History professors say Cesar Chavez’s labor movements should continue to be taught and sexual assault allegations should be brought to light

Following a recent New York Times investigation that found evidence of sexual assaults committed by civil rights leader Cesar Chavez, universities and cities are rethinking how to remember him.

An investigation released by the New York Times on March 20 revealed allegations that civil rights and labor leader Cesar Chavez sexually abused many women in the labor movement and raped his organizing partner Dolores Huerta. As universities and schools reconsider Chavez’s place in curriculum and memory, Pitt professors said Chavez’s movements should remain in the U.S. history curriculum and his accusations should be brought to light.   

Cesar Chavez was the founder of the National Farm Workers Association, later known as the United Farm Workers of America, and helped raise the pay and working conditions for farm workers in the late 1960 and 1970s.

After the report, California State University immediately covered a statue of Chavez and announced that it will be removed. The Texas Education Agency directed the removal of Chavez from any public school curriculum, and California education officials told teachers to minimize the role of Chavez when teaching.

Eladio Bobadilla, an assistant professor of history, said he was shocked and “disturbed” to hear the recent news about Chavez, although he already knew Chavez was a “deeply problematic figure.” Chavez added cult-like aspects to his movement in its later years and centralized his power in it.

Bobadilla teaches HIST 1691 “U.S. Latino History” and HIST 0673 “U.S. Immigration History” and includes Chavez in his course curriculum. He focuses on his impact in the labor movements from the ‘60s through the late ‘80s and he included some of Chavez’s troubled character before the allegations.

“I taught Chavez as a complicated, deeply flawed individual with a troubling record of abusive behavior toward activists and toward the people he ostensibly represented,” Bobadilla said. “I’ve always thought it was important to highlight the good, the bad and the ugly about Chavez and his movement.”

Bobadilla said the new allegations will be discussed in his classes as a reminder of what he believes to be Chavez’s already deeply troubled character. 

“It will be critical for students to know and learn that Chavez had a dark side, one that is often ignored and forgotten, and that he was not the whole movement, ” Bobadilla said. 

Bobadilla added that the dynamic of the movements Chavez was a part of should be discussed in their entirety while highlighting other contributors to the reforms.

“Other women and men did the work, fought for reforms and effected great and meaningful change,” Bobadilla said. “It will be important to consider what his horrendous actions tell us about power and gender dynamics within social movements.”

John Stoner, a teaching professor of history, said he has taught briefly about Chavez’s contributions to the farmworkers’ movement, though he did not “delve into his life more broadly.” Stoner said he believes discussions about controversial historical figures like Chavez should include good and bad aspects to avoid a one-sided narrative. 

“I would argue that we have a moral and professional obligation to ensure that we aren’t selectively using evidence to make historical figures or their organizations appear one way or another to suit our own personal or organizational agendas,” Stoner said. “That would be considered a biased scholarship.” 

Bobadilla said he believes Chavez’s actions are inexcusable though the accomplishments of the broader movements should still be discussed.

“People are complicated and good people do bad things, but sexual assault and rape are not in the same category as tactical mistakes, organizing errors, and political miscalculations,” Bobadilla said. “The movement was always larger than Chavez, and we should acknowledge the misconduct on this scale not only caused immeasurable harm to the victims and survivors, but to the movement itself.”

Stoner said he believes that without understanding the implications of good and bad decision-making, people would not be able to “have holistic conversations about them.” 

“When historical figures or events become one dimensional, they are less likely to be understood in their complexity,” Stoner said.