
Upstate orchard putting new farmworker protections to the test
Earlier this month, about a dozen workers arrived in Wolcott, a small town halfway between Rochester and Syracuse, to grow apple trees. At this time of year, farmworkers are grafting and budding, and planting long rows of seedlings.
They traveled to Wafler Farms, an apple orchard and fruit tree nursery, from Jamaica. Some have been making the journey for many years, living on the farm for up to three seasons and earning money to support their wives and send their children to school back home. It's a precarious arrangement: They can only return to the farm, and therefore to the US, if their boss brings them back.
'Sometimes you have to see something being done wrong and shut your mouth — you can't say nothing. Because if you say something, you just might not come back next year,' said Christopher, a seasonal worker who has been returning to the farm for a decade. (Four Wafler Farms workers spoke with New York Focus and asked to have their names changed to protect them from retaliation.)
Things were supposed to be different this year. A long-awaited union contract took effect in April, granting workers benefits including higher pay and the right to return each year if there is work for them.
So far, the contract is not being followed, according to the farmworkers.
Wafler Farms never agreed to the contract. The family-run farm refused to bargain with the union, which was formed in 2022 by a majority of the approximately 90 people working there during the peak of the harvest, and is affiliated with the United Farm Workers of America, a national labor union. So negotiations were moved to an independent arbitration process, as stipulated by state law. Wafler declined to participate in that process, as well, and a contract was finalized without the employer's input.
It's among the first few union contracts that farmworkers have won in New York since 2019, when the state legislature granted them collective bargaining rights as part of a package of landmark protections for agricultural workers. They are excluded from unionizing under federal law — a legacy of New Deal-era politics.
The fruit farm is now a testing ground for what workers can achieve under New York's law, and how far the state will go to help them.
Wafler Farms is arguing in a Wayne County Supreme Court case that the union is not legitimate, on the basis that the farm owner did not have the chance to discourage it from forming and that employees on guest worker visas do not have the right to unionize. (A handful of farms and the New York State Vegetable Growers Association brought a lawsuit making a similar argument in October 2023, but the court upheld the right of guestworkers to organize, and the case is now being appealed.)
Wafler has sought to halt contract negotiations while the case proceeds, but has so far failed to do so.
Wafler Farms and its attorney did not respond to requests for comment.
On April 30, the union filed a charge against Wafler Farms with the state Public Employment Relations Board for failing to follow the contract. The labor board, set up to resolve disputes for state public workers, is tasked with enforcing the farmworker union law. The charge is awaiting a hearing at the board.
If it rules against the farm, it may still be up to the union to enforce the contract.
'We would prefer that PERB would say, 'Hey, we issued this order and the company is refusing to abide by it, we're going to take them to court,'' said Armando Elenes, secretary treasurer of the United Farm Workers.
But Elenes isn't optimistic that the board will be that aggressive. 'We are testing the law in real time,' he said.
New York's more than 50,000 farmworkers had long been excluded from many of the labor protections that other workers in the state enjoy. They didn't get overtime pay, benefits like disability and family leave, or the right to unionize.
Then, in 2019, the legislature passed the Farm Laborers Fair Labor Practices Act, ending those exclusions. The law guarantees farmworkers a day of rest each week. It grants them overtime pay after 56 hours of work in a week (unlike the 40 hour threshold for other workers). and it gives them the right to unionize, although they can't legally go on strike, limiting their power to extract concessions.
Since then, workers on fifteen farms in New York have formed unions. Eight have formed with the United Farm Workers, the union best known for its 20th century boycotts and worker organizing in California. The UFW has struggled in recent decades to retain members and win contracts, and labor experts have hailed its recent organizing successes in New York as a potential turning point.
'It's really hard to organize folks in rural areas, because folks are really isolated,' said Reverend Richard Witt, executive director of the Rural & Migrant Ministry, a New York organization that helped pass the 2019 reforms. 'And then you add into that the power dynamics, and economic dynamics … within agriculture, it makes it really, really hard to organize.'
The United Farm Workers and two other unions — the United Food and Commercial Workers and the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union — have been organizing workers across the state, including on apple orchards, a dairy farm, and Long Island vineyards.
Many of those workers are immigrants, often undocumented, or migrants who come to the US for a portion of the year through a guest worker program called H-2A. That program allows employers to hire temporary workers from other countries and requires them to provide housing and pay a minimum wage on par with the industry's wages in the region. More than 10,000 workers were approved for the visas in New York last year.
At Wafler Farms, nearly all of the workers are Jamaicans on H-2A visas. They say the work offers a pathway to a better life.
'The wages here are a lot better than what we get in Jamaica,' said Christopher, who has a wife and two children back home. 'To send your family to a good college, to live a standard life, it's difficult in Jamaica. A regular nine to five cannot do it.' One of the workers works as a DJ during his months in Jamaica, another as a tour guide, a third in construction.
