Poverty and Injustice in the Food System
Report for Oxfam America
June 2008
Denise VanDeCruze, SAF Operations Manager and
Melinda Wiggins, SAF Executive Director
Student Action with Farmworkers
1317 W. Pettigrew St.
Durham, NC 27705
www.saf-unite.org
919-660-3616
Student Action with Farmworkers is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization whose mission is to bring students
and farmworkers together to learn about each other’s lives, share resources and skills, improve conditions
for farmworkers, and build diverse coalitions working for social change. SAF accomplishes its mission by
working with farmworkers to address their concerns through documentation of human rights violations,
grassroots education and mobilization, leadership development of young people, policy advocacy, and
support of labor organizing.
The History We Wrote This Summer
Cecilia kills turkeys,
Dipping their beaks into the cold water,
She feels the volt in her own hands.
Cutting carrots for her daughter,
“Not meat tonight, Mija,”
No meat for $5.75 an hour,
six turkeys a minute,
three hundred and sixty an hour,
to stand in a trailer
in the middle of the summer
and feed your family carrots.
Trisha bends her back all day to the sun.
Bow down before the tobacco, Trisha,
kneel before the altar
of wage slavery,
$60.00 a barn,
$30.00 a bottle,
in the one room home
of the goddess of tobacco croppers.
Jessica,
with Jesus tattooed between her breasts.
Jessica moves form mission to mission.
In the hot shed where they grade cucumbers,
six fingers smashed,
broken
before she was sixteen in the fast wooded slots
where the cucumbers vanish.
“If you wore your sweat as a gown,
your blood as your crown,
you would tattoo
his name too,
just to feel his presence
when the night was too long.”
Jessica sleeps with her God each night
Beneath the stars
in a lonely room behind the cucumber shed.
Margarita,
fifteen years old,
carries her child
into the pepper fields
so he will learn at a young age
what is good and what is bad.
Margarita, bending under the weight of her own
offspring,
works all day
to bend another.
What must she think
of her baby on the cot beside her
praying her husband will not come home.
When the door opens,
praying his hands will not fly.
What must she think
when her baby
too tired to cry,
lays and stares at the ceiling of the room.
She tells me one day she will buy a house.
One day her son will sleep in a bed.
(Close your eyes, Margarita,
somewhere the darkness will buy you
a castle better than any on earth.
Somewhere a child rolls in the swells of a bed,
somewhere a husband does not return,
somewhere your night is silent.)
One of these days
I will leave, she says,
through the trapdoor of night
and the bottom of empty bottles.
I will climb from my bed,
count the stars on my hands,
the scars on my back,
the steps down the road.
I will rise like the myrtle,
Green vines and orange blossoms
Lining endless rows of melon,
cracked in the sun.
And I want you to know,
if he loved you with his words,
and saved you with his hands,
and tamed you with his belt,
and broke you with his heart,
would you expect to stay
one moment longer?
Cecilia, Trisha, Jessica, Margarita,
all day under the sun.
Cecilia, Trisha, Jessica, Margarita,
all day in the white man’s tobacco shed,
pepper,
cucumber,
turkey plant.
Cecilia, Trisha, Jessica, Margarita,
I close my eyes
to see
my hands vanish beneath their brown
sun-kissed skin.
I pass
them to you in a glance
and a handful of the earth they breathe.
Cecilia, Trisha, Jessica, Margarita.
(Student Action with Farmworkers 1998,
p.44-46)
INTRODUCTION
The Southeast1 has a long history of food system workers that struggle with poverty and injustice. Many
field and food processing workers earn low (sub poverty) wages, bear widespread labor abuses, and face
high rates of occupational injuries and illnesses. The recent arrival of a more vulnerable, undocumented
workforce has contributed to a decline in labor conditions. Increased enforcement of immigration laws,
especially in workplaces with active union campaigns and in poultry processing plants across the country,
has led to a climate of fear and intimidation. As food system workers struggle for basic human rights,
many face harsh resistance as well as retaliation by employers and public xenophobia.
For the purposes of this report, food system workers include both food processing workers and field
workers. Food processing workers work on farms or in plants raising animals for food processing or
preparing meat or fish for packaging. The meat processing industry has four segments: animal
slaughtering, meat processed from carcasses, rendering and meat byproduct processing, and poultry
processing (Rural Migration News). Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), which are
facilities that feed and grow animals, are legally classified as farming or ranching facilities although they
usually operate solely to support meat-processing factories.
Farmworkers work in the field doing manual agricultural labor such as planting, cultivating, and
harvesting crops, as well as preparing crops for market or storage. Farmworkers also maintain plants and
trees in greenhouses and nurseries. According to the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS),
from which the majority of the demographic data about farmworkers is retrieved, farmworkers are hired
workers, and include farm, nursery and livestock laborers, as well as supervisors and farm managers.
According to the NAWS, around 56% of farmworkers are migrants who move from one location to
another in search of agricultural work and live in temporary housing. Based on our experience and
anecdotal evidence, we believe that this percentage is much higher in the Southeast. The other 44% of
farmworkers are seasonal workers that live in permanent housing and do farm work in their local area
when it is in season. Auxiliary workers, such as animal herders and grounds keepers, are seen as
farmworkers in the eyes of the law.
The Southeast has a relatively high concentration of food system workers compared to other regions in
the U.S. The Southeast has more of the nation’s meat-processing workers than any other region and
Florida and North Carolina rank 4th and 6th respectively in states with the largest farmworker populations
nationwide. In recent years several factors have increased challenges for food industry workers. This
paper will detail those challenges in the context of how people are working to alleviate them.
Part One of this paper will offer a snapshot of the history and current demographics of farmworkers and
commercial food processing workers in the Southeast. Through the use of the latest research, statistical
data from the National Agricultural Workers Survey, U.S. Department of Labor and other sources, and
the experiences of organizations that work directly with food system workers, we will explore
demographics throughout the region.
Part Two of this report will offer an analysis of the current conditions, how the conditions of these
workers affect the community and vice versa, how trends may manifest themselves in the future, and food
system workers’ links to poverty and rural communities. The effects of conditions such as family
separation and mechanization will be explored.
1
Throughout this paper, we will include the following twelve states as the Southeast region: Arkansas, Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West
Virginia.
Part Three of this paper will survey policies that affect the conditions of food system workers. This
section will identify and survey the impact of some organizations that work with food system workers,
particularly black and immigrant populations in the Southeast.
In the conclusion, we will offer suggestions for reform in these industries. We will include how the
immigrant rights, labor rights, and environmental justice movements are connected to food system
workers, as well as where there are unmet needs and barriers to improving wages and conditions for food
system workers in the Southeast.
HISTORICAL LEGACY OF FOOD WORKERS IN THE SOUTHEAST
“In spite of all the endeavors to disguise this point, it is as clear as light itself, that Negroes are
as essentially necessary to the cultivation of Georgia, as axes, hoes or any other utensil of
agriculture” (Georgia Historical Society, 1842, p. 93)
The legacy of dehumanizing farmworkers plays an important role in informing the current situation of
food system workers. While it is common throughout the U.S. in present day, the Southeast was the first
region to utilize workers for large-scale agricultural production. The power imbalances between
owners/managers and slaves that were used to control and maximize profits from this workforce are still
present in some form today.
Indentured servitude to slavery to migrant
Beginning in the 1600s, white laborers were brought from England as indentured servants and many
Native Americans were forced to work in the fields. Indentured servants sold future years of their labor in
return for the initial passage to America. In some colonies, up to 75% of the population was made up of
indentured servants. Current guestworker programs and legislative proposals of earned legalization can be
compared to the system of indentured servitude because they establish a debt-based means of
immigrating.
Since indentured servants and enslaved Native Americans did not provide enough labor, Africans were
forcibly brought to America as slaves to work in the fields from the 1650s through the 1800s. This source
of free labor helped to provide cheap goods and huge profits for employers in the export-based colonial
economy and thereafter. After slavery was abolished in 1865, most former slaves remained in the fields as
sharecroppers both because it was what they knew and because Black Codes often restricted what work
was available to them. Sharecroppers worked in exchange for a small portion of the profits of the crops,
which often went towards servicing large debts to the landowner. Few workers were able to escape
poverty through sharecropping. A two-tiered legal system (Jim Crow) was constructed to limit the
freedoms of blacks; if blacks refused to work then they were imprisoned for small or no offences then
leased back to growers as farmworkers. Recently Colorado has returned to the practice of utilizing prison
labor to work in the fields.
During the Great Depression, poverty intensified and many workers became migrants, moving across the
country to follow work opportunities. During World War II, significant numbers of African American
migrant workers, white sharecroppers, and Caribbeans worked on farms up and down the East Coast.
Also during this time, worker organizing and farmers’ insistence that they were experiencing labor
shortages due to the war prompted the U.S. government to enter into agreements with Mexico and the
British West Indies to bring guestworkers to the U.S. to harvest sugar cane, cotton and beets. Though the
initial Bracero program was ended in the 1960s due in part to efforts by the United Farm Workers to bring
attention to the widespread abuses in the program, guestworkers continue to arrive in the U.S. to work on
a temporary basis. H-2A workers work in agriculture, such as tobacco and cucumbers, while H2-B
workers labor in non-agricultural jobs, such as the coastal crab industry.
Sources of immigrant work force
"At the West Columbia plant, managers were well aware of illegal immigrants on the payroll,
according to Eric Lawson, a former supervisor. On one of his first days on the job last year,
Lawson said a manager told him that most workers at the plant were either illegal or underage,
so 'all you got to do is threaten 'em a little and they'll do whatever you want.'"- Two former
workers asked about hiring of undocumented immigrants in South Carolina (Alexander &
Ordonez, 2008)
After the civil rights movement in the 1960s many blacks left farm work for other industries; this left
opportunities for growers to recruit Haitians and eventually Latin Americans to work in the fields. Real
wages in farm work declined after 1960 as U.S. citizens began leaving the industry en mass. The 1980s
economic crises in Mexico, which included the loss of communal farmland and the devaluation of the
peso, left millions of rural farmers without land to grow food for their families. This led to an increase in
migration of Mexicans to fields across the U.S.
Some relief was provided for many of these Mexicans through the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control
Act (IRCA), which granted permanent residency to 3 million undocumented immigrants, many of whom
were farmworkers. The amnesty provisions of IRCA may have fostered the current influx of Latinos into
the rural South who were able to move more freely than before (Furuseth & Smith, 2004). Some of these
newly documented immigrants left farm work for work in processing plants and other low wage work,
and were replaced by a new wave of undocumented field workers.
