On February 6, I had the opportunity to attend a screening of the documentary, “Food Chains: The Revolution in America’s Fields,” hosted by the Silverton Grange. The film starkly reveals the impoverished conditions endured by the farm laborers who plant, tend, and harvest the food that you and I eat every day.
After the movie, a panel convened to discuss the movie’s themes and implications.
Some context
There’s a reason the Grange wanted us to talk about this matter as a community.
This is a farming community. Nobody doubts that. The farms are essential to the local economy, and they produce the food that we all eat. Farming is essential work.
This is also a community with a high poverty rate. According to the most recent data available from the United States Census Bureau, 14.6% of families with children live below the poverty line in our beloved local community of Mt. Angel, where 17.5% of the population works in agriculture and related industries. It seems clear that many families in our community live below the poverty line despite working as hard as a person can possibly work.
Personally, I have always been of the opinion that the very best way to eradicate poverty in our communities is to pay the workers a living wage. But there’s a loophole in the law.
FLSA
The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) created a loophole when it introduced minimum wage and overtime protections for most workers. The Federal law exempted farm laborers from both of those crucial worker protections.
The good news is, FLSA was amended in 1996 to require minimum wage payments for most farm workers (except those who harvest by hand on a “piece rate basis” — they can still legally toil in the hot sun all day for less than minimum wage).
But the overtime loophole has never been closed. Nearly a century after the law was passed, farm laborers in most states are still not eligible for overtime pay, regardless of how many hours they work.
Oregon HB 2358
Oregon, like most states, still does not have any overtime protections in place for agricultural laborers.
Understandably, farm laborers believe it’s time for that to change.
PCUN, a coalition representing farm laborers and Latinx working families, has been calling for legislation to grant overtime protections to agricultural workers, who often work 55 to as much as 70 hours a week during the harvest season.
Accordingly, in the 2021 session of the Oregon State Legislature, Democratic Representative Andrea Salinas introduced HB 2358, which would phase in overtime protections for agricultural workers over a period of several years.
In an attempt to placate farmers and make the bill more palatable for passage, Rep. Salinas introduced a late-session amendment which would defray the additional cost to farmers of paying their employees overtime. The proposed amendment would provide farmers with a tax credit, which would phase out over a period of several years.
Panel Discussion
After the Silverton Grange presentation of the “Food Chains” documentary, a panel convened to discuss the implications of both the film and the proposed overtime bill, HB 2358.
We heard from Ira Cuello-Martinez, the Policy Manager at PCUN, the labor coalition which has been asking for this legislation.
The bill’s primary sponsor, Representative Salinas, gave a moving account of her own family’s history of agricultural labor, and how that experience had motivated her to introduce this bill. She explained how the tax credit would offset the increased cost of paying overtime to the workers; and in the event that a farm didn’t have enough taxable income to claim the entire credit, the remainder of the credit could carry forward to the next year.
To balance the discussion, the panel also included two farmers. Unfortunately, a technical issue prevented Jim Bernau of Willamette Valley Vineyards from joining in the video call, although via the chat feature he shared the view that food tastes better when you know that it was produced by workers who were paid fairly.
Speaking on behalf of many worried farmers in Oregon, Mike McCarthy of McCarthy Family Farm expressed his concerns that the proposed legislation would put farms out of business. His farm already pays workers better than the minimum wage, he explained; but he is not able to set his own prices when he sells produce to grocery chains like Wal-Mart. Instead, due to globalization, he finds himself forced to compete on price with farms in distant countries (where prices are kept low by differences in currency values and the standard of living). That’s an understandable concern, and the “Food Chains” documentary had made it clear that American farmers are often unfairly squeezed by highly profitable grocery chains. McCarthy contended that without a way to compel supermarkets to pay higher prices to farmers, the overtime bill would put many farmers out of business, or force them to lay off their workers and convert to mechanized harvesting processes.
During the discussion, in response to a concern about the tax credit appended to HB 2358, Representative Salinas floated the possibility of making the credits refundable (instead of a carryforward offset against taxable profits). This proposal could help a lot: because refundable credits are a far more tangible means of support for farmers who may find themselves struggling during the transition. I don’t know if the Representative has taken any action on this point since then; I know the early 2022 Legislative session has kept everyone quite busy in the intervening weeks.
[ Update: Great news. She did! The proposal to make the credits refundable was added to the final bill. ]
I also came up with a creative proposal of my own, which I will briefly outline below.
Talking with Farmers
Regardless of my own personal preconceptions, I believe it’s important to hear from everyone who would be affected by proposed legislation such as this.
As responsible legislators, we should do our best to understand the consequences of our proposed rules, and do our best to mitigate any negative impacts while amplifying positive impacts. To do that, it’s essential that we listen to the concerns of our constituents.
Via Facebook, I got in touch with an old friend from college who now operates a farm in Eastern Oregon. She shared that increased mechanization is likely coming to the harvesting process in the next few years, regardless of whether or not the overtime bill passes.
After the panel presentation, a member of the local community also put me in touch with local farmers, and I have been in communication with them via email.
