AMHERST COLLEGE
lU'-t- j
iBiiiiiiiiiiii EASONAL FARMWORKER
POWERLESSNESS
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MIGRATORY LABOR
OP THE
COMMITTEE ON
LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-FIKST CONGRESS
FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS
ON
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?
JULY 21, 1970
PART 8-B
Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare
MIGRANT AND SEASONAL FARMWORKER
POWERLESSNESS
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MIGRATORY LABOR
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE
UNITED STATES SENATE
NINETY-FIRST CONGRESS
FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS
ON
WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?
JULY 21, 1970
PART 8-B
Printed for the use of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
36-513 0 WASHINGTON : 1971
COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE
KALPH YARBOROUGH, Texas, Chairman
JENNINGS RANDOLPH, West Virginia JACOB K. JAVITS, New York
HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, Jr., New Jersey WINSTON L. PROUTY, Vermont
CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island PETER H. DOMINICK, Colorado
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts) GEORGE MURPHY, California
GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania
WALTER F. MONDALE, Minnesota WILLIAM B. SAXBE, Ohio
THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri HENRY BELLMON, Oklahoma
ALAN CRANSTON, California
HAROLD E. HUGHES, Iowa
Robert O. Harris, Staff Director
John S. Forsythe. General Counsel
Roy H. Millenson, Minority Staff Director
Eugene Mittelman, Minority Counsel
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor
WALTER F. MONDALE, Minnesota, Chairman
HARRISON A. WILLIAMS, Jr., New Jersey WILLIAM B. SAXBE, Ohio
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts GEORGE MURPHY, California
ALAN CRANSTON, California RICHARD S. SCHWEIKER, Pennsylvania
HAROLD E. HUGHES, Iowa HENRY BELLMON, Oklahoma
BoREN Chertkov, Counsel
Herbert N. Jasper, Professional Staff Member
EiJ^ENE Mittelman, Minority Counsel
(H)
Format of Hearings on Migrant and Seasonal Farmworker
powerlessness
The Subcommittee on Migratory Labor conducted public hearings
in Washington, D.C., during the 91st Congress on "Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworker Powerlessness." These hearings are contained
in the following parts :
Subject matter Hearing dates
Part 1 : AVho are the Migrants? June 9 and 10, 1969.
Part 2 : The Migrant Subculture July 28, 1969.
Part 3-A : Efforts To Organize July 15, 1969.
Part 3-B : Efforts To Organize July 16 and 17, 1969.
Part 4-A : Farmworker Legal Problems Aug. 7, 1969'.
Part 4-B : Farmworker Legal Problems Aug. 8, 1969.
Part 5-A : Border Commuter Labor Problem May 21, 1969.
Part 5-B : Border Commuter Labor Problem May 22, 1969.
Part 6-A : Pesticides and the Farmworker Aug. 1, 1969.
Part 6-B : Pesticides and the Farmworker Sept. 29, 1969.
Part 6-C : Pestic-ides and the Farmworker... Sept. 30, 1969.
Part 7-A : Manpower and Economic Problems April 14, 1970.
Part 7-B : Manpower and Economic Problems April 15, 1970.
Part 8-A : Who Is Responsible? July 20, 1970.
Part 8-B : Who Is Responsible? July 21, 1970.
Part 8-0 : Who Is Responsible? July 24, 1970.
