[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 74 (Thursday, May 20, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1041]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           INTRODUCTION OF THE MSPA CLARIFICATION ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHARLES T. CANADY

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 20, 1999

  Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, America's farming community plays 
a vital role in the prosperity of the nation. Our growers are facing 
tremendous challenges as the world economy changes--changes in 
international competition, environmental stewardship, and providing for 
the nutritional needs of the planet's growing population. Given these 
pressures, farmers should not have to contend with government agencies 
that overstep regulatory boundaries set by Congress. Unfortunately, 
this is precisely what is happening.
  Agriculture is a labor-intensive industry, particularly during the 
planting and harvesting seasons. This is especially true for specialty 
crops such as citrus, vegetables, apples, and peaches, which are grown 
in many different regions of the country. Temporary and migrant workers 
are critical to meeting the need for farm labor. Congress, through the 
Migrant and Seasonal Workers Protection Act (MSPA) and other 
initiatives, created a national standard to ensure safe working 
conditions for these workers and entrusted enforcement of these laws 
and regulations, primarily with the Department of Labor.
  The need for effective migrant worker protections is well recognized; 
however, current federal policies are placing an unfair burden upon 
agricultural employers. In 1997, the Department of Labor issued a new 
interpretation of the joint employer rule found in MSPA that holds 
farmers to a stricter standard than other employers. The new regulation 
is written so broadly that virtually any grower can be classified as a 
joint employer for liability purposes. This is in spite of several 
court rulings that struck down the Department's attempts to interpret 
the joint employer rule in such a fashion. Because the new guidelines 
would apply to MSPA alone, only agriculture employers are subject to 
them. This action, combined with overlapping housing regulations, 
Department of Labor initiatives to classify year-round employees as 
seasonal workers, onerous federal transportation insurance 
requirements, and other policies are selectively punitive and unfair to 
agriculture.
  The MSPA Clarification Act, which I am introducing today, seeks to 
ease the inequitable burden on farmers. The bill would restore the 
original definition of joint employer and make other common sense 
changes in the regulatory structure governing agricultural labor. It 
would clarify that farm workers who enter into voluntary carpool 
arrangements should not be classified by the Department of Labor as 
licensed farm labor contractors in violation of MSPA; grant farmers a 
10-day grace period in which they may correct MSPA violations; 
streamline worker housing regulations; and require federal 
investigators to confer with growers prior to entering the farm 
operation.
  The MSPA Clarification Act does not weaken or do away with the basic 
protections afforded to migrant workers under MSPA. It merely seeks to 
provide for a reasonable relationship between growers and the 
government by returning to the original intent of Congress for MSPA. 
The legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau Federation and 
other agricultural groups from around the country. It has the 
bipartisan support of many in Congress. I look forward to working with 
my colleagues to ensure a safe and productive farm workplace through 
this important piece of legislation.

                          ____________________