This is part of a series on nonviolent protest methods, which explains approaches and provides inspirational examples from history. For additional resources, please explore the Museum of Protest’s activist guides and view items in the collection.

A farm workers’ strike is a form of collective action where agricultural laborers refuse to work to press for demands such as better wages, improved working conditions, or social and political change.

Ordinary people can wield power without violence by withholding their cooperation in economic life. A strike by farm workers exemplifies this: by halting agricultural production, workers leverage their crucial role in the food supply to put pressure on landowners, companies, or authorities.

Unlike industrial strikes in factories, farm workers’ strikes take place in fields and plantations, often in rural areas. They are usually carried out by seasonal harvesters, field laborers, or plantation workers who traditionally have had less visibility and fewer legal protections than other workers.

Strategy and Effective Use of Farm Workers’ Strikes

For a farm workers’ strike to be most effective, several conditions and strategies tend to enhance its impact:

Mass Participation and Unity: The greater the number of farm workers who join the strike, the more leverage it creates. Solidarity is critical – if virtually all the laborers across many farms or an entire region stop work, it can bring agricultural operations to a standstill. For example, in the 1946 sugar plantation strike in Hawaiʻi, 33 of 34 plantations were shut down as over 25,000 workers walked off the job simultaneously, according to Wikipedia. This kind of widespread participation makes it hard for farm owners to find replacement labor and forces the issue to be taken seriously.

Timing and Economic Pressure: Farm strikes are often timed to coincide with crucial agricultural periods (such as harvest season) when the work stoppage will inflict maximum economic loss. By striking at the peak of harvest, workers know crops may rot unpicked, directly impacting the profits of landowners or companies. This economic noncooperation targets something the opponent values – the harvest and revenue – creating a strong incentive for negotiations. In South Africa’s Western Cape in 2012, part-time harvest workers went on strike during the busy picking season, which disrupted production (only 600,000 cartons of fruit were packed in one region vs. the usual 1,000,000) and alarmed both farm owners and the government, as documented by South African History Online.

Organization and Discipline: Effective strikes require organization – often through a union or workers’ committee – to coordinate actions and maintain nonviolent discipline. Strikers may form picket lines, hold meetings, and communicate their demands clearly. Keeping the protest nonviolent is important to win public sympathy and avoid giving authorities an excuse to crack down. Some farm worker movements have even organized their own systems to prevent chaos: during the 1946 Hawaiʻian sugar strike, the union created a volunteer strike police force to guard against any vandalism or violence by strikers and set up kitchens and committees to support workers’ morale, according to Wikipedia. By ensuring protests remain peaceful and orderly, farm workers can frame their cause as a just and dignified fight, which often garners greater community support.

Alliances and Public Support: Farm workers’ strikes are most impactful when they don’t remain isolated to the fields. Gaining the support of consumers, urban allies, religious groups, and the media can amplify pressure. One common strategy is to pair the strike with a consumer boycott of the agricultural products in question, so that the economic pressure is felt both at the production level and in the marketplace. During a famous farm workers’ strike in California (the Delano grape strike), organizers called on the public to stop buying grapes, a boycott that spread nationwide and dramatically strengthened the workers’ position, as noted by Wikipedia. Public demonstrations, solidarity marches, and endorsements from prominent figures can further legitimize the strike. In many cases, broader labor federations or civil rights organizations also lend support, seeing the farm workers’ struggle as part of a wider movement for justice.

Endurance and Negotiation: Strikes, especially in agriculture, can be long and arduous. Farmers and companies may attempt to wait out the workers or use strikebreakers. Successful farm worker strikes often require patience and resilience – sustained support (financial and material) for the strikers and their families is key. Relief funds, donated food, and communal networks help workers survive without wages. This staying power creates pressure for the other side to come to the negotiating table. Ultimately, the goal is to force concessions or formal negotiations that result in meeting the workers’ demands (or at least a compromise). An effective strike ends not merely with workers back in the fields, but with a tangible victory – such as a wage increase, better working conditions, recognition of a union, or policy changes.

By carefully planning along these lines – maximizing participation, timing the strike for impact, maintaining nonviolent discipline, enlisting outside support, and persevering in the face of challenges – farm workers can greatly increase the chances that their strike will succeed. Of course, outcomes also depend on how the opposing landowners or authorities respond. The following case studies illustrate both the power of farm workers’ strikes and the challenges they face in different contexts.

