On November 21, 2025, the United Farm Workers (UFW), a national agricultural labor union, filed a lawsuit against the Department of Labor (DOL). The suit challenges an interim final rule published in the Federal Register that amends the methodology used to calculate wages for workers employed through the DOL’s H-2A program. The outcome of this case could significantly impact the wages of many agricultural workers, as the H-2A program had nearly 400,000 certified positions in 2024.
The H-2A program was established to address domestic labor shortages by allowing employers to hire nonimmigrant foreign workers on a temporary or seasonal basis. To protect the wages of domestic workers, the DOL created the Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWR). AEWRs set a minimum wage rate for H-2A workers to ensure that their wages do not negatively impact domestic wage rates. The methodology for calculating AEWRs has evolved over time. Recently, the 2023 AEWR Rule required employers to pay the higher rate when two Standard Occupation Code (SOC) codes applied to a job description. This provision was challenged and vacated in Teche Vermilion Sugar Cane Growers Ass’n, Inc. v. Su, leading the DOL to briefly revert to the 2010 AEWR rule.
On October 2, 2025, the DOL published an interim final rule that amended the AEWR methodology once again. The interim rule relies solely on the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey for calculating AEWRs. It creates five SOC codes covering the most common field and livestock positions and sets AEWRs based on these codes. The rule also introduces a standard adjustment factor to account for employer-provided housing, lowering AEWRs for employees who receive housing.
UFW’s complaint seeks an injunction to block the implementation and enforcement of the interim rule. The union argues that the rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in three ways: it is not in accordance with the law, it is arbitrary and capricious, and it violates the APA’s notice-and-comment rulemaking requirement. UFW claims that the interim rule will lower AEWRs, allowing employers to pay H-2A workers less than U.S. farmworkers, thereby creating downward pressure on domestic wages. The union also asserts that the DOL failed to analyze the adverse economic effects of the new AEWR methodology on U.S. workers’ wages and that the housing deduction will negatively impact U.S. worker wages. Additionally, UFW argues that the DOL did not follow the notice-and-comment requirements and failed to satisfy the “good cause” exemption for bypassing these procedures.
The implications of this lawsuit are profound. If UFW’s injunction is granted, the DOL will be barred from enforcing the interim rule, potentially leading to higher wages for H-2A workers and protecting the wages of U.S. farmworkers. Conversely, if the court upholds the interim rule, it could result in lower wages for H-2A workers and increased downward pressure on the wages of domestic agricultural workers. The case highlights the ongoing tension between ensuring fair wages for foreign workers and protecting the economic interests of domestic laborers. As the legal battle unfolds, it will be closely watched by stakeholders in the agricultural industry and labor advocates alike.