[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 26 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E367]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. MICHAEL D. CRAPO

                                of idaho

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, March 4, 1997

  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation in 
favor of economic opportunity and vitality. The Fair Labor Standards 
Act [FLSA] was designed to promote economic opportunity. There have 
been instances, however, when unintended consequences are revealed. 
When they do, it is our imperative to correct them properly so that 
FLSA will be applied consistently and continue to promote basic 
economic fairness, its original goal. One unintended consequence, 
however, impacts a major economic force in our country as well as my 
home State of Idaho: Agriculture.
  FLSA itself recognizes that agriculture is a special industry and 
consequently contains numerous exceptions to the applicability of 
FLSA's ``time-and-a-half-overtime'' provisions. Unfortunately, a sugar 
beet is deemed ``not a vegetable'' under FLSA. As a result, no overtime 
is due a farmer's workers if the farmer transports sugar beets from his 
fields to the processing plant. If a farmer stockpiles his sugar beets 
in an effort to be more efficient and then contracts transportation 
with a hauler to bring these same vegetables to that same plant, 
however, the hauler is nevertheless required to pay his drivers 
overtime. This occurs even though those plant workers are also exempt 
from FLSA's overtime provisions. The scenario is not hypothetical; it 
occurs regularly to one constituent of mine who has for years been 
involved in the annual beet haul involving sugar beets. Ironically, 
applying FLSA to the beet haul actually lowers the compensation that 
his truck drivers are actually paid.
  In Idaho, the beet haul requires farmers to stockpile their crops in 
beet piles and await the processor's delivery instructions. Once 
processing begins, it is a 24-hour-per-day, 7 days a week affair, 
lasting from late September until early January. The most economically 
advantageous method--to both drivers and their employer--for 
compensating beet haul drivers is to pay them by the load.
  Truck drivers who want to work, hustle loads; they are rewarded for 
the diligent work ethic. The less motivated worker earns less. 
Unfortunately, with respect to my constituent--and my constituent 
alone--the Department of Labor has insisted that FLSA's overtime 
provisions apply to the beet haul.
  In theory, FLSA requires all beet haul operations to pay ``time-and-
a-half.'' In reality, my constituent's competitors never have been 
required to comply with this FLSA provision; that competitor still pays 
by the load. This is despite the fact that both hauling entities are 
regulated by the Federal Department of Transportation. The competitor 
hauls a small percentage from beet piles located in Oregon--that is the 
only difference. This circumstance harms my constituent since his 
diligent workers are paid less under this rule and he must still absorb 
higher labor costs. This disparate treatment has caused my constituent 
to lose his better drivers repeatedly to his competitor. They earn more 
working by the load; my constituent pays more because he is not treated 
the same as other beet haulers.
  One might already assume that FLSA's agricultural exemptions would 
cure this inequity. It does not: a sugar beet as defined under the act 
is not a vegetable and therefore, the exemption does not apply, even 
though a sugar beet is, in fact, a vegetable. Consequently, the beet 
haul does not enjoy the FLSA agricultural exemption which applies to 
other agricultural endeavors.This inequality thus requires a 
definitional, that is, a legislative, solution. The legislation I 
propose is simple, direct, and in no way will interrupt the overall 
flow and impact of FLSA. This legislation seeks to include sugar beets 
as vegetables in FLSA. This legislation will level the playing field 
and enhance one of the actual goals of the statute: economic fairness.

                          ____________________