- Just ask Debbie Berkowitz, a senior fellow at the National Employment Law Project who used to work with the government agency that oversaw industry practices. On Wednesday, she published a piece in response to the new report. This is how she described the conditions:
In my work at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, I witnessed the dangers: poultry workers stand shoulder to shoulder on both sides of long conveyor belts, most using scissors or knives, in cold, damp, loud conditions, making the same forceful movements thousands upon thousands of times a day, as they skin, pull, cut, debone and pack the chickens. The typical plant processes 180,000 birds a day. A typical worker handles 40 birds a minute.
By law, companies are required to grant their employees access to bathrooms. A set of standards, written by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 1998, makes clear that facilities must be available to employees upon need. In response, the industry has instituted a system, whereby extra workers are available to swap in in the case someone has to leave the line to use the restroom, a system which the government supports so long as "there are sufficient relief workers to assure that employees need not wait an unreasonably long time to use the bathroom."
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Molly Ivins devoted a chapter to poultry workers in 2004, based on research she started publishing in 1999: Workers in chicken factories endure conditions that would shame Guatemala or Honduras. Many stand for hours on end in sheds that reek of manure, or chop chickens all day in cold, dark plants, or are constantly scratched by live chickens that have to be crammed into cages by the thousands. The New York Times reported that the Rev. Jim Lewis, an Episcopal priest whose assignment is to improve the lives of poultry workers, once led a wildcat strike against a plant where a worker was fired after he had a finger cut off. The wages are so low, workers often qualify for welfare. And as Texans know from our experience with Big Chicken in East Texas, these plants are often notorious polluters as well, fouling both air and water. You can go to the grocery store and get a whole fryer for about $4. Want it "organic?" that's about $7. If you want a farmer's market chicken, they're around $25. That's about $21 worth of externalities per chicken.Lest you think hideous working conditions are found only in the Third World, consider the case of Big Chicken, the poultry industry in America.
I'm okay with that. We should get closer to paying for the real value of a chicken, or pig, or strawberries, than what we're currently paying. If that means improved labor conditions, less pollution, and not supporting industry that creates a welfare state then I consider those all wins. Who knows, maybe it would even reduce the amount of food waste and make us more efficient with our food. By buying from the Walmarts of the world or the large scale factories of the world, we support an environment that is less than admirable, and exploitative of the workforce. This is where Trump fails, and where wall supporters fail, I think. I'd wager that the majority of these workers are immigrants, legally or illegally. The fallacy of "they'll take our jobs" is ridiculous because nobody wants to work in these conditions.
I had a revelation about that at the farmers market last week. I was eyeing a big piece of ethically raised ribeye and noticed that it was hella expensive compared to the ribeye you'd see at the grocery store. But then I thought about how my great grandparents bought meat, and how a roast was a big goddamn deal to them because it was expensive. If I had bought that piece of ribeye, it would have been a big deal to me. If I had bought a more-evil slice of meat at a lower price, I really wouldn't care as much. The cows my grand-cestors ate were raised basically like the ethically sourced meat I would buy today. They paid a premium for that meat, and it makes sense that I should do the same. Coincidentally, eating vegetarian has become easier and easier as time goes on. I prefer to make meat a conscious decision, rather than a 'oh well it's here' default.We should get closer to paying for the real value of a chicken, or pig, or strawberries, than what we're currently paying.
If that's true then by getting rid of NAFTA and allowing no illegal immigrants and fewer unskilled legal ones there will be nobody that will take these jobs. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Innovation will have to occur and these jobs will have to restructured into jobs that are something Americans are willing to do.The fallacy of "they'll take our jobs" is ridiculous because nobody wants to work in these conditions.
Paying people reasonable wages and allowing them to work in safe conditions wont result in 800% markup. At most it will add a couple cents a pound to each chicken. In the modern free trade environment that would be unacceptable and drive American producers out of business but with 10% tariff an all countries that pay their employees less than we do US industry would be able to compete just fine.
Small producers have no economy of scale. We own 3 chickens and just the hatchlings cost me more than a 5lb chicken from the store. Add in 6 months of food and I'm probably at 25-30 bucks a chicken before I get a single egg. Since I can't get a chicken to weight (food wise) for the price i pay for a cleaned full grown chicken obviously there is a different price scale at the mass production end. My ethics don't really extend to the chicken itself it's got the intellectual capacity of an ant. Ifit was cheaper to grow them in test tubes I wouldn't even be opposed to that. But I do think that that the people working these facilities should be treated better and I have empathy for them.
I know no one who has raised chickens who views them more favorably than iguanas. Most people I've met are indifferent to lizards but actively disparaging of chickens. Bill McKibben in Eaarth describes attempting to get local farmers around his place in New Hampshire to produce sustainable bacon. None of them could do it for less than $14/lb.
I don't like the concept of 'voting with your wallet'. It essentially says, you have the choice of having enough money to live or being an ethical person. In almost all cases, those are mutually exclusive. Instead, we should get rid of the system that means people have to work 12-hour shifts to feed themselves, and you have to put up with that because otherwise you can't feed yourself. It's all a vicious cycle that we have the power to break, if we choose to.