While the money supports their families, the farm work comes with challenges.
'For a lot of guys, your relationship gets ruined because of leaving your family for so long,' said George, another worker. 'We take the chance because we want betterment for our family.'
The H-2A program does not provide a path to citizenship, and workers are excluded from the Social Security system. Their presence in the US is contingent on their employer, meaning they can't seek out better pay and conditions by switching jobs, and they risk losing their livelihoods if they aren't rehired.
'You just don't know if you're coming back until they call you,' said Christopher. 'You could be in Jamaica, you don't have a primary job that you can depend on, you're depending on this job that you have now.'
In 2022, workers at Wafler decided to unionize with United Farm Workers. They hoped that a union would protect their jobs, even when they spoke up about working conditions. They also hoped it would stop the verbal abuse they faced from their boss. A video taken by one of the workers that year shows the owner screaming and repeatedly swearing at a group of them.
'Everybody was tired of this type of situation where if you see something wrong, and you try to talk about it, there is a backlash coming,' said Christopher.
The United Farm Workers has charged that some workers were called back later than usual last year in retaliation for union organizing. Those charges are awaiting a decision by the state labor board.
At Wafler and on other farms, the union efforts have been 'extremely contentious,' said Richard Stup, the director of the Agricultural Workforce Development Program at Cornell University. 'When you have a closely-held business like a farm, where people have been personally invested in it sometimes for generations, the idea of a union coming in and lodging itself in the middle of your business is almost inconceivable.'
Farm owner Paul Wafler 'was really pissed when he found out' about the union, Chistopher said. 'He was like, 'You stabbed me in the back.''
A couple of miles down the road from Wafler Farms, workers at Cahoon Farms, which grows apples and cherries, also organized with the United Farm Workers and won the union's first contract in New York. Management at Cahoons Farm agreed to follow it.
The Wafler contract is the first in the state to be imposed through arbitration. Under the 2019 law, if the union and employer can't reach a contract through bargaining, the matter can be brought to an arbitrator selected by both sides. Since the unions aren't allowed to strike, the process is meant to ensure that employers can't indefinitely delay negotiations.
The Wafler Farms contract includes the recall rights that the workers had sought: they will be brought back every year in order of seniority. They'll get a small wage increase for the two years of the contract, paid holidays and vacation, and some employer matching for a retirement plan.
But right now, that contract isn't being followed, the union charges. The workers are not being paid the more-than-$19 hourly wage stipulated by the contract, and the owner has changed their working conditions without negotiating with the union.
Under the 2019 reforms, farmworker unions are under the purview of the Public Employment Relations Board, which oversees New York public sector unions as well as private sector workers who can't unionize under federal law, like at horse racing tracks and religious organizations.
The board has the power to certify unions, oversee the bargaining process, and rule on charges of unfair labor practices. Employers who violate the law face fines of up to $5,000 and up to a year in prison. The board can also petition the state Supreme Court to enforce the law. (No unfair labor practice charges in agricultural workplaces have yet reached that point.)
'PERB is used to dealing with public employers, which operate in a much different manner than not only private employers, but agricultural private employers,' said Elenes of the United Farm Workers. 'I think they're having a wake up call that this is a different animal — this is agriculture.'
The union's charge against the farm for violating the contract is awaiting a hearing at the board. The union is seeking back pay for the workers, among other remedies.
'Our goal is the prompt resolution of certification and ULP matters and helping the parties build a healthy and productive collective bargaining relationship,' board chairperson Timothy Connick told New York Focus in a statement.
Even without the contract being followed, some things have changed since the workers unionized. For one, they now get paid for orientation.
And the swearing has abated. 'They talk to us much different,' said George.
'There's a lot of respect now,' said Christopher.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


UPI
4 hours ago
- UPI
Army, Trump ready June 14th birthday parade with tanks, rocket launchers
President Donald Trump congratulates a cadet at the United States Military Academy graduation ceremony in Michie Stadium at West Point, New York, on May 24, and will review the Army's 250th birthday parade on June 14. Photo by John Angelillo/UPI | License Photo June 7 (UPI) -- The U.S. Army celebrates its 250th birthday on June 14th in the nation's capital, which coincides with President Donald Trump's 79th birthday, and will be marked by a parade that may include tanks, rocket launchers and more than 100 military vehicles. With the two birthdays occurring on the same day, the previously scheduled parade that was intended as a relatively small event at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., has grown in size and cost. Up to 300 soldiers and civilians, the U.S. Army Band and four cannons were initially slated to honor the Army's 250th birthday, with seating available for 120 attendees, The Washington Post reported. U.S. Army leaders last year sought a permit for the event, but Trump's election victory has changed its scope, while doubling as an unofficial celebration of the president's birthday. Axios reported the parade will live up to Trump's request for a showcase the U.S. miliatary's might, with dozens of tanks, rocket launchers, missiles and more than 100 other military aircraft and vehicles participating. About 6,600 Army troops will participate, and the Army is paying to house them in area hotels. The parade route has been moved to the northwest portion of Constitution Avenue and will include a flyover of F-22 fighter jets, World War II planes and Vietnam-era aircraft. The event is scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m. EDT at 23rd Street and continue along Constitution Avenue N.W. to 15th Street. Trump will review the parade on the Ellipse. The event has an estimated cost of nearly $45 million, including more than $10 million for road repairs after the heavy military equipment passes over. The parade's estimated cost has Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., skeptical about its benefits. "I would have recommended against the parade," Wicker told an interviewer on Thursday, but the Department of Defense wants to use it as a recruiting tool. "On the other hand, [Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth] feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force," Wicker said. "So, we'll see."


