Various versions of the Simpson-Mazzoli proposals would call for
streamlining the H-2 program. The changes are designed to make it
more acceptable to employers. Currently, the H-2 program is used to
bring under 30,000 foreign workers to the U.S. to perform seasonal
work where employers cannot find American workers. The H-2 work-
ers have been used mostly for cutting sugar cane in Florida and for
picking apples on the East Coast.
Simpson-Mazzoli proposals would call for new regulations to be writ-
ten by the Attorney General in consultation with the Secretaries of
Labor and Agriculture. Further, they would preempt state laws pro-
hibiting the admission of nonimmigrant workers and they would man-
date expedited appeal rights for agricultural employers.
However, the proposals would leave intact existing provisions of the
H-2 program which call for employers to pay workers for transporta-
tion, provide housing, provide meals at cost, and pay a wage rate that
would not adversely affect U.S. workers. In addition, employers would
be required to pay an administrative fee to participate in the program.
Employers would have to conduct active recruitment to assure that no
U.S. workers are available and they would have to file their needs for
workers with the U.S. Department of Labor from 50 to 80 days ahead
of time.
Although employers of H-2 workers are not required to pay U.S.
Social Security and unemployment insurance taxes, some provision
for pensions and unemployment is often added over time in contracts
employers would have to make with foreign governments for workers.
Also, workers’ compensation and off-the-job insurance have become
standard items under current H-2 contracts. Finally, under require-
ments of the H-2 program, employers must offer the same benefits to
all workers — not just their foreign workers.
For many agricultural employers, participation in the H-2 program
would mandate significant increases in wage and benefit costs. Fruit
and vegetable producers in the West have objected especially to the
requirements for providing workers with housing.
As a relatively small program involving 30,000 workers, the current
H-2 program has generated considerable controversy as well as legal
opposition in the courts. If the program were to be expanded to 300,000
workers (as some have advocated), it would become much more highly
visible, would attract more lawsuits, and would become vulnerable to
increased political pressures.
Some voices in the agricultural community have advocated a rein-
statement of the Mexican Bracero program; but this measure appears
to have little support outside of agriculture.
In summary, the pending changes in immigration law call into ques-
tion the viability of American agriculture’s large scale dependence on
foreign workers over time. Present reliance of the fruit and vegetable
150