As a part of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), tariffs on food imports in the
U.S., Canada, and Mexico were decreased. This, coupled with the continued subsidies in the U.S., has led
to unfair advantages for U.S. growers, resulting in more than 2 million Mexicans losing their land,
drastically declining conditions in many parts of Mexico, and more migration from Mexico to the U.S.
From small farms to big businesses
Agricultural production has increasingly moved to factory farms, with fewer and fewer farmers
controlling more of the production and labor. While this trend has been mounting for over 40 years in the
fields, it has also occurred in the last two decades in food animal production. Consumers in the U.S. have
tripled their per-capita consumption of chicken since 1950. The increased consumption and production of
poultry and other meat led to a rise in food processing plants. In the poultry industry, production doubled
from 1987 to 1997 and the numbers of hogs raised on factory farms has increased to a majority of hogs
raised in the U.S. from less than 10% in the late 1980s (MacDonald, Ollinger, Nelson, & Handy, 1999).
Getting millions of processed chickens to supermarket shelves every day became a gigantic business for
the major chicken producers like Tyson, Perdue, Pilgrim’s Pride, Holly Farms, and Hudson Foods.
Success in the marketplace depended on achieving expanded operations with economies of scale, low
costs, and accelerated production speeds. The availability of large pools of unskilled labor was another
factor that lured these industries into rural communities of the Southeast over the last twenty years.
Employers transformed the food animal processing sector during this time from one in which workers had
unions bargaining on their behalf to one where workplace organization became high-risk for workers.
Many companies shut down their plants, dismissed their long-time workers (often African American and
white), and then reopened with a nonunion immigrant workforce.
CURRENT DEMOGRAPHICS OF FOOD WORKERS IN THE SOUTHEAST
“In the fields, the United States is like a developing country” -Darlene Adkins, Coordinator of
Child Labor Coalition (Human Rights Watch [HRW], 2000, p. 2)
According to the USDA's Economic Research
Service, there were 404,527 food system
workers in the Southeast in 2002; 190,809
were farmworkers and 213,718 were meat
processing workers. According to the 2002
Census of Agriculture, there were 668,882
total hired farm workers in the Southeast,
189,717 of whom worked for 150 days or
more. See Tables 1 and 2.
“A recent survey of farmworkers conducted by the U.S. Department
of Labor paints the following portrait of a farmworker. He is 29
years old, married, and has a sixth-grade education. His primary
language is Spanish. In the past decade, the median income of an
individual farmworker has remained less than $7,500 per year and
$10,500 per year for his family. At the same time that his relative
poverty has increased, his use of social services has declined.
Although his work as a farmworker is by nature contingent, only 20
percent of farmworkers receive unemployment benefits, only 10
percent receive benefits under Medicaid, and only 13 percent receive
food stamps. Just 5 percent of farmworkers received employerprovided health insurance. Less than half owned a vehicle, which
means that farmworkers depend on employers, contractors and coworkers for transportation to work. Only 14 percent own a home in
the United States. Both of these percentages are lower than in 19941995, a sign not only that many farmworkers live in poverty, but also
that the real value of their wages is declining. For example, the price
of tomatoes shows how the value of farmworker wages has declined
over the last 20 years. Although the price of tomatoes to the
consumer has increased with inflation, the average piece rate for red
tomato pickers is still 72 cents per 5/8 bushel basket, a wage that has
barely risen for 20 years. This means that a farmworker has to pick
over 40 bushels a day to make minimum wage. Because of inflation,
the fact that the piece rate has remained the same for 20 years means
that farmworkers and their families can buy 30 percent less with the
same wages.” (Rosenbaum, 2005, para. 4)
According to the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in 2005,
the racial make-up of farmworkers was 28.6%
white, 3.4% black and 65.3% Hispanic.
Managers were mostly white (69.9%), while
the laborers were mostly people of color
(88.2%). The national numbers of Hispanic
farmworkers vary from a low 59.6%
according to the USDA to a high of 83% as
surveyed through the NAWS. The racial
make-up of food processing workers was
31.2% white, 17.9% black, and 46.8% Hispanic. Food processing workers were more diverse than
farmworkers, yet 75.3% of the managers were white, while 82.6% of the laborers were minorities. This
shows a trend towards white management and people of color as workers throughout the food system.
According to the USDA and NAWS, farm work is dominated by males (83.8% and 79% respectively).
And this percentage has increased in recent years. More women work in the food processing industry
(37.3%). Farmworkers tend to be relatively young and have a median age of 35 (USDA) and average age
of 33 (NAWS). The USDA and NAWS agree that the educational level for farmworkers is low, with both
reporting many workers having less than a 9th grade education. Nationally, the NAWS reports that 53%
of farmworkers are undocumented and 25% are U.S. citizens as compared to the USDA's reporting that
60.1% of farmworkers are citizens. See Table 3.
Most advocates believe that the statistics published about the numbers and wages of field workers, as well
as the documentation status of all food system workers, are inaccurate. The USDA and Census Bureau
include farm supervisors and farm managers when determining average farmworker wages, resulting in
an inflated average wage. This makes it difficult to accurately represent the inequities in pay and working
conditions. Most farm operators complete surveys for the Census Bureau, resulting in estimates of
information about farmworker households. Because the Census is conducted at a specific time of the year,
the numbers of workers may be inaccurate due to counting migrant workers in both the sending and
receiving state or not counting them at all.
Unfortunately, state specific data is variable and not always comparable. While most states rely on the
U.S. Census Bureau's numbers, some also use estimates or counts based on interactions with government
agencies such as health, agriculture or employment security offices. Because of the isolation of labor
camps and fear by undocumented workers of government agencies, many workers avoid participating in
enumeration studies or are never found. Often the number of field workers that are used are not actual
counts, but estimates based on the number of workers that are needed to work the amount of farmland that
is in production or on payroll surveys. The NAWS does not gather enough data in each state, with the
exception of the three or four states with the highest number of farmworkers. It is possible to draw some
regional conclusions from the NAWS if the all of the data gathered since its inception is reviewed.
With regard to documentation status, many advocates assume that the percentage of workers in the food
system is higher than reported in national studies and reports. This is due to many workers utilizing false
documents, as well as the numbers of workers that are never counted in enumeration studies. Lack of
immigrant documentation results in census counts that may represent only half of the actual immigrant
population.
Gender analysis of food workers
Jobs in agriculture are often segregated by sex, with women more often working in packing sheds and
processing plants than in the fields. For instance, women have only recently been brought to North
Carolina through the H-2A guestworker program. This change came about because of a lawsuit and
subsequent anti-discrimination clause in the Farm Labor Organizing Committee's contract with H-2A
employers. There are more women working in food processing than on the farms, with as high as 90% of
the workers on catfish farms in the Mississippi Delta being African-American women (Mississippi
Workers’ Center, 2008). Recruiters and employers often preference men over women because of the hard
labor associated with farm work and their belief that women will not be able to perform the same as men.
Because food system women earn less money than men and may not have their own transportation, they
have very little economic or social freedom in comparison to their male counterparts.
Many women working in the fields and factories face sexual harassment and discrimination, and are often
responsible for working outside the home as well as caring for the children and their household.
According to Sara White, President of The Mississippi Workers’ Center, sexual harassment is
commonplace in the male-dominated poultry plants and even the mostly female catfish plants in the Delta
(Student Action with Farmworkers Interview on June 17, 2008). Abuse is also common in the fields. One
farmworker woman talks about the verbal abuse she experienced:
"It was while working in pears that I had an experience so horrible that I erased it from my
memory for 25 years. I brought the kids with me to the pear orchards. I was alone because my
husband was working in another orchard. My children saws lots of pears had fallen from the
trees so they started putting the fruit in the pear bin with their little hands. When the boss came,
he began to swear at me. I could tell he was swearing at me although I didn't understand what he
was saying. He was yelling. Then he came and kicked over the bin. It scared me so much, but it
didn't just scare me, it made me feel like, 'Who was I? I was something stepped on, something
disgusting to him.’" (STITCH, 2004, p. 7)
Farmworker women face many unique health issues. Because the Field Sanitation Standard requiring
bathrooms in the fields is rarely enforced, many women do not go to the bathroom the entire work day.
This leads to high incidences of urinary tract infections among farmworker women. Also many
farmworker women labor in the fields while pregnant. The recent Ag-Mart case, in which three pregnant
women that worked in the fields of North Carolina and Florida gave birth to babies with severe birth
defects, presents the potential hazards that women face when working in fields sprayed with dangerous
chemicals. While the direct link between the pesticides and birth defects were not conclusive in the
AgMart case, research shows that one of the effects of pesticides is birth defects.
Farmworkers also tend to face high rates of domestic violence. According to interviews conducted in
1995 by the Migrant Clinicians Network (MCN), they found that within the previous year 20% of the
farmworker women that were interviewed had experienced abuse from their husbands, boyfriends, or
intimate partners. Few of these women are able to receive help due to their isolation, mobility, and lack of
transportation, as well as the lack of family support networks in the U.S.
“Things here began to change around 15 or 20 years ago when lots of men began to go to the
U.S. Now, everyone dreams about the north. The men return with money, cars, and clothes. Then
a friend or neighbor says, “Next year, I’m going over there, too.” Soon, “next year” becomes
three years and then 6 years and then 9 years. It just keeps growing… When your husband is
away, you worry a lot. You think about so many things. You worry that he might be caught by
Immigration or have an accident, as happens to so many people… The men don’t go over there to
enjoy themselves. They go there to suffer… You can’t really accept the situation. The five months
while he’s here pass so quickly, and when he’s gone, time passes so slow… What more can I say?
I am like so many women. The men go to the U.S. That’s what they have to do, and the women are
left behind.” – Maria Gutierrez, Pajuacarán, Mexico (Rothenberg, 2000, p. 299)
As many food system workers migrate from Mexico and Central American countries to work in the U.S.,
many of their wives are left behind in their native country to raise their families and manage the farms.
Not only do many food system workers leave family members behind in their neighboring countries, but
many family members work in corporate agricultural production in their native countries. U.S.-supported
corporate banana production has a more than 50 year history in countries like Guatemala. The segregation
of duties that we find prevalent in the Southeast is repeated there, as women work sorting and packing the
bananas that are harvested by men. The women also face similar harassment and discrimination on
banana plantations. Maria Carmen Molina, a banana worker for a subsidiary of Del Monte says, "I was
born on one of the Bobos sector plantations in the department of Izabal, Guatemala. My mother and father
were working at the time for the United Fruit Company. When my mom became pregnant with me, the
bosses fired her. They told her they couldn't have pregnant women working there because they couldn't
produce as much as young women who didn't have 'such complications'” (STITCH, 2004, p. 13).
