Dairy cows huddle at sunset on a farm in Manitowoc County. Advocates and farmers say an ICE raid that took 24 migrants into custody Sept. 25 poses a threat to the state’s dairy farms and the immigrant workers that keep the industry afloat. (Photo by Andrew Kennard/Wisconsin Examiner)

The morning of Sept. 25, federal agents and immigration authorities swept into Manitowoc to arrest people alleged to be in the country without proper documentation. Agents first went to a Walmart parking lot where dairy workers are known to meet up before driving to the farms where they work. The action then moved on to private residences, where migrants were arrested as they left the house. 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security claims the ICE raid in Manitowoc was aimed at dismantling an international sex and drug trafficking ring, but has so far provided little evidence to support that claim. Federal authorities initially said 21 migrants had been arrested in the raid, before later saying 24 had been picked up. 

On Tuesday, DHS released the names of six of the 24. Only one individual named in the release has been charged with a sex crime — Jose Hilario Moreno Portillo, who was charged in Manitowoc County court in May with the 2nd degree sexual assault of a child. However, Moreno Portillo has not yet been convicted and court records show he’s been in ICE custody since July. 

ICE did not respond to a request for comment on why Moreno Portillo was named as being arrested in the Manitowoc action when he was already in ICE custody. 

The five other named individuals have been convicted of identity theft, hit-and-run, disorderly conduct, driving under the influence, possession of narcotic equipment, traffic offenses and a failure to appear charge. 

In Wisconsin, immigrants without documentation aren’t able to obtain driver’s licenses, which often causes them to wrack up several criminal traffic offenses when they’re pulled over and ticketed for driving without a license. 

With little proof that ICE actually broke up a ring of sex traffickers, immigration advocates and farm groups see the raid as a direct threat to the state’s dairy farms and the immigrant workers that keep the industry afloat. 

Farmers and immigrant advocates in Wisconsin have been watching ICE’s actions on dairy farms across the country closely. In March, ICE raided a dairy farm and petting zoo in New York. In April, a raid on a dairy farm in Vermont resulted in eight arrests. And in early June, ICE arrested 11 immigrants in a raid on a dairy farm in New Mexico. 

But so far, enforcement against undocumented people on dairy farms had been sporadic and far from the Midwest. In June, President Donald Trump announced and then retreated from guidance that ICE would not aggressively target farms and the hospitality industry. 

While last Thursday’s raid in Manitowoc didn’t take place on a dairy farm, most of the individuals arrested were dairy workers. Beyond that, they were dairy workers in the county with the highest concentration of dairy factory farms in the state. Manitowoc County and its northeast Wisconsin neighbors are the epicenter of the modern farming powerhouse that maintains Wisconsin’s status as “America’s Dairyland.” 

“It’s just sending an economic ripple effect across the dairy industry, which is Wisconsin’s rural economy,” says Luis Velasquez, statewide organizing director for immigrant advocacy group Voces de la Frontera. “And then also there’s the symbolic and political dimension to it as well. We are America’s Dairyland, and so this enforcement is not just an administrative matter, but it threatens the industry’s well being. Who are we going to be after all of this? Are we still going to be America’s Dairyland?”

Velasquez says the raid sent a “big anxiety wave” through immigrant communities across the state. 

“These views have just spiraled out of control in terms of the rumors that have been sent out across the community, rumors of ICE coming into their neighborhoods, to their homes, to their schools,” Velasquez says.  

“I have had serious conversations since the raid in Manitowoc of folks who are planning to leave after many years of being here,” he adds. “They just don’t feel like this is a humane lifestyle anymore. They’ve given many years of their lives, and many of them have children here.” 

Michael Slattery, a Manitowoc County farmer who grows grain and raises Holstein steers, points to data that shows 70% of the labor on Wisconsin’s dairy farms comes from immigrants and estimates that the dairy industry is the driver of 20% of Manitowoc County’s economy. 

Slattery says farmers can’t survive without that migrant labor because no one else is willing to do the work.

“Do you want to get up at 3 a.m. seven days a week to go out in the cold, the heat, to get kicked by cows when you’re putting the suction cups on, to be shat upon, pissed on, pushed around by 1,400 pound cows? People don’t want that,” he says. “I’ve tried to hire part time labor here, I cannot get people, they don’t want to do this sort of stuff.”

