Press Room

New Report by Farmworker Justice Reviews Dept. of Labor Enforcement in Agriculture

The federal employment laws meant to provide protection for agricultural workers need more enforcement in order to improve the conditions in our fields, according to a new report released today.

The report by Farmworker Justice analyzes the Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) statistics on its enforcement of the minimum wage and other basic labor protections applicable to agricultural workers on farms, ranches, and dairies. Widespread violations of the minimum wage and other wage-hour laws in agriculture harm farmworkers, as well as the many law-abiding businesses suffering competitive disadvantage caused by unscrupulous employers.

In “U.S. Department of Labor Enforcement in Agriculture: More Must Be Done to Protect Farmworkers,” a report based on reviewing 8 years of agency data under two presidents, Farmworker Justice found a mixed record. The number of investigations of agricultural workplaces conducted by the Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division remained fairly consistent despite the hiring of additional investigators and a stated commitment to improving compliance on farms. The data revealed increases in the amount of time spent by agency investigators on agricultural workplaces, increases in the number of farmworkers at investigated employers, as well as increases in the amounts of backpay assessed for violations.

“Consumers of fruits and vegetables want to know that farmworkers in the field are treated decently, and law-abiding growers do not want to be undermined by businesses that violate wage-hour laws, but the reality is that there are widespread violations in agriculture. The U.S. Department of Labor plays an important role in deterring and remedying violations of law. The agency has modestly improved the quantity and quality of its enforcement of labor-protective laws, but many employers still view the risk and the financial consequences of getting caught as too small to deter them from violating the law,” said Bruce Goldstein, President of Farmworker Justice, a national advocacy group in Washington, D.C.

The report’s recommendations include:
• Increase the number of investigations per year and ensure that the Department seeks and collects the full measure of back pay, liquidated damages and civil money penalties.
• Continue increasing the Department’s use of important tools in the law, including the authority to ask a federal court to issue a “hot goods injunction” against the sale of goods produced in violation of the minimum wage. It also should continue increasing its use of the “joint employer” concept when farm operators deny that they “employ” any farmworkers on their farm and seek to impose sole responsibility for minimum-wage violations on farm labor contractors.
• Continue to improve collaboration with farmworker groups on the ground. DOL also should improve its education of the public and Congress about the value of its enforcement efforts on farms.

“The bottom line is that because many farmworkers are suffering systematic violations of basic labor standards, Congress should increase funding for enforcement of the wage-hour laws in agriculture. In addition, the Department of Labor should continue to allocate more investigator time to agriculture and continue to increase its use of all the tools that Congress provided to the agency to remedy and deter violations of employment laws,” added Goldstein.

Wall Street Journal LTE: Guest Workers and the Bracero Model

We couldn’t disagree more with the contention that the Bracero program was “one of the most successful programs of all times” (“Bring on the Guest Workers” by William McGurn, Main Street, March 24). The Bracero program, which began during World War II to provide foreign labor to U.S. farms, ended in 1964 after years of exposés about its labor- and human-rights abuses. While Mexican citizens often were grateful for the job opportunities, the Bracero program exploited the workers’ vulnerability. The guest workers held a restricted, nonimmigrant status with no right to earn immigration status or citizenship. They were tied to particular employers and depended on the employer for the chance for a visa in a following season. Wages stagnated and U.S. citizens and immigrants were displaced in favor of the more controllable foreign workers. While protections against undermining of U.S. workers’ wages and working conditions existed, they weren’t strong enough and they weren’t enforced effectively.

More important, we already have an agricultural guest-worker program and its history reveals that it should not be a model for this nation’s immigration policy. The H-2A temporary foreign agricultural-worker program also began during World War II and has been revised several times, but the program suffers from the same flaws as the Bracero program. The U.S. should not become a nation of guest workers but instead should remain a nation of immigrants who are granted the opportunity to become citizens and enjoy our economic and political freedoms.

House Judiciary Committee Still Playing Cruel Games with Immigration

The House Judiciary Committee will mark-up four punitive, one-sided immigration bills this week. The four bills revive previously-failed bills. If they were to pass, they would deepen the problems of our broken immigration system. They are: Rep. Trey Gowdy’s (R-SC) draconian interior enforcement “SAFE Act” from last Congress, renamed the “Michael Davis, Jr. in Honor of State and Local Law Enforcement Act” (H.R. 1148); Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-TX) “Legal Workforce Act, (H.R. 1147)” which requires all employers to use the E-verify system for checking immigration status; Rep. Jason Chaffetz’s (R-UT) “Asylum Reform and Border Protection Act of 2015” (H.R. 1153), which would gravely harm asylum seekers, survivors of domestic violence and trafficking, military members, and abused neglected or abandoned children; and Rep. John Carter’s (R-TX) ironically named, “Protection of Children Act of 2015” (H.R. 1149), which would lower due process standards for all unaccompanied children and expedite their removal from the US.

President Obama’s Executive Immigration Actions Will Prevail, Despite Temporary Obstacle Presented by Court Decision

A very conservative, outspoken federal judge yesterday issued a temporary order blocking the Federal Government from implementing the President’s deferred action programs that were announced on November 20, 2014, known as DAPA and expanded DACA. The not unexpected ruling held that of the 26 states challenging the programs, Texas, at least, has “standing” to sue. The district court judge based the order enjoining the deferred action programs on the claim that the Obama Administration had not followed proper procedures in creating the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) Program and the expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (expanded DACA) program. The judge reserved for later the decisions of whether the programs violate any law or the Constitution. The U.S. Government will appeal the temporary injunction against President Obama's immigration relief, and the appeal is likely to succeed. The ruling unfortunately creates uncertainty and fear in affected communities, but should be recognized as being only a temporary roadblock as the President’ actions were constitutional and will prevail. Farmworker Justice urges individuals to stay calm and to continue preparing for administrative relief. The decision does not affect the current DACA program announced in 2012, which is still in effect and accepting new applications and applications for renewal.

“Farmworker Justice, along with many legal experts, believes that President Obama’s executive actions are a proper exercise of his prosecutorial discretion, are constitutional, and will ultimately prevail. Farmworker Justice urges the Department of Justice to request the Court of Appeals to issue an emergency stay, which could expedite the process of review,” said Bruce Goldstein, president of Farmworker Justice. “Several hundred thousand farmworkers who labor on our farms and ranches could be eligible for these deferred action programs. The programs are well within the President’s authority. By eliminating the constant fear of deportation, farmworkers and other aspiring Americans will be able to contribute more fully to their communities and will be empowered in their workplaces.”

Farmworker Justice will continue to work with groups throughout the country to support and plan implementation of the DAPA/DACA programs and to win legislation that creates a path to citizenship for undocumented farmworker families.

Farmworker Justice opposes anti-immigrant amendments to Homeland Security Appropriations bill

Washington, DC – Farmworker Justice opposes amendments to the appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security (H.R. 240) that seek to prevent the Administration from implementing President Obama’s immigration executive actions, which are urgently needed to protect immigrant families, youth, and others.

“The DACA and DAPA programs are sensible efforts to address the broken immigration system that is harming immigrants, employers, and the nation. They are a modest step in the right direction and should not be obstructed,” said Bruce Goldstein, President of Farmworker Justice. Among agricultural workers, the people who labor in dangerous, low-paid jobs on our farms and ranches, a majority are undocumented. Many of these undocumented farmworkers live in fear of detection, job loss and deportation, and are vulnerable to abuse.

The President’s deferred action programs will allow eligible residents who lack authorized immigration status to come forward, submit to background checks and properly document themselves with the federal government and in their workplaces. Those undocumented immigrants who qualify will obtain a temporary relief from deportation and temporary work authorization. “With protection against the constant fear of deportation, farmworkers and other aspiring Americans will be able to contribute more fully to their communities and will be empowered in their workplaces,” said Goldstein.

The President’s actions are a proper exercise of his authority to enforce immigration laws. “Congressional efforts to prevent the Administration from taking these modest steps should be rejected not only because the President possesses the authority, but also because the Administration’s efforts are sensible and humanitarian as well as economically beneficial to our nation and food system,” said Goldstein.

We commend President Obama’s action to address our broken immigration system. The President took action because Congress has refused to address the urgent need for comprehensive immigration reform. In 2013, the Senate passed a comprehensive immigration bill that included a carefully negotiated compromise regarding agricultural workers and employers. Unfortunately, the House failed to act. These proposed amendments move in the fundamentally wrong direction.

Farmworker Justice Statement on President Obama’s Announcement of Executive Action on Immigration

Washington, DC – Farmworker Justice applauds President Obama for taking action to address our broken immigration system. Farmworker Justice has been helping farmworker organizations advocate for a more just immigration system because immigration policy has profound impacts on farmworkers, their families and their communities. The President’s administrative relief for certain undocumented immigrants will help several hundred thousand farmworker families. It also represents a step toward desperately-needed, comprehensive reform of our immigration system that Congress should enact.

“We commend President Obama for providing temporary protection against deportation and work authorization for undocumented immigrants who have strong ties to our communities. Several hundred thousand farmworkers who labor on our farms and ranches could be eligible for this administrative relief. It is sensible and within the President’s authority. With protection against the constant fear of deportation, farmworkers and other aspiring Americans will be able to contribute more fully to their communities and will be empowered in their workplaces.