State Landscapes: trends in demographics & industries
According to the USDA, the average farm size in the Southeast is 210 acres, with Arkansas having the
largest average farm size at 305 and Tennessee having the smallest average farm size at 133. These are
below the national average of 441. North Carolina leads the region in total agricultural output, with
$10,225,543 in 2006, which is 4% of the total. Florida, Georgia, and Arkansas are not far behind North
Carolina with $7,710,155, $7,301,941, and $6,980,599 respectively. See Table 4.
Florida leads the Southeast in commodity receipts in terms of field crops, with $1,753,399 from
greenhouse, $1,204,949 from oranges, and $551,128 from tomatoes. Florida and North Carolina have the
most farmworkers in the Southeast with over 100,000 workers in each state. North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia and Florida have many farms with hand-harvested fruits, vegetables and other crops
that require arduous manual labor. North Carolina and Virginia also have large nursery and greenhouse
industries. Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia have a high demand for workers in the equine and
cattle industries (USDA, 2008).
Georgia has the highest receipts from broilers at $2,731,022, followed closely by Arkansas at $2,324,562,
Alabama at $2,161,592, North Carolina at $2,088,212, and Mississippi at $1,771,560. North Carolina
leads the region in receipts from turkeys at $517,500, which also bring in top agricultural receipts in
Virginia, South Carolina, and West Virginia. Tyson Foods in Springdale, Arkansas brings in the largest
annual sales from broilers at $7.9 billion and has the second highest production in the U.S. Other top
broiler processors in the Southeast are located in Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Alabama. See
Table 5.
Raising chickens and hogs supplanted traditional field crops in many areas in the Southeast as companies
such as Tyson Foods, Perdue, and Smithfield Foods opened slaughtering and processing facilities around
the region. In the mid 1990s, North Carolina moved to No. 1 in food animal production (ranking in the
top three in turkeys, chickens, and hogs). North Carolina has the highest receipts from hogs than any other
state in the Southeast, with total receipts reaching $1,917,244. This is due primarily to Tar Heel, North
Carolina being the home to the top pork slaughterer in the U.S., with the Smithfield plant employing
5,200 workers that slaughter 32,000 hogs per day. Since the town has a total population of only 70, we
assume that their decision to locate the enormous facility in a place with such an apparent labor shortage
suggests an expectation that the plant would attract immigrant labor. According to the Environmental
Justice Network, North Carolina has more than 10 million hogs on several thousand farms that produce
more than 19 million tons of waste each year. See Tables 6 and 7.
The Delta states of Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi have a large concentration of catfish plants, most
of which opened in the 1970s and 1980s. As the U.S. cotton industry declined, the catfish plants were
created to make former cotton farms economically productive. The original workers in these plants often
worked on the same sites as farmworkers previously labored. The hope was that these plants would help
revitalize the Delta area, which had some of the worst poverty conditions in the country. Although the
plants were profitable due to the companies’ control of the supply chain (they grew the fish and processed
it on site), the new wealth was not shared with the workers. Fish plant workers are generally started at
minimum wage with little or no wage increases and no benefits.
Projections for the future of food workers
According to the USDA, the need for hired farmworkers declined by more than half from 1960 until
2005. From 1990 until 2006, the numbers decreased from 1,145,000 to 1,009,000. Currently less than 1%
of all wage and salary workers in the U.S. are farmworkers. The amount of production on U.S. farms has
increased, while real wages for farmworkers have declined. These changes are partly due to small family
farm loss, as well as increased mechanization and economic trends. The consolidation of farms has led to
a vertically integrated food system.2 This means that fewer and fewer companies, such as Archer Daniels
Midland and Perdue, control every level of production--from seeding/breeding to the grocery and
everything in between. See Tables 8 and 9.
There has been a 75% decline in farmers with gross sales of $250,000 or less since the 1960s. The small
family farm loss has impacted some communities more than others. In particular, African American
farmers have been hit hardest, leaving the farm at three times the rate of white farmers. The number of
African American farmers has decreased from more than a million in 1920 to less than 18,000. This loss
was partly due to discrimination by the Farmer's Home Administration who denied credit to small African
American farmers in the 1990s (Thompson, 2002). This farm loss is directly linked to the growth of food
animal processing, since many small farmers when faced with losing their farm turned to contract poultry
production. Companies like Perdue take advantage of the desperation of small farmers by presenting them
with one-sided contracts. Many farmers go into debt, often putting up their farms as collateral, to build
poultry houses and make other changes as required by the companies. According to the National Poultry
Growers Association, the majority of these contract growers have below-poverty incomes.
Some of these contract growers are losing their farms as chicken factories close throughout the Southeast,
partly in response to the inflated price of chicken feed stock and the decline in chicken consumption since
2007. The largest U.S. chicken producer Pilgrim’s Pride cut chicken production by 5 percent in 2008,
resulting in a factory closing in Siler City, North Carolina, a possible factory closing in El Derado,
Arkansas, the sale of its turkey business and the closure of six distribution centers (Linker, 2008). The
closure of the Siler City plant alone resulted in the loss of 836 jobs and affects over 200 contract farmers
across the state. The company did not provide any compensation or benefits for laid off employees
(Quintana, 2008). Tyson Foods is closing a factory in Wilkesboro, North Carolina and selling two other
2
A vertically integrated corporation controls most or all aspects of production. This model allows food-processing
companies to provide their own feed and take the animals directly to their own slaughterhouse and processing
plant. For example: Continental Grain processes and sells pork and poultry, operates feedlots, and sells
nutritionally enhanced corn used as poultry and livestock feed.
chicken plants. This decline in the poultry business will certainly have adverse effects on low-wage
workers, as they will be forced to compete over a shrinking pool of available jobs (Andrejczak, 2008).
The loss of factories and farms in the Southeast is a part of a global problem. As Southerners have seen
factories pick up and move farther south, many Latin American countries are witnessing agricultural
companies abandoning their country in search of a cheaper workforce. The loss of small family farms in
Latin America is directly linked to the increase of campesinos harvesting crops in the fields of the U.S.
One farmworker talks about the loss of banana plantations in Guatemala. "When I turned 14, I started to
work for Bandegua in the packing plant...We know that free trade is already in our region, that it is
carrying away the work because Chiquita...just abandoned five plantations in Izabal. Production is already
moving to other places in order to lower costs and to get a box for a lower price" (STITCH, 2004, p. 16).
Another trend with food animal workers is that the speed lines are likely to continue increasing, even
though workers are at a high risk of injury due to high production speeds. Many advocates, including
Human Rights Watch, contended that line speeds need to be regulated by state and federal standards.
(HRW, 2004) Yet poultry industry experts predict that line speeds will increase up to 40% in 10 years
(Pehanich, 2007). In most trade publications, labor issues are rarely if ever discussed except to be listed as
a “production cost factor”. Increased competition from foreign sources creates pressure to reduce the cost
of labor now more than ever.
Connection between food workers and rural communities
Roosevelt called the South the number one economic problem in the nation in 1938. While poverty has
declined nationally, it has increased in the South. The rural South has more than one in six persons living
in poverty and more than one in four counties marked by persistent poverty (Smith-Nonini, 2005).
Children and people of color represent disproportionate shares of the rural poor. Among the rural
population in 2002, 33% of blacks, 27% of non-metro Hispanics, and 35% of Native Americans were
poor (USDA ERS, 2004). Rural areas tend to have more low skilled jobs that typically pay less. Although
lack of opportunity has made out-migration and population loss perennial problems for the region, recent
Latino in-migration is changing this (Cromartie & Kandel, 2004).
Between 1990 and 2000, nine of the ten states with the fastest rural Latino growth rates were in the South.
Between 2000 and 2004, almost 1 million new Latinos/Hispanics settled here (Johnson & Lichter, 2006).
While the impact of this recent wave of immigration is ongoing, Latinos are revitalizing the South
economically, while also influencing rural communities demographically, socially, and culturally. A
recent study of Latino boomtowns in the South revealed that declines in poverty and unemployment and
increases in retail sales per capita and median home values were strongest in counties with high levels of
immigration. Further, the proportion of residents receiving public assistance was lowest in counties with
high numbers of Latino immigrants. Yet this reality has not served to curb negative public perception and
media coverage that emphasizes the undocumented status of many new Latino residents. And many of the
deep-rooted economic and social problems associated with the region nevertheless persist and many
manufacturing sectors, including textiles, tobacco, and furniture, have declined significantly (Furuseth &
Smith, 2004). See Map 1.
Another issue affecting many rural communities where food system workers live is the sizeable amount
of waste produced by CAFOs and animal feeding facilities. Unfortunately this animal waste it is not
considered industrial waste, so is often released into communities without limits and standards. Instead of
re-organizing the current model of concentrated animal feed facilities, which is very profitable,
companies opt to legally challenge any attempt by local governments to regulate these facilities and often
relocate to areas that have less regulations. Rural areas that house these facilities are faced with
contaminated water supplies, polluted air and massive soil erosion that will persist long after many animal
feeding facilities have closed. The residents are forced to accept these environmental injustices or face job
loss from closing facilities should they successfully advocate for more regulations.
"Aided by studies by Virginia Tech and a welcome by Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services officials, the hog industry is targeting the "southside" of Virginia,2 the area of the state
south of Richmond and reaching west from the Tidewater area to Danville in south-central
Virginia. This is a rural, economically depressed area, making it vulnerable to the lure of jobs and
tax dollars presented by factory-scale farms seeking as little regulation as possible.
Environmentalists fear that Virginia's lax regulatory environment could attract hog operators from
neighboring North Carolina,3 which last year adopted toughened regulations for hog factory
farms." (Natural Resources Defense Council, 1998)
CURRENT CONDITIONS OF FOOD WORKERS
“I made my first outreach trip...What seemed to me to be four days of wasted energy, turned into
ten workers who were working 16 hour days for only about $70, with no access to bathrooms nor
water, a 15 minute lunch break, and a grower who is often drunk and abusive, both verbally and
physically. As we met with [the workers] in the middle of the night on a foggy farm road under a
full moon, and stayed up until two in the morning to get their paperwork to initiate their suit, I
realized that even though we may have to distribute 100 pamphlets to get one case, it was
undoubtedly worth every minute.” ––Jorja Cummings, SAF intern (unpublished)
The overall conditions of food system workers in the Southeast are very poor. The wages, housing, labor
rights and health and safety of food system workers are continuously compromised by unjust policies and
practices that preference employers over workers. Food system workers often face poverty and
discrimination, as well as barriers in language and access to health, educational, legal, and immigration
services.