(Ill)
CONTENTS
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES
Tuesday, July 21, 1970
Dunwell, Roger McClure, lawyer, Rio Grande Valley, Tex., representing Page
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee 5394
Fernandez, Efrain, the Rio Grande Valley, Tex 5445
Segor, Joseph C, executive director. Migrant Services Foundation, Inc.,
Miami, Fla 5456
Juarez, Rudolpho, migrant farmworker, Florida 5479
Moore, Philip, staff counsel, project on corporate responsibility, Washing-
ton, D.C 5499
Cochran, Clay, executive director. Rural Housing Alliance, Washington,
D.C 5521
STATEMENTS
Chisholm, Hon. Shirley, a Representative in Congress from the State of
New York, prepared statement 5389
Cochran, Clay, executive director. Rural Housing Alliance, Washington,
D.C 5521
Prepared statement 5522
Dunwell, Roger McClure, lawyer, Rio Grande Valley, Tex., representing
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee 5394
Prepared statement 5401
Supplemental statement, with exhibits A-J 5406
Fernandez, Efrain, the Rio Grande Valley, Tex 5445
Juarez, Rudolpho, migrant farmworker, Florida 5479
Moore, Philip, staff counsel, project on corporate responsibility, Washing-
ton, D.C 5499
Prepared statement, with appendixes 5508
Segor, Joseph C, executive director, Migrant Services Foundation, Inc.,
Miami, Fla 5456
Prepared statement 5494
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Articles, publications, etc.:
"Bax Vows Housing Help," by the Associated Press 5589
"Collier Courthouse Picketed — Migrants Ask More Aid," from the
Miami Herald, April 10, 1970 5476
"Commissioners Hear Report on Hunger Tour," from the Belle Glade,
April 14, 1970 5477
"Community Organizes: Migrants Begin Struggle," by Ed Domaingue,
from the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 16, 1970 5577
"Crop Damage Relief — Farmers Await Word on Loans," from the
Miami Herald, April 1, 1970 5472
Cuban Nurse Aids Migrants 5575
"Damage to Crops Critical, Aid Asked," from the Miami Herald,
March 31, 1970 5472
"Declare Disaster in Seven Counties, Kirk Asks U.S.," from the
Miami Herald, April 2, 1970 5474
(V)
VI
Articles, publications, etc. — Continued
"Deletions Made In TV Show," special to the Ledger from the New PagB
York Times 5590
"Disaster for Migrants, Too." from the Miami News, April 13, 1970. _ 5476
"Farmers Face Lack of Help," from the Palm Beach Post, May 6.
1970 .._.' 5479
"Farmers Home Administration and Farm-Labor Housing: Missing
the Mark," bj^ Jim Hightower, associate director of program de-
velopment, Rural Housing Alliance 5814
"Fear, Mistrust Greet the Law," from the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla.,
July 13, 1970 5563
"Hunger, Lack of Jobs Stalk Florida's Migrant Pickers," from the
Miami News, April 10, 1970 5475
"Migrants: An Invisible Army of 25,000 Languishes in Poverty in
Polk," by Ed Domaingue, from the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July
13, 1970 '.._._ 5559
"Migrants Ask Kirk for Help," from the Miami News, April 15, 1970_ 5478
Migrants: How To Escape Trap 5569
"Migrant Leaders Given Letter on Labor Conditions," from the
Belle Glade, April 14, 1970 5478
Migrant Services Foundation, Inc., report to the board of directors,
by the executive director, Joseph C. Segor 5465
"Migrant Storm Exposure 'Bias' Claims Disputed," by Ed Domaingue,
staff writer, from the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 18, 1970 5587
"Migrant's Legal Aides Charge State Fails the Jobless," from the
Palm Beach Post, April 3, 1970 5474
"Nine Florida Counties Seek Disaster Aid," from the Miami Herald,
March 28, 1970 5471
"Pieces and Scraps — Farm Labor Housing in the United States,"
by Lee P. Reno 5652
Report of the Miami Herald staff writer J. K. de Groot on the migrant
of south Florida:
"A Migrant's Life— Like They Told Him: Your Lot's Hard
and You Got To Bear the Load," from the Miami Herald,
August 21, 1970 5554
"Can't Improve Lot, Migrants Believe," from the Miami Herald,
August 18, 1970 5545
"Housing for Many Migrant Workers May Worsen Before It
Gets Better," from the Miami Herald, August 19, 1970 5548
"Most of the Migrants Call Florida Home," from the Miami
Herald, August 16, 1970 5538
"Oldtimer Versus Migrant — Cultures Clash on the Land," from
the Miami Herald, August 17, 1970 5541
"State Shifts Migrant Mess to Washington," from the Miami
Herald, August 20, 1970 5551
"Report of the Migrant Labor Task Force of the State Human Rights
Advisory Council," by Herbert L. Amerson, council chairman, and
William Galbreath, task force chairman 5628
"Solutions to Problem Available," by Ed Domaingue 5583
"Some Days You Work and Eat — Some Days You Don't," by Ed
Domaingue, from the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 14, 1970 5564
"Summary of Harvesting Conditions in Southern, Central, and
Northern Florida," from the Farm Labor Bulletin, Florida State
Employment Service, April 2, 1970 5473
"TV Show Criticism — A Repeat," by Hubert Mizell, from the Ledger,
Lakeland, Fla., July 17, 1970 5582
"'Ten Years Go Past But Little Changes," by Ed Domaingue, from
the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 15, 1970 5570
Time To Face Responsibility 5576
"The Excepted People — The Migrant Workers in Washington
State," by Dr. Tom J. Chambers, Jr., Washington State Council of
Churches, Seattle, Wash 5591
"The Migrant Stream in Polk" 5563
Communications to:
Holland, Hon. Spessard L., a U.S. Senator from the State of Florida,
Old Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C., from George F.
