A federal district court partially blocked a US Labor Department rule raising mandated wages for workers on seasonal agricultural visas.
A preliminary injunction granted Thursday by a Western District of Louisiana judge will cover H-2A workers employed in sugar cane farming and processing in Louisiana and those employed by several industry associations named as plaintiffs.
District Court Judge Robert B. Summerhays found in an order that plaintiffs were likely to succeed in advancing claims that the agency had exceeded its statutory authority in revising the wage methodology for those jobs.
Plaintiffs argued in July that the Supreme Court decision overturning Chevron deference strengthened its case against the rule.
Two other district courts that have rejected challenges to the rule based their decisions in part on deference to DOL’s interpretation of the statute, Summerhays wrote. He found that the justices’ ruling on agency deference impacted the case because the DOL’s defense relied heavily on agency deference, but after the Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo “this deferential standard of review is no longer applicable.”
The lawsuit was one of multiple challenges to an adverse effect wage rate rule issued last year that adopted a new methodology boosting pay for some occupations and required employers to pay the highest possible wage when workers perform multiple job duties. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is set to hear a separate challenge to the rule next week.
Employers that hire foreign workers through the temporary visa program must pay the highest of either a prevailing wage, collectively bargained wage, or adverse effect wage rate, which covers most workers on the visas.
The 2023 rule that the association challenged dropped Trump administration changes to the adverse effect wage rate methodology and mandated that workers who could be classified under multiple occupations be paid the highest applicable AEWR wage. Industry groups have argued the rule means increases to labor costs that would be unsustainable for many farmers.
Summerhays granted a motion by the Labor Department to dismiss claims under the Congressional Review Act. But he denied a motion to dismiss claims under the Regulatory Flexibility Act that the economic analysis of the rule was inadequate.
The Labor Department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The case is Teche Vermilion Sugar Cane Growers Assoc. Inc v. Su, W.D. La., No. 6:23-cv-00831, preliminary injunction issued 9/18/24.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editor responsible for this story: