President Obama travels to Keene, California, on Monday to designate the home of César E. Chávez as a national monument—a worthy honor for a key figure in the ongoing push for safe working conditions and fair pay. One thing the President is unlikely to raise in his remarks is that just a few months ago, his administration took the side of big agriculture against the safety of farmworkers.
In April, White House staff jettisoned a key Department of Labor (DOL) proposal establishing safety protections for young agricultural workers – teenagers working in very dangerous jobs.
That’s rather important context going into Monday’s event. The White House’s press release rightly notes that “Chávez played a central role in achieving basic worker protections for hundreds of thousands of farmworkers across the country, from provisions ensuring drinking water was provided to workers in the fields, to steps that helped limit workers’ exposure to dangerous pesticides, to helping to establish basic minimum wages and health care access for farm workers.”
The Administration has recognized the danger of this work before, and the DOL proposal would have updated 40-year-old “hazardous orders” designed to protect hired children. Last year, announcing the proposed changes, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis said: "Children employed in agriculture are some of the most vulnerable workers in America.” And: “Ensuring their welfare is a priority of the department, and this proposal is another element of our comprehensive approach."
The fatality rate for young agricultural workers is four times greater than for their peers in other workplaces. The DOL’s proposal would have prohibited children under 18 years old from working for hire to perform some of agriculture industry's most dangerous jobs: operating farm machinery; feeding, herding, or otherwise handling farm animals; managing crops stored in grain elevators or silos; or picking tobacco (because young people are especially vulnerable to a form of nicotine poisoning known as “green tobacco sickness”). For better or worse, but nevertheless significantly, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the new requirements would have exempted children who work for their parents or a relative or friend standing in the place of a parent, no matter what their age or the activity.
The Farm Bureau (aka Big Ag) and its supporters in Congress attacked the rule relentlessly, labeling the rule an assault on family farms. The White House never went to bat for DOL’s proposal, never bothering to make the case why the rule was needed. The rule’s opponents were able to dominate the debate, despite frequent, outright lies. Farmworker and worker safety advocates supported the rule, but lacked the political power that Big Ag was able to bring to the fight.
On April 26th of this year, the Administration withdrew the proposed rule. The press release took the extraordinary step of saying “To be clear, this regulation will not be pursued for the duration of the Obama administration.”
President Obama will honor farmworkers on Monday. But when the Administration had the chance to actually take action to make agricultural work for young people safer, it caved to political pressure. Sadly, actions speak louder than words.
Showing 2,834 results
Rena Steinzor | October 7, 2012
President Obama travels to Keene, California, on Monday to designate the home of César E. Chávez as a national monument—a worthy honor for a key figure in the ongoing push for safe working conditions and fair pay. One thing the President is unlikely to raise in his remarks is that just a few months ago, his […]
Sidney A. Shapiro | October 2, 2012
When the government succeeds in protecting the public from harms, is that good news – or something to be atoned for by eliminating other successful protections? If the Department of Labor issues a new rule on construction crane safety, saving dozens of lives each year, should the agency also be required to eliminate an existing […]
| September 28, 2012
Remember Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, argued before the Supreme Court last term? It’s back – the Court will hear argument again Monday – and bigger than before. A brief recap: For decades, Shell has extracted oil from the Niger Delta, causing extensive environmental degradation. The government of Nigeria, with the alleged support of Shell, […]
Robert Verchick | September 27, 2012
I’ll forego reporting on India today to address a new development in the post-Hurricane Katrina litigation: Judge Jerry Smith’s breathless hairpin turn in the “Katrina Canal Breaches Litigation.” On Monday, Judge Smith, writing for a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, dismissed a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers […]
Rena Steinzor | September 27, 2012
This post was written by CPR President Rena Steinzor and Policy Analyst Wayland Radin. Today CPR releases Cozying Up: How the Manufacturers of Toxic Chemicals Seek to Co-opt Their Regulators, exposing the work of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) and Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment (TERA), two industry advocacy groups that have undue influence on […]
John Echeverria | September 25, 2012
The most interesting issues to watch in Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States, which the Supreme Court will hear next week on October 3, are ones the parties have not addressed. The central issue in the case as framed by the principal briefs is whether a temporary increase in the frequency of inundation […]
Aimee Simpson | September 24, 2012
Today, CPR releases a new white paper examining criminal enforcement of water pollution laws in Maryland. In Going Too Easy? Maryland’s Criminal Enforcement of Water Pollution Laws Protecting the Chesapeake Bay, CPR President Rena Steinzor and I analyze a number of key questions concerning the critical, deterrence-based enforcement mechanism of criminal prosecution and its role […]
Ben Somberg | September 20, 2012
A host of concerned groups and individuals wrote to Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack today urging him to withdraw proposed changes to poultry inspection rules until food safety and worker safety concerns are addressed. The letter was signed by a range of food safety and worker safety groups and individual signers, including CPR Member Scholars […]
Daniel Farber | September 19, 2012
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. Obesity is an environmental issue because the food system (from farm to table) uses a lot of energy and produces significant water pollution. More food equals a bigger environmental footprint. Sweetened soft drinks are a good example: they use corn sweetener, and corn production has a large footprint because so much […]