Sorn, manager, labor division, Florida Fruit and Vegetable As-
sociation, August 31, 1970 (with attachment) 5538
VII
Communications to — Contintied
Mondale, Hon. Walter F., A U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota,
from:
Holland, Hon. Spessard L., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Florida, Committee on Appropriations, Washington, D.C., ^^Be
September 2, 1970 5537
Orendain, Antonio, United Farm Workers, Organizing Com-
mittee/AFL-CIO , Texas Branch, McAllen, Tex., July 15, 1970_ 5448
Sanchez, R. P. (Bob), attorney and counselor at law, McAllen,
Tex., July 22, 1970 5650
Shultz, George P., Secretary of Labor, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, D.C., June 26, 1970 (with enclosure) 5828
Wragg, Otis O. Ill, managing editor, the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla.,
July 18, 1970 5558
Questions posed by the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor to the
Department of Labor concerning migrant and seasonal farmworker
housing and answers subsequently submitted 5829
MIGRANT AND SEASONAL FARMWORKER
POWERLESSNESS
(Who Is Responsible?)
TUESDAY, JULY 21, 1970
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the
Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
Washington, B.C.
The subcommittee met at 9 : 30 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 318,
Old Senate OfHce Building, Senator Walter F. Mondale (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Mondale (presiding), Saxbe and Schweiker.
Committee staff members present : Boren Chertkov, counsel.
Senator Mondale. The subcommittee will come to order.
Today, we begin the 2d of the 3 days of hearings in which we are
making inquiry into the misery and powerlessness of migratory
farmworkers, and who might be responsible.
Yesterday, we heard a team of doctors, with emphasis on conditions
of farmworker health, nutrition, and housing.
This morning, we will attempt to determine why Federal programs
do not reach this population, who is blocking the progress and per-
petuating the misery at the local level. We will also hear from a wit-
ness representing the Project for Corporate Responsibility. All of this
is designed to seek answers to the incredible plight and misery which
has continued over the decades, despite all efforts to the contrary.
I would like to add at this point that Congresswoman Shirley
Chisholm has requested an opportunity to testify before the subcom-
mittee. I am honored that she has an interest in our study, and it stands
as a tribute to her concern for all oppressed people. In a most eloquent
statement she pinpoints the responsibility of all Senators and all Con-
gressmen to the migrant, noting that they are otherwise politically
powerless and without representation.
Because of schedule complications, Mrs. Chisholm cannot be with
us. But, without objection, I would like to order her statement printed
in the record, as though read.
(The prepared statement of Congresswoman Chisholm follows:)
PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. SHIRLEY CHISHOLM, A REPRE-
SENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Mr. Chairman. I would like to take this opportunity to commend
you. Senator Mondale, as well as the other members of this subcom-
(5389)
5390
mittee for the laudable efforts you have made in focusing public atten-
tion upon the problems of migrant farmworkers. That intolerable con-
ditions persist is not due to a lack of effort on your part. Rather, it is
due partially to a lack of more legislators who are as knowledgeable
and concerned as this small group here today.
