# data[].attributes.body
During the Grape Strike and Boycott of 1965-1970 there was one group in particular that stood out pretty obviously, the grape farm owners. These individuals were pretty apparent when it came down to being the opposing group to the protestors. These farmers treated their workers very poorly by working them long hours, little breaks and little pay. The farm owners had known that they had an advantage over their workers which could affect the longevity of this strike/boycott, their pay and financial security. Though the farm owners rely on human resources also known as the pure man power that the Filipino workers were able to supply. Many opposed the farm owners and would not purchase their grapes which resulted in the farmers attempting to sell their products under aliases. With the lack of buyers for their products the strike/boycott was working and achieving its purpose. When it came to the vulnerabilities of the strike/boycotts opposing side the purse aspect that they were not moving any product is a large enough impact that it would affect the entire livelihood of the farms.

UFW.org. 2017. "The 1965-1970 Delano Grape Strike and Boycott" https://ufw.org/1965-1970-delano-grape-strike-boycott/

# data[].attributes.headline
Issues & Objectives - Frederick Carrington

# data[].attributes.subject
Issues & Objectives - Frederick Carrington

# data[].attributes.body
Cesar Chavez and his strikers achieved great success in getting fair wages and other benefits for agricultural workers in the United States. There has been a long history in the United States of exploiting agricultural workers with poor wages. Often the work is seasonal and it is a struggle for agricultural workers to survive with limited work and poor wages. The lack of representation for these workers made it a struggle to change this exploitation. Chavez achieved the impossible by organizing the agricultural workers. By organizing the works to strike he was able to put extreme pressure on those responsible for the work and poor wages available for the agricultural workers. Chavez's work is often considered similar to that of Martin Luther King. Although they were taking part in much different struggles there are similarities in the way they achieved their goals by peaceful mean. The Delano Grape strike lasted a shocking five years and was a pivotal part of Chavez's success. The strike led to a boycott on non-union grapes. This forces farm owners to use workers that were part of the Unions. The Unions would represent and fight for better wages and benefits for the workers. Workers that were not part of the Union would not have the protection that the Union could offer. Without protection from the unions these workers would be exploited. Chavez success in striking and organizing boycotts allowed for a better life amongst agricultural workers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Non-Violent Struggle Group - Matthew DiMuro

# data[].attributes.subject
Non-Violent Struggle Group - Matthew DiMuro

# data[].attributes.body
The non-violent struggle group consisted of resisters who named themselves the United Farm Workers. Cesar Chavez led such activism that influenced the workers to not retaliate, but to initiate a strike in demand for equal pay. At a point, Chavez had fasted for 25 days to encourage the workers that non-violence was a solution in response to the violent attacks from growers. Through their renewed commitment to non-violence their success was clearly evident as they evolved from a small local group to a national union.

Admin. “Education of the Heart: Cesar Chavez in His Own Words.” UFW, ufw.org/research/history/education-heart-cesar-chavez-words/

Peoples World. 2003. Cesar Chavez http://www.peoplesworld.org/article/cesar-chavez-a-legacy-for-peace-justice-and-non-violence/

# data[].attributes.headline
The general conflict situation- Britt Hatcher

# data[].attributes.subject
The general conflict situation- Britt Hatcher

# data[].attributes.body
The general conflict was between California grape farmers and hired hands. They hired immigrants as a source of cheap labor. The Latino and Filipino workers desired a better wage. Members of the Agricultural workers organizing committee walked out and requested Cesar Chavez who led a Latino farm workers union to join them. The farmers did not like the immigrants forming together and would often try and put them against one another. He only joined if they would take a vow of non violence. The other side did not take this vow though and the farmers brought in strike breakers and police. The strike breakers would beat them and try to get them to disperese. This was a very long boycott it took many years and sprouted several other rebellions. The farmers even tried to hide there grapes under a different name so people would buy them, the strike gained a lot of public opinion and was televised. By 1970 the boycott showed to be victories and the farmer signed there first union contracts.

# data[].attributes.body
Icon
César Chávez Grape Workers Strike and Boycott
Module 10 Strategic Estimates
Avatar of jlewkowicz2015
jlewkowicz2015
 + 1
●
1m

# data[].attributes.body
ésar Chávez Grape Workers Strike and Boycott
Module 10 Strategic Estimates
Avatar of jlewkowicz2015
jlewkowicz2015
 + 1
●
1m

# data[].attributes.body
Chavez work with Father Donald McDonnell, Fred Ross and securing allies such as the Farm Workers Association amongst other things, afforded Chavez and the farm workers to receive the collect bargaining agreement they non-violently boycotted, protested and march for. At the end of the day the farmers were dependent of the "farmhands," or workers that some level of compromising was necessary. The workers were able to bridge the gap on some disparities and the farmers were able to have income due to their workers. Chavez work certainly improved these conditions and more.
Charmain Postel a(originally submitted 11/2/17 8:01pm
History.com. 2009. Cesar Chavez. A + E Networks
http://www.history.com/topics/cesar-chavez

# data[].attributes.headline
Collective Bargaining Agreement. - Charmain Postel 

# data[].attributes.subject
Collective Bargaining Agreement. - Charmain Postel 

# data[].attributes.body
Determined to unionize farm workers. With disparities after leaving the field, the workers lack of resources allowed Chavez to, "boycott protest, march and fast," until they received the collective bargaining agreement. In addition to his social justice action, increase in pay and of course unionization not only in California, but also improved conditions in other states such as Texas, Arizona, and Florida.

