Status as of August 30, 2026. The Department of Labor's final rule rescinding 29 CFR Part 42 was placed on public inspection on August 28, 2026; official publication in the Federal Register is dated August 31, 2026, at 91 FR 55744. The rule takes effect September 30, 2026. This article will be updated if the rescission is challenged in court.

The Department of Labor (DOL) is rescinding 29 CFR Part 42 in its entirety — a 1980 regulation requiring three of its component agencies to maintain formal interagency committees and written coordination plans for enforcing labor protections covering migrant and seasonal farmworkers. The Department states the regulation is obsolete, pointing to abolished offices and repealed statutes referenced in its text. All eight comments received opposed the rescission; the rule was finalized as proposed.

In brief

  • 29 CFR Part 42 is removed and reserved. Citations: FR Doc. 2026-17726, Docket No. ETA-2025-0003, RIN 1205-AC27 / 1235-AA50 / 1218-AD53.
  • Effective date is September 30, 2026. Substantive protections under MSPA, OSHA standards, and the H-2A program are unaffected.
  • The rescission terminates the Department's obligations under a 2024 settlement agreement, which applied only while Part 42 remained in effect and unchanged.

Contents

What the rule removes

Part 42, promulgated in 1980, did not establish worker rights. It set out internal procedures governing how DOL component agencies coordinate enforcement in agriculture. The regulation mandated four categories of structures.

Requirement Substance
National Committee National Farm Labor Coordinated Enforcement Committee, with membership by the Under Secretary of Labor (later the Deputy Secretary), the Solicitor of Labor, ETA, OSHA, and ESA; review of subagency policy and enforcement strategy
Regional Committees Regional Farm Labor Coordinated Enforcement Committees meeting at least quarterly, with public attendance required at certain meetings
Coordination plans Written national and regional coordinated enforcement strategies and an annual coordination plan
Designated personnel Farm Labor Specialists in the Wage and Hour Division and Compliance Officers in OSHA as farm labor contacts; collection and review of specified enforcement data

All four disappear. Part 42 is removed and reserved in the Code of Federal Regulations. The rescission rests on the Department's general housekeeping authority at 5 U.S.C. 301, invoked consistent with Executive Order 14192 on deregulation (90 FR 9065, January 31, 2025). The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs determined the rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 and did not review it.

Why the Department says the rule is obsolete

The Department's core argument is that the regulation describes an institutional landscape that no longer exists.

  • The Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act, one of the three "protective statutes" defining the scope of Part 42, was repealed in 1983 (Pub. L. 97-470, § 523).
  • The Employment Standards Administration, whose Regional Administrator chaired the Regional Committees under the regulation, was dissolved in 2009, with relevant authorities delegated to the Wage and Hour Division Administrator (74 FR 58836).
  • The position of Under Secretary of Labor, named in the National Committee's composition, was replaced by the Deputy Secretary in 1986.

The second argument is operational. The Department states coordination now runs through other channels: monthly departmental Agriculture Taskforce meetings, quarterly Regional Agriculture Coordination calls, recurring interagency calls on emerging issues, joint investigations, and strategic referrals between component agencies. It also points to statutory frameworks enacted after 1980 — the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA) and the H-2A program under the Immigration and Nationality Act — arguing that current enforcement is built around those regimes and their implementing regulations rather than around Part 42.

The Department expressly rejected the intermediate option several commenters proposed: retaining Part 42 while updating its outdated references to abolished agencies and repealed statutes. Its position is that the defect is structural rather than terminological, and that renaming entities would not change the fact that the mandated structures are not used in current operations.

The 2024 settlement and why it did not block rescission

This is the substantive core of the story. In 2024, a group of advocacy organizations sued the Department alleging it had failed to comply with Part 42. The litigation produced a court-approved settlement under which DOL agreed to take steps to reconstitute the National and Regional Committees and hold public meetings — with the obligation expressly framed as lasting only for as long as the regulations at 29 CFR Part 42 remain in effect and unchanged (Farm Labor Organizing Committee v. Su, No. 24-706 (D.D.C. Dec. 9, 2024), ECF No. 33).

That conditional phrasing is what makes the rescission work. Once Part 42 leaves the Code of Federal Regulations, the condition fails and the obligation lapses on its own terms. The settlement did not bar the Department from rescinding or modifying the regulation through notice-and-comment rulemaking. The Department states it has complied with the settlement since its effective date and is under no obligation to retain the rule.

The preamble also discloses a fact worth isolating. The Department acknowledges it did not consistently implement these structures until the settlement agreement required activities similar to those the regulation prescribed. In other words, committees now being rescinded as decades-dormant were partially revived by litigation less than two years ago, and are being eliminated along with the rule itself.

The symmetry runs further back. Part 42 was itself adopted in 1980 partly as the product of a settlement in earlier litigation, NAACP, Western Region v. Brennan (D.D.C.), as the original rulemaking preamble records (45 FR 39486, June 10, 1980).

What commenters argued and how the Department responded

The proposed rule was published July 1, 2025 (90 FR 28247), and the 60-day comment period closed September 2, 2025. Eight comments were submitted — from legal advocacy organizations, nonprofit worker advocates, a state interagency committee, a state workforce agency, and one individual. All eight opposed the rescission.