Wages and Benefits
Although Vanessa says she can’t consider what she makes in the field ‘good money’, she did get
$150 a week or $7 a bin for picking oranges. She [got] paid by the hour [minimum wage] for
tobacco and everything else [was] piece rate. Vanessa explains that “when you get paid ‘piece
rate’ you take your full bucket to be dumped at the truck. There the crew leader will empty your
bucket and give you a ticket which is usually worth 40 or 50 cents. At the end of the day the book
keeper will take up your tickets, count them, and write down how many tickets you collected. At
the end of the week the crew leader pays the farmworker according to the amount of tickets you
colleted throughout the week.” ––Oral History of Vanessa, Interviewed by Kris Adams, SAF
intern (Student Action with Farmworkers, 1998, p. 27)
In 2005 median wages for non-management farmworkers were $6.75/hr according to the USDA, with an
average of $7.30/hour totally $11,000 annually for an individual and $16,000 for a family (NAWS). This
represents some of the lowest wages for unskilled workers in the country. Farmworkers on the East Coast
earn nearly 30% less than workers nationwide. Farmworkers that work on small farms are not protected
by the federal minimum wage law and are often paid by the bucket of fruit or vegetable that they pick
(piece-rate pay), earning as little as $.35 for a bucket of sweet potatoes, $.42 for a pint of blueberries, $.70
for a bucket of pickle cucumbers, and $.50 for a bushel of apples. A common problem with piece rate pay
is that often workers end up making less than the minimum wage. For instance, there are ten lawsuits in
Virginia and North Carolina that allege that seafood workers were paid piece-rate pay that resulted in
earnings less than minimum wage, even though by law cannery workers must earn the minimum wage.
Real wages for farmworkers have decreased by 5% over the last decade, when wages are adjusted for
inflation (NC Farmworker Institute, 2007). See Tables 8 and 10.
Even though the majority of farmworkers earn sub-poverty wages, they are eligible for few benefits or
social services. Farmworkers do not receive paid vacation, sick leave, or holidays, essentially meaning
that if they do not work they do not get paid. Only 10% have employer-provided health insurance and
less than 15% use Medicaid. Only 2% use social security and less than 1% use general assistance welfare
(NC Farmworker Institute, 2007).
While food processing wages remain relatively high compared with those of low-skilled employment in
other industrial sectors, according to the U.S. Department of Labor in 2000, 100% of the poultry plants
had wage and hour violations. The food-processing industry is becoming more competitive and pricesensitive, with improvements in profit margins measured in fractions of a cent. Managers often cut
corners that compromise the safety of employees to increase production and profits. According to the
2002 Census, wages for food-processing workers averaged $10.80/hour (but this amount is inflated
because it includes the wages of managers).
Real wages for food processing workers dropped in the 1980s after union representation declined. In
1982, when about half of the workers in meat and poultry processing were represented by unions, the
entry-level base wage under United Food and Commercial Workers contracts was $10.69/hour. Many
meat processors demanded that the UFCW agree to a cut in wages to the $8.25/hour that many non-union
plants paid; there were 158 strikes involving 40,000 workers between 1983 and 1986 over wage cut-backs
and two-tiered wages. Some plants closed, and by 1987, unions represented only 20 percent of meat
processing workers. When new plants opened, they chose rural locations in the Southeast, where there
was little or no competition for workers, especially ones affiliated with unions. In 2006, according to the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, the mean wage of food-processing meat, poultry and fish cutters and trimmers
was $10.22/hour and $10.55/hour for slaughterers and meat packers. See Table 11.
Food system workers are routinely cheated out of wages. Lack of compensation for overtime, deliberate
miscalculation of hours and unlawful deductions for tools, protective equipment, travel and housing
abound in food system industries. Since these industries rely on an extraordinarily vulnerable workforce
(undocumented immigrants, immigrants and people of color) for a bulk of the labor, there is no incentive
to pay fair wages. Since practices that cheat employees out of wages are commonplace, employers are
pressured to utilize unfair practices or face a competitive disadvantage. This race to the bottom traps food
system workers in poverty wages, as well as dangerous working conditions.
Living and working conditions
“She had had a fall at the [catfish processing] plant which of course had extremely slippery and
dangerous conditions. It was April when it happened, and now, in late June, her pain continued
to be unbearable. Not standing, sitting, or laying down gave her any relief from her pain. She had
had an x-ray to show no broken bones, and has been given pain pills. But she has missed a lot of
work…Yesterday, she had her first visit to a physical therapist and when she came back to the
plant, they had switched her work task to one that involves a lot of bending and stretching and
pulling. She lasted a couple of hours and then broke down in tears. They told her to go home if
she couldn’t work. She is sure they are going to fire her now.” ––Journal of Jorja Cummins, SAF
intern (unpublished)
The rate of occupational illnesses and injuries among food system workers is alarming. The injury and
illness incidence rate for farmworkers and poultry processing workers is higher than the total private
industry rate. And the rate for animal slaughtering, excluding poultry, is nearly three times the current rate
for injuries and illnesses in other industries. See Table 12.
“When you are cutting the flower of the tobacco you aren’t paying attention to what’s one the
bottom. You’re moving so fast it’s easy to slip on rocks or mud. I have also cut myself when I put
the tobacco on the racks. Sometimes the bosses will not even get you a band-aid for your cut,
nothing.” ––Oral History of Guadalupe, Interviewed by Kris Adams, SAF intern (Student Action
with Farmworkers, 1998, p. 29)
Agriculture is exempt from many workplace labor laws, making farm labor one of the most dangerous
occupations in the United States. Farmworkers face many work-related health hazards, with exposure to
pesticides, heat stress, falls, cuts, and rashes being some of most common. According to the National
Center for Farmworker Health, farmworkers face higher incidences than other wage earners of pesticiderelated illnesses, tuberculosis, parasitic infections, dermatitis, and heat stress. Children of farmworkers are
particularly at risk for illness and injury, and are highly susceptible to pesticide-related illness due to
living adjacent to fields and their stage of development. Many farmworkers do not have access to local
health care because they lack transportation, are unaware of the available services, and lack funds to pay
for services. According to a NC Farmworker Health Program patient profile, nearly 90% of their patients
needed interpreter services, had no health insurance, and were at or below the federal poverty level. There
is a lack of culturally appropriate health materials and workshops accessible to farmworkers and due to
the high turnover rate in farm work, there is a constant need to provide health education for workers. Most
farmworkers in the Southeast do not have the same workers' compensation coverage as other workers;
when they are covered many workers have to have to seek out legal assistance to ever recover benefits
due to a work-related injury.
Farmworkers tend to live in isolation in rural areas without access to resources and few witnesses to their
housing. Migrant workers are often housed by their employers in squalid conditions. This housing is often
overcrowded and unsanitary with inadequate laundry, kitchen and bathroom facilities. Most labor camps
lack telephones, restrict visitors and place housing in areas that are hard to find and access. According to a
study conducted by the Housing Assistance Council in 2001, seven out of ten farmworkers on the East
Coast live in crowded housing. There are basic federal health and safety laws governing farmworker
housing standards, but they are rarely enforced.
"The one farm had over 200 workers. This was a huge operation that was still working steady at
9:30 at night when we ventured forth onto the property. This site had the most well hidden
housing facilities, and with good reason. The workers were being housed in long barracks style
building with no windows and several individuals in each room. Despite our diligent efforts to
locate the housing and work our way past the packing houses and the in-coming and out-going
tractor trailers, once we arrived at the housing, we were met immediately by the ‘bull’ who in no
uncertain terms denied us access to the other workers. He was very intimidating, bordering on
aggressive. He talked to my friend over the car, while leaning against my car door, preventing my
exit. ––Journal of Jorja Cummings, SAF intern (unpublished)
Food processing plants are largely free of unions and binding job descriptions. Poultry plants can increase
the speed of the line at will, leaving the workers to do their jobs at dangerously fast paces. With line
speeds upwards of 91 birds per minute, workers experience high rates of injuries. Plants systematically
deny workers’ compensation claims and company-sponsored clinics are complicit in denying work
injuries and encouraging workers to stay on the line at all costs. Due to the dangerous and repetitive
nature of the work in meat-processing plants, many workers suffer sprains, back pain, and contusions, as
well as long-term disabilities from years of working on the line. These workers tend to experience
repetitive motion injuries, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, at an alarmingly higher rate than do other
workers nationally. Workers that slaughter animals also work in extreme temperatures in the plants, often
in extremely hot or below-freezing temperatures. The floors of the plant are often wet from water or
blood, making even walking across the plant floor an accident waiting to happen. "Workers have been
maimed by machines and poisoned by toxic chemicals. Two were killed in accidents managers might
have prevented. Even more suffer from grueling, repetitive work that can leave their hands wracked with
pain or missing fingers" (Hall, Alexander, & Ordoñez, 2008).
“Carolina is a wife and mother of three. She worked in a turkey plant in Virginia from 19841989, from the age of 17 to the age of 22. She was working to support her first daughter from
another marriage. She has a matching set of scars on her wrists. She has already had surgery for
carpal tunnel syndrome on both hands. Sometimes she has trouble holding her children. Manual,
her husband has it worse. He moans in his sleep. Carolina says, ‘He can’t hold the baby, carry
groceries, open containers of juice, or move the laundry basket. The knot in his shoulder, and the
pain in his hands keep getting worse as he continues to work at the chicken plant. The nurse
refuses to tell the company doctor to look at his hands.’” ––The Hazards of Factory Work by
Katherine Ray, SAF intern (Student Action with Farmworkers, 1998, p. 54-55)
Companies have a financial incentive to under-report workplace injuries and often compile misleading or
false data to avoid workers' compensation claims. "The company has compiled misleading injury reports
and has defied regulators as it satisfies a growing appetite for America's most popular meat. And
employees say the company has ignored, intimidated or fired workers who were hurt on the job" (Hall,
Alexander, & Ordoñez, 2008).
Although food system workers are subject to frequent preventable injuries, most workers do not receive
health benefits and currently rely on home remedies, cheap or free services or emergency care. Latino and
immigrant workers are often reluctant to seek care for fear that they will be deported, will not be able to
pay, or can't communicate due to a language barrier.
The injuries to food system workers have tremendous impact on families. Once one wage-earning
member of the family is no longer able to work due to a work-related injury, it may mean that women and
young children have to enter the workforce for the first time. This can lead to a change in traditional
gender roles in a family, with the woman being the highest paid employee in a household. It can also
create difficulties for families that are accustomed to traditional roles of family members, as well as lead
to high dropout rates among children.
