Labor Department suspends contested H-2A worker protection rule

The U.S. Department of Labor has suspended a contested measure that extended protections to H-2A workers who organize to form labor unions.

Components of the rule, “Improving Protections for Workers in Temporary Agricultural Employment in the United States,” had been enjoined nationwide since December 2024.

On June 20, the Labor Department’s Wage and Hour Division suspended the rule, citing “significant legal uncertainty, inconsistency and operational challenges for farmers lawfully employing H-2A workers.”

The Labor Department said it will not be enforcing the rule effective immediately. The move does not change existing regulations or limit the division’s authority to enforce H-2A requirements put into place before the 2024 final rule, according to a news release.

In December, a preliminary injunction issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi enjoined components of the rule nationwide. Previous rulings in Georgia and Kentucky had stayed the rule in 21 states which had filed suit, along with members of five agricultural associations.

The National Council of Agricultural Employers (NCAE), which filed suit in Kentucky last September,  applauded the announcement.

“NCAE and our members were shocked and offended by the promulgation of the Worker Protection Rule,” Michael Marsh, NCAE president and CEO, said in a news release. “America’s farm and ranch families care about their workers and work each day to ensure that their business operations are in compliance with local, state and federal regulations at significant expense.

“From the outset, it was clear that the pejorative nature and tenor of the rule was intended to feed and foster false and inappropriate narratives about America’s agricultural community. America’s farmers and ranchers are excited and relieved that this administration put this rule out to pasture.”

The rule, which took effect in June 2024, shielded migrant workers with H-2A temporary work visas who organize to form labor unions and against wage theft and trafficking. Opponents argued it was unconstitutional and beyond the Labor Department’s statutory authority, imposing unlawful demands on agricultural employers and creating disruption across the farming industry.