Comment Department's response
Part 42 is essential to protecting farmworkers and ensuring cross-agency coordination (AFOP, CLASP, NELP, Texas RioGrande Legal Aid, Michigan IMSC) Commenters did not account for practices developed over time; coordination has functioned for decades without reliance on Part 42
Rescission could violate the 2024 settlement agreement (TRLA, CLASP) The settlement applies only while the regulation is in effect and unchanged, and expressly preserves the Department's rulemaking discretion
Rescission is arbitrary and capricious (NELP, TRLA, others) The APA permits repeal where the agency gives a reasoned explanation, citing Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, 579 U.S. 211, 221 (2016)
Update the outdated references rather than eliminate the rule (AFOP, CLASP, IMSC) The problems extend beyond terminology to the entire framework; updating names would not address disuse
Rescission ends public regional meetings and reduces direct stakeholder access (CLASP, IMSC) A meeting structure codified in 1980 is not necessary; engagement continues through roundtables, listening sessions, and virtual forums

One exchange is worth noting separately. Commenters cited a 2017 Midwest regional meeting as the most recent example of activity under the rule. The Department did not dispute the example and treated it as confirming its own account of the structures' dormancy.

What changes for farmworkers

The rescission does not alter worker rights, employer obligations, or complaint procedures. Part 42 was directed at DOL component agencies, not at workers or farms. What changes is the form of coordination and the mechanism of accountability.

  • The codified requirement to hold public regional meetings disappears — a forum whose existence was fixed in federal regulation rather than left to agency discretion.
  • Coordination among WHD, OSHA, and ETA moves entirely to informal arrangements: working groups, joint investigations, and referrals. Mandatory written coordination plans and enforcement strategies no longer exist.
  • The requirement to designate dedicated farm labor contacts in WHD and OSHA is eliminated.
  • The prescribed collection and review of specified enforcement data for National Committee review ends.

How much this matters in practice is precisely what the comment record disputes. The Department treats the formal structures as immaterial to outcomes; the organizations opposing rescission argued that a codified procedure gave outside parties a fixed point of leverage that informal engagement does not provide.

What does not change

  • MSPA. The Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (29 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) is unaffected, including Wage and Hour Division enforcement authority and farm labor contractor requirements.
  • H-2A. Requirements of the temporary agricultural worker program (8 U.S.C. 1188, together with 20 CFR part 655 subpart B and 29 CFR part 501) are untouched. ETA certification and WHD enforcement continue as before.
  • OSHA standards. Agricultural safety and health requirements — covering heat exposure, grain bins and silos, hazardous machinery, and youth worker protections — remain in force, and OSHA continues to maintain its Agricultural Operations topics page.
  • Complaint referrals. ETA Employment Service regulations still require referral of complaints to enforcement agencies and cross-referencing of debarment lists.
  • Paperwork. The rule imposes no new information collection or recordkeeping requirements.

Timeline and what comes next

Date Event
July 1, 2025 Notice of proposed rulemaking published (90 FR 28247)
September 2, 2025 60-day comment period closes
August 28, 2026 Final rule placed on public inspection
August 31, 2026 Publication in the Federal Register, 91 FR 55744
September 30, 2026 Effective date; Part 42 removed from the Code of Federal Regulations

The regulation remains formally in effect until September 30, 2026. Two commenters raised the arbitrary-and-capricious argument during the comment period, which ordinarily precedes its restatement in litigation. The Department relies on Encino Motorcars and on the procedural character of the rescinded rule, and the absence of significant-regulatory-action status narrows the field for procedural challenge. No litigation had been reported as of August 30, 2026.

The settlement-based objection could in principle be raised before the court that entered the stipulation and order of dismissal, as an enforcement matter. Its prospects are constrained by the agreement's own language tying the obligations to the regulation's continued effect.

Frequently asked questions

Does this rule eliminate protections for farmworkers?
No. 29 CFR Part 42 governed internal coordination procedures among Department of Labor component agencies. Substantive protections come from MSPA, OSHA standards, and H-2A program regulations, none of which are affected by the rescission.

When does the rule take effect?
September 30, 2026. Federal Register publication is dated August 31, 2026, at 91 FR 55744, document number 2026-17726.

How many comments were received and what did they say?
Eight, all opposing the rescission. They came from legal advocacy organizations, nonprofit worker advocates, Michigan's Interagency Migrant Services Committee, a state workforce agency, and one individual. The rule was finalized as proposed.

How does the rescission interact with the 2024 settlement agreement?
The settlement in Farm Labor Organizing Committee v. Su required the Department to reconstitute the committees, but only for as long as 29 CFR Part 42 remained in effect and unchanged. Rescinding the regulation ends that condition, and the agreement expressly preserved the Department's authority to modify or rescind the rule through notice-and-comment rulemaking.

Does the rescission affect the H-2A program?
No. ETA certification requirements and Wage and Hour Division enforcement under H-2A rest on 8 U.S.C. 1188 and separate implementing regulations that this rule does not amend.

What happens to the public regional meetings?
The codified requirement to hold them is eliminated. The Department states stakeholder engagement will continue through roundtables, listening sessions, and virtual forums, but without the frequency mandated by federal regulation.

Official sources

Document Citation
Final rule 91 FR 55744 (Aug. 31, 2026); FR Doc. 2026-17726; Docket No. ETA-2025-0003; RIN 1205-AC27, 1235-AA50, 1218-AD53
Proposed rule 90 FR 28247 (July 1, 2025)
Rescinded regulation 29 CFR Part 42 (adopted at 45 FR 39486, June 10, 1980)
Settlement agreement Farm Labor Organizing Committee v. Su, No. 24-706 (D.D.C. Dec. 9, 2024), ECF No. 33
Comment record regulations.gov, Docket No. ETA-2025-0003

This article is informational and does not constitute legal advice. Information is current as of August 30, 2026. Questions about a specific situation are appropriately directed to a licensed practitioner.