4 ms·

There's the catch. Americans would take all kinds of back-breaking work for the right amount of pay. American agriculture has always relied, more or less, on u

by Frondo 7y ago

There's the catch. Americans would take all kinds of back-breaking work for the right amount of pay. American agriculture has always relied, more or less, on underpaying its laborers, the extreme case being slavery (entirely unpaid, entirely forced, human beings were "owned"). After slavery was officially ended, we still hire the least politically empowered, and the most easily abused. The constant threat of deportation is a feature for American ag owners; it's hardly a step away from slavery, because yes, people can return to their own countries, but they aren't rational economic actors in any reasonable sense of the word.

schnevets 7y ago
The agriculture podcast Farm to Taber has a few interesting episodes on this topic (including the Prison Labor episode here: https://www.farmtotaber.com/episodes/2018/4/27/convict-labor https://www.farmtotaber.com/episodes/2018/4/27/convict-labor). America suffers from a cognitive dissonance because they refuse to recognize agricultural laborers as a skilled labor force. Anyone can pick berries for a day, but someone who has been working on farms for 30 years will give exponentially more output because of the muscle memory and constitution they have developed. It is a true form of skilled labor, and it's the truth behind articles where farms struggled to replace immigrant labor with Americans. (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/us/farmers-strain-to-hire-american-workers-in-place-of-migrant-labor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/us/farmers-strain-to-hire...). As exploitative as the industry is (and, depending on your view of capitalism, you may say all labor is exploitative), it was significantly better before President Clinton's 1996 immigration law (https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigration https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigr...). Seasonal workers could migrate to the US, work temporarily, and then return home for their own growing season with relative ease. Many of these workers only felt pressured to bring in their families and settle permanently after their own, US-based livelihoods were threatened. Restoring temporary worker status would be a huge benefit for America's agricultural industry. Recognizing the competence and skill involved in growing our food would also help us make sure crops get picked. Automation that improves throughput per worker and affords workers more benefits should be the end-goal, but there's no way we'll be able to reach it with the industry's current political climate.
- Frondo 7y ago
  Agreed on all points. I just wanted to link this video, because it's a great example of what it means for farm labor to be skilled labor: https://twitter.com/UFWupdates/status/1005532868007739392 https://twitter.com/UFWupdates/status/1005532868007739392 That's not an efficiency of movement you get after a week of doing this work; there's a LOT of practice in being able to do that all day long. These people are paid extremely poorly for the expertise they bring to their work.

by Frondo 7y ago

schnevets 7y ago

The agriculture podcast Farm to Taber has a few interesting episodes on this topic (including the Prison Labor episode here: https://www.farmtotaber.com/episodes/2018/4/27/convict-labor https://www.farmtotaber.com/episodes/2018/4/27/convict-labor). America suffers from a cognitive dissonance because they refuse to recognize agricultural laborers as a skilled labor force. Anyone can pick berries for a day, but someone who has been working on farms for 30 years will give exponentially more output because of the muscle memory and constitution they have developed. It is a true form of skilled labor, and it's the truth behind articles where farms struggled to replace immigrant labor with Americans. (https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/us/farmers-strain-to-hire-american-workers-in-place-of-migrant-labor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/05/us/farmers-strain-to-hire...). As exploitative as the industry is (and, depending on your view of capitalism, you may say all labor is exploitative), it was significantly better before President Clinton's 1996 immigration law (https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigration https://www.vox.com/2016/4/28/11515132/iirira-clinton-immigr...). Seasonal workers could migrate to the US, work temporarily, and then return home for their own growing season with relative ease. Many of these workers only felt pressured to bring in their families and settle permanently after their own, US-based livelihoods were threatened. Restoring temporary worker status would be a huge benefit for America's agricultural industry. Recognizing the competence and skill involved in growing our food would also help us make sure crops get picked. Automation that improves throughput per worker and affords workers more benefits should be the end-goal, but there's no way we'll be able to reach it with the industry's current political climate.

Frondo 7y ago
Agreed on all points. I just wanted to link this video, because it's a great example of what it means for farm labor to be skilled labor: https://twitter.com/UFWupdates/status/1005532868007739392 https://twitter.com/UFWupdates/status/1005532868007739392 That's not an efficiency of movement you get after a week of doing this work; there's a LOT of practice in being able to do that all day long. These people are paid extremely poorly for the expertise they bring to their work.