LABOR, IMMIGRATION & FOOD WORKER JUSTICE
Labor laws that affect food workers
“State subsidies for American agriculture have always included either a tacit or official license to
exploit the labor of marginalized populations…” (Smith-Nonini, 2004)
In the early 20th century most U.S. workers gained rights that attempted to ensure fair working
conditions. Unfortunately, farmworkers are excluded from the major labor laws passed before 1960
guaranteeing the right to organize, minimum wage, overtime pay and child labor laws. Both The National
Labor Relations Act of 1935, which protects workers trying to form unions, and The Fair Labor Standards
Act of 1938 (FLSA) originally excluded all farmworkers. Only in 1978 were farmworkers on large farms
included in FLSA, but farmworkers continue to be excluded from overtime pay provisions and can work
in the fields as young as 12 years of age as opposed to 16 for all other jobs. The practice of agricultural
exceptionalism under the law has its roots in political compromise. The 1930s labor laws were impossible
to pass without the support of Southern Congressmen who viewed any new rights being given to the then
largely black farmworker population as upsetting the rigid racial and social order of the South. Like the
Black Codes, agricultural exceptionalism provides the legal framework for denying rights, freedoms and
benefits to farmworkers.
Very few states nationwide, but in particular in the Southeast, have passed laws to protect farmworkers.
No state in the Southeast guarantees farmworkers the minimum wage. Among Southeastern states, only
Florida and Virginia mandate workers' compensation for farmworkers. Farmworkers have historically
been and remain unable to affect political change mainly because growers have had a disproportionate
influence on federal and in particular state legislation and thus been able to preserve the exclusion of
farmworkers from labor laws.
Although food-processing workers have the protections of these laws, the workers are largely uneducated
about their rights and the laws are routinely violated in the plants. One consistent violation that food
processing workers experience is forced overtime or not being paid overtime rates. They are often told to
wait for supplies or product for hours, terminated if they leave during this time and not paid for the time
that they waited. The industries that employ them also have powerful lobbies that work to weaken
regulations. Agencies responsible for inspecting and regulating these plants are chronically under-funded.
Penalties for non-compliance with regulations created to protect employees are small and rarely enforced
(HRW, 2004)
The South has long been associated with right-to-work laws and anti-union sentiment, (Lewis, 2007) and
the presence of undocumented workers has generally not aided the labor cause. High turnover rates are
another challenge to unionization. Poultry worker turnover is still around 70%, and some employers have
responded by providing incentives to those who stay longer (Short, 2001). Some evidence suggests that
employers use racial and ethnic tensions to deter workers from organizing. Fear of deportation and a
general distrust of unions mean the immigrant workforce is unlikely to achieve better working conditions
than those experienced by the native workforce, who previously did the same or similar jobs (Short,
2001).
Immigration
“A Punitive Enforcement-Only Approach will not Reduce Undocumented Migration but Will
Exacerbate the Harms Associated with Undocumented Migration” – (Beardall, 2006)
As in centuries past, current food system workers consist of a group without full privileges or access to
the U.S. political system. The debate about undocumented workers has successfully been framed by
conservative groups around their “illegal” status and the mistaken assumption that they consume scarce
resources and pose a significant security threat. Immigration reform has thusly focused on preventing and
punishing the illegal act of crossing the border without authorization instead of enabling workers to
legally migrate. The enforcement-without-reform policy of the last 20 years, including the initiation of
employer sanctions, has been a resounding and obvious failure. Although undocumented migration
appears to have plateaued, it has done so at an all time high, with 7.2 million unauthorized workers now
employed in the U.S., representing almost 5 percent of the civilian labor force.
In the last decade the Latino population in the Southeast has risen in large part to the number immigrating
in order to work in the food system industry. The recent increase in the immigrant and Latino community
has been accompanied by a rise in anti-immigrant groups that actively promote public mistrust and
discriminatory policies. Given this hostile environment, many immigrant food system workers have not
been able to fully participate in the community, are not able to access important local resources, and face
isolation, discrimination and other systemic barriers to improving their working and living conditions.
During this time, there has been a significant backlash toward immigrant food system workers, as well as
their advocates. This has come in the form of local ordinances and resolutions to deny benefits to
immigrants, provide information and resources in English only, deny access to higher education for
immigrant youth, and fine landlords and businesses that rent to or hire undocumented immigrants. Given
the federal inability to re-structure immigration, negative public sentiment about new immigrants has led
to prejudicial local and state laws. For instance, a Georgia statute banned preachers from proselytizing in
Spanish and commissioners in one NC County voted to remove signs, posters, and other items that have
languages other than English from county property.
In addition, many states are partnering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to deputize
local law enforcement to act on behalf of ICE. This partnership has led to an increase in immigration
raids, often involving violence and separating young children from their undocumented parents, and racial
profiling. Targeted immigration raids by ICE have recently increased especially in poultry plants
throughout the country, leading to an increased climate of fear among undocumented and documented
Latino workers alike and further isolating them from the larger society.
In 2007 the Secure Fence Act was signed into law by President Bush, which authorizes the spending of
$1.2 billion for the construction of a seven-hundred-mile fence along the U.S. Mexico border. The
increased militarization of the border in recent years have made undocumented Mexicans working in the
U.S. reluctant to return for fear of not being able to re-enter the U.S. Thus shuttle migrants have been
transformed into permanent residents of the U.S. Many farmworkers that remained in small towns in the
Southeast transitioned to food processing work.
There has also been an increase in extremists groups on a local level that focus on immigration. Many of
these groups protest at immigrant rallies, routinely speak on local radio shows about the negative
consequences of immigrants, and rally members from across the country to speak out against immigrants.
We expect these hate groups to continue to make immigration and immigrants a key to organizing and
building their base for political gain. We also expect to continue to see anti-immigrant county ordinances
and bills introduced in state General Assemblies. As food system employers continue to recruit workers
from Mexico and Latin America who speak indigenous languages, we expect that these workers will be
even more isolated. We expect an increase of immigrants from Central America, who are displaced as a
result of the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
Highlights of organizations supporting food workers in the Southeast
There are a number of state and federal programs that provide basic health, education and job training
programs for food system workers. Funded at the federal level, most of these local health clinics, public
school systems, and quasi-government agencies target migrant workers. Unfortunately, these types of
basic services may thwart organizing and actually benefit employers who can continue to pay workers
sub-poverty wages and offer no benefits. At the same time, many advocates realize the real day-to-day
needs that farmworkers face and often advocate for the continued provision of direct services until more
systemic changes can be made.
There are federally funded legal services programs that provide free legal support for low-income
individuals. Some also have farmworker-specific programs that involve significant outreach to farm
laborers. Due to restrictions on legal aid, there are independently funded legal programs that also work
with food system workers. These programs are able to serve undocumented workers and file class action
lawsuits. Unfortunately, these programs tend to be under-staffed and over-worked. For instance, the
Southern Migrant Legal Services (SMLS) with a staff of five lawyers and two support staff conducts
outreach to workers in Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas.
SMLS does not have the capacity to represent undocumented workers or cases involving racial
discrimination, sexual harassment or human trafficking.
There is little community or labor organizing with food system workers in the Southeast. The most
significant organizing with field workers is in the major agricultural states of North Carolina and Florida.
In 2004, the Farm Labor Organizing Committee signed the first contract with guestworkers in the country
and the largest farm labor contract in the region. Over 8,000 H-2A guestworkers were covered by this
historic agreement between FLOC and the NC Growers' Association. There was a side agreement with
the Mt. Olive Pickle Co., which was the target of a mutli-year boycott called by FLOC. The long-term
sustainability of this contract is tenuous and depends on whether the recent contract changes made will
reduce the number of grievances brought by workers this year.
The other significant organizing with farm laborers in the Southeast is in southern Florida. The grassroots
community organizing group, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, represent a diverse group of tomato
workers that are organizing for more pay per pound of tomatoes that they pick. They have pressured
corporate giants of Taco Bell, McDonalds, and most recently Burger King to pay one penny more per
pound of tomatoes, which would be passed down directly to the workers. The CIW is unique to farm
labor organizing in that they represent a relatively large settled agricultural workforce in a fairly small
geographic area. This has enabled them to build deep relationships with workers and develop strong
leaders in the community.
The United Farm Workers also has a presence in Florida, and is considering working in other
Southeastern states that have a large H-2A population. Their most significant victory in the region was a
contract for Quincy Farm mushroom workers in Florida in the 1990s. After FLOC established the first
contract with guestworkers, the UFW has begun negotiating with employers that hire H-2A workers
nationwide. They are considering prioritizing this work and have outreached to workers and recruiters in
Mexico and Thailand, from where there are significant H-2A workers coming.
Again, the few farm labor policy advocacy efforts are also based in Florida and North Carolina. The
Farmworker Association of Florida is a worker organizing and advocacy group that focuses on health and
safety issues. They conduct diagnosticos to learn what are of most concern to workers, participate in
community based participatory research, train workers on occupational health and safety issues, and
coordinate statewide efforts to improve pesticide laws. In North Carolina, the Farmworker Advocacy
Network is a coalition of legal, health, organizing, and advocacy groups that focus on policy advocacy.
The Coalition is currently focused on pesticides, housing, and wage issues affecting farmworkers. These
campaigns include monitoring government agencies that are in charge of enforcing the laws protecting
farmworkers, working with legislators to introduce positive bills supporting farmworkers, and involving
farmworkers and their allies more directly in the legislative process. Most recently FAN helped to
introduce and pass the first improvements in the NC Migrant Housing Act since it was enacted in 1989.
They currently have a bill in the legislature to close some loopholes in the pesticide laws.
FAN has recently begun a partnership with the Western NC Workers Center, which supports poultry
workers in Western NC. WNCWC was interested in advocating for policy changes for poultry and other
food animal processors on a state level and in FAN's model for policy advocacy. Instead of forming a
separate group to focus on food animal workers, it was decided to make poultry workers a fourth aim of
FAN's work, at least initially. The WNCWC will identify other allies across the state to involve with this
specific work and will continue to receive technical support from the Center for Community Change in
Washington, DC. The WNCWC has recently developed an interesting model of expanding their reach by
placing staff members at local Latino centers in the western part of the state. Although the Latino centers
focus more on direct services and cultural programming, the WNCWC staff will specifically focus on
workers rights issues.
Student Action with Farmworkers uses a model similar to the one implemented by the WNCWC. SAF
recruits, trains, and supports college student interns to serve as farmworker advocates at partner legal,
health, organizing, and community organizations. SAF interns conduct outreach to field workers and food
processing workers to inform them of their rights, conduct health and safety training, and assist them with
workplace grievances. The majority of SAF interns are from farmworker families themselves, making it
easier for them to build trust in the rural communities in which they work. While the overwhelming
majority of SAF students are in North Carolina, several work in South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
Pennsylvania and New York as well. SAF has received numerous requests from organizations and
students in the Southeast and beyond to expand this program.