“Even as we celebrate with those who will be eligible for relief, we are disappointed at the limits of the program. The eligibility criteria will deny administrative relief to many deserving farmworkers and their family members, including many long-time farmworkers who do not have U.S. citizen children.” said Bruce Goldstein, President of Farmworker Justice.

Goldstein concluded: “Immigrant farmworkers and other aspiring Americans deserve to be treated with respect and should be given the opportunity to earn immigration status and citizenship. Demands by some employer groups for exploitative guestworker programs should be rejected. Congress should pass immigration legislation that remains true to our history as a nation of immigrants.”

OpEd in The Hill: Old McDonald had a farm and a hamburger joint – but no employees

The simple family farmer in the folk song “Old McDonald’s Farm” tended alone to his animals; he didn’t hire any farmworkers. Much has changed since the era of Old McDonald, yet today’s farming corporations often claim they don’t “employ” any of the workers on their farms or ranches.

Similarly, the McDonald’s Corporation, which started in a single store in 1948, claims it doesn’t employ any of the workers in its franchised restaurants. By denying employer status companies seek to avoid responsibility for ensuring that workers receive the minimum wage, Social Security coverage and other worker benefits and protections, and for negotiating with unions.

Today about 2.5 million people labor on farms and ranches in the United States. They cultivate and harvest fruits, vegetables and other crops and they raise and care for dairy cows, chickens, sheep and other livestock. Most of them work on larger farms that use from several dozen to a few thousand farmworkers each year. A large percentage of these farmworkers are recruited, hired and employed through farm labor contractors, “crewleaders,” labor leasing firms or other intermediaries. The farm operator often contends that it does not “employ” any farmworkers. Rather, it claims that the labor contractor is the sole “employer” and therefore is solely responsible for complying with the minimum wage, workers’ compensation, Social Security contributions and immigration laws.

About 1.5 million people work at tens of thousands of McDonald’s fast food franchises around the world, whom McDonald’s claims that it does not employ. It contends that the franchisee is the only employer and is solely responsible for setting job terms and complying with labor and immigration laws.

These efforts to escape status and responsibility as an employer have dire consequences for many workers. The farm operators and McDonald’s possess economic power to dictate how the farm labor contractors operate and how the McDonald’s franchisees carry out their functions. They take advantage of that power for their own benefit, leaving few resources for the worker to gain from the labor contractor or franchisee.

Farmworkers often do not receive the promised, or even legally-required, job terms from their labor contractor. If they dare to sue the labor contractor, most have a hard time collecting what is owed. With a majority of the farm labor force lacking authorized immigration status, few farmworkers feel protected to file lawsuits or join a labor union.

The McDonald’s Corporation’s success is built largely on its ability to control the consistency of the customer experience at its company-owned and franchised restaurants throughout the world. For workers who wish to reform the way they are treated, many franchise owners will not and cannot adopt major changes unless McDonald’s revises its approach.

One of the solutions is to reject the companies’ claims that they are not “employers,” instead making the farm operator and McDonald’s “joint employers.”

Farmworkers have sued growers and their labor contractors as joint employers with some success, and fast food workers are also now making efforts to hold McDonald’s responsible as an employer of the workers in its franchised restaurants in the U.S. Recently, the chief attorney at the National Labor Relations Board announced plans to bring a case to hold McDonald’s responsible as an employer under the National Labor Relations Act. The NLRA (which excludes agricultural workers and employers) protects most workers’ right to organize free from retaliation and requires employers to bargain collectively in good faith with certified labor unions.

The response from business has been predictably fierce. Both McDonald’s and farm operators want to exercise the right to control their franchises and labor contractors, respectively, to assure their profit, which has substantial consequences for the people who actually perform the work.

Long ago, Old McDonald’s Farm stopped being the predominant model for agriculture, and McDonald’s ceased to be an owner-operated hamburger joint. The courts should make clear that fast food chains and farm operators are jointly responsible as employers of the workers who labor in restaurants and farms.

Goldstein is president of Farmworker Justice, a non-profit, nonpartisan organization in Washington, D.C. that works to improve living and working conditions for migrant and seasonal farmworkers.

By Bruce Goldstein

Capital Press Letter to the Editor: Farmworker pay case not ‘extortion’

The head of a national farmworker rights group defends the U.S. Department of Labor's actions in the case involving three Oregon blueberry growers.

How about a little bit of objectivity when it comes to farm operators that deprive hard-working farmworkers of the minimum wage? Your editorial, “It’s time for DOL to pay up” (Sept. 25), shows no sympathy for farmworkers who are just scraping by on meager wages and are ripped off by their employers.

You also misrepresent what happened by calling it “extortion.” These employers were told by the Department of Labor that it found violations of workers’ rights. The department can take several actions and employers can contest those actions. The department is permitted to go to federal court and ask a federal judge to issue an injunction to temporarily hold up the sale or shipment of goods that were produced in violation of the law. The farm operators can have their day in court.