Simply expecting farm families to pick up the slack isn’t the answer, he adds.  “These dairy farms, they don’t have enough family members that can come out and replace immigrant labor, both documented and undocumented, that are leaving,” Slattery says. “They’re in a money-losing situation now.” 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Losing the dairy labor force would have ripple effects across the economy in Wisconsin and the country. 

“What do they do in that situation? If your cows cannot be milked, in two, two and a half weeks they’ll go dry,” he says. “The cows get milk fever, get ill, that’s your cheap hamburger in the stores. They’re selling the cows at a loss, that’s what they’ll do. There’s less milk in the market, that will drive up prices for cheese, milk and butter.”

Danielle Endvick, executive director of the Wisconsin Farmers Union, says if Wisconsin’s immigrant workers leave the state — either from being arrested by ICE or leaving on their own to avoid arrest — farms could close and prices could increase. 

“Immigration raids and mass deportations can shrink rural economies, are terribly destabilizing for communities and can harm schools, churches, just the fabric of our rural communities too,” Endvick says. “Our rural spaces, our farmers can’t thrive if we’re treating a key workforce like they’re disposable. I think that immigrant workers are essential to Wisconsin dairy, and that when they are threatened, farmers in our rural communities are threatened too.”

There’s an ongoing debate within Wisconsin government over whether workers who receive federal disability payments should also be eligible to get unemployment benefits from the state — and if so, how much.

The post Draft bill would reduce Wisconsin unemployment aid for workers with disabilities appeared first on WPR.

Demonstrators protest the suspension of the "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" show outside the El Capitan Entertainment Centre, where the show is performed, in Los Angeles earlier this month. While Kimmel has returned to the air, dozens of public workers have been fired across the country for comments about the assassination of Charlie Kirk. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Hours after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Suzanne Swierc shared two thoughts on her private Facebook page — that the killing of the right-wing activist was wrong, and that his death reflected “the violence, fear and hatred he sowed.”

The post upended her life.

Indiana Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita soon obtained a screenshot of the post by Swierc, an administrator at Ball State University, and added it to an official website naming and shaming educators for their comments about Kirk.

Libs of Tik Tok, a social media account dedicated to mocking liberals, shared her comments with its 4.4 million followers on X. A week after the post, the university fired her.

“The day that my private post was made public without my consent was one of the worst days of my life,” Swierc told reporters this past week. She said she received calls, texts and other harassing messages, including one suggesting she should be killed, that left her terrified.

A wave of firings and investigations has swept through academia and government in the wake of Kirk’s death, as state agencies, colleges and local school districts take action against employees over comments perceived as offensive or inappropriate. Dozens of workers in higher education alone have lost their jobs.

A Texas State University student was expelled after he publicly reenacted Kirk’s assassination; Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and other Republicans had called for the student’s expulsion. Clemson University in South Carolina fired one worker and removed two professors from teaching. The University of Mississippi fired an employee. An Idaho Department of Labor employee was terminated.

The purge is driven in part by Republican elected officials who are encouraging Americans to report co-workers, their children’s teachers and others who make comments seen as crossing the line. They have been egged on by the Trump administration, with Vice President JD Vance urging listeners of Kirk’s podcast to call the employer of anyone “celebrating” his killing.

President Donald Trump has threatened to expand the crackdown beyond Kirk, warning falsely in the Oval Office last week that negative press coverage of him is “really illegal,” despite constitutional protections for freedom of the press.

Trump headlines Arizona memorial service for Charlie Kirk at packed stadium

At Kirk’s memorial service, Trump said, “I hate my opponent.” His choice to lead the Federal Communications Commission threatened ABC over comments about the reaction to Kirk’s death made by the late-night comedian Jimmy Kimmel and the network pulled his show for several days.

Mark Johnson, a First Amendment attorney based in Kansas City, Missouri, who has been practicing law for 45 years, said he had never seen a moment like the current one.

“Not even close,” Johnson said. “What’s been happening in the last month is astonishing.”

In Indiana, Rokita is using his office’s “Eyes on Education” webpage to publicize examples of educators who have made controversial remarks about Kirk. The page, billed as a transparency tool, housed a hodgepodge of submitted complaints about teachers and schools in the past. Now, it also includes 28 Kirk-related submissions as of Thursday afternoon.

Wisconsin Republican U.S. Rep. Derrick Van Orden threatened to strip an entire town of federal funding after a high school math teacher noted on her personal Facebook page that Kirk had in the past said some gun deaths are worth it to have the Second Amendment. The teacher has been suspended.

Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters, who is leaving his job next month to head up a conservative teachers organization, has launched investigations of school employees in response to tips submitted to Awareity, an online platform that allows parents and others to report concerns. Last week the Oklahoma State Department of Education said it had received 224 reports of “defamatory comments.”

Florida Republican U.S. Rep. Randy Fine has urged people with information about anyone celebrating Kirk’s death who works in government in Florida to contact his office. And South Carolina Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace wants federal funding cut off for any school that fails to fire or discipline staff who “glorify or justify” political violence.

“It’s at a scale never before seen and I think it’s completely unhinged,” Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors, said of the rush to fire higher education faculty.

Free speech consequences?

Kirk, who founded the campus conservative activism organization Turning Point USA and was close to Trump, was a hero to many Republicans. They saw a charismatic family man and a Christian unafraid to take his hard-right vision onto liberal college campuses.

But many Democrats and liberals experienced Kirk as a provocateur with a record of incendiary remarks about people of color, immigrants and Islam. While many of Kirk’s opponents have condemned the assassination, some have also emphasized their disagreement with his views or suggested his death arose out of what they saw as his hateful rhetoric.

“I have faculty who are getting fired, who have tenure and are getting fired, for saying things like ‘I condemn political violence but the words that Charlie Kirk used, he sort of reaped what he sowed,’” Wolfson said. “All things told, I may not agree with that statement, but that’s a perfectly reasonable thing for somebody to say. Certainly not something to be fired for.”

MSUN professor on leave as influencers targeted Montanans in wake of Charlie Kirk’s death

Some Republicans have long denounced what they view as past Democratic censorship, including Biden administration efforts to pressure social media companies to censor content during the COVID-19 pandemic. They have also criticized firings and pushed back on perceived political correctness run amok during the height of the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, moments of ascendant progressive influence.

But as the current round of terminations plays out, some conservatives argue public employees who speak out about Kirk are facing the consequences of their actions. Oklahoma state Rep. Gabe Woolley, a Republican, said individuals in a taxpayer-funded role who work with children should be held to a high level of accountability.

“I think the most important factor to consider … is that these people chose to enter the public square on public social media accounts and to mock and celebrate the death of an American patriot who was a Christian martyr who was killed for his faith doing what God called him to do,” Woolley said.

Woolley added that “if you choose to make something public, you should not be shocked or surprised by any type of public pushback.”

Swierc described a relatively restricted Facebook account. It was private and couldn’t be found by searching for her name; only individuals with mutual Facebook friends could request to add her as a friend. She did not list her employer on her profile.

Swierc’s post on Kirk could only be seen by her Facebook friends. At some point, someone — Swierc doesn’t know who — made a screenshot of the post. It was then circulated publicly and ended up on Indiana’s “Eyes on Education” page.

On Sept. 17, Ball State University President Geoffrey Mearns fired Swierc, who had been director of health promotion and advocacy within the Division of Student Affairs. In a letter informing Swierc of her termination, Mearns wrote that many current students had written to the university to express concern and that her post had caused unprecedented disruption.

Swierc filed a federal lawsuit against Mearns on Monday, alleging he violated her First Amendment rights. Swierc, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, wants a court to order Mearns to expunge her termination from her Ball State University personnel file, along with unspecified damages.

“I do not regret the post I made, and I would not take back what I said,” Swierc said during a virtual news conference organized by the ACLU of Indiana. “I believe that I, along with every person in this country, have First Amendment rights to be able to speak on a number of things.”

Ball State University declined to answer Stateline’s questions, citing the lawsuit. In an unsigned public statement on the day of Swierc’s firing, the university said the post was “inconsistent with the distinctive nature and trust” of Swierc’s leadership position and had caused significant disruption to the university.

Swierc’s lawsuit is one of a growing number of legal challenges to firings and employee discipline over comments about Kirk. On Wednesday, a federal judge ordered the University of South Dakota to reinstate an art professor who had placed on administrative leave after calling Kirk a “Nazi” but later deleted the post and apologized.

Aggressive state attorney general

Swierc didn’t name Rokita, the attorney general, as a defendant in her lawsuit, but the official has loomed over the situation.

Two days after Kirk’s assassination, Rokita urged his followers on X to submit to him any evidence of educators or school administrators celebrating or rationalizing the killing. He wrote that they must be held accountable and “have no place teaching our students.”

