6
CapitalPress.com
Editorials are written by or
approved by members of the
Capital Press Editorial Board.
Friday, March 19, 2021
All other commentary pieces are
the opinions of the authors but
not necessarily this newspaper.
Opinion
Editor & Publisher
Managing Editor
Joe Beach
Carl Sampson
opinions@capitalpress.com | CapitalPress.com/opinion
Our View
Mandatory OT will facilitate automation
n some sense, it’s diﬃ cult to argue
against the “fairness” of paying
farmworkers overtime.
Time has value, and in an ideal world
every employee’s time would be held
equally dear. In the real world, however,
things aren’t that neat and other factors
come into play.
The Fair Labor Standards Act, passed
by Congress in 1938, established a fed-
eral minimum wage and provided for
overtime pay for work over 40 hours.
The act also provided 19 job classiﬁ ca-
tions, including farmworkers, that are
exempt from the overtime rule.
Legislators in Oregon and Washing-
ton want to end the exemption for farm-
workers in their states.
Though critics have posited that the
exemption was the product of racism
and the pandering to the needs of special
interests, farmers note that farm work
is distinct from factory production. The
I
Retailers that once easily avoided over-
time because their businesses — by law
and custom — were not open much
more than 40 hours each week have
long operated seven days a weeks and
more than 10 hours a day. State and
municipal workers, technically exempt,
have entered into collective bargaining
agreements that provide for overtime.
And, more importantly, the public
at-large has a growing — though per-
haps uninformed — sense that exemp-
tions and exceptions for farmwork-
ers and processors are exploitive, even
though those who do that work enter
into the industries voluntarily and know-
ing the conditions of employment.
At the same time, the economics of
agriculture have not changed since 1938.
Farmers are still price takers, not price
makers, who cannot simply pass along
higher labor costs to consumers the way
retailers and manufacturers, though lim-
Capital Press File
The push for overtime for farmworkers
will likely prompt more farmers to switch
crops or automate their operations.
nature of some farm work makes it dif-
ﬁ cult to schedule in eight-hour days and
40-hour work weeks.
That argument held sway when the
exemption was made part of the orig-
inal federal Fair Labor Act during the
Depression, and in the 1950s when it
was adopted into state law in Oregon
and Washington.
But, we live in a much diﬀ erent time.
ited by the impacts of competition, do.
As retail operations have expanded
hours they have added more part-time
workers to get around the overtime
issue. Farming operations are already
having a hard time ﬁ nding enough qual-
iﬁ ed farmworkers, making it unlikely
they can readily add to their ranks.
More likely, producers will take a
hard look at their crop and harvest what
pencils out, and leave the rest. Others
might opt to move to a lower value, but
less labor-intensive, crop.
Labor shortages and higher costs
have driven automation. Mandatory
overtime will make robotics even more
attractive.
Paying overtime, on its face, is only
fair. But in the end, is it really best for
those involved? In a few years, after pro-
ducers automate, ask the farmworkers
who ﬁ nd themselves unemployed.
Oregon needs a
Dairy farms held to high
standards for animal care,
moratorium on
permits for large dairies environmental impact
W
hen Washington-based East-
erday Ranches announced it
had ﬁ led for
Chapter 11 bankruptcy
GUEST
on the heels of allega-
tions that it had cheated
VIEW
Tyson Foods out of mil-
Emma
lions of dollars, it had a
Newton
bizarre yet familiar ring
to it here in Oregon. It
doesn’t take long to ﬁ g-
ure out why.
Only a few years before, the Lost
Valley Farm mega-dairy ﬁ led for bank-
ruptcy after more than 200 environmen-
tal violations and photographs surfaced
showing its manure storage areas (called
“lagoons”) overﬂ owing and threaten-
ing local groundwater. The cleanup
took 11 months. Soon after Lost Valley
was shut down by the state of Oregon,
another company swooped in, purchased
the property and submitted a permit for
a new 28,000-cow mega-dairy on the
same site. That company is Easterday
Dairy, owned by the same Easterday
family currently embroiled in the Tyson
#cattlegate scandal.
Despite a scandal colored by increas-
ingly outlandish allegations over bills
for phantom cows and their phantom
food, Oregon’s Department of Agricul-
ture has yet to deny or even halt the per-
mit review for the proposed Easterday
Farms mega-dairy. The Easterday family
has since given up control of the Wash-
ington farm in question and its 54,000
cows, now fed with a court-ordered pay-
ment from Tyson.
Despite signiﬁ cant public backlash
over the initial permitting of Lost Val-
ley, Oregon oﬃ cials insisted Lost Val-
ley’s proprietor was simply a “bad actor”
and his misdeeds unfortunate, but not
indicative of a greater trend in the mega-
dairy industry. The scandals surrounding
Easterday and our records of other large-
scale factory farm pollu-
tion clearly disprove that
theory.
