In the introduction of a bill to effectively overturn the Supreme Courts 1990 rulIng In Adams Fruit Co.. Inc. versus Barrett. Under that decision. the court ignored the wellestablished principle of the exclusivity of workers compensation remedies by Interpreting the Migrant and Seasonal Agriculture Workers Protection Act to provide for a private right of action for certain jobrelated injuries even if they had been covered by workers compensation at the time of the injury. This decision upsets the doctrine of exclusivity of workers compensation by permitting farmworkers to seek dual remedies. The fundamental purpose of the workers compensation system is to provide a prompt and reasonable remedy to the Injured employee without delay or expense. In theory. employers who pay Into workers compensation programs do so to avoid being exposed to additional liability. Allowing such a remedy over and above workers compensation essentially gives migrant and seasonal farmworkers greater protection than all other employees. The Adams Fruit decision creates problems for both employers and employees. Employers can be exposed to potentially enormous liability for damages. In spite of the fact that they have contributed Into the workers compensalion system. It also eliminates any incentive for employers to provide workers compensation coverage for their employees in the 14 States where migrant and seasonal farmworkers are covered only at the option of their employer. At the close of the last Congress. an amendment was attached to the legislative appropriations bill. H.R. 5427. temporarily suspending the Adams Fruit decision through July 6. 1993. The bill will permanently resolve this issue by ensuring that workers compensation benefits are the exclusive remedy for migrant and seasonal farmworkers. I look forward to working with my colleagues In the resolution of this Issue.
Keywords matched
migrant Migrant