Historical Examples of Farm Workers’ Strikes

Delano Grape Strike (1965–1970, United States)

One of the most significant farm workers’ strikes in history was the Delano grape strike in California. It began in September 1965 when Filipino American farm laborers, organized under the Agricultural Workers Organizing Committee (AWOC), walked off the grape vineyards around Delano to protest low pay and harsh conditions, according to Wikipedia. Soon after, they were joined by Mexican American farm workers led by César Chávez’s National Farmworkers Association (NFWA), marking an unprecedented alliance across ethnic lines.

What started as a local labor dispute evolved into a five-year nonviolent campaign that garnered national attention. Strikers maintained picket lines in the fields and also launched a sweeping consumer boycott of grapes, urging Americans around the country to stop buying grapes to support the farm workers’ cause. This boycott, along with marches and community organizing, put intense economic and moral pressure on the growers. Throughout the strike, the farm workers remained committed to nonviolent methods – even in the face of arrests and intimidation – which helped win broad public sympathy.

By July 1970, the perseverance paid off. The major table grape growers agreed to sign a collective bargaining agreement with the newly formed United Farm Workers union (UFW, which had evolved from the AWOC-NFWA partnership), as documented by Wikipedia. More than 10,000 farm workers benefited from this victory, which brought improved wages and working conditions.

The Delano strike’s success was due largely to its creative combination of tactics (strike + boycott) and its grassroots strength. It also had a lasting legacy: it demonstrated that even the most marginalized field workers could organize and win, and it gave birth to a lasting farm workers’ movement. Historian analyses note that the strike “revolutionized the farm labor movement in America” by unionizing a workforce long thought unorganizable. Today, the Delano grape strike is remembered as a textbook example of effective nonviolent protest and the empowerment of farm workers.

Hawaiian Sugar Plantation Strike (1946, Hawaiʻi)

Earlier, in 1946, another dramatic farm workers’ strike took place on the sugar plantations of Hawaiʻi. On September 1, 1946, the powerful International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) led over 25,000 sugar plantation workers to strike almost in unison, shutting down 33 of the 34 sugar mills across the islands, according to Wikipedia. These workers – many of them immigrant laborers – were fighting for higher pay, shorter working hours, and the end of an exploitative system where part of their wages was paid in kind (housing and food) rather than cash.

The strike was remarkable not only for its size but for its high level of organization and discipline. The union anticipated potential problems and took steps to ensure the protest remained orderly: they established a union security patrol (sometimes called a “union police”) to prevent vandalism or violence by any strikers, organized transportation and communal kitchens to feed the unemployed workers, and even set up entertainment committees to keep morale high during the work stoppage.

This meant the workers could sustain a unified front for a long period – which turned out to be 79 days of striking. Plantation owners and the colonial government (Hawaiʻi was a U.S. territory then) tried various tactics to break the strike, from bringing in outside rice supplies to starve out strikers who depended on company stores, to using police to block picketing (leading workers to hold peaceful parades instead). The workers, however, stood firm and even flexed their political muscle – many strikers voted en masse in local elections during the strike, helping elect pro-labor candidates and ending longtime one-party control of the islands.

In the end, after nearly three months, the plantation companies agreed to most of the workers’ demands. When the strike concluded in November 1946, the sugar workers had won a significant wage increase (an extra 19¢ per hour), a reduction of the workweek from 48 to 46 hours, and the complete elimination of the abusive “perquisite” system (so workers would receive full cash wages), as noted by Wikipedia. Although the union didn’t achieve every goal (the companies refused a union shop clause), the workers celebrated the strike as a major victory and a turning point in Hawaiʻi’s labor history.

This case illustrates how effective planning and nonviolent discipline in a farm workers’ strike can yield tangible gains. The strike also had broader consequences: it diminished the old plantation oligarchy’s power and paved the way for better conditions and unionization in Hawaiʻi’s agricultural industry.

Banana Plantation Strike (1928, Colombia) – “Banana Massacre”

Not all farm workers’ strikes end peacefully. A sobering example comes from Colombia in late 1928, when thousands of workers on the banana plantations of the United Fruit Company (an American corporation) went on strike. These plantation laborers – about 25,000 in number – had long endured low pay, grueling hours, and harsh living conditions on the company’s tropical farms, according to Britannica.

