Business feature: Official ‘disappointed’ with farming, ranching ruling

Courtesy photo: Jennifer Lansford

Matthew Lansford checks on cow and calf pairs on his family’s farm, Lansford Inc. Lansford is one of the local employers affected by the recent New Mexico Supreme Court ruling on workers’ compensation for farmers and ranchers.

In an action that will financially affect the agricultural industry, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled Thursday that it is unconstitutional for farm and ranch workers to not have workers’ compensation. The ruling follows last year’s New Mexico Court of Appeal’s ruling that farm and ranch workers are not exempt from workers’ compensation.

“We’re deeply disappointed,” said New Mexico Cattle Grower’s Association Executive Director Caren Cowan. “It’s a job killer. People won’t be able to afford to hire help.”

According to Cowan, the ruling resulted following a lawsuit made by two workers — one farmer and one rancher. Despite already receiving medical care, both workers decided to pursue a claim after being contacted by the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty.

The claims, according to Cowan, were denied by the New Mexico Workman’s Compensation Administration, and were then taken to the New Mexico Court of Appeals. The agriculture industry soon appealed to the NM Supreme Court, and the claim was put on hold February of this year until Thursday’s ruling.

According to local farmers, this ruling is problematic because of the price-taking financial nature of the agricultural industry, adding more expenses on top of the insurance already provided by farmers to workers.

“The problem is we don’t set our prices,” said farmer Allen Deen. “The government sets our prices. The imposed tax makes it harder for us. It’s just another expense that keeps dwindling our income away.”

Rick Ledbetter expressed his disappointment with the ruling, and said the state Legislature previously gave exemptions because of costs.

“We have to take whatever the market will give us,” said Ledbetter. “We have to absorb these costs rather than pass them on.”

According to Ledbetter, farming expenses may increase upwards of 10-15 percent.

“It’s just part of the life we live at this point,” said Ledbetter. “We really have no way of compensating for it.”

According to Roosevelt County farmer Matt Rush, the ruling adds an unnecessary burden to farmers who already provide workers with insurance.

“It’s like getting kicked when we’re already down,” said Rush. “It’s just another case-in-point of people in Santa Fe and D.C. not comprehending what we do.”

Eastern Plains Insurance Agent Tom Dannelley said insurance companies were not pursuing for the ruling, and agrees on the financial burden the ruling will place on farmers.

“If a farm hand is making $24,000 a year, the work comp premium would be $4,320,” said Dannelley. According to Cowan and Dannelley, it would cost farmers $17-18 per $100 of salary for a workers’ compensation policy for each worker.

Jennifer Lansford and her husband, Matthew, own Lansford Inc., a Clovis farm and cattle ranch with five employees. The Lansfords have been farming and raising cattle for 13 years.

Jennifer Lansford said the ruling is “very discouraging for employers.”

“As agricultural producers, we are price takers, not price setters,” she said. “Most other businesses can adjust their sales prices of their products accordingly to accommodate for an overhead expense such as insurance. We do not control commodity prices; therefore, we can’t recoup the cost of workers’ compensation insurance through our product sales.”

She said the rates for agricultural workers’ compensation insurance “are incredibly high right now” because there’s limited data on which companies can base their rates.