But Rokita has also said the Indiana Attorney General’s Office isn’t investigating individuals submitted to his “Eyes on Education” page — suggesting the effort is mainly intended to generate public pressure against employers. Each example on the page lists contact information for the school’s leadership and in some instances information about the next local school board meeting.

“For a government official, especially of that caliber, to be creating a database and doing this has an incredibly chilling effect on speech,” said Ashkhen Kazaryan, a senior legal fellow at The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank located at Vanderbilt University that promotes the values of free speech and free expression.

Rokita didn’t agree to an interview. “Our goal is to provide transparency, equipping parents with the information they need to make informed decisions about their children’s education,” Rokita said in a news release.

On Monday, Rokita sent a six-page letter to school superintendents and public university administrators, providing guidance on the legal authority to fire and discipline teachers for speech related to Kirk. The letter suggested that speech occurring on social media is a factor that weighs in favor of the authority to fire an employee because it carries the risk of being amplified and disrupting school operations.

Rokita also analyzed comments about Kirk by a U.S. history teacher in Indiana who had said the assassinated activist can “suck it” and referred to comments made by Kirk in 2023 that some gun deaths every year are the cost of Second Amendment rights. The district’s employer had chosen not to terminate the teacher, but Rokita laid out a legal justification for firing the employee.

He concluded the letter by writing that many schools would be within their legal authority to fire teachers “who have similarly contributed to the divisive and, for many, painful eruption of controversial discourse on social media and elsewhere concerning Charlie Kirk.”

Joseph Mastrosimone, an employment law professor at Washburn University, said private employers have broad discretion to fire workers over speech. But the government is different, he said, with the First Amendment providing at least some level of protection to employees.

Decades of court cases have established the core principle that if a public employee is speaking in their capacity as a citizen on a matter of public concern, then the government can only take action if the speech causes significant disruption to the delivery of the public service and that disruption outweighs the employee’s interest in the speech, he said.

Mastrosimone said if a teacher’s message made in his or her own time is causing community outrage and pandemonium, “that’s probably going to count as some disruption.”

“And there might be sufficient disruption to outweigh whatever interest the employee has in the speech,” Mastrosimone said. But the closer the teacher’s message is to core political speech — such as voicing support for a candidate for office — the more the scales tip in favor of the employee being able to speak without fear of discipline.

“It is certainly a matter of public concern, what’s going on here with the Charlie Kirk assassination. The interests are probably pretty high, I would think,” Mastrosimone said.

Push to honor Kirk

As some Republican officials have called for action against public employees who have made comments about Kirk, they have often drawn a line at what they see as celebrating or glorifying his assassination. Walters, the outgoing Oklahoma state superintendent, has gone further and is investigating districts for “refusing to honor his memory.”

The Oklahoma State Department of Education last week said in addition to reports on individual teachers, it was investigating 30 reports of schools that didn’t observe a moment of silence. Three reports alleged schools weren’t flying their flags at half-staff.

On Tuesday, Walters announced an official push to start a Turning Point USA chapter in every Oklahoma high school. Later that day, he announced he would resign as superintendent to become CEO of the Teacher Freedom Alliance, a new group that casts itself as a conservative alternative to teachers’ unions.

Walters’ Turning Point effort comes after Oklahoma state Sen. Shane Jett, a Republican, filed three pieces of legislation to honor Kirk, including one that would establish “Charlie Kirk Free Speech Day” and another requiring public colleges and universities to develop a “Charlie Kirk Memorial Plaza” on their campuses.

Walters and Jett didn’t respond to interview requests.

“Charlie Kirk inspired a generation to love America, to speak boldly, and to never shy away from debate. Our kids must get involved and active,” Walters said in a news release on Tuesday. “We will fight back against the liberal propaganda, pushed by the radical left, and the teachers unions. Our fight starts now.”

Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org.

Wisconsin's unemployment rate held steady in August even as the number of people employed in the state fell.

The post Unemployment in Wisconsin holds steady in August even as the number of people working falls appeared first on WPR.

Robert Cherone, a 45-year-old from Elkhorn, was crushed by a robotic machine at the company’s facility.

The post 45-year-old Elkhorn man dies in ‘tragic accident’ at West Milwaukee pizza factory appeared first on WPR.

The November Farm Foundation® Forum, Growing Together: Trends and Transformation in U.S. Agriculture Labor, highlighted some of the findings from a recent multi-day symposium that explored the future of the U.S. agricultural workforce. The symposium, held by Farm Foundation and the Economic Research Service at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, aimed to convene a network of researchers and stakeholders to engage in productive discussions focused on farm labor issues. The primary goal was to strengthen and enhance ongoing farm labor research.