Similarly with regard to farmworkers, there are few organizing efforts or organizations dedicated to food
processing workers' rights in the Southeast. The most significant groups are workers rights centers,
mainly based in North Carolina, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Like the CIW, these organizations are based
in the community in which they work and are committed to being there for the long-term. In most cases,
these groups are dedicated to ensuring that workers are informed of their rights, receive adequate health
and safety training, and are able to join together to discuss their common problems. These organizations
have only recently begun thinking about how to influence policies affecting food system workers. See
Appendix B for a map of worker centers.
The United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) is leading the most well-known organizing drive
with hog processing workers in the region. Partnering with a worker center in Eastern North Carolina, the
UFCW has been organizing the African American and Latino workforce employed at Smithfield
processing plant for over ten years. This campaign highlights just how strongly and for how long an
employer can fight to thwart off the union. Although Smithfield has other union shops, they have used a
number of anti-union tactics to intimidate workers and weaken the union's organizing drives. Smithfield
has been found to be in violation of the National Labor Relations Act on a number of occasions, but still
continues to resist the organization of its employees. Most recently, ICE raids have impacted the numbers
of undocumented immigrants working at the plant. Many believe that the company collaborated with ICE
to intimidate union leaders.
As most people in the U.S. are less and less connected to where their food comes from, there has been
some recent efforts to connect consumers directly with local, organic farmers. In many cases these efforts
are part of larger conversations around domestic fair trade, which focuses on social justice standards in
sustainable agriculture. There is a coalition of farmers, farmworker groups, food processors, and others
that have recently formed the Domestic Fair Trade Association to look at the future of agriculture in the
U.S. As a part of this, North Carolina-based Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) is
working with the farmworker support committee CATA and several organic groups to develop a food
justice label that will take into consideration the needs of farmers and farmworkers.
There are also a few coalitions that come together annually for networking and capacity building, which
include food system worker groups. The Southern Human Rights Organizers' Network (SHRON) is a
network of activists in the South that supports organizing within the context of civil rights, social justice,
and human rights issues. The Mississippi Workers' Center for Human Rights supports low-wage nonunion workers in Mississippi through training, legal assistance and organizing support. They have been
key to the success of SHRON; through this and other networking they have built strong relationships with
workers organizations internationally.
There is also a South East Immigrant Rights Network that focuses on immigration reform. It is made of
immigrant groups across the region, including the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition,
the Kentucky Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, the Mississippi Immigrants’ Rights Alliance,
the Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama, and the Florida Immigrant Coalition.
There are also a number of support organizations for food system workers whose primary purpose is to
bring workers and their allies together. These include groups like the Highlander Center, Student Action
with Farmworkers, National Farm Worker Ministry, Jobs with Justice and Interfaith Worker Justice.
These groups raise awareness of the struggles of food system workers and organize allies to work for
social and economic justice through participation in worker-led campaigns and actions. These groups tend
to work statewide, regionally, or nationally. For instance, in the Southeast there are a number of groups
focused on involving people of faith in the movement for justice. There are interfaith committees in
Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee. There are also National Farm Worker Ministry staff members
and support groups in North Carolina and Florida. One of the unique things about some of these groups is
their involvement of worker and grower groups. For instance, The Georgia Poultry Justice Alliance brings
together food system workers and poultry growers, as well as members of the religious, immigrant, labor
and environmental community to educate the larger community and make policy changes.
In some areas, there have been efforts to bring together black and Latino workers. Black Workers For
Justice is one such group that has initiated partnerships with Latino and farmworker organizing groups.
BWFJ has been working to defend the rights of black workers in Eastern North Carolina for over twenty
years. They have an interest in expanding further in the South in order to build black leadership within the
larger labor and African American liberation movements. As with other effective groups in the Southeast,
BWFJ not only focuses on social and economic justice, but also uses a racial, gender, and human rights
lens to analyze their struggle.
See Appendix B for a list of organizations working with food system workers in the Southeast.
Conclusion
Food animal processing workers and field workers face many similar struggles. While farmworkers tend
to earn less than factory workers and are not covered by most labor laws, workers that slaughter and
process meat products tend to have more dangerous and debilitating jobs without effective industry
regulations. Because farm work and food-processing plants are often concentrated in the same rural
communities and neither job alone can provide enough income, many families work in both industries or
move from farms to plants and back to farms.
There are a number of unmet needs with regards to food system workers. The laws protecting workers are
virtually non-existent, when there are protections they are not enforced, and there is little support for
worker organizing. There is little collaboration among organizations that support food system workers
and even less with contract growers or other employers. Most organizations that advocate for food system
workers are under-resourced, have little bilingual capacity, and do not work across racial or cultural lines.
There are few foundations that support worker advocacy in the Southeast, such as the Fund for Southern
Communities, Southern Partners Fund, and Z. Smith Reynolds Foundation, but they give small grants for
a limited time.
As African Americans have shifted away or been forced from work in the food system industry, new
immigrants have migrated to the Southeast to find work. This population surge has spurred antiimmigrant policies and sentiment, which has made the Southeast a target in the national immigration
debate. Historical themes of racism and disenfranchisement seen under slavery and Jim Crow continue to
be prevalent in the fields and processing plants in this region today. The "New South" as it is commonly
called is a staging ground for what is to come in the U.S. and is faced with a choice: whether to provide
economic opportunity and labor rights to a primarily disenfranchised group of workers or to continue to
preference the interests of large scale agricultural employers.
Below are some concrete recommendations for improving the food system industry for workers:
(1) Advocate for protections of undocumented workers, while engaging in federal immigration reform
Latinos are preferred and actively recruited for food system jobs because many factors make them more
vulnerable to abuse than native populations. This exploitation of some workers has a negative impact on
all workers. It encourages job steering that places certain populations in unsafe jobs because they are less
likely to seek retribution if injured. It decreases wages by exposing a segment of workers to egregious
wage violations. It increases abuses as employers routinely use the threat of deportation to control their
undocumented workforce. Nativist groups have convinced many local workers that if protections were
afforded to undocumented workers then they would be negatively impacted. In reality, if undocumented
workers were protected, worker abuse would decrease and overall workplace standards would increase.
There would be no incentive to preference undocumented workers because of their vulnerability.
While it is understood that food system corporations could not function without the labor of
undocumented workers, the struggle for their human rights in the workplace has been mired in political
rhetoric. We need to re-frame this issue as one of economic necessity to corporations and rights for all
workers. While advocating for the protection of all workers regardless of their documentation status is
crucial, there is a also a need for comprehensive immigration reform.
(2) Increase labor standards & enforcement
Labor and health and safety standards are almost non-existent for farmworkers and there is a prevalence
of unsafe work conditions, child labor, sexual harassment and other abuses among all food system
workers. Policies that could be changed on a state by state basis that could improve the situation include
covering farmworkers the same as other workers under state workers compensation laws; improving
health and safety laws covering pesticides and migrant housing; and passing laws that regulate the line
speed in processing plants. Living wage campaigns that include all food system workers are needed.
Advocates could look to international labor standards with regards to determining basic human rights
standards to work toward. Some organizations working with food system workers have begun to use the
"human rights" frame in their work, but most of these organizations need connections to national and
international organizations that have been working on human rights issues for many years.
In addition to improved laws, there is a great need for increased enforcement of laws. Fines must be
increased and regulatory agencies must have real power to exact tangible consequences on non-compliant
employers. Advocacy groups that monitor enforcement agencies tend to need training, designated staff,
and partnerships with unlikely groups to be effective at policy advocacy work.
(3) Develop creative partnerships with small growers or pro-worker employers
Employers have historically pitted their interests against those of their workers, but this divide is often
artificial and represents an unprofitable clinging to traditional roles. When employers are convinced that
the better treatment of workers positively affects their bottom line, they will be less resistant to increasing
workplace standards. The amount of money that agribusiness and food-processing corporations spend to
fend of lawsuits and public relations fallout associated with unfair treatment of workers is sizable and
could easily be offset by positive changes in their operations. The most successful efforts to date in this
regard are alliances between workers and contract farmers that organize against corporate meat
processing giants.
(4) Support regional and international industry-wide change
As companies successfully move away from organized labor, it is important for workers and their allies to
form alliances with groups throughout the Southeast region, as well as nationally and internationally. As
globalization has had a tremendous impact on food system workers, it is important for advocates to think
about global solutions to their work. This can include networking through international conferences,
participating in strategic alliances with other food system workers in a sending country, or being a part of
national and international coalitions that are working on issues from a global perspective. Some unions
have been successful at working internationally to organize a specific industry located in multiple
countries.
(5) Educate the larger community about food system worker issues
Most of the communities that house food system workers are unaware of the unjust conditions inherent in
this work. Grassroots campaigns that focus on outreach and education have been successful in increasing
awareness and involvement of communities in the struggle for workplace rights. These campaigns should
include in-person presentations, paid media, and community resources and materials. Student Action with
Farmworkers utilizes a number of creative means, such as documentary projects and popular theater, to
conduct education in the community. For instance, SAF interns conduct audio interviews and take
photographs of farmworkers that are used in public presentations, online exhibits, bilingual publications,
and traveling exhibits.
(4) Promote Cross-Racial Unity
Food system workers come from marginalized communities and tend to have strong racial and cultural
affiliations. Employers exploit racial differences to prevent worker communication and organizing across
race. In some poultry plants, Latinos are given preferred jobs because of their reluctance to report abuses.
Throughout the food system, whites are preferred as managers. African Americans often get paid more
than their Latino counterparts because of their documented status.
As the labor becomes more diverse, especially with the increase of indigenous workers from southern
Mexico and Central America, workers’ ability to unify across racial and cultural lines will be critical to
their ability to organize for better collective conditions. The Mississippi Workers Center has responded to
the ethnic shift in workers in poultry and fish plants by educating workers about strategies to combat the
divisive tactics used by employers. Some strategies include cultural exchanges and universalizing issues
specific to an ethnic group. Some African American church leaders have also been successful in framing
the current struggles of the new immigrant workforce in a civil rights context. In this respect African
Americans have proven to be powerful allies because of their history of systematic oppression in the U.S.
(5) Partner with existing movements for change
Although there are very few resources and organizations dedicated to worker organizing and advocacy
with food system workers in the Southeast, there are some new developments in the region that present
new opportunities for collaboration. Specifically, there are networks of environmental, labor, and
immigration activists that are organizing, building coalitions, and advocating for policy change at the
local, regional and national level, whose concerns intersect with those of worker advocates. With regards
to environmental issues, there are a number of environmental justice coalitions that have developed to
specifically address the impacts of living in and or around factory hog farms, catfish ponds, and largescale turkey farms. For instance, in eastern NC the Environmental Justice network is a coalition of
activists, researchers, and concerned citizens. Due to living in an area that is dominated by factory hog
farms, they are faced with environmental hazards on a daily basis. They recently held an outdoor event at
the NC General Assembly to drive home the point that they can no longer have outdoor community
celebrations at their homes because of the overwhelming odor from the neighboring hog farms.
