Oregon farmworkers hold a spectrum of opinions on the state’s new overtime pay law.

Under the legislation passed earlier this year, farmworkers — who previously did not qualify for overtime pay under an agricultural exemption — will be owed time-and-a-half wages after 55 weekly hours of work in 2023, after 48 hours of work in 2025-2026 and after 40 hours per week beginning in 2027.

Many workers say they are excited about the law and hope it will increase their income, while others are concerned that employers who can’t afford to pay overtime will cap their hours.

“I just want people to know that there are two sides,” said Pepe Rivera, an employee at an orchard and packing operation in Hood River.

The legislation sparked a debate between labor unions, farm industry groups and lawmakers, but experts say one set of voices was largely, and ironically, overlooked: that of farmworkers.

“These are important voices, and they aren’t being heard,” said Ronald Mize, a professor in Oregon State University’s School of Language, Culture and Society.

Bob Bussel, retired director of the University of Oregon’s Labor Education and Research Center, said he is not aware of any data collection on farmworkers’ opinions about the law.

“But I do know there was a big turnout of farmworkers at the Legislature,” he said.

Bussel was referring to the approximately 200 testimonial letters that Oregon farmworkers submitted to the Legislature in favor of the overtime pay bill.

According to Ira Cuello Martinez, climate policy associate at the Latino union Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste, or PCUN, workers submitted the letters with help from the union and partner organizations.

The letters capture the struggles of farmworkers desiring better pay.

“My work harvesting fruit and vegetables deserves the same recognition as any other work,” wrote Maria Luisa Silvano Alvarado, a farmworker in Woodburn.

Ana Lilia Median, a farmworker in Oregon since 1993, also testified in favor.

“We sacrifice our lives working more than 10 hours a day and still do not receive overtime,” she said.

“I ask you to support the payment of overtime for farmworkers after 40 hours because we do not have a good quality of life,” testified a third farmworker, Raul Lazaro Gaspar.

Although the testimonies are a crucial part of the public record, experts say it’s important to note that PCUN represents only 9% of farmworkers in Oregon. According to Martinez, Oregon employs about 87,000 farmworkers; the union has about 8,000 registered members.

In reality, farm employees’ opinions on the overtime law are not monolithic.

“There are definitely mixed opinions about it,” said Elena Rodriguez, co-owner of Rodriguez Family Vineyard and the daughter of a longtime farmworker, who has been talking with workers.

Unfortunately, until researchers conduct polling, community sentiment is purely anecdotal, experts say.

Hector Cabrera, a farmworker and vineyard supervisor in Dundee, said most of the fellow workers he has talked to support the law, but some are concerned about their hours getting cut.

Martinez, of PCUN, similarly said that although the union has not polled farmworkers, anecdotally, most workers he has talked to seem pleased with the law.

“We’ve heard some folks who are concerned that their hours may be reduced or that there may be less work as a result of this new law, and so there’s kind of a mixed bag of what farmworkers are anticipating,” said Martinez. “But I think for the most part, most folks are excited and believe it’s about time they start receiving overtime compensation.”

Some workers, however, do not support the policy.

Josue Reyes, a longtime employee on a hazelnut farm, opposes the law.

“I’m not with it. I’m against it,” he said. “It’s going to affect us, because if they’re (employers) gonna have to start paying overtime, they’re gonna cut hours.”

Pedro Reyes, Josue’s brother, said the new law also worries him.

“It’s good for somebody else, not for us,” he said.

Pedro Reyes said he fears that if he asks for extra work hours in the future, his employers will turn him down because they won’t be able to afford time-and-a-half pay.

Jose Francisco Tejeda, an employee at Results Partners LLC, a vineyard development and management company, said he does not anticipate that the law will impact him, but he expects it may hurt seasonal, contract-based farmworkers and employees on small farms. For that reason, Tejeda’s feelings about the law are mixed.

“In my opinion, it’s good in part because they’re recognizing the labor that the workers do,” he said. “For many years, they haven’t. It hasn’t been recognized. But it (the law) will have effects.”

Rigoverto Vargas, a longtime crop worker in Junction City, expressed a similar view.

“It’s going to affect people,” said Vargas. “If they (employers) pay us overtime, I don’t think they can afford us.”

Although members of PCUN submitted testimony to the state Legislature, several farmworkers who are not union members said they felt excluded from the legislative process.

“In the process, I don’t think that the voices of actual farmworkers were considered,” said Cabrera, the vineyard worker from Dundee.

If farmworkers had been more included, Cabrera said he thinks the resulting law would have been more nuanced.

Rivera, from Hood River, said he also wishes farmworkers had been more included.

Rivera said that because his perspective on the law isn’t black-and-white, labor unions did not appear to be interested in his testimony when he offered it.

“I know both sides. I’m not completely one-sided on either side,” he said. “…I want to know that there’s a happy medium. And no way did they (union organizers) want to talk to me.”

Several farmworkers said that as the law is phased in and potential amendments are considered moving forward, they hope their community will be more included in the process.