|
January 31, 2022
Brian Pasternak
Administrator, Office of Foreign Labor Certification (ETA)
U.S. Department of Labor
200Constitution Avenue NW, Room
In addition to these public comments that EPI submitted to the Department of Labor re RIN 1205- AC05, EPI also signed on to the extensive comments submitted by Farmworker Justice on behalf of 35 organizations that focus on the rights of farmworkers and migrant workers, and fully endorses the recommendations outlined in the comments.
Re: Adverse Effect Wage Rate Methodology for the Temporary Employment of
Nonimmigrants in
Dear Mr. Pasternak:
The Economic Policy Institute submits this comment in response to the Department of Labor (DOL)’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Adverse Effect Wage Rate Methodology for the Temporary Employment of
About EPI
The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank established in 1986 to include the needs of low- and
186 Fed. Reg. 68174 (Dec. 1, 2021).
wages and working conditions of all workers, and has published research relating to labor standards for migrant workers in temporary work visa programs as well as similarly situated U.S. workers, and has offered a comprehensive plan to reform the U.S. immigration system in a way that uplifts labor standards, raises wages, and leads to a more broadly shared prosperity. EPI has also researched, written, and commented on farm
I. INTRODUCTION: THE
The
The
Despite the rapid growth of
Although they are legally authorized to work,
employed with these temporary visas are among the most exploited laborers in the U.S. workforce because the employment relationship created by the visa programs leaves workers powerless to defend and uphold their rights; this is certainly the case in
2See for example, Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Ripe for Reform: Abuses of Agricultural Workers in the
2
The abuses often start before
U.S. workers seeking jobs in agriculture are also vulnerable to being discriminated against and kept out of farm jobs because employers sometimes prefer exploitable
As a result, considering the many flaws in the
II.FARMWORKERS PROVIDE AN ESSENTIAL SERVICE BUT ARE VASTLY UNDERPAID, AND REMAIN SOME OF THE LOWEST PAID WORKERS IN THE U.S. WORKFORCE
As EPI research has also demonstrated, farmworkers are among the
3See for example, Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Recruitment Revealed: Fundamental Flaws in the
See also United Nations Office of the High Commisioner for Human Rights, “Debt Bondage Remains the Most Prevalent Form of Forced Labour
4See for example, Jessica Garrison, Ken Bensinger, and Jeremy
5See for example, Ken Bensinger, Jessica Garrison, and Jeremy
3
what production and nonsupervisory nonfarm workers earned ($24.67), who are the most appropriate cohort of workers outside of agriculture to compare with farmworkers.6
Farmworkers have very low levels of educational attainment, and compared to the two groups of workers with the lowest levels of education in the United States, farmworkers earn even less on average: Figure A also shows that nonsupervisory farmworkers at $14.62 per hour earned 44 cents per hour less than the average wage earned by all workers without a high school diploma ($15.06), and farmworkers earned roughly $5 less per hour than the average wage earned by all workers with only a high school diploma ($20.09).
Many farmworkers employed through the
6Daniel Costa, “The farmworker wage gap continued in 2020: Farmworkers and
Economic Research Service, “Wages of Hired Farmworkers” in “Farm Labor,” U.S. Department of Agriculture, last updated August 18, 2021.
4
Rate
A previous analysis I coauthored also helps illustrate just how little farmworkers earn. Using data on consumer expenditures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) about consumer spending on fresh fruits and vegetables, in conjunction with other data, we explored the question: How much would it cost to give farmworkers a significant raise in pay, even if it was paid for entirely by consumers? The answer is, not that much. A 40% increase in pay for farmworkers would cost just $25 per household in increased spending on fruits and vegetables per year.7 About the price of a couple of
III.DESPITE INDUSTRY CLAIMS TO THE CONTRARY, THE AEWR IS NOT TOO HIGH AND HAS NOT INCREASED UNREASONABLY FOR AT LEAST THE PAST TWO DECADES
As noted above and also reported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS), farmworkers earned just 60% of what production and nonsupervisory nonfarm workers earned, who are the most appropriate cohort of workers outside of agriculture to compare with farmworkers. In the proposed rule, DOL also cites another key data point that contextualizes farmworkers wages within the broader trends in the agricultural industry:
The ERS data also indicates that labor costs as a share of total gross farm income has not risen significantly over the past two decades, with the ERS concluding that “[a]lthough farm wages are rising in nominal and real terms, the impact of these rising costs on farmers” incomes has been offset by rising productivity and/or output prices,” and adding that “labor costs as a share of gross cash income do not show an upward trend for the industry as a whole over the past 20 years.”8 [emphasis added]
As the ERS data DOL has cited show, farms have become more productive and increased income at the same time that labor costs have risen, and thus labor costs for farmers have not risen as a share of income for the past 20 years. Data on farmworker wages and the share of labor costs disprove that the claim which is often made and repeated by farm employers and agribusiness lobbyists and
Farmers also simultaneously claim that a labor shortage exists and that it is difficult to find agricultural workers, while expecting wages to remain the same and not rise in response to said
7Daniel Costa and Philip Martin, “How much would it cost consumers to give farmworkers a significant raise? A 40% increase in pay would cost just $25 per household,” Working Economics blog (Economic Policy Institute), October 15, 2020.
