Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
There may be some misunderstanding among NIOSH staff on this point inas-
much as the evidence package presented to the present committee states that the
MSAWPA “provides that employment-related protection for migrant and seasonal
agricultural workers is administered and enforced by the DOL Employment Stan-
dards Administration.” In fact, the Wage and Hour Division of DOL's Employment
Standards Administration has responsibility for enforcement of the FLSA provi-
sions pertaining to agriculture for all hired farm workers (except those exempted by
statute), not just those deemed “migrant and seasonal” under the MSAWPA.
The committee noted some additional possible misunderstandings regarding
hired workers in the AFF sector. In discussions of child workers, AFF program de-
scriptions consistently refer to children and adolescents under the age of 20 years
with respect to both farm residents and youths performing work on farms. But
child labor refers exclusively to children, legally known as “minors”, that is, persons
under 18 years old.
Another possible misunderstanding concerns enforcement of occupational
safety regulations. The evidence package states, “OSHA lacks authority for most
of the agricultural workforce since much of that workforce is self-employed or
consists of unpaid family labor, and OSHA is restricted from inspecting farms that
employ fewer than 11 workers at those worksites.” 4 But FLSA statutory exemptions
govern child labor on all farms, not only those on small farms. In some impor-
tant farm states, such as California, OSHA has delegated regulatory authority to a
state agency, in this case Cal/OSHA, which under state law authorizes inspections
on all farms that employ hired workers, not only those employing more than 10
workers.
A more serious misunderstanding concerns the statement in the evidence pack-
age regarding the FLSA: “The Federal Fair Labor Standards Act applies to migrants
and local residents regardless of farm size or the number of person-days of farm
labor used on that farm. However, these standards do not apply to youth working
on family farming operations.” 5 Neither statement is true as written.
The AFF evidence package inappropriately makes the general statement that
“regulating at the State level has been ineffective.” 6 That is not true in California,
Washington, and possibly other states. In fact, some would argue that state regula-
tion in California and Washington is far more effective than federal regulation in
states where only federal OSHA law applies.
Finally, a sweeping statement is made about the availability of data from
workers' compensation insurance programs that is simply misleading: “Most
farmers, ranchers, fishermen and agricultural workers are not covered by workers'
4 NIOSH Evidence Package, p. 34.
5 NIOSH Evidence Package, p. 67.
6 Ibid, p. 68.
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search