The Use of Prison Labor
The Economic, Environmental, and Security Concerns
A White Paper
By David Bernstein
CEO, AnythingIT
Copyright © 2013 AnythingIT, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in
any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior
permission of the copyright owners.
2
Wages: The Cost of Business
In 1865, slavery and involuntary servitude was abolished by the 13th Amendment except as punishment
for crime.1
In 1871, the Virginia Supreme Court declared that prisoners were ‘slaves of the state”.2
In the federal prison system, 100% of able bodied prisoners are required to work, according to the U.S.
General Accounting office of the Prisoner Labor Division. Starting in 1997, UNICOR, a corporation that
employs prisoners in a variety of capacities to process electronic waste and produce goods and services
for federal agencies began to accept computers, monitors, printers, and other types of e-waste for
recycling at federal prisons. UNICOR sold these e-waste items to its customers, sometimes following
refurbishment, or disassembled the items into their component parts and sold the parts to recyclers for
further processing. As of June 2010, UNICOR had 103 factories at 73 prison locations, employing
approximately 17,000 inmates or 11 percent of the inmate population. UNICOR’s minimum wage is
$0.23 an hour.3
Not listed on the annual report is a fact uncovered in a book by Christian Parenti, in Lockdown America:
Police and Prisons in the Age of Crisis. Parenti reveals that the percentage average industrial orders
delivered late are 6%. UNICOR delivers 42% of its orders late. Despite this track record, the Department
of Defense purchased $388 million in goods and services from UNICOR in 2001. The U.S. Postal Service
spent an additional $21 Million. 4
Quantity, not Quality
The U.S. Department of Justice is conducting an investigation into military contracts issued to
ArmorSource, an Ohio company, and then subcontracted to UNICOR, following the recall of 44,000
potentially defective combat helmets. According to U.S. Representative Chris Carney, “FPI (UNICOR) has
not met protective standards, nor has it met required deadlines in its production of these crucial
helmets ... and we can’t wait any longer to protect our troops.”
The 44,000 helmets, which were recalled on May 14, 2010, were part of a 600,000 helmet contract for
the U.S. Army and 100,000 lightweight helmets for the U.S. Marine Corps. The contracts are now in
question as a result of the recall, as the helmets failed ballistics testing.
Competing for Business
In 2011, UNICOR pulled in approximately $900 million in revenue. That profit has come at the expense
of electronic recyclers and other small businesses across America, who are complaining about the edge
that UNICOR has in winning government contracts.
Utilizing poorly paid and often indifferently supervised prisoners to manufacture not only goods for use
in the federal prison system, but also products that are in direct competition with private-sector
businesses has compromised quality. In the past UNICOR has obtained multiple contracts to make
ballistic helmets for the U.S. military and in 2007 it was awarded a non-competitive Army contract
pursuant to a provision in federal procurement regulations.
3
UNICOR was awarded another non-competitive contract in 2008, which comprised 100% of the helmet
needs for the U.S. Marine Corps and effectively shut out private industry. According to a 2013 press
release from Rep. Carney’s office, in both cases UNICOR’s products failed to pass first article testing –
the process that is designed to ensure the equipment meets specifications – and after an 18-month
delay, not a single acceptable helmet had been delivered.
Michael Mansh, president of a small apparel factory in Olive Hill, Ky., recently faced the challenge of
competing with prison labor, according to CNNMoney. In February, Mansh reportedly learned that his
100-person factory, Ashland Sales and Service, risked losing a contract to make windbreakers for the
U.S. Air Force. Losing the Air Force contract would have forced the clothing maker to shut down, Mansh
told CNNMoney. "That's 100 people buying groceries. We use trucking companies in the town, buy parts
and light bulbs there every day," he said in an interview with the news outlet. "That's all lost when
prisons take away contracts."
Being a federally owned corporation with an abundance of employees forced to work for under $1 per
hour, it almost by defaults wins contracts to create military apparel, operate call centers and process
government electronic waste. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has proposed new rules that would
change the way prison manufacturing companies do business, subjecting them to stricter standards that
would lead to higher prices.
In Grand Rapids, MI, U.S. Representative Bill Huizenga is focusing on UNICOR with a new bill that was
introduced in May, 2013. The Federal Prison Industries Competition in Contracting Act of 2013 would
force UNICOR to compete with private businesses for government contracts.
Huizenga's bill would get rid of that "no-bid" status, essentially forcing Unicor to compete with private
companies. The legislation also would gradually raise the wages of inmate workers, all of whom are
under the Federal Bureau of Prisons, to minimum wage. Half of inmates' wages "would go toward
reparations for their crimes" or other such payments, Patrick said. The other half could be used to pay
for external debts and obligations.
In July 1996, Master Chief Petty Officer John Hagan, the Navy's senior enlisted sailor, told the House
National Security Committee that “UNICOR’s product is inferior, costs more and takes longer to procure.
Unicor has, in my opinion, exploited their special status instead of making changes which would make
them more efficient."
"UNICOR’s product is inferior, costs more and
The Defense Logistics Agency found that
takes longer to procure. Unicor has, in my
Unicor's prices were an average of 13 percent
opinion, exploited their special status instead of
higher than those of commercial companies,
making changes which would make them more
according to a letter George Allen, the deputy
efficient."
commander of the agency's Defense Personnel
-Master Chief Petty Officer John Hagan
Support Center, wrote in May 1996 to Rep. Van
Hilleary, R-Tenn.
The Environment In and Out of Our Prison System
The Electronic Recycling industry has a few certifications to ensure environmental responsibility, as well
as worker safety and data security. The e-Stewards certification is an accredited, third-party audited
4
certification program for electronic recyclers, refurbishers, and processors, available in developed
nations. The certification was developed by the Basel Action Network (BAN). BAN is the world’s only
organization focused on confronting the global environmental injustice and economic inefficiency of
toxic trade (toxic wastes, products and technologies) and its devastating impacts. At the core of the
program is a detailed electronics recycling standard, which is based on international law and a
requirement to keep toxic materials out of landfills, incinerators, prisons, and developing countries
throughout the recycling chain.
In 2006, the Center for Environmental Health released a report documenting toxic exposure in e-waste
processing prisons to inmates, prison personnel and families. Meanwhile, the system was undercutting
U.S. recyclers trying to do business the right way.
Unicor’s website states, “In addition to UNICOR's restrictive no-landfill policy, of electrical components,
the Recycling Business Group complies with OSHA standards”. The addition of the word “restrictive”
implies that the no-landfill policy is limited. That is because they are not e-Steward certified, UNICOR’s
downstream partners are not audited, and regulations cannot be guaranteed.
UNICOR staff reported that e-waste was
sometimes sold to vendors that exported it
to other countries and that staff and inmates
at times loaded international shipping
containers with e-waste. Prior to
approximately mid-2003, UNICOR did not
seek any information about the fate of its ewaste and whether it was being unlawfully
disposed of abroad or used in ways that
created environmental and human health
hazards.
"EPA and electronics manufacturers fiddle while
computers get burned in China, dumped in our local
landfills or hauled into prison sweatshops. Once again we
are given sound-effects instead of effectiveness. As
electronics consumers and as global and US citizens we
deserve far better than a voluntary call to -- perhaps,
maybe, if you want to, do something, without doing, too
much of, anything different, at all."
-Jim Puckett, Executive Director of BAN
Jim Puckett, Executive Director of BAN, said,
"EPA and electronics manufacturers fiddle while computers get burned in China, dumped in our local
landfills or hauled into prison sweatshops. Once again we are given sound-effects instead of
effectiveness. As electronics consumers and as global and US citizens we deserve far better than a
voluntary call to -- perhaps, maybe, if you want to, do something, without doing, too much of, anything
different, at all."
Office of the Inspector General – The Investigation
The Office of the Inspector General, Oversight and Review Division published a Review of the Federal
Prison Industries’ Electronic Waste Recycling Program in October, 2010 after UNICOR’s recycling of ewaste resulted in complaints from Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and UNICOR staff and inmates, most
notably from Leroy A. Smith, Jr., a former Safety Manager at the United States Penitentiary (USP) in
Atwater, California.5
In particular, the complaints stated that UNICOR’s e-waste recycling practices were not safe and had
made UNICOR staff and inmates sick. As a result of these complaints and at the request of the BOP,
Department of Justice (DOJ), and attorneys for Mr. Smith, the Inspector General investigated the safety
5
of UNICOR’s e-waste recycling operations, as well as other allegations of theft, conflict of interest, and
environmental crimes that arose during our investigation related to UNICOR’s e-waste operations.
During the investigation, the Office of the inspector General team conducted more than 200 interviews
and examined documents from BOP institutions and headquarters related to UNICOR’s recycling
operations and health, safety, and environmental practices. Among the witnesses interviewed were
UNICOR Chief Operating Officers, the BOP Assistant Director for the Health Services Division, BOP
National Safety Administrators, staff of UNICOR’s Recycling Business Group who managed UNICOR’s ewaste rThecycling program, UNICOR factory managers and foremen, local Safety Managers, and
inmates. They also reviewed more than 10,000 documents, examined numerous BOP and UNICOR email accounts, and performed forensic examinations on hard drives and laptop computers of certain
UNICOR personnel.
By February, 2009, eight correctional institutions were examined: USP Atwater, Federal Correctional
Institution (FCI) Ft. Dix, FCI Elkton, USP Leavenworth, USP Lewisburg, FCI Marianna, FCI Texarkana, and
Federal Correctional Complex (FCC) Tucson. At the conclusion of the site visits to the prisons, the federal
agencies that assisted the Office of the inspector General provided written reports about their findings
and provided the Office of the Inspector General with comprehensive health, safety, and environmental
reports on conditions from 2003 to 2009 for each of the eight UNICOR e-waste recycling facilities that
had ongoing operations during the investigation. These eight FOH reports were subjected to peer review
by OSHA and NIOSH.
Investigative Summary
The investigation found that prior to 2009 UNICOR’s management of the e-waste recycling program
resulted in numerous violations of health, safety, and environmental laws, regulations, and BOP policies.
It was concluded that UNICOR’s Headquarters staff poorly managed UNICOR’s e-waste program prior to
2009. UNICOR staff members often failed to perform hazard assessments on new e-waste operations or
did so incorrectly, and important health and safety information was not shared with BOP executives and
safety staff that could have prevented the violations from occurring. It was also found that managers in
UNICOR’s Recycling Business Group, primarily General Manager Lawrence Novicky and his assistant,
Bruce Ginther, concealed warnings about hazards related to toxic metals from UNICOR and BOP staff
and from inmates.
“Numerous instances of staff misconduct and
performance failures were also discovered. These
A Failure of Standards
included actions that endangered staff and
The investigation identified numerous systemic
inmates, as well as jeopardized the client’s data
shortcomings in UNICOR’s and the BOP’s
operations that are believed to have jeopardized
and reputation: dishonesty, dereliction of duty,
UNICOR’s ability to comply with industry standard
and theft, among others.”
health, safety, and environmental requirements.
Numerous instances of staff misconduct and
performance failures were also discovered. These
included actions that endangered staff and inmates, as well as jeopardized the client’s data and
reputation: dishonesty, dereliction of duty, and theft, among others. In all, the report concluded that 11
UNICOR and BOP employees committed either misconduct or performance failures in their work related
to the e-waste recycling program.
6
The Inspector General’s report also identified potential criminal conduct by BOP and UNICOR staff,
which resulted in referrals to two other Department of Justice components. In February 2007,
information was referred to the Environmental Crimes Section in the Justice Department’s
Environment and Natural Resources Division indicating that UNICOR managers had knowingly
endangered staff and inmates, were aware of unlawful disposals of hazardous waste, and had concealed
information from regulators. Following a lengthy investigation that the Environmental Crimes Section
conducted in conjunction with the Office of the Inspector General, EPA, FBI, and the U.S.
Attorneys’ Offices for the Northern District of Ohio and the District of New Jersey, no action was
initiated because of various evidentiary, legal, and strategic concerns.
It was determined that UNICOR failed to address hazards related to e-waste in its recycling factories and
to warn staff and inmates about the presence of toxic metals in their work areas. In addition, it was
concluded that due to UNICOR’s failure to conduct such assessments, UNICOR did not properly integrate
hazard controls into its e-waste work processes.
Cadmium and lead exposures were eventually controlled to levels below OSHA exposure limits over
time, however. These changes took place over periods of years, through a process of “trial and error” at
some factories. UNICOR and the BOP did not have policies that required UNICOR to have qualified
personnel, including staff from the BOP’s Health Services Division, conduct assessments on UNICOR’s
new operations, or on changes in existing operations, that would identify the hazards that UNICOR was
required to disclose under OSHA regulations. Interviews and review of inmate injury records revealed
that inmates who worked in glass breaking operations frequently were cut by the broken glass, some
resulting in serious injuries.
Improvements
In 2008, the Federal Occupational Health Service released a report documenting substantial problems in
the protection of prisoners and prison personnel from e-waste toxics. The Office of the Inspector
General made more than 150 recommendations to rectify the deficiencies that were identified during
their inspections of UNICORS e-waste facilities. These recommendations addressed 47 issues in 12
general topic areas. By 2009, with limited exceptions, UNICOR’s e-waste operations (including CRT glass
breaking activities) were compliant with OSHA requirements and were being operated safely, though
the agencies that assisted the investigation recommended additional improvements. The major concern
was that UNICOR and the BOP need to hire or retain staff that is adequately trained to identify and
correct health, safety, and environmental compliance problems. 16 of the 47 issues required future
updates from the Inspector General’s office.
The recommendations address issues involving factory supervision and regulatory compliance. For
example, it was recommended that UNICOR and the BOP implement procedures that will hold
supervisors accountable for compliance with health, safety, and environmental laws and regulations.
The Waiting Game
On August 5, 2011, The Council of Prison Locals (CPL) of the American Federation of Government
Employees (AFGE) circulated a press release criticizing the Bureau of Prison's (BOP) failure to implement
safety recommendations to UNICOR. According to the release, "It's unconscionable that BOP has yet to
implement the inspector general's recommendations to ensure worker safety," said CPL President Bryan
Lowry. "The inspector general's findings are in line with what we've been saying for years. Our staff
members were exposed to dangerous levels of toxic metals, which BOP knew about and allowed to
7
continue. The inspector general concluded improvements were needed, yet we're still waiting on the
agency to put these safety measures in place to protect our staff," Lowry added.
Recidivism
The UNICOR prison inmate work program is an important management tool that federal correctional
officers and staff use to deal with the huge increase in the BOP prison inmate population. It helps keep
nearly 19,000 prison inmates productively occupied in labor-intensive activities, thereby reducing
inmate idleness and the violence associated with that idleness. It also provides strong incentives to
encourage good inmate behavior, as those who want to work in UNICOR factories must maintain a
record of good behavior and must have completed high school or be making steady progress toward a
General Education Degree.
The national Reentry Resource Center, a project of the Council of State Government, conducted a study
to research the rehabilitation rate of prisoners. The study used two groups; A treatment group that
consisted of inmates who had worked for UNICOR (57%), a combination of UNICOR and vocational
training (19%), and vocational training with no UNICOR participation (24%). The comparison group was
drawn from prisoners who had participated in less than 6 months of UNICOR, failed to complete a
vocational program, or had never been enrolled in either.
The study reveals that the male treatment group was less likely to experience a parole revocation at
both 6 and 12 months after release. At 1 year after release, 6.6% of the treatment group had
recidivated, compared to 10.1% of the comparison group. In the analysis of female prisoners, no
significant differences were found, and recidivism rates were low in both the treatment and comparison
groups.6
Clearly, prison labor has advantages, both to the rehabilitation process, as well as providing an
inexpensive source of labor in abundance. At what point, however, do we cease taking business from
environmentally certified companies and putting the health and safety of this labor at risk, as well as
the security of the agencies that employ their services?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
U.S. Const. Amend XIII.
Ruffin v. Commonwealth 62 Va. 1024 (1871)
UNICOR Annual Report 2001, 3rd unnumbered page of the pdf file.
UNICOR Annual Report 2001, p. 9.
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. “A Review of Federal Prison
Industries’ Electronic-Waste Recycling Program. October, 2010.
6. http://oldrm-nrrc.csgjusticecenter.org/what_works/evaluations/unicor
8