886 Fed. Reg. 68185, citing Economic Research Service, Farm Labor, U.S. Department of Agriculture, last modified Aug. 18, 2021, at footnote 70.
5
shortage. As DOL rightly points out in the proposed rule, it is a rule of economics that wages rise in response to a labor shortage, and wages should “increase by an amount sufficient to attract more workers until supply and demand [are] met in equilibrium.”9 It is irrational to claim that there is a labor shortage in the farm labor market, but not expect wages to
Finally, some employer groups are making unreasonable comparisons to support their argument that the AEWR wage is too high. For example the National Council of Agricultural Employers (NCAE), in their comment on the proposed rule, notes that
A starting teacher in rural Hemingford, Nebraska, with a BS in education can expect an annual salary of $39,919. An
The NCAE’s comparison is inappropriate on two fronts. First, it takes the Nebraska hourly wage rate and annualizes it for someone working 8 hours per day and 40 hours per week for an entire year (52 weeks) at the AEWR for Nebraska, $16.47 per
986 Fed. Reg. 68185, citing 80 Fed. Reg 24146,
108 U.S.C §1188.
11Comment submitted to the proposed rule by Robert Roy, President and General Counsel for the National Council of Agricultural Employers, January 25, 2022.
12Philip Martin, Brandon Hooker, Muhammad Akhtar, Marc Stockton, How many workers are employed in California agriculture? California Agriculture, Volume 71, number 1, pages
13Philip Martin and Daniel Costa, “Farmworker wages in California: Large gap between
6
of the utmost importance to consider what they’re actually
The second flaw in the NCAE’s argument is related: the vast majority of
Finally, the teacher example is misleading because it purports to use teaching jobs as an example of a
IV. THE AEWR AND OTHER
The
14See for example Philip Martin, “The
15Katie Reilly, "'I work 3 jobs and donate blood plasma to pay the bills.' This is what it’s like to be a teacher in America," Time, September 13, 2018.
16Sylvia A. Allegretto and Lawrence Mishel, Teacher pay penalty dips but persists in 2019: Public school teachers earn about 20% less in weekly wages than nonteacher college graduates, Economic Policy Institute, September 17, 2020.
178 U.S.C. § 1188(a)(1).
18Daniel Costa, “The farmworker wage gap continued in 2020: Farmworkers and
7
The AEWR and other
For years, the AEWR has played a central role in fulfilling DOL’s mandate to prevent adverse effect to U.S. workers, and we support the Department’s decision to continue this role. The AEWR requirement appropriately “reflects a longstanding concern that there is a potential for the entry of foreign workers to depress the wages and working conditions of domestic agricultural workers.”21 As the Department explains in the Proposed Rule, “[t]he AEWR acts as ‘a prevailing wage concept defined over a broader geographic or occupational field,’” thereby “protect[ing] against localized wage depression that might occur in prevailing wage rates.”22 The potential for wage depression in the
The
19See for example, Farmworker Justice, No Way to Treat a Guest, 2011; Daniel Costa, Temporary work visa programs and the need for reform: A briefing on program frameworks, policy issues and fixes, and the impact of
20Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Ripe for Reform: Abuses of Agricultural Workers in the
212010 Final Rule, 75 Fed. Reg. 6883, 6891 (Feb. 12, 2010).
22Proposed Rule, 86 Fed. Reg. at 68176 (quoting 75 Fed. Reg. at 6893).
23Id.
24Id.
8
Unfortunately, the AEWR in practice acts as a wage ceiling. DOL has long accepted the interpretation that U.S. workers who demand more than the AEWR are not “available” within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1188(a)(1)(A).25 It must be remembered that in practice, the AEWR is in fact a floor, and that growers must reasonably negotiate with both U.S. and
In addition, we note that the AEWR is merely one piece of a larger set of wage protections in the H- 2A program. Employers seeking to use the
As a result, it is difficult to assess the impact of this AEWR rule independent of broader changes to the
V. THE PROPOSED RULE MAKES CHANGES THAT WILL BENEFIT U.S. AND
The Proposed Rule makes two key changes to the AEWR methodology that will benefit workers. First, it revives the Department’s longstanding reliance on the wage findings of the USDA’s Farm Labor Survey (FLS) to set the AEWR for field and livestock positions. Second, it recognizes the growth of
We strongly support DOL’s decision to continue setting the AEWR for field and livestock workers at the wage rate determined by the FLS. For nearly 35 years, DOL has relied on the FLS wage findings to set the AEWR. The FLS is an annual survey of farm employers that reports a combined average wage for the six primary field and livestock occupations at the state, regional, and national level. As the Department has repeatedly recognized, the FLS is the best source of accurate data on most farmworkers’ wages.27 However, the previous Administration departed from this longstanding approach in November 2020 when it issued its Final Rule on the AEWR methodology. The 2020 AEWR Final Rule would have abandoned the FLS, frozen worker wages for two years, and then adjusted
25See Hernandez Flecha v. Quiros, 567 F.2d 1154, 1156 (1st Cir. 1977).
2620 C.F.R. § 655.122(l).
27Proposed Rule, 86 Fed. Reg. at 68178; 2010 Rule, 75 Fed. Reg. at 6898.
9
upward annually based on changes in the Employment Cost Index. Such a drastic change of approach would have been disastrous for workers, and the Department was rightly enjoined from enforcing the 2020 AEWR Rule.
We also support the use of OEWS wage findings to set the AEWR for any
VI. WHENEVER THE OEWS IS USED TO SET THE AEWR, THE HIGHEST OF THE LOCAL OR STATEWIDE WAGE SHOULD BE UTILIZED
While we support the proposed continued general rule of requiring
When wage data for a specific, narrower occupation is unavailable in the FLS to set the AEWR, DOL proposes to use the statewide average wage for the occupation that is reported the OEWS survey for the occupation according to the corresponding Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code. However, wage rates for the same occupation can vary widely in a state, especially in a large one like California, which has counties with very high living costs (e.g., Monterey) and some with less expensive living costs (e.g., many of the counties in the San Joaquin Valley). The OWES also reports wage survey data by local area, which are reported as Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), counties, or nonmetropolitan areas. Therefore, using the statewide OES wage to set the AEWR and ignoring local wage rates available from the OEWS makes little sense.
The local wage rates are easily accessible on Foreign Labor Certification Data Center’s website, which is public and free.28 The FLC Data Center’s online wage library hosts wage rates surveyed by the OEWS and makes them available by local area and SOC code, and lists the average for the area and occupation. Searching for the local OEWS wage for the occupation will not cause any additional burden on employers than searching for the statewide OEWS wage rate for the occupation would cause. In fact, most prevailing wage rates in two other separate temporary work visa programs managed by
While DOL has proposed to make the AEWR methodology more reflective of occupations with higher wage rates that are not reflected in the FLS, it should go one step further and require payment of the
28https://flcdatacenter.com
10
highest wage available to set the AEWR from among all of the data sources available which include the state or regional FLS wage, the statewide OEWS wage for the occupation, or the local OEWS wage for the occupation (rather than picking the statewide OES in every case and ignoring the local OES wage). This will help ensure that farmworkers in counties with higher wages will not be at a disadvantage, and will help prevent downward pressure on local wages that would be caused by farmworkers in
In sum, in order to prevent downward pressure on farm wages, the updated prevailing wage methodology should be the highest among: (1) the local prevailing wage rate established by a SWA;
(2)the wage established in a collective bargaining agreement; (3) the state minimum wage; (4) the federal minimum wage; (5) the state or regional wage reported by FLS; but when an OEWS wage applies, it should be (6) the local wage reported in the OEWS for the occupation; or (7) the statewide wage reported in the OES for the occupation.