The only solution is
to ﬁ rst deny the Easter-
day permit on the site
of the former Lost Val-
ley, then enact a morato-
rium on all new indus-
trial dairy facilities
housing more than 2,500 cows. A pause
in new permitting would give Oregon
time to assess the damage already done
by these mega-dairies and prevent more
“bad actors” from adding to the prob-
lem. Mega-dairies are notorious for the
squalid quarters of their resident cows
but they also disproportionately contrib-
ute to the state’s greenhouse gas emis-
sions. Because of their intensive water
requirements, these facilities drain
scarce water resources and frequently
leave remaining groundwater polluted.
Aside from the sordid details of
Easterday’s present ﬁ scal situation,
ODA simply can’t aﬀ ord to ignore the
catastrophic consequences of letting
these mega-dairies run amok in a cli-
mate crisis and a global pandemic.
Oregon law gives ODA grounds to
deny a permit if the party fails “to dis-
close fully all relevant facts” or misrep-
resents “any relevant facts” during the
permit process. Between allegedly bill-
ing a vendor to feed thousands of ﬁ c-
titious cows and apparently masking a
dire ﬁ nancial situation, it seems East-
erday Farms left out a few key “rele-
vant facts” in its permit application to
the ODA.
Emma Newton is the Oregon orga-
nizer with Food & Water Watch and
Stand Up to Factory Farms.
A
politician once said, never let a good cri-
sis go to waste. That is exactly what envi-
ronmental extremists are
attempting to do in Emma New-
GUEST
ton’s opinion piece about a fam-
ily facing bankruptcy and reeling
VIEW
from the tragic death of a family
Mike
member.
Miranda
That callous approach, mislead-
ing opinion pieces, and accompa-
nying paid social media campaigns
against our family farms cannot go unchecked.
While I cannot speak about the family facing
bankruptcy, I can speak to the values of Oregon’s
dairy families and the extraordinary environmen-
tal and animal ethics we lead with daily.
When it comes to human health and the safety
of our food supply, we all want the same things:
clean air, clean water and healthy communities.
Oregon dairy farmers are doing their part — not
only when it comes to producing milk and cheese,
but also when it comes to operating with a high
degree of responsibility and respect for human,
animal and community health.
Dairy farmers operate that way because their
families and employees both live in the same
communities where they farm, drink the water
and breathe the air. In taking care of their oper-
ations they are also taking care of their own
communities.
The Oregon dairy industry is very diverse. We
have farms of all sizes, both conventional and
organic, and diﬀ erent management models but
all are held to high standards for animal care and
environmental impact. Whether a farm is success-
ful or responsible is not based on its size or if it
has one more cow too many. The size of a farm
should not matter because it’s the values of our
Oregon farmers that lead to successful outcomes
that are both carefully measured and regulated.
The values that drive sound management and
positive outcomes are not unique to dairy farmers
but unite us in our practice.
Public policy should and, when done correctly,
does encourage best management practices. Our
laws and regulations are demanding and are
designed to help achieve our state’s shared goals,
including reducing carbon out-
put and improving air quality.
Dairy farmers are and will con-
tinue to work with policy makers
toward those goals that allow fam-
ily farms to produce more food,
in a cleaner more eﬃ cient way.
With that in mind, it is import-
ant that our policymakers, includ-
ing our regulators, use facts, not misstatements
and hyperbole to set policy and make regulatory
decisions. The facts are on Oregon dairy farmers’
side. We care about our animals, our community,
and our shared environment.
We have members with innovative plans
for reducing waste, or reusing it completely to
ensure waste generated from animals and crops
are re-used. Several farms around the state
use methane digesters generating carbon-neg-
ative renewable natural gas. The digester at
Threemile Canyon Farms sequesters green-
house gas emissions equal to about what
29,000 passenger vehicles generate per year.
Our members work every day to recycle water,
manage irrigation practices and conserve pre-
cious water resources.
The Oregon Dairy Farmers Associa-
tion (ODFA), was founded in 1892 to work
for dairy farmers throughout the state. These
multi-generational organic and conventional
Grade A dairy farm families work hard 365
days a year and are proud of the care they pro-
vide for their animals, they produce a high
quality ﬂ uid product that ranks among the high-
est quality milk in the nation, and our produc-
ers take pride in their care of the environment.
For additional information on Oregon dair-
ies and our commitment to healthy animals and
environmental stewardship, visit the ODFA
website, http://oregondairyfarmers.org.