In these cases, there was no “extortion.” The growers decided to settle the controversy by paying tens of thousands of dollars to numerous underpaid farmworkers. Much later, the growers decided they wished they had not settled. So they asked the court to be allowed to renege on the settlement and re-open the case so that it could be litigated.

Meanwhile, some of the workers were reimbursed for their losses, as they should have been under the settlement, while others undoubtedly have moved on and may never be found to be given their lost earnings. So now the growers will have their day in court for a judge or jury to decide whether the farmworkers were underpaid. Stop misrepresenting what happened to attack the Department of Labor’s efforts to enforce the few employment laws that protect farmworkers.

Bruce Goldstein, President
Farmworker Justice

Farmworker Justice’s Statement on Obama’s Delay of Administrative Relief

Farmworker Justice is deeply disappointed in President Obama's delay of anticipated administrative relief to fix our broken immigration system. In June, after the House of Representative’s failure to pass needed immigration legislation, the President had announced that he would take executive action by the end of the summer. Although the White House had not yet indicated what the administrative action would entail, it is expected to include granting administrative relief against deportation and work authorization to millions of undocumented immigrants with strong ties to the U.S. protection.

“This delay in ‎fixing the broken immigration system will inflict unconscionable harm on the millions of hard-working aspiring Americans, including the many farmworkers who labor on farms and lack authorized immigration status,” said Farmworker Justice President Bruce Goldstein. “The entire food system is undermined by the failure of the political leadership in this country to address this crisis responsibly. Farmworker Justice will continue to press the Administration and Congress for immigration reform,” said Goldstein.

More Than 175,000 People Call for Stronger Workplace Protections for Farmworkers

Farmworkers, public health advocates, labor organizations, and public officials, were among the more than 175,000 who submitted comments to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calling on the agency to strengthen its Agricultural Worker Protection Standard (WPS). The WPS is the only federal standard designed to protect the nation’s more than 2 million farmworkers from one of their greatest occupational hazards: pesticide exposure.

“Farmworkers face dangerous exposure to poisons over the course of their working life,” said Eve Gartner, attorney for Earthjustice, a public interest law firm. “While most Americans benefit from broad workplace protections, farmworkers are not protected by the same health and safety standards.”

“The nation’s 2 million farmworkers deserve the level of workplace protections provided to other workers,” said Margaret Reeves, PhD, a senior scientist with Pesticide Action Network. “Protections for workers from pesticide exposure also mean protections for farmworker children and families.”

“Each year pesticide exposure poisons tens of thousands of farmworkers and their families,” said Virginia Ruiz, Director of Occupational and Environmental Health at Farmworker Justice. “We hope EPA responds to the hundreds of thousands of individuals who submitted comments in support of stronger protections and acts quickly to implement a Worker Protection Standard that prevents needless illness, injury, and death in farmworker communities.”

The groups are calling on EPA to change the proposed standard to include:
● Parity with safety rules provided to workers in non-agricultural industries
● Improved safety training annually and starting before workers enter treated fields
● Easily accessible information about pesticides used on the farm and in nurseries
● No children under 18 years of age allowed to handle hazardous pesticides
● Strict adherence to no-entry rules for areas recently treated with pesticides
● Improved protections and safety monitoring for pesticide handlers

Elvia Vasquez of Oxnard, California worked in the fields of Southern California picking strawberries, lettuce and broccoli for nearly a decade. "I would get rashes and headaches when forced to enter the strawberry fields that had been sprayed with pesticides only hours before," said Vasquez, who now works with Organizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas, Inc. to educate farmworkers on the dangers of pesticide exposure.

“We know the EPA has all the information they need to finalize a stronger, better WPS that actually provides real protections for the people who feed our nation,” said Tirso Moreno, General Coordinator of the Farmworker Association of Florida . “The administration has heard the stories from farmworkers and they know what is needed to do the right thing.”

"Millions of farmworkers are exposed to cancer-causing chemicals without adequate safeguards to protect their health," said Murshed Zaheed, Deputy Political Director at CREDO. "The least the EPA can do is take basic steps to protect farmworkers from being exposed to these toxic chemicals."

Indeed the administration has been hearing from workers and advocates for over a decade now – the WPS was first adopted in 1995 and has been awaiting revision since 2000. EPA is finally expected to issue the finalized rule by early 2015, after closing its public comment period on their proposal for a revised WPS at midnight on Monday, Aug 18.

More than 175,000 petition signatures were collected by Earthjustice, Farmworker Association of Florida, Farmworker Justice, Migrant Clinicians Network, Pesticide Action Network North America, United Farm Workers, and CREDO.