Deducting wages from farm labor for lodging or food is covered under section 3m of the FLSA. If a producer wants to claim a credit to wages, they have to demonstrate-

Quote:Lodging must be regularly provided by the employer or similar employers;
The employee must voluntarily accept the lodging;
The lodging must be furnished in compliance with applicable federal, state, or local laws;
The lodging must primarily benefit the employee, rather than the employer; and
The employer must maintain accurate records of the costs incurred in the furnishing of the lodging.

If the rent would entirely match the pay, it's kosher, but there's no state in the us where that pans out or where a court would uphold such an arrangement. At 500 in rent, and ten an hour, that means you could get 50 hours of labor as a credit to wages. The other 150 (and 200 labor hours per month is absurdly low, 320 is the harvest average, 160 offseason @ 9.62-15.00/hr) would have to be paid. There are producers who try to pull a straight trade, ofc, and who try to rake their employees over the coals, for sure. They're not well regarded by the dol or other producers or labor. It's seen for precisely what it is. The low end of pay is from n. carolina. A straight trade in the off season would suggest a rent of 1500, and in harvest 3000. Take a look at single bedroom apartments for rent in that range and see if that's how you imagine on farm housing. Spoiler alert, nowhere near. In general, farm labor housing is either a communal bay or shared rental units offsite, the price being split amongst the occupants, and lower than the entire range. Even (or especially) an unscrupulous producer would far prefer that they stay elsewhere, officially. Alot of the time those arrangements break occupancy rules which would invalidate their claim, so the producer will only claim a single occupant as a credit to wages under 3m. Leading to twenty migrant laborers in a single bedroom apartment or trailer or motel room, every one of them getting paid - because any single one of them is due wages in excess of any reasonable cost for lodging.

Long intro, more info than you probably wanted, but the question of whether or not the arrangement would be ethical or legal is answered by the fact that it was so common, and so commonly unethical, that we made it illegal by federal law. A section of law which protects farm labor and in home employees, mostly - two historically disadvantaged and exploited classes of labor. The guys who pick the crops outside, and the ones who serve the mint juleps inside. The initial tactic of the post civil war souths plantations was precisely this. Former slaves would just so happen to owe all of whatever happened to be the market rate for their labor, if anyone were interested in paying them - which no one was. It continues in a limited form and against federal law to this day. Chiefly among people who have (or believe they have) no legal recourse.

-and this, this is where you went...in defense of christianity, seeking the hypocrisy of others. Industry best practice for wholesale producers is to offer the going rate and a per unit modifier to incentivize productivity through competition between teams. Lodging (as a perk) is both legally tricky and an unnecessary complication to a man interested in harvesting crops. Farmer, not slumlord. In point of fact, "farms" that operate in the manner suggested are almost entirely in the business of human trafficking, using farm status for visas. A far cry from the situation and worldview advocated for in magic book because, frankly, the people who came up with that religion did not share our ethics our laws or our situation. All of it pointless, in effect, as the simple answer to biblical slavery and modern servitude or exploitation, from a christian apologists viewpoint... is that people, and not a god, got/gets that part wrong.

(July 26, 2021 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:Demanding labor from people who stay at your property is exploitative as taking advantage of their lack of a dwelling.

Not all labour of this type is exploitive. During the lambing and shearing seasons (April through July), my father would hire casual labourers - generally Romany -to help out. They were allowed to park their caravans on the farm, but Da also had some small cottages built for any of them who wanted a change. He never charged ground rent, fed them while they were there, and paid above the going rate. He ALWAYS had to turn people away.

Boru

Your father is a communist!

I think that the more salient point is that his father didn’t engage in the type of exploitative labor practice being discussed.

He paid better than the going rate, and sure there were cottages if they were interested, which he could have charged reasonable rates for, and there were ground lots with no rent. That’s why he had to turn people away. He was doing it right. The lodging arrangements were a competitive labor advantage over other producers. I would assume that drew quality employees and invested the employees, themselves, in the quality of work. Today, his operation would be a case example used to inform other interested producers about the law and industry practices.