Mike Miranda, a dairy farmer in Coos
County, is board president of the Oregon Dairy
Farmers Association.
READERS’ VIEW
Legislative leaders need
to ensure public is heard
Like the past several sessions, the Ore-
gon Legislature is considering a slate of
bills that could deeply impact producers
like me. Unlike recent sessions, legislators
considering those bills do not have to look
the impacted public in the eye, because the
Capitol is closed to the public. In spite of the
limitations, I planned to participate in hear-
ings around bills that could impact my oper-
ation and my family. Even if I couldn’t look
them in the eye in person, at least legislators
would not be able to ignore my voice. Or so
I thought.
I have watched several hearings where
the chair gave unlimited time to invited
proponents of a bill that further regulates
or taxes me, while giving limited time for
opponents. Then they give “members of the
public” one minute each. Sixty seconds to
explain the huge impact these bills would
have. Even giving just one minute, they are
still not letting everyone on the ag and for-
estry side of the issue testify. If I’m the one
you are trying regulate and tax, how is it fair
to not let me speak even for one minute?
I did my part. I signed up. I was ready
to wait as long as necessary to have my
turn. I set aside work at home that needed
doing because this is important. And I did
wait. Twice so far, only to be told, “we’re
out of time.” I’ve heard from other people
who also waited hours on ag bills and never
got to testify.
Most recently, I sat through over an hour
of testimony from a legislator — who has
never owned or managed forestland —
about forest taxation, while dozens of for-
esters and small woodland owners sat wait-
ing to testify. The hearing was cut oﬀ before
myself and many others were allowed to
testify. There is no additional opportunity to
testify scheduled, leaving opponents stuck
with written testimony only.
Why are legislators so willing to invite
other legislators to use up public testimony
time? At the expense of those impacted by
the bill in question along with those who
best know the subject matter. How is it that
with people physically in a hearing room
you can hear from dozens and dozens about
a bill, but somehow online, you can only
get to 8 or 10 or 12? Why cut oﬀ hearings
when people are waiting to testify because
of some artiﬁ cial deadline? If I’ve still have
work to get done at my operation, it doesn’t
matter if it’s ﬁ ve o’clock. I work until the
job is done.
I can live with election results I don’t like.
But I can’t live with a legislative process that
prevents my voice from being heard on bills
that have a dramatic eﬀ ect on me and my
family and the business we’ve built and the
community where we live. Oregon’s legis-
lative process needs to be transparent, open
and fair. From what I’ve seen so far, it’s one
for three (somewhat transparent). That’s not
good enough.
Tim Miller
Siletz, Ore.
Lincoln County Farm Bureau
Support for
Farm Workforce
Modernization Act
Your March 5 article, “Farm labor sup-
plier opposes new ag workforce bill,” is a
one-sided portrayal of the newly reintro-
duced Farm Workforce Modernization Act
(FWMA) and does a disservice to your read-
ers, including the agricultural employers the
bill would help.
The article is correct that “many farm
groups support the bill.” We are in good
company with more than 250 other state and
national groups. That’s because it will stabi-
lize the current workforce and bring needed
reforms to the H-2A program, including con-
taining costs. In fact, if the FWMA had been
enacted after it passed the House in 2019,
the H-2A wage rate in Oregon and Wash-
ington would be $15.52 instead of the cur-
rent $16.34. Oregon and Washington’s rates
are the highest in the country, increasing
an average of 5.4% annually over the past
decade. The FWMA would cap that at 3.25
percent.
FWMA streamlines the H-2A program,
reduces bureaucracy, and saves time and
money for growers. This is particularly sig-
niﬁ cant for smaller growers with limited
staﬀ and resources. For employers still rely-
ing on a domestic, though possibly undocu-
mented, workforce, the sleepless nights are
real. Growers know that through no fault of
their own they might have nobody to harvest
their crop. The FWMA provides stability
and peace of mind to the grower, but impor-
tantly also to the worker. And with a future
work requirement and payment of a ﬁ ne, this
is anything but amnesty.
No legislation is perfect, including the
FWMA. Passing it through the House is
the ﬁ rst step. The Senate process will oﬀ er
opportunities for further improvements and
we have our list ready to go. Our collec-
tive members are hurting. They need stabil-
ity and economic relief today. They cannot
aﬀ ord to endure the worsening status quo for
another 20 years in the hopes that a perfect
employer-friendly bill will manifest itself.
Our bet is on the FWMA — the only agri-
cultural labor bill to pass the House in 30
years — and its author, Congressman Dan
Newhouse.
Jim Bair, President,
U.S. Apple Association
Jon DeVaney, President,
Washington State Tree Fruit Association
Mark Powers, President,
Northwest Horticultural Council