Bill Overview
Title: Protect Local Farms Act
Description: This bill preempts state laws that provide for a maximum workweek of less than 60 hours for agricultural employees. Under federal law, agricultural employees are generally exempt from maximum hours (i.e., overtime) requirements.
Sponsors: Rep. Jacobs, Chris [R-NY-27]
Target Audience
Population: Agricultural employees globally
Estimated Size: 600000
- The Protect Local Farms Act affects agricultural employees, as it defines a maximum workweek for them.
- Federal law currently exempts agricultural employees from maximum hours and overtime requirements, implying many may already work extensive hours.
- States with laws enforcing maximum workweeks of less than 60 hours will be preempted, impacting agricultural workers in those states.
Reasoning
- The Protect Local Farms Act primarily affects agricultural workers, especially those in states with max workweek laws under 60 hours.
- These workers may experience changes in work hours and overtime pay, potentially impacting their work-life balance, income, and overall wellbeing.
- The budget implies a limited targeted intervention; high-impact solutions may only reach a subset of the target population.
- The policy may also affect farm owners differently based on their reliance on a rural workforce, possibly altering business profitability and operation patterns.
Simulated Interviews
Farm Supervisor (California)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy allows us to enlarge our work operations without overtime costs.
- My team might experience tighter schedules, but it could lead to more work opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Seasonal Farm Worker (Georgia)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about working longer hours and the physical toll it will take.
- It might be an opportunity to earn more money if I can manage the hours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Fruit Picker (Texas)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy won't change anything for me; my work hours depend on the season.
- I'm okay with my current setup as I earn enough without overtime.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Small Farm Owner (New York)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the potential increase in labor costs if I can't afford to pay overtime.
- The policy could impact the quality of life for my workers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Farm Equipment Operator (Florida)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy may lead to longer work hours, but might not impact me if my company chooses to keep the current schedule.
- Could mean more work when we are busier, potentially offering more shifts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Agricultural Lawyer (Washington)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is potentially harmful to workers' rights, increasing hours without guaranteeing adequate compensation.
- It might increase my workload as disputes and negotiations grow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 7 |
Agri-Tech Developer (Michigan)
Age: 24 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy doesn't directly affect my work though it could shift demand for more efficient equipment.
- I hope it opens new technological advancements to help farmers handle longer hours.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Farm Worker (Iowa)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I already work these hours, so the change might mean more regulated breaks but not a large impact on work-life balance.
- Could be concerning if it later affects job security through wage structuring.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Vineyard Worker (Oregon)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried the policy will mean less time with family and the same pay as before.
- If overtime is not compensated, it will affect my quality of life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 2 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 1 | 3 |
Agri-Consultant (Nebraska)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might affect the advice I provide but offers little direct personal impact.
- I foresee much debate on how farms adjust to maximize productivity legally.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 2: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 3: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 5: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 100: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Key Considerations
- Striking balance between cost reduction for local farms and workers' right to fair work conditions and pay.
- Potential for litigation from states against federal preemption of their laws.
- Impact on worker satisfaction and long-term productivity when work hours increase without additional compensation.