The labor movement has undergone major changes in the last decade, including several major labor
unions leaving the AFL-CIO to form a new coalition of unions, as well as a prioritization by labor unions
of immigrant workers. This interest by big labor to organize this relatively new workforce has its
challenges and opportunities. Labor unions should develop strong relationships with local immigrant
advocates and community based organizations to better understand the cultural differences with
organizing within this community. And community based groups that are not focused on labor could
benefit from these partnerships by including more information about workplaces issues in their work.
The most recent and probably most significant groups that have the potential to advance workers’ rights
among food system workers are those focused on immigrants, Latinos and immigration issues. There are
a number of Hispanic/Latino centers throughout the Southeast that are mostly working with recent Latino
immigrants on a very local level. These groups tend have limited resources and focus on educating
members about how the U.S. and local systems work, as well as about local bilingual (Spanish/English)
services. Few of these groups have a workers' rights or policy advocacy component. One model that will
be interesting to monitor is that of the Western NC Workers' Center placing staff in local Hispanic/Latino
centers to focus on workers' rights.
There are also a number of statewide groups that are focused on policy advocacy as it relates to
immigration. Often these groups are coalitions of organizations that work directly with immigrants and
that see immigration reform as the most important way to improve the day-to-day lives of their
constituents. As has been noted throughout this paper, while conditions for food system workers are poor
as a whole, undocumented workers often face additional barriers to improving their conditions and are
systematically discriminated against because of their documentation status. While the ultimate goal of
these organizations is to change immigration policy, they are often engaged in a number of tactics that are
not directly policy related. Many times, they focus on trying to change public opinion around immigrants.
For instance, Welcoming Tennessee is specifically focused on public ad campaigns to promote better
understanding and community acceptance of immigrants. There are a number of states that are looking to
these models to change public opinion. One interesting component of some of the statewide immigrant
coalitions is that they sometimes include or have allies in the business community. If these partnerships
could be extended to talks around workplace health, safety and wages, there could be unique
opportunities for improving working conditions.
References
Alexander, K. H. A. & Ordonez, F. (2008, June 1). House of Raeford – Federal agents target poultry
processor: 2 ex workers asked about hiring of illegal immigrants in S.C. The Charlotte Observer.
Retrieved May 15, 2008, from http://www.charlotte.com/739/story/648438.html
Andrejczak, M. (2008, April 14). Pilgrim's Pride to cut chicken production by 5%. MarketWatch.
Retrieved on June 1, 2008, from http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/pilgrims-pride-cut-chickensupply/story.aspx?guid=%7B760587A2-6B32-447A-8061-B2E69FD8AB8E%7D
Beardall, B. (2006). Statement on Behalf of the Equal Justice Center and the National Immigration Law
Center to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on EmployerEmployee Relations. Austin, TX: Equal Justice Center.
Easterbrook, M. & Fisher, J. P. (2006, March 1). Part 4: Health Care Costly For Immigrants in Illegal
Immigration – Who Profits, Who Pays. Raleigh News & Observer. Retrieved June 12, 2008, from
http://www.newsobserver.com/1155/story/412836.html
Furuseth, O. J. & Smith, H. A. (2004). From Winn-Dixie to Tiendas: The Remaking of the New South.
In O. J. Furuseth & H. A. Smith (Eds.), Latinos in the New South. United Kingdom: Ashgate
Publishing.
Georgia Historical Society. (1842). Collections of the Georgia Historical Society, Vol. II. Boston, MA:
Freeman and Bolles.
Hall, K., Alexander, A., & Ordoñez, F. (2008, February 10). The cruelest cuts - The human cost of
bringing poultry to your table. The Charlotte Observer. Retrieved June 14, 2008, from
http://www.charlotte.com/poultry/story/487187.html
Hanson, G. H. (2007). The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration. CSR No. 26, March 2007. New
York, NY: Council on Foreign Relations.
Human Rights Watch (2000). Fingers to the Bone: United States Failure to Protect Child Farmworkers.
New York, NY: Tucker, L.
Human Rights Watch. (2004). Blood, Sweat and Fear - Workers’ Rights in U.S. Meat and Poultry
Plants. New York, NY: Compa, L.
Kandel, W. & Cromartie, J. (2004). New Patterns of Hispanic Settlement in Rural America.
Washington, DC: Economic Research Service.
Lewis, A. (Producer & Director). (2007). Morristown: In the Air and Sun [Documentary]. Whitesburg,
KY: Appalshop.
Lichter, D.T. and K.M. Johnson. (2006). Emerging Rural Settlement Patterns and the Geographic
Redistribution of America's New Immigrants. Rural Sociology, 71, 109-131.
Linker, A. (2008, April 18). A Troubled Town - Siler City's tether to the Hispanic community is ready
to snap. Triangle Business Journal. Retrieved June 13, 2008, from
http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2008/04/21/story2.html
MacDonald, J. M., Ollinger, M. E., Nelson K. E., & Handy, C. R. (1999, March). Consolidation in U.S.
Meatpacking. Agricultural Economics Report No. 785.
NC Farmworker Institute. (2007). United States Farmworker Factsheet. (2007 ed.) [Brochure]. Durham,
NC: Student Action with Farmworkers.
Natural Resources Defense Council. (1998, December). America's Animal Factories: How States Fail to
Prevent Pollution from Livestock Waste. Natural Resources Defense Council.
Passel, J. S. (2006, March). Size and Characteristics of the Unauthorized Migrant Population in the U.S.
Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center.
Pehanich, M., (2007, January). Poultry Processing: The Next 10 Years - Equipment Suppliers Take a
Look at the Future of Poultry Processing. Watt Poultry USA January 2007 Retrieved on June 1, 2008
from http://www.wattpoultryusa-digital.com/wattpoultryusa/200701/
Quintana, S. (2008, May 27). Final Day Of Operations For Siler City Pilgrim's Pride Plant. MyNC.com
- Chatam County Story. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from
http://chatham.mync.com/site/chatham/news/story/2813
Rosenbaum, J. J. (2005). Migrant Farmworkers’ Labor Rights Protected by Southern Migrant Legal
Service. Retrieved June 1, 2008, from http://www.tba.org/Journal_TBArchives/200502/TBJ-200502migrantWorkers.html
Rothenberg, D. (2000). With These Hands: The Hidden World of Migrant Farmworkers Today.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Rural Migration News. (2005, July). Meat and Migrants. Rural Migration News Volume 11 Number 3.
Retrieved June 6, 2008, from http://migration.ucdavis.edu/rmn/more.php?id=1038_0_2_0
Short, D. (2001). Mexico in the Heart of Dixie: Impact of an Influx of Immigrants 21 UAB Mag. 2,
Summer 2001. Retrieved on June 11, 2008, from http://main.uab.edu/show.asp?durki=41202
Smith-Nonini, S. (2005). Federally Sponsored Mexican Migrants. In J. Peacock, H. Watson & C.
Matthews (Eds.), The American South in a Global World. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press.
STITCH. (2004). Pushing Back: Women Workers Speak Out on Free Trade. [Brochure]. Washington,
DC: STITCH.
Student Action with Farmworkers. (1998). Fields without Borders. Durham. NC: Student Action with
Farmworkers.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2008). Farm Labor. Released May 16, 2008, by the National Agricultural
Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service (2004) Rural Poverty at a Glance Report
Number 100. Retrieved on May 15, 2008 from
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/rdrr100/rdrr100_lowres.pdf.
Appendix A: Tables and Maps
Table 1: Hired Farm Labor, 2002
State
Total Hired Farm
Workers
Workers for 150
days or more
Workers for less
than 150 days
South Carolina
27,544
8,894
18,650
Georgia
60,713
18,406
42,307
Florida
118,581
49,610
68,971
Alabama
35,697
9,703
25,994
North Carolina
97,138
27,916
69,222
Virginia
48,014
13,647
34,367
West Virginia
10,274
1,833
8,441
Tennessee
53,712
10,346
43,366
Kentucky
115,177
16,174
99,003
Mississippi
34,109
10,194
23,915
Arkansas
38,833
13,311
25,522
Louisiana
29,090
9,683
19,407
Maryland
17,316
6,765
10,551
California
535,256
201,852
333,404
3,036,470
927,708
2,108,762
United States
Source: 2002 Census of Agriculture, USDA
Information from the Census of Agriculture is derived from survey forms that are completed by farm operators
that report on their business and their employees. The majority of reported hired workers are employed by the
farm operator for less than 150 days out of the year.
Table 2: Employment in Farm Production and Meat Processing by Region, 2002
Region
Farm Production –
Wage/salary workers
Meat Processing
Southeast (SC,GA,FL,AL)
87,688
74,614
Appalachia (NC,VA,WV,TN,KY)
70,851
71,081
Delta States (MS,AR,LA)
32,270
68,023
Southern Plains (OK,TX)
63,336
45,044
Northeast (11 states)
84,079
37,666
Corn Belt (OH,IN,IL,IA,MO)
68,847
76,339
Maryland
6,625
3,676
California
244,525
22,411
Unites States
885,985
503,939
Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
The ERS information derives employment figures by combining data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and
the Census Bureau’s County Business Patterns. Principal sources for the data are payroll surveys.
Table 3: Demographic characteristics of farmworkers and all wage and salary workers
Farmworkers
All wage and
salary workers
Percent male
83.3
52.0
Median age in years
35.0
40.0
Percent under age 25
25.6
15.5
Percent over age 44
29.2
37.6
Percent married
52.7
56.0
Percent White (race, including most Hispanics)*
94.2
83.0
Percent Hispanic (ethnicity)
59.6
13.6
Item
Source: USDA, ERS using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 Current Population Survey Earnings File.
*Black farmworkers are not specifically identified in this USDA report. Non-white farmworkers make up 5.8% of
wage and salary workers.
Item
All wage and
salary workers
Farmworkers
Percent
Foreign-born
39.2
15.9
U.S. citizenship
60.1
90.9
Less than 9th grade education
34.8
3.6
Some college education
20.6
58.1
Source: USDA, ERS using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 Current Population Survey Earnings File.
Table 4: Agricultural Data by State
State
Employment
Wage/Salary
2002
8,032
Avg.
Farm
Size
2002
197
Total Ag.