The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
A bond market meltdown might be inevitable
The recent surge in yields on long-dated U.S. Treasurys has generated concern in some circles. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, recently warned that the bond market is likely to crack as a result of spiraling government debt levels. 'I just don't know if it's going to be a crisis in six months or six years, and I'm hoping that we change both the trajectory of the debt and the ability of market makers to make markets,' he said. Others remain more sanguine and observe that interest rates have in fact normalized close to their pre-2008 global financial crisis levels. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, both real and nominal rates were stuck at unusually low levels for about a dozen years. But, since 2022, we have seen both policy and market rates edge toward their pre-crisis levels. With interest rates reverting back to their historical norms, is the current wariness surrounding the long end of the yield curve among key investors warranted? To evaluate the validity of such fears, it is worth reviewing recent U.S. fiscal history. During the past 45 years, the U.S. has had to deal periodically with the 'twin deficits' problem — the near-synchronous widening of the fiscal deficit and the current account deficit. In the past, bipartisan policy compromises pushed through by enlightened political leadership have helped America avoid a debt/currency crisis. In the early 1980s, the Reagan-era tax cuts contributed to a decline in U.S. government revenue that was not offset by cuts on the spending side and this led to a widening of the budget deficit. Meanwhile, the high interest rates associated with the Paul Volcker disinflation episode led to a sharp appreciation of the U.S. dollar and contributed to a deterioration of the trade and current account balances. This simultaneous deterioration of budget and current account balances gave rise to the twin-deficit hypothesis and highlighted the potential interconnectedness between fiscal deficits and trade deficits. Emergence of 'twin deficits' during the early 1980s generated significant concern in policymaking circles and led to concrete measures on both the fiscal front (in the form of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990) and on the exchange rate stabilization front (in the form of multilateral agreements such as the 1985 Plaza Accord and the 1987 Louvre Accord). In the Clinton era, further steps (such as the 1993 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, the reduction in military spending associated with the post-Cold War peace dividend and the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act) were undertaken to improve the U.S. fiscal outlook. During the fiscal 1998 through fiscal 2001 period, the federal government even ran budget surpluses. Concerns regarding the 'twin deficits' reemerged during the George W. Bush era as fiscal and current account imbalances worsened. Prior to the 2008 global financial crisis, economists worried that the spike in budget and trade deficits was serious enough to threaten a dollar crisis. Following the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, however, there was a dollar shortage abroad and the U.S. currency actually strengthened. Furthermore, as household consumption collapsed and personal saving rate rose, the U.S. current account markedly improved in the post- global financial crisis era. During the Obama era, the 2011 Budget Control Act and the artificially suppressed borrowing costs (via Fed's quantitative easing and near-zero interest rate policies) helped ease the fiscal burden. Over the past five years, both the budget and trade deficits have deteriorated sharply. Budget deficits have exceeded 5 percent of GDP since 2020 and projections indicate deficits will remain elevated, raising concerns about fiscal sustainability. Critically, government borrowing costs have risen sharply since 2022. Historian Niall Ferguson has suggested that America's superpower status may be threatened as the U.S. government now spends more on interest payments than on defense. Unlike prior episodes, the current cycle of deteriorating external and fiscal imbalances is significantly more worrisome as the country appears to be beset by institutional decay and political ineptitude. Domestic and foreign investors in U.S. Treasurys are starting to fret about the absence of fiscal rectitude even as government debt-to-GDP ratios reach levels last observed in 1946. Additionally, illogical and inconsistent policies on the trade and foreign policy front raise the prospect of a so-called 'moron premium' being applied to U.S. assets. Legislative threats to tax foreign capital is raising alarm and will likely push up the cost of borrowing even further. Such actions are also fueling concerns about the pre-eminent reserve currency status of the U.S. dollar. Any diminishment of dollar's exorbitant privilege will affect U.S. fiscal sustainability. Unlike the 1990s, there is currently no political consensus on reining in fiscal profligacy and restoring fiscal sanity. Harvard's Ken Rogoff recently noted: 'To be sure, this isn't just about Trump. Interest rates were already rising sharply during Biden's term. Had Democrats won the presidency and both houses of Congress in 2024, America's fiscal outlook would probably have been just as bleak. Until a crisis hits, there is little political will to act, and any leader who attempts to pursue fiscal consolidation runs the risk of being voted out of office.' The late great MIT economist Rudiger Dornbusch once quipped: 'In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.' Recent spikes in bond market volatility and long-dated Treasury yields suggest that the moment of fiscal reckoning may finally be approaching. Vivekanand Jayakumar, Ph.D., is an associate professor of economics at the University of Tampa.