History. 2009. Cesar Chavez. A+E Networks.
http://www.history.com/topics/cesar-chavez

# data[].attributes.body
Chavez work with Father Donald McDonnell, Fred Ross and securing allies such as the Farm Workers Association amongst other things, afforded Chavez and the farm workers to receive the collect bargaining agreement they non-violently boycotted, protested and march for. At the end of the day the farmers were dependent of the "farmhands", or workers that some level of compromising was necessary. The workers were able to bridge the gap on some disparities and the farmers were able to have income due to their workers. Chavez work certainly improved these conditions and more.

History.com. 2009. Cesar Chavez. A + E Networks
http://www.history.com/topics/cesar-chavez

# data[].attributes.body
As I was researching a reading about Cesar Chavez, repeatedly heard the word "braceros" but no real meaning. Is this what they called farmers in general or Mexicans?

For reference check out this website: http://I3d.cs.colorado.edu/systems/agentsheets/new-vista/grape-boycott/history.html

# data[].attributes.body
One important third party that aided Cesar Chavez' grape workers in the light of public relations was the Delano Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee or (AWOC). They were a group of predominantly Filipino grape pickers who were on strike for a pay raise in 1965. They reached out to Chavez and ultimately broadened the strike's goals to include "union contracts signed by the growers and laws allowing farm workers to unionize and engage in collective bargaining."

Ganz, Marshall. Why David Sometimes Wins: Leadership, Organization, and Strategy in the California Farm Worker Movement. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Pg. 123.
For reference:
https://tavaana.org/en/content/fighting-farm-workers-rights-cesar-chavez-delano-grape-strike-and-boycott

# data[].attributes.headline
Nonviolent Struggle Group - Nicholas Nooks

# data[].attributes.subject
Nonviolent Struggle Group - Nicholas Nooks

# data[].attributes.body
Chavez aimed to build up a broad support system among other laborers, churches, and civil rights activists to name a few. This wide range of supporters proved to be beneficial since they could offer different unique sides to the fight that would support the cause. For example the support received by the church "sent the message that this was a mainstream, non-radical cause that was safe for community members to join; it also gave volunteers a kind of moral authority and provided a vital network for grassroots activists across the country."

Nicholas Nooks
Shaw, Randy. Beyond the Fields: Cesar Chavez, the UFW, and the Struggle for Justice in the 21st century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008. Pg. 37.
For Reference:
https://tavaana.org/en/content/fighting-farm-workers-rights-cesar-chavez-delano-grape-strike-and-boycott

# data[].attributes.body
The Friendly Parties:
Backing up César Chávez was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.. In 1968, King Jr. sent Chávez a telegram expressing how their struggles were one. He admired him and his stance against non-violent action.

Robert F. Kennedy is listed as a friendly party to Chávez just like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr..
When César Chávez was fasting for non-violence, Kennedy was in the crowd that gathered when it ended to support his stance.

The Hostile Party:
Table Grape Growers were considered to be a hostile party due to the fact that they were not in support of looking out for laborers. They wanted cheap labors and no benefits. As you can imagine a business owner would be against having to pay more even if it was well deserved.

The UFW was impactful however they expressed their feeling about non-violent tactics as cowardly. They had a very 'masculine' view that fighting meant you were among the strong and effective men. Their intentions or goals may not have been malicious however their strategies and talk were more aggressive, militant manor.

The Neutral  Party:
Mahatma Gandhi is considered to be party of the neutral party because he laid out the format in which Chávez followed. Though there was a format to follow that he created, Gandhi is more than likely would have been a part of the friendly party however, there is no way of proof.  One could articulate that he was a non-violent supporter and Chavez did quote him by saying "Do something! Offer your life! If you really want to do something, be willing to die for it."
Both César and Gandhi had non-violent souls however they could have been in support of different areas for change and they may not have agreed on certain things. Since there is no way to prove Gandhi stance, he is placed in the neutral party.