Output
(thousands)
2006
$2,293,191
SC
GA
17,729
218
$7,301,941
FL
53,615
236
$7,710,155
AL
8,312
197
$4,656,492
NC
29,944
168
$10,225,543
VA
11,845
181
$3,412,544
WV
1,787
172
$648,384
TN
11,774
133
$3,450,650
KY
15,501
160
$5,214,446
Top 5
Commodities
2006
Broilers
Greenhouse
Turkeys
Cattle
Cotton
Broilers
Cotton
Greenhouse
Chicken eggs
Cattle
Greenhouse
Oranges
Tomatoes
Cattle
Sugar Cane
Broilers
Cattle
Greenhouse
Chicken eggs
Cotton
Broilers
Hogs
Greenhouse
Turkeys
Tobacco
Broilers
Cattle
Dairy
Turkeys
Greenhouse
Broilers
Cattle
Turkeys
Chicken eggs
Dairy
Cattle
Broilers
Cotton
Greenhouse
Soy beans
Horses
Cattle
Broilers
Corn
Soy beans
Commodity
Receipts
(thousands)
2006
$563,200
$282,947
$177,523
$140,968
$105,301
$2,731,022
$590,344
$400,000
$368,736
$308,196
$1,753,399
$1,204,949
$551,128
$484,288
$356,888
$2,161,592
$399,475
$290,595
$274,490
$183,487
$2,088,212
$1,917,244
$1,026,509
$517,500
$496,108
$506,236
$426,086
$266,213
$260,709
$237,400
$143,520
$113,325
$43,654
$32,210
$26,398
$483,160
$413,782
$335,155
$272,680
$251,572
$1,110,000
$607,796
$604,010
$339,260
$325,729
Top 5
Exports
2006*
Cotton
Poultry
Other
Tobacco
Wheat
Cotton
Poultry
Peanuts
Other
Vegetables
Other
Fruits
Vegetables
Meat
Seeds
Poultry
Cotton
Other
Peanuts
Wheat
Tobacco
Meat
Poultry
Cotton
Other
Wheat
Poultry
Other
Meat
Tobacco
Poultry
Feeds
Fruits
Feed Grain
Meat
Cotton
Other
Soy beans
Wheat
Tobacco
Tobacco
Live
animals
Soy beans
Feed grain
Wheat
MS
9,582
263
$4,384,969
AR
13,464
305
$6,980,599
LA
9,224
286
$2,567,353
MD
6,625
170
$2,007,170
CA
244,525
346
$34,139,096
US
885,989
441
$275,700,012
Broilers
Cotton
Soy beans
Aquaculture
Cattle
Broilers
Rice
Cotton
Soybeans
Cattle
Cotton
Sugar
Rice
Cattle
Soy beans
Broilers
Greenhouse
Dairy
Corn
Soy Beans
$1,771,560
$553,857
$289,814
$269,210
$205,567
$2,324,562
$848,839
$641,517
$604,029
$534,727
$308,258
$282,382
$210,051
$196,500
$162,950
$534,886
$355,479
$152,844
$120,785
$86,234
Dairy
Greenhouse
Grapes
Almonds
Cattle
Cattle
Dairy
Corn
Broilers
Soybeans
$4,492,229
$3,804,453
$3,302,178
$2,040,357
$1,676,354
$49,148,366
$23,421,987
$21,716,106
$18,851,949
$16,920,732
Cotton
Poultry
Soy beans
Rice
Feed grains
Rice
Cotton
Poultry
Soybeans
Feed Grain
Cotton
Rice
Soy beans
Feed grain
Other
Other
Feed grains
Soybeans
Wheat
Live
animals
Tree nuts
Fruits
Other
Vegetables
Cotton
Other
Feed grains
Soybeans
Wheat
Live
animals
Source: Economic Research Service, USDA.
*Exports are defined as goods that are sold outside of the United States. Annual estimates of U.S. exports by State
and commodity group are based on each State’s share of U.S agricultural production.
Note: Number of workers by commodity is not available.
Table 5: Top Broiler Processing in the United States, 2007
Company and
Production: Million
2006 Annual Sales
Company Employees
Headquarters
Pds/Week
Pilgrim’s Pride
181.9
$7.4 billion
56,500
Pittsburg, TX
Tyson Foods
151.9
$7.9 billion
N/A
Springdale, Ark.
Perdue Farms
56.2
$3.4 billion
22,000
Salisbury, MD
Wayne Farms
34.9
$1.1 billion
9,250
Gainesville, GA
Sanderson Farms
34.7
$1.0 billion
8,680
Laurel, MS
Mounaire Farms
27.6
$794 million
6,356
Selbyville, Del.
House of Raeford
20.6
$578 million
N/A
Rose Hill, NC
Keystone Foods
19.4
N/A
6,950
Huntsville, AL
Koch Foods
18.6
$1.3 billion
7,500
Chicago, IL
Foster Farms
17.0
$1.39 billion
10,600
Livingston, CA
Source: WattPoultry.com
Note: Figures are for total company production. Each company operates multiple facilities, often in multiple
states. Production and related figures are not available by plant.
Table 6: Top Pork Slaughters in United States, 2006
Company Plant
Daily Slaughter Capacity
Smithfield – Tar Heel, NC
32,000
Tyson – Waterloo, IA
19,200
Swift – Marshalltown, IA
18,500
Excel – Beardstown, IL
18,000
Hormel – Austin, MN
18,000
Source: nationalhogfarmer.com
Table 7: Table Top Pork Slaughters in Southeast United States, 2006
Company Plant
Daily Slaughter Capacity
Smithfield – Tar Heel, NC
32,000
Smithfield – Gwaltney, VA
10,800
Greenwood – Greenwood, SC
3,000
Martin’s – Falcon, NC
1,000
The Pork Co. – Warsaw, NC
750
Source: nationalhogfarmer.com
Note: “Daily Slaughter Capacity” is defined as the estimated daily slaughter capacity per plant for market hogs and
light hogs. Production value and number of employees per plant are not provided.
Table 8: Trends in wages and numbers of hired farmworkers
d
Table 9: U.S. Number of Farms & All Farm Workers, 1910-2000
Source: National Agricultural Statistics Service 2008
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Farm_Labor/fl_typwk.asp
Table 10: A Comparison of U.S. Wage Rates 1981-2007
Source: National Agricultural Statistics Service 2008
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Charts_and_Maps/Farm_Labor/fl_typwk.asp
Table 11: A Growing meat processing workforce is increasingly located in rural areas
Table 12: Incidence rate for workplace injuries and illnesses, 2006
Industry
Incidence rate*
Total Private Industry
4.4
Crop Production
5.8
Poultry Processing
6.6
Animal (except Poultry) slaughtering
12.5
Motor Home Manufacturing
16.8 (highest rate)
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
*The incidence rate is calculated as the number of workplace injuries and illnesses per 100 full-time workers.
Map 1: Mapping Hispanic Workers (USDA, Economic Research Service)
Appendix B: Food System Worker Organizations
Most Southeastern states have a state migrant health program, migrant education program, head start centers, and
job training programs. Most states in the region also have local Latino centers.
Jobs with Justice (www.jwjet.org), the United Food and Commercial Workers (http://www.ufcw.org/) and
Interfaith Worker Justice (http://www.iwj.org/) also have offices in several Southeastern States.
Below are some worker advocacy organizations and organizations that have farmworker programs in the Southeast,
as well as a map of worker centers across the country:
Alabama
Hispanic Interest Coalition of Alabama
http://www.hispanicinterest.org/
Southern Poverty Law Center
http://www.splcenter.org/
Florida
Centro Campesino Farmworker Center
http://www.centrocampesino.org/joomla/
Farmworkers Self-help
http://fshflorida.org/
Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center
http://www.fiacfla.org/coalition.php
Florida Immigrant Coalition
http://www.floridaimmigrant.org/
Guadalupe Social Services
http://www.catholiccharitiescc.org/guadalupe.ht
m
Harvest of Hope Foundation
www.harvestofhope.net
Migrant Farmworker Justice Project
http://www.floridalegal.org/migrant.htm
National Farm Worker Ministry
www.nfwm.org
Student/Farmworker Alliance
http://www.sfalliance.org/
The Rural Women's Health Project
www.rwhp.org
United Farm Workers
http://www.ufw.org/
Georgia
Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights
http://www.glahr.org/
Georgia Legal Services, Farmworker Division
http://www.legalaidga.org/GA/StateDirectoryProfile.cfm/County/%
20/City/%20/demoMode/%3D%201/Language/1
/State/GA/TextOnly/N/ZipCode/%20/LoggedIn/
0/orgID/1195
Southeast Georgia Communities Project, Inc.
http://www.segcp.org/
Kentucky
Kentucky Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee
Rights
http://www.kcirr.org/
Mississippi
Mississippi Immigrants’ Rights Alliance
http://www.yourmira.org/
Mississippi Poultry Worker Justice Project
http://www.equaljusticecenter.org/PoultryWorke
r.htm
Southern Human Rights Organizers Network
http://www.shroc.org/
North Carolina
El Vinculo Hispano
http://www.hispanicliaison.org/index.html
Farmworker Advocacy Network
http://wwwcds.aas.duke.edu/saf/action/advocacy.htm
Farm Labor Organizing Committee
http://www.floc.com/
Farmworker Unit, Legal Aid of NC
http://www.legalaidnc.org/Public/Learn/Statewi
de_Projects/FWU_Summary.aspx
National Farm Worker Ministry
http://www.nfwm.org/stateoffices/nc.shtml
NC Farmworkers Project
http://www.age.uiuc.edu/ASH-NET/fw-nc.htm
NC Justice Center
http://www.ncjustice.org/content/index.php?pid
=281
Rural Advancement Fund International
http://www.rafiusa.org/
Student Action with Farmworkers
http://www.saf-unite.org
South Carolina
Acercamiento Hispano/SC Hispanic Outreach
www.schispanicoutreach.org/
Immigrant Community Access Point
http://icapsc.com/
Our Lady of Mercy Comm. Outreach Services
Johns Island
http://www.olmoutreach.org/
SC Appleseed Legal Justice Center
www.scjustice.org
SC Centers for Equal Justice, Migrant Division
http://www.sccej.org/migrantdivision.html
Tennessee
East Tennessee Interfaith Coalition for Worker
Justice
http://www.etnpronet.org/directory/display_net
worker.php?networker_id=58
Highlander Research and Education Center
http://www.highlandercenter.org/
Knoxville Area Committee on Central America
http://www.etnpronet.org/directory/display_net
worker.php?networker_id=44
• Southern Empowerment Project
http://www.southernempowerment.org/
Southern Migrant Legal Services,
A Project of Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid
http://www.trla.org/office/?of=60
Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights
Coalition
http://www.tnimmigrant.org/
Virginia
Central Virginia Legal Aid Society, Inc.
http://www.cvlas.org/RTF1.cfm?pagename=
Legal Aid Justice Center
http://www.justice4all.org/our_programs/vjc