51–60 of 137 posts
We are just trying to buy time to ramp up production of materials that can reduce the burden on the medical system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm not sure about strawberries but aren't farmworkers in general essential workers? Yes, but that doesn't mean they're immune from the coronavirus risk. The whole point is that they face the coronavirus risk because they're continuing to work.
But some people are going to have to be exposed. Farmworker's exposure helps us flatten the curve.
Nobody "has" to be exposed, protective gear would work just fine. And no, exposing farmworkers doesn't help to flatten the curve. The curve would be equally flat if they weren't exposed.
What you just said is "Somebody has to die, let's kill the farmworkers so we're safe". You might want to rethink.
What we need to do is stop exploiting them. They're not at high risk because they need to be, they're at high risk because we're not paying them well. Because we withhold even the options for basic hygiene for them. Because we value profit over human life.
I'm not sure about strawberries but aren't farmworkers in general essential workers? Our food supply and delivery chain is what allows others to stay at home.
Sorry, I am going to be the insensitive sleazeball here. The point of staying at home is not that if you get this disease you are going to die. The issue is that if we ALL get it then a larger proportion of people are going to die because we don't have enough hospitals. We had to choose some people as being important enough that they are allowed to be out and about and use some of that valuable limited healthcare res…
"during this period"? They're as essential to our survival even if we're not in a pandemic. It's maybe time we recognized that and stopped exploiting labor just because it's unskilled. If we paid them by the value they actually create. I'd really urge you to reconsider your stance, and be there to help them advocate for fair pay even when this is over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, and I'd hope this is echoed by everyone: I'd rather have less strawberries, that are more expensive, than have strawberries picked by someone who died as a result of contracting COVID-19 in a field whilst they were picking strawberries to earn money to feed themselves/their family.
Everybody says this, and then proceeds to buy the cheapest, most convenient products possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a big difference between "the job can't be done safely" and "the way the job was done previously wouldn't be safe if they continue doing it that way". There's literally no step in "picking strawberries" that can't be done while maintaining social distancing. It will increase the cost of labor, and force humans to be treated like... humans. But farming isn't inherently unsafe re: coronavirus.
You say "increase the cost of labor" like it's nothing. Fact is, industries like this couldn't be operated on the up and up in the US- people wouldn't buy the product at the price it'd need to be sold for. I'm not saying this to justify the current conditions, I'm just pointing out that it's this or an eradication of the industry. edit: an eradication I'm totally fine with.
If this approach is unsustainable (and it would be), then there are a lot of other things that need to change. What doesn't need to happen is us shrugging our shoulders, saying "meh, farmworkers need to suffer, it's too expensive otherwise"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These farm workers live in bunk houses basically and are trucked in on school buses. Most of them are migrant laborers or undocumented immigrants. Those conditions are not safe.
My wife works with 14 H2As who serve only one property for 9 months a year in about the best possible situation and it is definitely true that they live in bunk houses, but for better or worse you find this everywhere in the world, even singapore[1]. In 10 years of working in the ag industry though, every place she has worked they have always been documented, whether FLC or H2A. The majority I've worked with while he…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Except if reports are to be believed coronavirus carrying foods could survive the trip from farm to table and infect people nationwide rapidly.
If so that'll happen no matter what. Packaged food will be handled by multiple people before it gets into the consumer's hands.
It takes everyone making sacrifices to stop the spread. Especially the landowners and leaders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"during this period"? They're as essential to our survival even if we're not in a pandemic. It's maybe time we recognized that and stopped exploiting labor just because it's unskilled. If we paid them by the value they actually create. I'd really urge you to reconsider your stance, and be there to help them advocate for fair pay even when this is over.
How would the value they create or "fair pay" be measured?
From there, we get to "would you die without them? If yes, maybe they're underpaid. Maybe $18K a year just isn't fair pay under any circumstances, not if we can't force people via a "well, you could always die" clause.
As for the value they create - you have food available to you. How valuable is that to you? Would you like it if farm workers applied the "well, you could always die or do it yourself" clause?
Because at some point, that becomes an option.