From the article: [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...] [...]
From the article:
Goats have become a familiar sight on California hillsides, munching through weeds and brush before they can become fuel for wildfires. But the companies that put those herds to work said a change in state labor rules have made goat grazing too expensive to continue.
The labor rule in question was a temporary state law that allowed goat herders to be paid under the same wage structure as sheep herders, but expired July 1. Goat grazing companies said the expiration meant they could face annual wage costs of about $240,000 per herder because of overtime requirements.
Company owners said the higher labor costs might force them to switch from goats to sheep, or shut down and sell their herds.
[...]
In California, grazing companies were frequently hired by cities and other local governments to use goats to reduce vegetation that could fuel wildfires. The exact percentage of California’s 500,000 sheep and 125,000 goats used for targeted grazing was unknown, but labor advocates and grazing company owners agreed it was at least 20% and increasing.
Tim Arrowsmith, owner of Western Grazers, a goat grazing company in Red Bluff, said goats could eat a much wider variety of plants than sheep, including starthistle, a thorny weed that grew densely and could become a wildfire risk because of its dry, fibrous stems and leaves. Sheep would eat starthistle only in the early stages of growth, but goats would eat it even after it became prickly.
[...]
The law at the center of the dispute was Assembly Bill 1066, signed by then-Gov. Jerry Brown, which gradually extended overtime pay requirements to agricultural workers. Under the law, agricultural workers eventually became entitled to 1.5 times their normal wage for working more than eight hours a day or 40 hours a week.
Range herders, including sheep and goat herders, were originally treated differently under the overtime law because most herding companies said they could not afford conventional hourly overtime for jobs that required herders to remain on duty around the clock. Instead, the state established a minimum monthly wage for herders that included $2,934 in regular wages and an additional $1,887 in overtime wages.
More than 90% of sheep and goat herders in California worked under H-2A visas, most commonly coming from Peru and Mexico. Companies like Western Grazers also had to cover herders’ room and board, meals, limited clothing expenses and transportation to and from their home countries, along with visa costs.
[...]
In 2022, the California Labor Commissioner’s Office determined that the alternative minimum monthly wage applied only to sheep herders, not goat herders. The interpretation meant goat herders were subject to standard overtime requirements for the hours they worked, potentially pushing annual wages to around $240,000 per herder, in addition to expenses paid by employers.
[...]
Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, who authored AB 1066 while serving in the state Assembly, said she fought for the bill because she believed agricultural workers should have the right to an eight-hour workday like other workers.
[...]
Workers on H-2A visas were particularly vulnerable, said Fletcher, now president of the California Federation of Labor Unions. Herders working under the visa program could work for employers such as Western Grazers for three years, return to their home countries for 90 days and then return to California for another three years, she said. They often spoke little to no English, worked in isolation and had no direct path to U.S. citizenship through the visa program.
[...]
Arrowsmith said grazing companies used H-2A workers because U.S. workers did not apply for herding jobs.
[...]
“All stakeholders agree that the alternative minimum monthly wage for range herders who are on duty 24/7 should be the same for sheep and goat herders because the workers and work involved in herding sheep and goats are similar and often overlap,” the report read.
“The Legislature got this study and did absolutely nothing with it,” said Soares. “They just let (SB 143) expire.”
From the article:
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]