Speech #910259035

It seems clear that whatever the worker said. it would be more practical for an employer to show that he was unemployed through his own fault. or that he is not available for work and should not be paid unemployment benefits. This would be in the employers interest because of the effect benefit payments could have on his experiencerated taxes. There is always a serious question as to the identity of the employer of a migrant worker. In some cases. the crew leader is really the employer. in others. the farm operator is. But -in all cases. there is a reasonable question as to who the employer is. Under social security. this is determined by references to a single Federal law. but under unemployment insurance this would be determined under the laws of the various States. In one State. the employer might be the crew leaderbut in an identical situation in the next State. it might be the farm operator. Thus. the legitimate question of who would pay the unemployment taxes. .which the committee provision would have avoided. was raised when the floor amendment was adopted If you are unable to identify* the employer under State law. or if there is litigation. .:the. migrant worker would have no effective coverage. regardless of a Federal law saying that he is covered. � You can be sure of one thing about this kind of situation: the crew leader is going to insist that the farm operator is the employer. and the farm operator is going to insist that the crew leader is the employer. because neither one of them is going to want to pay the tax. I might add that the poor migrant worker is not likely to know which one of them. was his employer because the question really turns on local law. In either event. the House conferees pointed out that the Senatepassed farm coverage amendment would start off by breeding needless litigation. And the House conferees were not willing to become party to barratry by legislation. . There were also questions as to how the seasonal employment provisions of State laws would apply to migrant workers. In some States. workers engaged in seasonal industries cannot qualify for unemployment benefits outside their regular working season. In other States. there are no such restrictions. Thus. for the migrant worker who works in several StatesStates with and without seasonal restrictionsit might be necessary to combine his earnings in all States in order to determine the benefits payable for a specific week. For the next week. however. only those earnings in one or two States might be used. Thus. unemployment insurance benefits might have to be revised from week to week because the season in one State might end while the season in another State would start. We were also faced with the question of how the migrant farmworker would know who his employers had been when it came time for him to claim benefits. When the migrant worker is employed by the farm operator. rather than a crew leader. he may work for a different employer on each day of the week. and in order to claim benefits. he will have to tell the employment office where he files a- claim and who he has worked for throughout the entire year. This would be a tremendous task for an educated nihn who can read. write and keep records. but for the uneducated semiliterateand sometimes nonEnglish speaking migrant workerit would be an impossible task. Moreover. the farm operator wouldknow the near impossibility of a worker ever identifying him and would tend to avoid paying unemployment taxes. Thus. the coverage of migrant Workers who are employed by farm operators would probably be a meaningless gesture until such time as administrative techniques are developed for dealing with this problem. Moreover. when a migratory worker hires himself out directly to a farm operator there is a question of whether he is truly an employee. or an independent contractor. If he is the former. the unemployment tax could apply. If he is the latter. it would not apply. and I must say that When a farmer engages a migrant workerwith instructions "to pick all the beans in the field" there is a serious doubt that he is truly an employee. Then. too. When the migrant family works. there is a question as to who is the employee: In a lot of cases. it is not a migrant worker alone who does the fafmwork. It is the migrants family: his wife. his older children. and even his 5-. 6-. and 7yearold children in some cases. The individual family members. however. may not be paid as individuals on the basis of the amount of work done. but the head of the family may be paid for everything done by the family. Under the unemployment compensation laws. the family earnings are not his earnings. and whatever is reported for him might have to be investigated to see how much was earned by him. by his wife. and each of the children.