"But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."
- Numbers 31:18

(July 25, 2021 at 5:37 pm)Huggy Bear Wrote: If I owned all the farmland and you needed a place to live, what kind of agreement do you think we would reach that would benefit us both?

Are you thinking latifundia here? Or more along the lines of a company town? Perhaps villeinage? Just asking to see what degree of horrifying dysfunctionality history lends to your example. Way to go down the track of immoral and broken.

Let's try something a little more interesting. If I owned all the air and you wanted to continue breathing, what kind of "agreement" do you think we couldn't reach that would benefit me? For the sake of discussion assume that you have a family that also wants to draw breath. Try not to dicker too long. Hypoxia leads to permanent brain damage in 3 to 5 minutes and I don't want you lowering your resale value.

Matters of degree are irrelevant. The belief system begins with the proposal that human beings are fundamentally broken, the earth has been cursed, and man deserves whatever misfortune or horror follows.

That the only remedy is the blood sacrifice of another, better, man.

Man, for his part, has never managed to do anything as horrific, and not for lack of trying.

(July 26, 2021 at 10:33 am)Angrboda Wrote:

(July 26, 2021 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Not all labour of this type is exploitive. During the lambing and shearing seasons (April through July), my father would hire casual labourers - generally Romany -to help out. They were allowed to park their caravans on the farm, but Da also had some small cottages built for any of them who wanted a change. He never charged ground rent, fed them while they were there, and paid above the going rate. He ALWAYS had to turn people away.

Boru

Your father is a communist!

SDLP for life, baby!!

Boru

(July 26, 2021 at 11:48 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Matters of degree are irrelevant.  The belief system begins with the proposal that human beings are fundamentally broken, the earth has been cursed, and man deserves whatever misfortune or horror follows.

That the only remedy is the blood sacrifice of another, better, man.

Man, for his part, has never managed to do anything as horrific, and not for lack of trying.

Even as a Christian, I regarded this as a myth.  I had already realized that whenever a writer said God did some natural event, it was the equivalent of someone saying "it allegedly happened, and God is in charge of everything, so I should attribute this to God - especially if I can make a story around it that benefits the priests ".

(July 26, 2021 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:Demanding labor from people who stay at your property is exploitative as taking advantage of their lack of a dwelling.

Not all labour of this type is exploitive. During the lambing and shearing seasons (April through July), my father would hire casual labourers - generally Romany -to help out. They were allowed to park their caravans on the farm, but Da also had some small cottages built for any of them who wanted a change. He never charged ground rent, fed them while they were there, and paid above the going rate. He ALWAYS had to turn people away.

Boru

I'm sorry I don't agree. I think in concept it's exploitive regardless of whether it's voluntary or how well the exploited are treated.

(July 26, 2021 at 3:45 pm)Helios Wrote:

(July 26, 2021 at 5:59 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Not all labour of this type is exploitive. During the lambing and shearing seasons (April through July), my father would hire casual labourers - generally Romany -to help out. They were allowed to park their caravans on the farm, but Da also had some small cottages built for any of them who wanted a change. He never charged ground rent, fed them while they were there, and paid above the going rate. He ALWAYS had to turn people away.

Boru

I'm sorry I don't agree. I think in concept it's exploitive regardless of whether it's voluntary or how well the exploited are treated.

I’m also sorry that you don’t agree - we must have different concepts of the meaning of ‘exploitive’. If I offer you employment at higher wages than anyone else is willing to pay AND give you free board and lodging into the bargain, in what way are you being exploited?

Boru

Quote:I’m also sorry that you don’t agree - we must have different concepts of the meaning of ‘exploitive’. If I offer you employment at higher wages than anyone else is willing to pay AND give you free board and lodging into the bargain, in what way are you being exploited?

Boru

Because your still demanding labor for those things.