BARN Act Shifts Farm Worker Visa Control to Agriculture Dept., Caps Wages, and Restricts Legal Aid

The Better Agriculture Resources Now Act, or the BARN Act, proposes a major overhaul of the H-2A temporary agricultural worker program. The biggest change is administrative: it strips the Department of Labor (DOL) of its authority over the program and hands it to the Department of Agriculture (USDA). This shift means the agency focused on agricultural production will now oversee the program historically focused on worker protections.

Fast-Track Farming and the 15-Day Clock

For agricultural employers, the process of bringing in temporary workers gets dramatically accelerated. Under Section 2, the USDA must review and issue a determination on an H-2A application within just 15 days of filing. If the USDA misses that deadline, the application is automatically considered approved. This ‘deemed approval’ provision is designed to cut bureaucratic delays, but it also means the USDA is under intense pressure. If they can’t keep up, approvals for potentially non-compliant employers could slip through the cracks, impacting worker safety and conditions.

New Limits on Pay and Tenure

This bill sets a new ceiling on how much employers must pay H-2A workers. Employers are no longer required to pay the prevailing wage rate, which is often higher. Instead, the wage requirement is capped at 115 percent of the highest Federal or State minimum wage rate. While this simplifies the calculation, it could mean a pay cut for workers in regions where prevailing wages are significantly higher than the minimum wage, effectively lowering labor costs for employers.

Furthermore, the time workers can stay in the U.S. is tightened. The initial period of authorized status is limited to one year, with a maximum extension of one additional year—totaling two years. If a worker stays the full two years, they are barred from reapplying for an H-2A visa for two months. This mandatory break limits worker continuity and could affect workers who rely on year-round employment. Even more concerning, if a worker experiences a work lapse of 60 days or more, their visa is automatically revoked, forcing them to leave the country.

Housing: Cash Allowance vs. Provided Shelter

The BARN Act introduces a significant change to housing requirements. While employers must still generally provide housing that meets Federal standards at no cost, they now have an alternative: a housing allowance. If a State Governor certifies that adequate temporary housing is available in the area, employers can pay a cash allowance instead of providing shelter. This allowance is based on the statewide average Fair Market Rental (FMR) for a two-bedroom unit, as established by HUD.

While this offers flexibility to employers, it shifts the burden of finding housing onto the worker. Since the allowance is based on a statewide average, it might not cover the actual cost of securing suitable, temporary housing in specific, high-cost rural areas. Workers who rely on employer-provided housing may find themselves struggling to secure adequate shelter with a fixed allowance, especially since the employer is not required to reserve accommodations.

Cutting Off the Lifeline: Legal Assistance Restrictions

Perhaps the most impactful section for H-2A workers is the severe restriction placed on the Legal Services Corporation (LSC). The LSC is prohibited from providing legal assistance to, or on behalf of, H-2A workers unless two conditions are met: the worker is physically present, and all parties have first attempted good faith mediation or other non-binding dispute resolution. If an arbitration agreement exists, the LSC must respect that process entirely. LSC staff are also barred from entering an employer's property to meet a worker without a pre-arranged appointment with that specific worker.

This provision drastically limits access to legal aid for a vulnerable population. If a worker faces unfair labor practices or poor housing conditions, they must navigate a mandatory mediation process before accessing legal representation. Given the power imbalance between an employer and a temporary worker whose visa status depends on that job, this restriction could make it significantly harder for workers to seek justice or challenge violations of their rights.