The Hill
6 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump stokes fear, confusion with pulled emergency abortion guidance
The Trump administration sowed confusion and fear among physicians with its move this past week to rescind Biden-era guidelines to hospitals that provide life-saving abortions. While the move doesn't change the law, doctors and reproductive-rights advocates fear it will have a chilling effect on health care workers in states with abortion bans, ultimately harming pregnant women. Earlier this past week, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced they would rescind guidance issued during the Biden administration, which reinforced to hospitals that under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA,) abortions qualify as stabilizing care in medical emergencies. Emergency rooms in states with abortion bans have been struggling since the 2022 overturning of Roe v. Wade to understand when they can legally provide emergency abortions. After President Trump pulled the Biden-era guidance seeking to clarify that question, emergency room doctors will experience 'more confusion' and 'more fear,' according to health and legal experts who spoke with The Hill. 'Clinicians are scared to provide basic medical care, and this care is clearly in line with medical ethics … medical standards of care, and they're being put in this situation where they can't win,' said Payal Shah, director of research, legal and advocacy at Physicians for Human Rights. Since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, at least 13 states have enacted near-total abortion bans, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute. There are exceptions in these states when continuing a pregnancy poses a threat to the health or life of the mother. However, most of the language in state laws is unclear on how that determination is made, resulting in instances of emergency rooms denying care. Doctors in states like Idaho, Texas and Tennessee have filed lawsuits requesting that lawmakers clarify when an abortion is allowed to save the life of a pregnant person. The doctors and patients involved in the lawsuits argue that state laws do not adequately protect pregnant patients in emergencies. Many of these states have severe punishments for doctors who violate abortion bans, like steep fines and prison time. 'For clinicians, there is actually no safe way to navigate this in this moment, and ultimately, that's how these laws are designed,' Shah said. 'They're designed to cause chaos and confusion. They're often written in ways that don't use medical terminology.' Without clear guidance, pregnant women suffer and sometimes die, as ProPublica has reported. One striking example of this is the 2023 case of Kyleigh Thurman, a Texas woman who was repeatedly denied care for a nonviable pregnancy after days of experiencing bleeding and pain. Health care workers discovered that she had an ectopic pregnancy, which is when a fertilized egg implants and begins to grow outside of the uterus, usually in a fallopian tube. Ectopic pregnancies are never viable and are life-threatening if not treated properly. It wasn't until her OB/GYN 'pleaded to hospital staff that she be given care,' that the hospital administered a shot ending her pregnancy, according to a complaint filed by the Center for Reproductive Rights on behalf of Thurman. The shot came too late, and the ectopic pregnancy ruptured Thurman's right fallopian tube, which was then removed. 'If a patient is actively hemorrhaging or experiencing an ectopic pregnancy which is also life-threatening, doctors need that clear guidance that yes, EMTALA applied,' said Autumn Katz, associate director of U.S. litigation at the Center for Reproductive Rights. A federal investigation into Thurman's case found that the Texas hospital violated EMTALA, according to a recent letter from the CMS. 'I finally got some justice,' Thurman said in a statement. 'I hope this decision will do some good in encouraging hospitals to help women in situations like mine.' Hospitals that violate EMTALA are subject to heavy fines and, in some extreme cases, risk losing a portion of their Medicare and Medicaid hospital funding, according to the National Institutes of Health. Former President Biden leaned on the law to preserve access to emergency abortion across the country, leading to a legal fight with Idaho, which has a strict abortion ban. The Supreme Court last year dismissed the case, declining to rule on the merits of a politically charged case. The rescinding of these guidelines also means hospitals that violate the law will likely not be investigated as often as they were under previous administrations, according to Shah. That lack of punitive risk means that hospitals could be incentivized to deny life-saving care for patients. 'The standard of EMTALA is pretty high,' said Katherine Hempstead, senior policy adviser at Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. 'This kind of takes that layer of reassurance away, and it will make a lot of providers feel very vulnerable.'