Bill Overview
Title: Fairness for Farm Workers Act
Description: This bill extends overtime pay protections to agricultural workers. The bill requires employers, beginning in 2023, to compensate agricultural workers for hours worked in excess of their regular hours (i.e., 55 hours in 2023, 50 hours in 2024, 45 hours in 2025, and 40 hours in 2026) at not less than one and one-half times the employee's regular rate. For employers with 25 or fewer employees, the overtime pay requirements begin in 2026. These overtime pay requirements do not apply, as under current law, to employees who are the parent, spouse, child, or other member of the employer's immediate family. The bill also repeals the exemption from overtime pay requirements for employers in various agriculture-related industries, including certain small farms, irrigation projects, sugar processing, and cotton ginning and compressing.
Sponsors: Sen. Padilla, Alex [D-CA]
Target Audience
Population: Agricultural workers globally
Estimated Size: 1800000
- The global agricultural workforce is estimated at approximately 1.1 billion people, with a significant proportion working under conditions similar to those described in the bill.
- Farm workers often work long hours, making them directly impacted by changes to overtime laws.
- Current legislation in various regions often excludes agricultural workers from standard overtime protections.
- The extension of overtime pay protections will affect farm workers who work more than the stipulated regular hours.
- Certain regions of the world rely heavily on agricultural labor, influencing the impact distribution.
Reasoning
- The Fairness for Farm Workers Act will primarily impact farm workers, particularly those who routinely work more than the threshold hours.
- The impact will vary based on farm size, as smaller farms have more time until they need to comply.
- Other stakeholders, like small family-owned farms, might face increased labor costs and need to adjust operations.
- Workers related to farm owners are still exempt, so the policy won't impact them.
- Geographical factors, such as regions heavily reliant on agriculture like California and the Southeastern US, will see varying levels of impact.
Simulated Interviews
Farm worker (California)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I work long hours and this policy seems fair. It would be nice to be compensated for the extra time I put in every week.
- I hope the farm I work at can afford this change without cutting hours or jobs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Farm worker (Florida)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think it will affect me much right now since I work on a small farm.
- In the future, it could help me earn more if they start to pay overtime. It's good that they are considering smaller farms eventually.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farm worker (Texas)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This change might mean cutting back on other worker hours to make up for overtime pay.
- I appreciate the policy's intention but am unsure about its practical effects on my job security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farm manager (North Carolina)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We might need to rethink our staffing or production schedules if we have to pay overtime.
- This policy is great for workers, but it's a challenge for us as a small operation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Student (California)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think it's a progressive step for worker rights in agriculture.
- As someone studying agriculture, I'm interested in how this policy will affect the industry in practice.
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 |
Policy analyst (New York)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could significantly improve the living conditions for many farm workers if implemented well.
- It's a step towards more equitable labor standards in agriculture.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farm owner (Iowa)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will increase our costs significantly, and we're already running on thin margins.
- We may need to implement limits on hours or hire more part-time workers to avoid overtime costs.
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 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Small farm owner (Wisconsin)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The future compliance requirements will require us to reassess how we schedule our workers.
- It's a financial burden, but I support fair pay for hard work.
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 |
Farmer's cooperative worker (Washington)
Age: 37 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Many small farms I work with are worried about this policy's impact on their operation costs.
- We will need to find ways to support these farms financially or operationally.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Grocery store worker (California)
Age: 27 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support fair wages for farm workers.
- I hope this policy doesn't cause price increases for the produce we sell.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $4350000000 (Low: $3900000000, High: $4800000000)
Year 2: $5000000000 (Low: $4500000000, High: $5500000000)
Year 3: $5850000000 (Low: $5250000000, High: $6450000000)
Year 5: $7100000000 (Low: $6300000000, High: $7900000000)
Year 10: $9650000000 (Low: $8600000000, High: $10700000000)
Year 100: $13500000000 (Low: $12000000000, High: $15000000000)
Key Considerations
- Employers may resort to operational adjustments, such as reduced working hours or hiring more part-time workers, to circumvent higher overtime costs.
- Gradual phase-in of overtime requirements may help manage abrupt operational cost spikes.
- Changes could lead to more equitable labor practices and improve worker wellbeing.
- Potential administrative and compliance costs for firms newly subject to overtime regulations.