Department of Labor Suspends Biden Era “Farmworker Protection Rule”

What are the Consequences for Agricultural Employers?

On June 20th, federal officials announced they would suspend the enforcement of the Biden Administration’s “Farmworker Protection” Rule passed in April of 2024. The legislation aimed to expand employment protections for H-2A farmworkers and increase the Department of Labor’s (DOL) ability to enforce and monitor program compliance. While the rule was designed to safeguard farmworkers (many of whom are working temporarily in the U.S. under the H-2A visa), it quickly became the subject of widespread legal pushback from agricultural employers and industry groups (Department of Labor, 2025).

What Was the Aim of the Rule?

The “Farmworker Protection Rule” attempted to implement several changes (Fisher Phillips, 2024):

1. Stronger Anti-retaliation Provisions: Provided explicit protections from employer retaliation for farmworkers who joined unions, cooperated in investigations subjecting their employers, and/or led complaints.
2. Expanded DOL Access: Investigators had greater access to employer-provided housing and worksites without prior notice.
3. Facilitated Labor Organization: Allowed labor union organizations to access H-2A workers more readily, and allowed organizing to occur in employer housing.
4. Increased Safety Regulations: Imposed more restrictions on employers concerning the safety of farmworkers, for example, vehicles could not be operated until all passengers were secured with seat belts.

Legal Pushback and Federal Injunctions

Following the announcement of the rule, several agricultural states and industry groups led suit under the assumption that it was an overreach of the DOL’s regulatory authority. In August of 2024, a federal judge in Georgia issued an injunction that blocked the enforcement of the rule in 17 states, and courts in Kentucky and Mississippi soon followed by targeting provisions that expanded union access and organizing protections. Some parts of the rule were effectively blocked nationwide, while in the 17 states it was blocked completely. This created uncertainty for H-2A employers as the patchwork of legal decisions confused agricultural businesses nationwide (Fisher Phillips, 2025).

The Consequences of Suspension

With the DOL’s official announcement of the rule’s suspension nationwide, employers can expect to return to the previous regulatory environment, at least temporarily. Here’s what that entails:

1. Reduced Compliance Burdens – Employers will not have to comply with enhanced housing inspection and union access mandates, which lowers the risk of potential violations that may stem from misunderstandings or misapplications of the rule.
2. Labor Organization Status Quo Restored – The rollback of the rule halts the expansion of union access to H-2A workers as employers are no longer required to provide physical or informational access to labor organizers.
3. Narrower Monitoring – While general DOL investigations and audits will continue as always, the suspension of the rule means that eld investigators no longer have the authority to access private housing or worksites without alerting the employer in advance.

What Should Employers Do Now?

Even though the Farmworker Protection Rule has been rolled back, there are still likely to be legal challenges and regulatory shifts as policy landscapes evolve. Employers participating in the H-2A program should:

1. Monitor Legal Developments: Ongoing litigation could revive aspects of the rule, or new elements may be introduced as policy landscapes change.
2. Maintain Documentation: Continue to follow DOL compliance guidelines and keep records of employment practices, housing conditions, and wages.
3. Review Worker Policies: Make sure protections and workplace complaint procedures are clearly dened even in the absence of the rule.
4. Consult Counsel: Employers should work closely with immigration and labor law counsel to ensure compliance with current regulations.

The suspension of the Biden-era Farmworker Protection rule oers clarity to many agricultural employers, especially in states where the regulation had already been challenged. However, it is likely that the debate will continue over how to best protect farmworkers while maintaining exibility for employers. As federal courts continue to weigh in, proactive compliance and legal awareness are the best defense for participants of the H-2A program.