Federal Court Strikes Down DOL Farmworker Wage Cuts as Agency Rescinds Coordination Rules

Inside the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on August 26, Judge Kirk Sherriff issued an order that immediately halted a sweeping wage reduction for temporary agricultural workers. The ruling struck down a Department of Labor methodology that would have lowered the Adverse Effect Wage Rate for H-2A visa holders, a move the agency had implemented to ease costs for American farmers.[4]

The decision exposes a fundamental contradiction in how the federal government currently manages agricultural labor. At the exact moment the courts are forcing the Department of Labor to maintain strict wage floors to protect farmworkers, the agency itself is actively dismantling the internal framework designed to enforce those very protections.[2][4][5]

Just days after the court ruling, the Department of Labor published a final rule rescinding 29 CFR Part 42, effective September 30, 2026. This regulation had historically mandated formal coordination between the Wage and Hour Division, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Employment and Training Administration to oversee migrant and seasonal farmworker conditions.[1]

The agency defends the rescission as necessary housekeeping, arguing that the regulations reference agencies abolished in 2009 and statutes repealed in 1983. According to the federal filing, modern enforcement relies on strategic task forces and joint initiatives rather than the rigid quarterly meetings mandated by the old text.[1]

However, labor advocates argue this deregulation removes a critical statutory safety net. The United Farm Workers, who successfully sued to block the H-2A wage cuts, view the simultaneous rollback of coordination rules as a vulnerability that could allow wage theft and unsafe conditions to slip through the cracks of siloed federal agencies.[2][3]

The stakes are heavily concentrated across the nearly 350,000 H-2A positions certified at more than 30,600 farms nationwide. The blocked wage rule alone was projected to save agricultural employers an estimated $2.46 billion annually by allowing them to pay entry-level workers lower rates and deduct housing costs.[4]

Employers argue these savings are a survival mechanism. With domestic labor shortages persisting, agricultural councils maintain that previous wage calculations were artificially inflated. Under the struck-down rule, for example, the H-2A wage in certain states would have dropped to $17.13 an hour after housing deductions, compared to previous baselines near $19.82.[4]

Judge Sherriff's ruling found that the Department of Labor bypassed standard Administrative Procedure Act requirements, failing to justify why it implemented the wage cuts on an emergency basis. The court specifically criticized the "greater than 50%" provision, which would have allowed farmers to pay the same lower wage for higher-level work if it comprised less than half of a worker's hours.[3][4]

For now, the existing, higher wage rates remain in effect. "Employers must be held accountable for paying back any difference between the new legal wage and the illegal wage rates still in effect," stated UFW President Teresa Romero following the decision.[3]

The landscape of farmworker regulation is now pulling in opposite directions. As the Department of Labor streamlines its internal oversight by clearing out legacy coordination rules, the federal courts are ensuring that the economic baseline for the workers themselves cannot be quietly eroded. The next checkpoint arrives on September 30, when the formal coordination mandates officially expire, leaving the agency's modernized task forces to prove they can police the fields without them.[1][4][5]