This forum highlighted the critical importance of farm labor to the competitiveness of US agriculture, particularly for labor-intensive commodities like fruits and vegetables. The discussion was moderated by Michael Marsh, president and CEO of the National Council of Agricultural Employers, and featured panelists: Philip Martin Professor Emeritus at the University of California, Davis; Andrew Padovani, senior research associate with JBS International; and Alexandra Hill, assistant professor at the University of California, Berkeley.

The Forum covered a wide range of topics, including wage rates and competition, legislative and regulatory challenges, litigation and legal actions, mechanization and labor alternatives, and economic and demographic trends.

Numerous Issues to Consider

One point brought up was that there has been no significant agricultural labor reform since 1986, making it difficult to address current labor issues. Farmers must also contend with many new regulations, including those related to wage rates and worker protection. The impact of the Adverse Effect Wage Rate and competition with countries like Mexico was also discussed.

One solution to rising labor costs is a push toward mechanization, which brings about its own set of questions around adaptation to this change. In some cases, robotic harvesters are not yet fast enough or inexpensive enough to replace human hand pickers, but the gap may be closing fastest for crops like apples.

The H2-A program was also a large part of the discussion. The use of H-2A workers is increasing, but the program’s costs and regulatory requirements are significant. The anticipated impacts of the incoming administration on the potential for ag labor reform was also briefly discussed during audience question and answer session.

Overall, the Forum underscored the urgent need for comprehensive agricultural labor reform to ensure the sustainability and competitiveness of US agriculture. The discussions highlighted the complex interplay of wage rates, regulatory challenges, and the need for mechanization and alternative labor sources.

The two-hour discussion, including the audience question and answer session, was recorded and is archived on the Farm Foundation website. 

The post Farm Foundation Forum Underscores Need for Comprehensive Agricultural Labor Reform appeared first on Farm Foundation.

Farmworkers play an “essential role in keeping food on our tables,” said U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack during opening remarks at a symposium held September 17-19, 2024, in Santa Cruz, California. The three-day event, “The Changing Landscape of Farm Labor Conditions in the United States: What the Future Holds and How to Prepare for It,” was hosted by U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Economic Research Service (ERS) and Farm Foundation. The symposium consisted of a two-day conference plus a one-day farm tour centered around the theme of U.S. agricultural labor conditions, challenges, and solutions. Dr. Jessica Crowe, chief of the Rural Economy Branch at the USDA’s ERS, along with ERS’s farm labor team, organized the event along four key themes: 

1. Trends in the farm labor force—including presentations on worker migration and the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Program
2. Labor costs—including presentations on the effects of H-2A Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR) and overtime laws on farmworkers
3. Farmworker conditions—including presentations on workplace safety; effects of climate change on worker health; workplace harassment
4. Workforce development and technology—trends in training current farmworkers and a new generation to develop, operate, and repair new technologies in the field and lead packing operations

In her opening remarks, ERS Assistant Administrator Kelly Maguire stressed that although critical to the Nation’s food security, “farm work is potentially hazardous and ERS data show that farmworkers receive lower wages when compared with nonsupervisory workers outside of agriculture.” Complicating the issue, both the private and government sector will need to “accelerate adaptation to a changing landscape of farm labor,” said Maguire. This will be necessary for the United States to remain competitive as a producer of labor-intensive commodities like fruit and vegetables, she said.

The symposium’s opening remarks continued with Secretary Vilsack highlighting that “the USDA, Department of Labor, and employers can all play a role in addressing systemic challenges” while emphasizing the importance of building “a system that works for everyone… by creating value and opportunity for employers and farmworkers.”

In his keynote address, Dr. Philip Martin, professor emeritus at the University of California-Davis, outlined three responses to rising farm labor costs: an increase in mechanization, an increase in the number of migrant workers with H-2A visas, and an increase in imported produce. However, questions remain as to the extent machines can lessen labor needs by commodity, the number of workers the U.S. will need in the future and where they will come from, and whether the U.S. can import more fruits and vegetables from Mexico, Central and South America.

