Ethics Migrant Tomato Workers

1407 Words3 Pages

Second Analysis Paper

The migrant tomato farm workers article discusses the aspect of being one of the nations most backbreaking jobs. These tomato workers work for 10 to 12 hours a day picking tomatoes by hand, earning a piece-rate of about 45 cents for every 32-pound bucket. Furthermore a typical day each migrant picks, carries and unloads two tons of tomatoes, and instead of trying to move forward and improve the quality of work and pay the tomato growers keep migrant workers pay as low as possible. The reason behind it is the pressure the tomato growers face for keeping their operation cost low. Although some of the pressure has come from increased competition with Mexican growers, most of it has been forcefully applied by the largest purchaser of Florida tomatoes the American fast food chains.

In 2005, Florida tomato pickers gained their first pay raise since 1970s when Taco Bell ended a consumer boycott by agreeing to pay the extra penny per pound that will go directly to the pickers. Shortly after McDonald’s agreed to a similar arrangement, increasing the wages of its tomato pickers to about 77 cents per bucket. However Burger King remained adamant in refusal to pay the extra penny, such action caused the tomato growers to cancel its increase wage deals with Taco Bell and Macdonald’s.

In according to such news, the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange announced that it will not allow any of its members to collect the extra penny for farm workers, describing the surcharge for poor migrants as “pretty much near un-American.” Furthermore, the Florida Tomato Growers threatened a fine of $100,000 for any grower who accepts an extra penny per pound for migrant wages. The organization claims for such a fine is that such a surcharge would violate “federal and state laws related to antitrust, labor and racketeering.” Yet it has not explained how that extra penny would break those laws; nor has it explained why other surcharges routinely imposed by the growers (for things like higher fuel costs) are perfectly legal.

Burger King has played a prominent role in rescinding the pay raise offers, and justifying its behavior by claiming that it has no control over the labor practices of its suppliers. In solution to these human right abuses, Burger King suggested that the poor farm workers of southern Florida need more money; they should apply for jobs at its restaurants.

Open Document