situated workers, including protections against employer interference with organizing efforts and access to remedies before the labor board.

Disparate impact. Third, the union invokes Article I, Section 29, a constitutional provision prohibiting denial or abridgment of equality of rights based on race or ethnicity. The union argues that the exemption has a disparate impact because most hired agricultural workers in Pennsylvania are Hispanic, Latino, or members of other minority groups. The complaint characterizes the exclusion as a measure that perpetuates vulnerability among a workforce heavily composed of immigrants, temporary visa holders, and workers who often face language barriers and geographic isolation.

Farming has changed. The lawsuit traces the agricultural-worker exclusion to comparable language in the federal National Labor Relations Act. According to the complaint, agricultural workers were omitted from the NLRA after political pressure from agricultural interests during the statute's enactment in the 1930s. Pennsylvania subsequently adopted similar language when it enacted its own labor relations law.

The union argues that the rationale for the exclusion has eroded over time as agriculture has become increasingly industrialized and consolidated. The complaint points to Pennsylvania's multibillion-dollar agricultural economy and the growth of vertically integrated food-production systems in which workers at different stages of the same supply chain are treated differently under labor law.

Arbitrary distinctions. For example, the complaint notes that a worker tending poultry on a farm may be considered an excluded agricultural laborer, while workers involved in later stages of production and processing receive statutory labor protections. The union describes that distinction as arbitrary and unsupported by any legitimate governmental interest.

The filing also emphasizes that several states, including California, New York, Wisconsin, Colorado, New Jersey, and Oregon, extend collective bargaining rights to agricultural workers, arguing that those jurisdictions demonstrate farmworker organizing rights are compatible with a thriving agricultural sector.

Impact on organizing efforts. The complaint also describes some of the practical consequences of the exclusion for the union’s organizing activities. The Plymouth Meeting-based union represents about 30,000 workers across Pennsylvania, including employees in meatpacking, food processing, cannabis, and related industries. The union says more than 100 of its members are agricultural laborers.

According to the complaint, the exclusion weakens organizing efforts throughout agricultural and food-production supply chains because farmworkers lack statutory protection against retaliation. The union alleges it has been forced to devote resources to determining whether workers qualify as agricultural laborers and to adjust organizing and bargaining strategies because of the legal risks facing those workers. It further alleges that it has abandoned organizing campaigns at some worksites where a substantial portion of potential bargaining-unit members would likely be classified as agricultural laborers.

Impacted members. Notably, the complaint alleges that at least three agricultural laborers represented by the union in the cannabis industry were terminated because of union-organizing activities. Because agricultural workers are exempt from the PLRA, those workers allegedly lacked access to statutory unfair labor practice remedies, the union notes.

The union argues that the exclusion fractures bargaining power throughout the food-production chain by allowing employers to rely on nonunion agricultural operations as leverage during negotiations with unionized processing and manufacturing workers.

Relief sought. The petition asks the court to declare the agricultural-worker exclusion unconstitutional and permanently bar state officials from enforcing it. The union also asks the court to strike the phrase "agricultural laborer" from the portion of the statute defining which workers are excluded from the term "employee."

The case was filed by FarmSTAND, UFCW Local 1776, and attorneys from Willig, Williams & Davidson.

News: LitigationNewsTrends LaborNews Labor StateLawClaims IndividualRights ImmigrationNews IndustryNewsTrends