# data[].attributes.headline
Dependency Balance -Lauren MouraChavez work with Father Donald McDonnell, Fred Ross and securing allies such as the Farm Workers Association amongst other things, afforded Chavez and the farm workers to receive the collect bargaining agreement they non-violently boycotted, protested and march for. At the end of the day the farmers were dependent of the "farmhands," or workers that some level of compromising was necessary. The workers were able to bridge the gap on some disparities and the farmers were able to have income due to their workers. Chavez work certainly improved these conditions and more.History.com. 2009. Cesar Chavez. A + E Networkshttp://www.history.com/topics/cesar-chavez

# data[].attributes.subject
Dependency Balance -Lauren MouraChavez work with Father Donald McDonnell, Fred Ross and securing allies such as the Farm Workers Association amongst other things, afforded Chavez and the farm workers to receive the collect bargaining agreement they non-violently boycotted, protested and march for. At the end of the day the farmers were dependent of the "farmhands," or workers that some level of compromising was necessary. The workers were able to bridge the gap on some disparities and the farmers were able to have income due to their workers. Chavez work certainly improved these conditions and more.History.com. 2009. Cesar Chavez. A + E Networkshttp://www.history.com/topics/cesar-chavez

# data[].attributes.headline
3.) The opponent group- Julia Lewkowicz 

# data[].attributes.subject
3.) The opponent group- Julia Lewkowicz 

# data[].attributes.body
Page 175
-California farm forearm
-Hired security guards
-California police officials

-Kern County Sheriff Roy Galyen (176)

page 177
- "Mothers  Against Chavez"
- "Citizens for Facts"

-Schenley Industries and DiGiorgio Corporation (178)

-Giumarra Corporation (181)

page 185
-Richard Nixon
-California Governor Ronald Reagan
-California Farm Bureau

# data[].attributes.headline
4.) The nonviolent struggle group and the wider grievance group (Nicole Navarro)

# data[].attributes.subject
4.) The nonviolent struggle group and the wider grievance group (Nicole Navarro)

# data[].attributes.body
- The union had all the intentions of being a violent group, until they heard that Chàvez threatened to fast. "Chàvez said his fast was penitence for the union's consideration of violence and that he would start eating again only after all of the strikers renewed their commitment to nonviolence" (183). This made the union upset and the unsuccessfully tried to lobby Chàvez.

- "Slowly, however, farm workers rallied by his side and the violence ceased. People gathered around him 24 hours a day and the movement started to become reunified" (183). All these people standing by Chàvez's side allowed there to be a decrease of temptation for violence.

- "Nonetheless, the boycotters gradually gained the upper hand and succeeded in getting many supermarkets to stop carrying table grapes." (184).

-As one boycott organizer said, "We just totally disrupted all of these stores and we were a pain. . . .We made life miserable for the stores and so they finally figured out we were more trouble than the grapes were worth. . . ." (184). Here you can see that protesting was making a huge statement, and it disrupted many things in society.

- "Using primarily nonviolent action between 1965-1970, the farm workers struggle had grown from a small, local action into a national union that included 20,000 farm workers under 150 grape contracts with companies that accounted for 85 percent of California's table grape market" (186). What started out as something small, turned into something that made a huge difference in what they believed in.

# data[].attributes.headline
1.) The general conflict of the situation- Julia Lewkowicz

# data[].attributes.subject
1.) The general conflict of the situation- Julia Lewkowicz

# data[].attributes.body
California farm workers:
- Among the lowest of the lower classes in western United States, and most had no union representation (173).

-Suffered from "abject poverty, displacement, homelessness, and extreme economic exploitation" (173).

-By the early 1960s, organizing workers was bleak even though other industries in the U.S. had unionized. Workers were constantly defeated through physical brutality and manipulation of 'braceros' (low paid Mexican workers) (174).

# data[].attributes.headline
2.) The issues and objectives of the contending groups (Nicole Navarro)

# data[].attributes.subject
2.) The issues and objectives of the contending groups (Nicole Navarro)

# data[].attributes.body
- Chàvez was in favor of improved working conditions for the farmers, and he also was in favor for increased wages (174).

- He also wanted all workers to pledge to be peaceful to one another and everyone else as well. To do that he spread a message of justice, respect, and dignity (175).

- The workers wanted minimum wage. They felt that they were not being paid fairly for the work they were doing.

-The farmers did not want to pay the workers more than they were already getting. The reasoning behind this was because they were supposed to be cheap labor, therefore, they did not want to pay them a lot of money.

# data[].attributes.body
Workers:
Filipino and Mexican-American workers were being paid about thirty cents less than broceros (p.174) and they were desperate for equal pay.
Therefore the workers began a non-violent protest, although, unfortunately, there was some violence throughout the pretest on the workers end, which was put to an end by Cesar Chavez's fast for peace.

Growers:
The growers were not willing to raise the pay for Filipino and Mexican-American workers, despite picketing efforts in the beginning of the movement, because they would be able to find cheap work with other individuals  that were too scared to participate. As the workers non-violent protests continued, the farmers began to suffer as large shipments of grapes were left to rot in the sun by those aiding in the protest.