A report released in Washington this morning highlights "The Hidden Struggles of Migrant Worker Women In The Maryland Crab Industry." The paper, by Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Inc. and the International Human Right Law Clinic at American University Washington College of Law, is focused mostly on immigration policy issues (a little outside our purview), but I wanted to note the section on worker safety.
The report looks at the hundreds of Mexican women who travel every year to the Eastern Shore of Maryland on H-2B guestworker visas to work in the crab industry. The researchers interviewed more than 40 current or former workers, and found that:
Work-related injuries are common for many of the migrant workers in the Maryland crab industry. Use of sharp knives, contact with chemicals, lack of formal training, and the pace of work all contribute to injuries. ... In fact, cuts, scrapes, and rashes on the hands and arms of workers were so routine that many interviewed workers did not view them as actual injuries. When the authors asked, “Have you experienced any injuries at work?” many workers responded “No.” When asked specifically about cuts, the women universally responded affirmatively. ... Many of the injuries sustained by these workers could, and should have been prevented by following laws related to occupational safety and health.
Addressing workplace safety hazards is often a struggle; immigrant or guest worker employees can face extra challenges. This made me think back to a study last year by Nebraska Appleseed surveying meatpacking workers in the state, which found:
crippling line speed, supervisory abuse, persistently high injury rates, and not being allowed to go to the bathroom. Sixty-two percent of workers said they had been injured in the previous year, far higher than the officially reported rate.
Across the county, we have a long way to go to address these problems. The crab houses and meatpacking plants have an obligation to provide their employees with a safe and healthy work environment. One obvious improvement, from the safety and health perspective, would be to reduce line and production speeds. In fact, there’s a good argument to be made that the employers’ obligation to set safe and manageable production speeds is embodied in the OSH Act’s General Duty Clause. An enterprising OSHA inspector—backed by a good attorney from the Solicitor of Labor’s office—could make the case that high production speeds present a recognized hazard that is likely to cause serious injury, and that a feasible means of abating the hazard would be to reduce the speeds.
Showing 2,817 results
Ben Somberg | July 14, 2010
A report released in Washington this morning highlights “The Hidden Struggles of Migrant Worker Women In The Maryland Crab Industry.” The paper, by Centro de los Derechos del Migrante, Inc. and the International Human Right Law Clinic at American University Washington College of Law, is focused mostly on immigration policy issues (a little outside our […]
Holly Doremus | July 13, 2010
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. As he had promised, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar on Monday issued a new decision memorandum suspending certain deepwater drilling operations.Monday’s decision replaces the moratorium that the federal District Court in New Orleans enjoined on June 22, and which the Fifth Circuit declined to reinstate last week. As I made clear in […]
Rena Steinzor | July 13, 2010
This post was written by CPR President Rena Steinzor and Michael Patoka, a student at the University of Maryland School of Law and research assistant to Steinzor. Last October, the EPA proposed to regulate, for the first time, the toxic coal ash that sits in massive landfills and ponds next to coal-fired power plants across […]
Holly Doremus | July 9, 2010
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. A three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit heard arguments Thursday on the Obama administration’s request that it stay the District Court’s injunction of the 6-month deepwater oil development moratorium, and by a 2-1 vote quickly rejected the request. The moratorium halted any new drilling, and the granting of any new permits […]
Victor Flatt | July 8, 2010
On Tuesday, the EPA released its long awaited rule to replace the Bush era Clean Air Interstate Rule, invalidated by the DC Circuit in 2008’s North Carolina v. EPA. There are many things that could have been different or improved, but given the EPA’s need to get a rule out quickly to replace the existing rule, […]
Matthew Freeman | July 8, 2010
Over on Slate this weekend, William Saletan posted an Elena Kagan piece in which he describes a 1996 incident in which the future presumptive Supreme Court Justice, then working at the White House, commented on a draft statement on “partial birth abortion” by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Congress was then on […]
Ben Somberg | July 7, 2010
Sorry to link to the Daily Show again, but I swear it’s relevant. On last night’s show, Lewis Black covered recent food safety and consumer product safety news. “But knowingly selling us broken cars, poisoned medicines — if I didn’t know any better, I’d think these companies were just in for the money!”
Rena Steinzor | July 6, 2010
Desperate to move a funding bill for Chesapeake Bay restoration out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, progressive Senator Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) went into the scrum with one of the body’s most conservative members, James Inhofe (R-OK). After a struggle of uncertain intensity and duration, the two emerged, with Inhofe, who openly ridicules the […]
Holly Doremus | July 6, 2010
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. Previously I wrote about the shortcomings of ESA consultation on the Deepwater Horizon and other offshore oil rigs. Today I take up the implications of the spill itself under the ESA. At least one ESA lawsuit has already been filed, and at least partially resolved. The Animal Welfare Institute, Center for […]