I speak to you not as a migrant worker or even as one who has a
great deal of expertise in the area of migrant problems. I speak rather,
as one who is concerned and as one who is committed to the struggle
of oppressed people everywhere to gain a fair share in the benefits of
American society. I come, too, because I feel a personal responsibility
to those who have no representation in our Government. All Members
of Congress, regardless of their geographic location within the coun-
try, have a moral obligation to represent migrant workers. I say this
because the very definition of migrancy excludes migrants from many
of our traditional political processes. The high degree of mobility
necessitated by the seasonal nature of harvesting usually makes voting
impossible. Migrants therefore, because they cannot vote and because
they are obligated to travel, are not really in anyone's district. They
are not really in anyone's State. They are found in all our districts and
in all our States and we must be cognizant of this if migrant workers
are to receive the adequate representation they deserve.
I am not needed, as a resident from Brooklyn, to describe the in-
human conditions under which migrant workers are forced to live.
I have seen the testimony previously presented before this subcom-
mittee and know that I could add little in terms of description. You
have heard all of this information for years ; you know the problems.
You have heard the transparent excuses from avaricious businessmen
who perpetuate human suffering by continuing their brutal exploita-
tion of workers. You have heard the solutions which have been offered.
You have heard all of these things and you have expressed genuine
concern. For that I commend you. But this concern, no matter how
genuine, doesn't feed hungry people, nor does it adequately clothe
them. Concern doesn't send children from the fields into the classrooms
for help in restoring human dignity. The concern exists but the prob-
lems persist. What is needed, it seems, is not more testimony ; nor more
excuses from growers. What is needed rather, is a positive program
of action which insures a decent life for those who are forced to work
as migrants. I believe, in conjunction with the United Farm Workers,
that the key to that insurance is unionization. My testimony, therefore,
focuses on the need for organizational efforts within the farm-labor
community and the barriers that this unionization faces.
THE NEED TO UNIONIZE
One of the most graphic ways of illustrating the need for unioniza-
tion is to examine the differential between the average wages earned
in industry and the average wages earned by farmworkers who have
yet to unionize. Frequently, those in industry earn twice as much per
hour, in addition to fringe benefits, for doing work which takes little
skill and is less physically exhausting. Furthermore, the differential is
increasing. In 1948, the average California farmworker earned 62 per-
cent of the hourly wage of his counterpart in manufacturing. In 1965,
the average farmworker's earnings had slipped to 46 percent of the
wages earned by the average worker in manufacturing.
5391
Collaborating evidence for the need to unionize can be clearly seen
by comparing wages and working conditions before the formation of
UFWOC with the conditions resulting from the recently signed union
contracts. The statistics sometimes vary, but they all tell the same story.
Before union contracts, workers earned about $1.33 per hour. The Cali-
fornia union contracts call for $1.80 per hour plus 20 cents per box of
grapes. Before UFWOC there was no provision for elderly migrants
who are without pensions. The new union contracts provide an eco-
nomic development fund to help care for these people. Before the
union there were no paid vacations, no acceptable grievance proce-
dures, no standards for safe and tolerable working conditions, no
guarantees of decent health facilities, few safety requirements, and
no help in covering prohibitive medical expenses. Many of the union
contracts provide all of these minimal serA^ces.
Statistics show that overall farm production is increasing while the
number of farmworkers is decreasing. In 1968, for example, agricul-
tural production more than doubled the 1950 output, yet only about
half as many workers were used to produce it. This is due primarily
to increased mechanization. Some have pointed to these statistics and
used them as a justification for discouraging unionization within the
farm industry. "Why should you waste your time forming unions?
There won't be any jobs left pretty soon. Machines will be doing it
better and faster. You should spend your time learning a new trade."
Yet precisely the opposite is true. An increased reliance on automa-
tion makes unionization both easier and more essential. Easier, because
mechanization tends to structure the labor market thus facilitating
organizational activity and more essential because those workers dis-
placed deserve a share in the jobs created by automation, a share which
can only be gained by a strong union. Someone will have to mn the
machines which replace handworkers. The union is necessary to insure
that those who have spent their lives in farm labor will be given first
choice at the new, high-paying mechanized jobs. The union must be
present to prevent inexperienced Anglos from taking all of the good
jobs from the Chicanos and blacks who have worked their entire lives
in the fields. The union is also necessary as a means of retraining those
workers who are displaced and who are unable to find farm-related
work.
