29 U.S.C. § 1832

Wages, supplies, and other working arrangements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Payment of wages

Each farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, and agricultural association which employs any seasonal agricultural worker shall pay the wages owed to such worker when due.

(b) Purchase of goods or services by worker

No farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association shall require any seasonal agricultural worker to purchase any goods or services solely from such farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association.

(c) Violation of terms of working arrangement

No farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association shall, without justification, violate the terms of any working arrangement made by that contractor, employer, or association with any seasonal agricultural worker.

(Pub. L. 97–470, title III, § 302, Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2593.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days from Jan. 14, 1983, see section 524 of Pub. L. 97–470, set out as a note under section 1801 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1986–2023 · leading case: Saintida v. Tyre, L., 783 F. Supp. 1368 (S.D. Fla. 1992).
Saintida v. Tyre, L., 783 F. Supp. 1368 (S.D. Fla. 1992). · cites it 9× “No separate award will be made for the violation of 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a), which requires that the employer pay the wages when due.”
Bacilio Ruiz Torres v. Mercer Canyons Inc., 835 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2016). “In addition, Plaintiffs claimed *1132 that Mercer failed to pay its domestic workers $12 per hour for qualifying H-2A work, in violation of AWPA, 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a), and 1822(a), and Washington wage law, Wash.”
Jimenez v. Servicios Agricolas Mex, Inc., 742 F. Supp. 2d 1078 (D. Ariz. 2010). · cites it 6× “Plaintiffs argue that Defendants violated AWPA in four ways: (1) by failing to pay wages owed when due in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a), (2) by failing to make, keep, and preserve records of the hours spent waiting at various times in violation of § 1831(c), (3) by knowingly…”
Maldonado v. Lucca, 636 F. Supp. 621 (D.N.J. 1986). · cites it 2× “29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a). Plaintiffs Benjamin Pabon and Ketsy Alicea and Widillia Hernandez, the administrator of New Jersey’s farmworkers opportunity program, testified without contradiction that plaintiffs’ working arrangement provided for payment each week.”
Gomez v. J. Jacobo Farm Labor Contractor, Inc., 188 F. Supp. 3d 986 (E.D. Cal. 2016). “cf, 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a) (requiring farm labor contractors to pay wages owed).”
Fulford v. Alligator River Farms, LLC, 858 F. Supp. 2d 550 (E.D.N.C. 2012). · cites it 6× “Alleged Violation of 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (c) Finally, plaintiffs claim that defendant violated 29 U.”
Doe v. D.M. Camp & Sons, 624 F. Supp. 2d 1153 (E.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 3× “No farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association shall, without justification, violate the terms of any working arrangement made by that contractor, employer, or association with any [migrant or seasonal] agricultural worker.”
Medrano v. D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of California, 125 F. Supp. 2d 1163 (N.D. Cal. 2000). · cites it 3× “*1166 The statutory provision at issue here 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a) provides that: Each farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, and agricultural association which employs any seasonal agricultural worker shall pay the wages owed to such worker when due.”
Valenzuela v. Giumarra Vineyards Corp., 619 F. Supp. 2d 985 (E.D. Cal. 2008). · cites it 2× “No farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association shall, without justification, violate the terms of any working arrangement made by that contractor, employer, or association with any [migrant or seasonal] agricultural worker.”
Salazar v. Brown, 940 F. Supp. 160 (W.D. Mich. 1996). “29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a). See, e.g., Charite v.”
Saur v. Snappy Apple Farms, Inc., 203 F.R.D. 281 (W.D. Mich. 2001). “and particularly 29 U.S.C. § 1832 , for non-payment of wages due them as agricultural workers (referring to the overtime wages allegedly due); 1 and Count Three for retaliatory discharge of Marvin J.”
Medrano v. D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of California, 336 F. Supp. 2d 1053 (N.D. Cal. 2004). “29 U.S.C. § 1832 (a) “simply provides that wages must be paid when due, without limiting the source of the obligation,” id.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.