Since this exchange was not a public group discussion (like the Silverton Grange panel), I won’t identify them by name here.
One farmer shared with me that their farm already pays their workers much better than minimum wage; employs the same crew year round; and also provides them with health insurance and a retirement plan. I think that’s fantastic. I can only say that if all farmers treated their crews so well, the question of overtime would be less of an issue.
When I asked if they were able to set their own prices, this farmer replied, “Price setting is very competitive across all levels of business, and contracts are not made on an annual basis. Grower contracts are generally made in 3-5 year periods for perennial crops. … If we miss out on contracting because we’re possibly asking more than the market will accept, our products can’t just sit in inventory until we renegotiate.”
When I asked what this farmer believed would be the best solution to the problem, they said they supported the proposal floated by Republican Representative Boshart-Davis. I eventually discovered (via web search) that the proposal in question would exempt farm workers from overtime pay for up to 60 hours per week for 22 weeks each year.
22 weeks? That’s almost half a year!
It’s easy to say what someone else should have to do; but I would ask you to look at this question dispassionately in simple basic terms, removing all other considerations. The question is this: Would you want to work 60 hours a week for 22 weeks straight, without earning any overtime pay or bonus of any kind? Unless you’re the owner of the company, or senior management with a really good salary, then the answer is an obvious “No.”
Fortunately, the Boshart-Davis proposal failed in committee (the House Committee on Business and Labor), while at last report the amended overtime bill itself is making its way to the Revenue Committee.
[ Update, the bill has now been signed into law. ]
The question remains, how to pay agricultural workers overtime without harming farmers. How can we soften the blow of new legislation?
Creative Proposals
Too often, we look at politics as a win-lose situation, where only one party can come out on top. That’s not my vision for Oregon. I believe we can create solutions where everybody wins.
So, we’re faced with a problem: our farmers are struggling financially. They are essential to our economy and to our daily nutrition. We want to see our farmers succeed. What can we do about it?
Oregon’s Own Farm Bill
On a Federal level, there’s a regular piece of legislation informally known as “the Farm Bill” that sets policy for agriculture in America by funding certain programs and subsidizing certain types of farms.
What if Oregon created its own version of this type of legislation?
Think about it. We want to see more people eating healthy, locally grown food: from fresh fruits and vegetables, to humane and sustainable livestock products. What better way to do this, than to subsidize the farms that produce these items? This would keep farms in business, and control price inflation at the same time, making healthy food more affordable for consumers.
The immediate objection is always, “How are we going to pay for it?” But the fact is, despite a time of economic crisis, Oregon has been running a budget surplus. The money is there.
And if for some reason we need to guarantee more budget stability beyond that current surplus level, we could raise the capital gains tax for households with more than a million dollars per year in investment income.
But wait, there’s more!
Oregon Fair Wage Certified
I found myself wondering, What if we created a brand, to support higher prices for locally produced food grown by workers who are paid a living wage? It could be something like, “Oregon Fair Wage Certified.”
The past decades have clearly demonstrated that people care about where their food comes from. Many consumers are willing to pay significantly higher prices for food that’s grown organically. Wouldn’t shoppers also be willing to pay a few extra cents per pound to eat food that they knew was produced locally, by workers who were paid fairly for their work? I think it’s an idea worth pursuing.
Of course, the certification process would require creating a new certification commission; but it could be well worthwhile to give consumers an informed choice.
A personal perspective
When I was a teenager in the 1990’s, I interviewed for a job driving a harvester at a local farm in Washington State where I grew up. This was before the 1996 amendment to the FLSA; and when I learned that the position paid less than minimum wage, I rejected the job.
Many laborers do not have that option. They have to take whatever work they can find. As public policy makers, it is our responsibility to protect those who cannot protect themselves.
A few years later, I got a job working at a fishing cannery in Alaska for minimum wage. The opportunity to earn overtime pay was the one thing that motivated people like me to apply for such a cold, physically demanding, smelly job. Just like the farm harvest, the fishing cannery operates seasonally. When the fish are running, the cannery is in operation, and the line keeps moving as long as there are fish to process, and the workers work an unsustainable number of hours each week; and then when the salmon run is over, the workers are sent home and the facility is idled until the next year.
The cannery was also a Union shop, and when I worked there I was a member of the Longshoreman’s Union (IBU/ILWU #37).
At one point during the season, the cannery owner came to see us. I thought he looked grumpy as he toured the facility. Someone who had met him shared with me that the owner was filled with pride over this cannery: that the ability to provide work to all these employees and produce a high-quality healthy food in the process was an achievement that filled him with a sense of accomplishment. Then I understood that the owner’s serious expression during his tour reflected his desire to create the best possible outcome for all parties; and my attitude towards him softened. In some ways, he even reminded me of my own grandpa.
I’m sure the farmers want the same thing for their employees. The farmers want to make a profit, which is reasonable; and they want their employees to make a good living, too.
I do believe that agricultural laborers deserve to be paid overtime, just like laborers in every other industry.
Let’s work together to create solutions where everybody wins.
Photo Credit
Photos by Mark Stebnicki via Pexels