Day 1 Overview: Farmworker Well-Being

After opening remarks, the first day’s sessions focused on the changing farm labor force, farmworker wages, workplace safety, and farmworker health. Presenters described the changing demographics of domestic crop workers as one that is aging, increasingly coming from Southern Mexico, and more likely to have at least one chronic health condition. In addition, the number of farmworkers on migrant H-2A visas continues to increase. Several speakers discussed farmworker wages from the perspective of the farmworker and farm owner. Audience members contributed to these discussions by considering how high costs of housing factor into the discussion on wages. With respect to H-2A wages, Dr. Zach Rutledge, assistant professor at Michigan State University, discussed the adverse effect wage rate (AEWR) including how the AEWR is calculated, problems with its calculation, whether the rate is too low or too high, and how changes to the AEWR would affect H-2A and non-H-2A farm wages.

Speakers discussed the impact of farmworkers being excluded from many federal workplace protection laws on farmworker well-being. State laws are patchwork with some states providing more protection for farmworkers than other states. For example, six states have implemented (or are finalizing) heat standards for agricultural workers while three states have regulations in place for wildfire smoke. Despite agricultural workers having fewer workplace protections at the federal level than other occupations, farmworkers are exposed to hazardous conditions including extreme weather, wild animals, hazardous plants, dangerous tools, hazardous chemicals, and poor living conditions. These risks found in the workplace can lead to injuries and illnesses that are often left untreated until the problem becomes severe. Dr. Brenda Berumen assistant professor at Texas State University, described several barriers that farmworkers face to seeking medical treatment including the high cost of care, unpaid sick leave to receive treatment (resulting in lost wages), long travel times to receive certain health services, and a lack of information and resources (including information in their native language).

Day 2 Overview: Technological Innovations, H-2A Visa Program

The sessions on the second day focused on workforce development, technology, and the H-2A visa program. Advances in technological aids in orchards and fields, such as platforms used in apple orchards, can increase labor productivity while reducing injuries associated with previous picking methods. However, adoption rates are slow as the structure and architecture of existing orchards and fields have to adapt to the new technology. In addition, robotics in fields and orchards are continuing to advance, but have a ways to go before the technology is efficient enough to be cost effective. However, patents for artificial intelligence (AI) in agriculture have increased substantially in the past few years. It is yet to be seen how the increase in agricultural AI will impact farm labor.

The H-2A visa program is an increasing source of temporary agricultural labor. Presenters discussed the problems of the program, including scams and illegal fees associated with the recruitment of migrant workers, lack of oversight and accountability for employers who break laws tied to H-2A, and the tethering of farmworkers to employers by visa status. While speakers and audience members debated the impacts of H-2A wages on farmworkers and employers, overall, symposium attendees agreed that H-2A is a significant program that employers increasingly seek out to secure farm labor. Furthermore, attendees agreed that problems exist that can result in exploitation of farmworkers, during recruitment and employment. Dr. Kelly Maguire closed the symposium by thanking those involved who organized the three-day event, including the interpreters, reflecting on what was learned through formal and informal conversations, and encouraging attendees to continue to build on newly formed relationships and to nurture new perspectives and information gained during the symposium.

---

This post-event summary of “The Changing Landscape of Farm Labor Conditions in the United States: What the Future Holds and How to Prepare for It” symposium was written by Dr. Jessica Crowe, chief of the Rural Economy Branch in the Resource and Rural Economy Division in the USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS).

Go to the project page>

The post Symposium on U.S. Farm Labor Conditions Discussed Sector’s Diverse Challenges and Opportunities appeared first on Farm Foundation.

Although critical to the nation’s food security, farm work is potentially hazardous, farmworkers receive lower wages when compared with nonsupervisory workers outside agriculture, and many hired farm workers lack legal work authorization and access to basic public services. For the United States to remain competitive as a producer of fruit, vegetables, and other labor-intensive commodities both private and government institutions will need to accelerate adaptation to a changing landscape of farm labor.

An upcoming conference on farm labor seeks to strengthen ongoing farm labor research by convening and developing a network of researchers and stakeholders. The Changing Landscape of Farm Labor Conditions in the United States: What the Future Holds and How to Prepare for It conference will take place September 17 to 19, 2024, in Santa Cruz, California.

The conference is presented by the USDA Economic Research Service and Farm Foundation. It will cover four key themes: trends in the farm labor force, including worker migration and the H-2A Temporary Agricultural Program; labor costs, farm worker conditions, and workforce development.

Visit https://farmfoundation.swoogo.com/farmlabor for more information and to register.

The post Upcoming Farm Labor Conference Tackles Critical Issues appeared first on Farm Foundation.