In October 1928 they presented a list of demands to United Fruit, including things like wage increases, a six-day work week, proper medical care, compensation for accidents, and an end to being paid in company script (credit) instead of real money. When the company did not meet these basic requests, the workers declared a strike in November 1928, effectively paralyzing banana exports from the Magdalena region of Colombia.

What followed was an example of a farm workers’ strike meeting severe repression. United Fruit had enormous influence – it lobbied the Colombian government and even the U.S. government to intervene. Fearing the strike could inspire broader rebellion, Colombian authorities deployed the army to crush it, as documented by Britannica.

On December 6, 1928, a large crowd of strikers and their families gathered in the town square of Ciénaga, expecting to negotiate with officials. Instead, they were met by soldiers. After issuing a brief warning, the Colombian troops opened fire with machine guns into the unarmed crowd. The exact number of people killed in this massacre is still disputed – the general in charge admitted to 47 deaths, but other reports say hundreds were killed, possibly over a thousand in the ensuing chaos, according to Britannica.

This tragic episode, known in history as the Banana Massacre, abruptly ended the strike without the workers’ demands being met. It stands as a stark reminder of the potential limitations and risks of the farm strike tactic: when an oppressive regime or powerful company is willing to use extreme violence, a nonviolent strike can be brutally suppressed.

However, even in defeat, the 1928 banana workers’ strike had a lasting impact – it exposed the plight of Colombian farm workers, fueled public outrage (both in Colombia and internationally), and became a rallying point for later labor and political movements. In the long run, the memory of the massacre galvanized reforms and union efforts in Colombia, illustrating that even a crushed strike can inspire future change. Still, as a case study, the Banana Plantation Strike shows that the effectiveness of a farm workers’ strike may be limited or negated in the face of military force and highlights the importance of international attention and solidarity to protect vulnerable protesters.

Western Cape Farm Workers’ Strike (2012–2013, South Africa)

In recent times, farm workers’ strikes continue to be a tool for change. A notable example occurred in the Western Cape province of South Africa in 2012–2013. Tens of thousands of farm laborers, many of them seasonal fruit pickers, staged a strike across the region’s vineyards and orchards to demand higher wages and better living conditions. At the time, farm workers earned a government-set minimum of just 69 South African rand per day (roughly 8 US dollars).

The workers – often living in poverty – demanded this daily wage be doubled to 150 rand (about $17) and called for other improvements such as fair hours, an end to abusive labor practices, and basic services like access to water and electricity, according to South African History Online. The strike started in one farming town in August 2012 and rapidly spread to at least 16 towns over the following months as more workers joined in solidarity.

The protests were intense and at times unruly: in some areas, groups of angry strikers burned vineyards and farm property, clashing with police who responded with rubber bullets. This shows how maintaining nonviolent discipline can be challenging, especially when frustrations run high – and it underscores how violence (even if mostly against property) can undermine a movement’s image.

The South African strike, largely spontaneous and not initially led by formal unions, put significant pressure on both farm owners and the government, which feared the unrest could spread nationwide, as noted by South African History Online. By early 2013, the strikes had forced urgent attention to farm workers’ conditions. The South African government intervened and negotiated a compromise.

In February 2013, the Labour Minister announced a substantial increase in the farm worker minimum wage – from 69 rand to 105 rand per day (a roughly 52% raise) – to take effect that March. This outcome, directly attributed to the strikes, meant immediate relief in income for the lowest-paid farm laborers.

However, the strike had mixed results. On one hand, it proved effective in achieving a core demand (higher wages) through disruptive protest. On the other hand, there were repercussions: some farmers retaliated by firing or blacklisting workers who had participated in the illegal strikes, and not all issues (like housing and labor brokers) were fully resolved, according to South African History Online. Moreover, the instances of violence during the protests dampened some public support and highlighted the fine line farm worker actions must walk to remain peaceful.

Even so, the Western Cape farm workers’ strike demonstrated the enduring relevance of this method in the 21st century – showing that farm laborers, through collective action, could force policy changes in a democratic society. It also served as a wake-up call about persisting inequalities in post-apartheid South Africa’s agricultural sector, much as earlier farm strikes did in other countries.