The United Farm Workers union and some immigration hardliners are among the unusual mix of critics challenging a Trump administration wage rule for the H‑2A temporary farmworker program. The U.S. Department of Labor’s October 2025 interim final rule changed how a key minimum wage is calculated and includes a “housing cost adjustment” that, in many states, lowers the hourly wage floor employers must offer H‑2A workers and U.S. workers in corresponding jobs.
Farmers in rural areas say they increasingly depend on the H‑2A visa program to hire seasonal workers when they cannot find enough people locally to do agricultural work.
In one Kansas example highlighted by public radio reporting, a hay and row‑crop farmer in Belleville said he relies on H‑2A workers from Mexico and described them as essential to keeping his operation running. The report also profiled an H‑2A worker who has returned year after year, saying the legal work arrangement helps him support family members in Mexico. (hawaiipublicradio.org)
A rule change centered on the “adverse effect wage rate”
At the heart of the dispute is the “adverse effect wage rate,” or AEWR—one of several wage floors that can apply to H‑2A jobs. In an interim final rule released on October 2, 2025, the Labor Department adopted a new method for setting hourly AEWRs for non‑range agricultural occupations. Under the new approach, the government uses Bureau of Labor Statistics wage data, adds two skill levels, and includes a housing cost adjustment based on a statewide estimate of fair‑market rent. (congress.gov)
A nonpartisan Congressional Research Service summary said the housing adjustment is capped at 30% of the hourly AEWR and, in 2025, ranged from about $0.71 per hour to about $3.18 per hour depending on the location—an adjustment that is expected to reduce employer costs. (congress.gov)
Some worker advocates and economists argue the revised methodology will reduce pay for H‑2A workers and create downward pressure on wages for U.S. farmworkers doing similar work. The Economic Policy Institute, for example, said the housing adjustment and other elements of the rule could undercut U.S. workers by making H‑2A labor cheaper for employers. (epi.org)
Unusual political alignment among critics
Public radio reporting described opposition spanning the political spectrum, including the United Farm Workers and conservative voices that argue the program can function as a labor subsidy that discourages wage increases that might attract U.S. workers. (hawaiipublicradio.org)
The United Farm Workers has been involved in legal efforts seeking to block or reverse the new wage methodology; a California outlet reported that a federal judge in Fresno heard arguments in a case challenging the wage cuts, with UFW President Teresa Romero commenting outside the courthouse about farmworkers’ limited bargaining power. (calmatters.org)
How big the program has become
The H‑2A program has expanded sharply over the past two decades. Separate analyses from the American Farm Bureau Federation and the Government Accountability Office show strong growth in the number of jobs certified by the Labor Department and in visas issued by the State Department. The Farm Bureau said nearly 400,000 positions were certified in fiscal year 2025, while GAO reported that almost 310,000 H‑2A visas were issued in fiscal year 2023. (fb.org)
Legislation and ongoing debate
The policy fight is also playing out on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers and farm‑industry groups have continued to discuss changes that would make H‑2A hiring easier for employers, including proposals affecting how wages are set and how long workers could remain in the United States.
Supporters of the Labor Department’s approach say it better accounts for the fact that H‑2A employers must provide housing and that the previous wage methodology was becoming increasingly costly for farms. Critics counter that lowering the wage floor risks shifting jobs away from domestic workers and weakening wage standards in an industry that already faces enforcement challenges.