The UFWOC contracts recently signed with the California growers
provide that the employers contribute 2 cents per box of grapes to
an economic development fund which would be partially used to re-
train workers displaced by automation. Without unionization those
cut off by automation would be left to fend for themselves in a world
which is completely alien to their previous way of life. Hopefully then,
unionization will protect the worker as the fann industry becomes
increasingly dependent on machines. If the union exists and is suc-
cessful in placing its workers in the high-paying jobs created by
automation, then those that will be displaced will be the wives and
children of those receiving the new jobs. It is these people Avho should
be displaced because they will no longer be economically dependent
on family stoop labor.
A less conspicuous, yet perhaps equally important, reason for unioni-
zation is that the struggle to organize is a process by which migrant
workers benefit — not only from the resultant union but from the pro-
5392
cess of organization. The struggle, in itself, is beneficial in two ways.
First, it tends to focus attention upon the problems of migrant work-
ers. Second, and more importantly, the fight of oppressed people to
liberate themselves from the bonds of economic exploitation increases
one's self-respect and aifirms one's humanity. You cannot be set free.
You must set yourself free. Unionization can play an important role
in that necessary struggle.
Unionization can further be seen as the best solution to the problems
of farmworkers if one examines the alternative courses of action. One
response would be to do nothing and hence depend upon the good
nature of the growers. Farmworkers know too much about the good-
natured growers to do this. Another way of attacking migrant prob-
lems would be to depend solely on legislative initiative from Congress.
Historically speaking however, this would be unwise, all too often
farmworkers have watched helplessly as their chance for a decent life
was compromised away in the name of "idealistic pragmatism," Thus
unionization is the only alternative which is both viable and effective
and which includes the workers themselves as the most important re-
source in the struggle.
Realizing then, that unionization is essential if migrant workers are
to share equitably in the benefits of American society, one must then
examine the barriers which exist to organizational activity. They are
by no means obstacles which are easily overcome ; however, neither are
they insurmountable.
BARRIERS TO UNIONIZATION
The growers
Perhaps the most obvious barrier to unionization is the steadfast
obstinancy of the growers themselves. They have constantly refused to
meet with workers to discuss even the most reasonable and mutually
beneficial agreements. Those that have met have done so reluctantly
and primarily because the economic sanctions employed eventually be-
came effective enough to damage their all-important margin of profit.
Not having had previous experience with unions, the growers are
fearful and thus unable to see the benefits unionization has for them.
Specifically, they have failed to take note of recently signed union
contracts which prohibit consumer boycotts, lockouts, and strikes dur-
ing the harvest season. These are the things to which the growers are
now so susceptible and it is these things which tend to hurt the farm-
ing industry. If unionization is necessary and if the growers refuse
to voluntarily cooperate, then economic sanctions will be employed
even though they may have a short-term crippling effect on the econ-
om}' of farming. The workers will do what is necessary to insure them-
selves a just wage and decent living conditions. It is up to the growers
to decide whether or not they will cooperate and thus help their own
industry.
The nature of niigrancy
The most highly publicized obstacle to unionization is the nature of
migrant farmwork itself. It is seasonal and thus creates a high degree
of mobility. The workers seldom are in one place long enough to facili-
tate organization. This constant mobility coupled with a short job
tenure tend to destroy the community of interest which draws workers
5393
toward unionization. There is, furthermore, an oversupply of labor
in migrant farm work which decreases the chances for successful strikes
and makes organizational activity more difficult. Potential scab labor
abounds. Often the growers use techniques reminescent of Steinbeck's
"Grapes of Wrath" ni order to encourage an oversupply of labor. The
annual worker plan, which is financed by the Farm Labor and Rural
Manpower Service and has as its ostensible purpose increased efficiency
in matching capable workers with available jobs, is used frequently
by growers as a means to overrecruit.
The absence and abuse of litigation
A third major barrier to successful unionization is the absence of
even minimal legislation to protect and encourage farm unions. You
are all aware, I know, of the exclusion of farm labor from the provi-
sions of the National Labor Relations Act and of similar exclusions
throughout the history of the labor movement in America. There is
currently no legally sanctioned right to organize or principal of major-
ity rule for the selection of employee bargaining representatives. Sim-
ilarly, there are no uniform prohibitions against unfair labor practices.