VII. DOL SHOULD INVEST HEAVILY IN IMPROVING THE OEWS IF WILL CONTINUE TO BE USED TO SET THE AEWR FOR CERTAIN OCCUPATIONS AND IN CASE IT BECOMES THE AEWR’S PRIMARY DATA SOURCE
While the FLS is currently by far the best available data set for understanding wage trends in agriculture and therefor for setting the AEWR, we realize that it is imperfect for the reasons DOL has outlined. However, while we support DOL’s decision to supplement the FLS with data from the OEWS, we nevertheless do not believe that the OEWS is an adequate substitute for the FLS because of its flaws with respect to data collection in the agricultural industry. DOL expresses concern that a future administration could decide to terminate the
In a previous comment to DOL which I coauthored about
The strength of the OEWS survey is that it has data on nearly 800 SOC occupations, and for all regions
in the United States. It’s the only wage data source we know of that does so, and another benefit is
29Daniel Costa and Ron Hira, “EPI comments on DOL Request for Information on determining prevailing wage levels for
Request for Information on Data Sources and Methods for Determining Prevailing Wage Levels for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Immigrants and
11
that each year DOL calculates the mean and median wage for each occupation, as well as the 10th,
25th, 50th (i.e. median), 75th, and 90th percentile wages for each occupation at the national
However, the OEWS is far from perfect. The OEWS covers so many occupations and regions, that often the sample sizes are quite small, diminishing the validity of the result. And when employers fill out the OEWS survey form, rather than writing in the actual salaries of their employees, employers choose from a range of salaries (hourly and/or annually), which diminishes the accuracy of the results.30 And finally, the BLS conducts the OEWS survey every year but pools three years of data for
its results, which as BLS notes, means there are “limitations associated with this estimation procedure in that it requires ‘updating’ for the earlier years of data and limits the usefulness of OEWS data for time series analysis.”31
We would urge the DOL conduct an audit of the entire OEWS data set to ensure geographic and occupational sample sizes are sufficient to return valid wage data. There are many examples of
When it comes to agricultural wages, the OEWS is especially deficient in terms of reflecting the wages of farmworkers because it is limited to
30Bureau of Labor Statistics, OES questionnaire form, U.S. Department of Labor, Form Approved O.M.B. No.
31See Section A, Question 4 in Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, Frequently Asked Questions.
32Retrieved May 30, 2021: https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=15- 1132&area=2700002&year=21&source=1
33Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, “Minimum Wage Increases Jan. 1, 2022,” August 19, 2021.
34Retrieved May 30, 2021: https://www.flcdatacenter.com/OesQuickResults.aspx?code=17- 2071&area=17780&year=21&source=1
35Occupational Employment and Wages, May 2020,
36Proposed Rule, 86 FR at 68181
12
are still directly hired by farms rather than FLCs, as both the National Agricultural Workers Survey and QCEW data show.37
OEWS data relying on only on wages paid by FLCs is a problem because of the FLC business model and the foreseeable results. The FLC model of employment may increase the incidence of employment law violations by separating the main beneficiary of the labor provided by
The results of this flawed business model are clear: FLC wages for many field and livestock workers are lower than those paid by farms that directly hire. DOL’s own studies have indicated that farm labor contractors and other employers in the support services field, on average, paid wages that were 14% lower than those paid by farm operators,40 and QCEW data also show lower wages paid by FLCs compared to
Thus, until and unless DOL makes significant investments in, and improvements to the OEWS data, they will continue to be inadequate as a substitute for the FLS if it is ever discontinued. The OEWS’s reliance on wage data collected exclusively by FLCs with a fissured business model and lower wages
37The latest National Agricultural Workers Survey (which does not include
FLC employment; see Rural Migration News, “Farm Labor: Employment Down, Wages Up,” University of California,
Davis, June 21, 2021.
38David Weil, The Fissured Workplace: Why Work Became So Bad for So Many and What Can Be Done to Improve
It. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2014.
39A number of studies show a wage penalty for subcontracted/outsourced workers. For example, see Arindrajit Dube and
Ethan Kaplan, “Does Outsourcing Reduce Wages in the
Guards.” Cornell University ILR Review, Cornell University, January 1, 2010; Deborah Goldschmidt and Johannes Schmieder, “The Rise of Domestic Outsourcing and the Evolution of the German Wage Structure.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 132(3),
4075 Fed. Reg. 6883, 6898 (Feb. 12, 2010).
41Rural Migration News, “Farm Labor: Employment Down, Wages Up,” University of California, Davis, June 21, 2021.
42Maria Perez, “What led to a migrant worker’s death from heatstroke?” USA Today, December 17, 2021.
43Daniel Costa, Philip Martin, and Zachariah Rutledge, Federal labor standards enforcement in agriculture: Data reveal the biggest violators and raise new questions about how to improve and target efforts to protect farmworkers, Economic Policy Institute, December 15, 2020.
13
will artificially depress the AEWR. Therefore, DOL should take steps to improve the collection of farmworker wage and earnings data under the OEWS; for example, by expanding the population surveyed by the OEWS to include
VIII. CONCLUSION: THE NEW AEWR IS AN IMPROVEMENT BUT ULTIMATELY CONGRESS MUST ACT TO IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR THE FARM LABOR FORCE AND
We commend the Department for its efforts to improve the AEWR methodology and strengthen its protections for U.S. and
Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the only rational and durable solution for stabilizing the farm labor force is for Congress to craft solutions that do not rely on temporary immigration statuses and indentured temporary migrant workers like
Sincerely,
Daniel Costa
Director of Immigration Law and Policy Research
Economic Policy Institute
14
|