In fact. experience has shown that the abuses associated with these farm employers have resulted in injury to many hundreds of workers. A third change made by these amendments is to redefine the term "agricultural employment" which the Congress in 1974 quite deliberately expanded to include most agricultural employers operations. As redefined. agricultural employment would no longer include any work engaged in by migrant and seasonal workers for canners. cotton ginners. or food processing or packing shed operators. This particular change is being justified by the totally spurious argument that these employers do not subject their employees to abuses for which the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act is designed to prevent. However. there are numerous examples of abuse associated with these employers. abuses for which most State laws provide no effective or appropriate remedy. and which most definitely involve migrant workers. One such example is also worth relating briefly. In 1976. the Owatonna Canning Co.. Inc.. of Owatonna. Minn.. recruited hundreds of migrant workers to travel from Texas to Minnesota to work in their asparagus fields. Among other promises made to the workers which later proved to be false. the employer promised to pay the workers adequately at or above the minimum wage. As is often the case in the other farm industries intended to be exempted by this amendment. these workers found that their pay was not only less than they were promised. but it was less than the Federal minimum wage.
Identified stereotypes
Generalization that farm employers abuse migrant workers.