This lack of legislative safeguards has prevented the establishment of
a tradition of collective bargaining and reasoned negotiations — a tra-
dition which has been very beneficial to other unionized industries,
of those few laws that do exist, most are either poorly and inequitably
enforced or for some reason are not applicable to migrant farmwork-
ers. Examples of this are too numerous to mention. The enforcement
of immigration standards and child labor regulations can only be
called shoddy at best, similarly, the few and pitifully inadequate mini-
mum wage laws that do exist mean little when the government looks
the other way while blatant violations occur. Other legislation has
subtly excluded farmworkers. Social security for instance, is rarely
available to migrants because the nature of their work makes it difficult
to determine employer-employee relationships, and because of the cor-
ruption which is associated with the deduction of social security taxes
by some employers and crew leaders. Furthermore, in most States,
residency requirements usually eliminate migrants from the food stamp
program, w^elfare assistance, and existing health services, leaving work-
ers to care for themselves out of their meager earnings.
The Workers
A decidedly less difficult barrier to overcome, yet in some instances
a very real one, is the workers themselves. In many cases the workers'
only experience with unions has been the exploitative grower-con-
trolled unions or those set up by avaricious labor contractors. These
experiences have left a deep-seated cynicism toward organizational
activities. In some situations there have also been certain cultural
blocks to successful unionization. Occasionally the concept of La Raza
has been perceived by Chicano workers as antithetical to unioniza-
tion. In other cases however. La Raza has been a positive force and
advantageous to union organizers. There are also thousands of
"casual workers" among the farm labor population — those who work
on farms on a part-time basis. Often they are not as interested in
union activity because their standard of living is not solely dependent
upon farm-labor working conditions. The effects of this occasional
cynicism and apathy are minimal. They become even less important
5394
because of the tremendous efforts of the UFWOC who have shown
workers that their union is different, that the powers can be beaten,
and that their greatest resource is the workers themselves.
Raciwi
Not the least of the barriers faced in the struggle to unionize is
the institutional and individual racism which pervades American
society at all levels. To overlook people's aversion to, and hatred of,
differences in others is to overlook one of the most important dynamics
operating in any social situation — it is to overlook the racist cancer
which continuously erodes the principles upon which this country
was founded, the fact that the eastern migrant stream is predomi-
nantly black is no accident. The fact the migrants of the western
stream are almost exclusively Chicano is no accident either. Both
are manifestations of institutional racism. Blacks and Chicanos are
disproportionately represented among migrant workers primarily be-
cause American society is fundamentally racist — because migrancy
is the worst kind of work and hence the only kind available to many
people of color.
People who are forced to travel as migrants are seen in the com-
munities in which they work as "different" — ^the commonly accepted
euphemism for dirty, diseased, immoral, and generally unwanted.
As harvest time approaches, farmers and other members of the "com-
munity" anxiously await the arrival of their migrants, as harvest
closes, they await, with equal anxiety, their departure. Psychologists,
and sociologists, most notably Gunnar Myrdal and Kenneth Clark,
have written detailed studies about the effects of this kind of discri-
mination on the people who are its victims. Certainly this psychologi-
cal impact is one more barrier to successful unionization of migrant
workers.
Caesar Chavez has spoken about another kind of racism — a subtle
form but one that greatly hinders the development of farm unions.
He has perceived that somehow the growers are surprised that their
workers are not happy. Somehow the corporate farmers don't like
the idea of negotiating with "dumb Mexicans." What they are finding
out is that their facist stereotypes are false, that Chicanos are not lazy
and dumb and satisfied, but rather, intelligent and militant about
obtaining a just share of the benefits of American society. What these
growers have found out and what all of America needs to find out is
that social revolution is not coming — it is here.
Senator Mondale. Our first witnesses this morning are Mr. Efrain
Fernandez and Mr. Roger Dunwell, from the Rio Grande Valley of
Texas.
Senator Yarborough will be here shortly. He asked that his best
Welshes be extended.
You may proceed.
STATEMENT OF ROGER McCLURE DUNWELL, LAWYER, RIO
GRANDE VALLEY, TEX., REPRESENTING UNITED FARM WORK-
ERS ORGANIZING COMMITTEE
Mr. Dunwell. Senator Mondale, honorable members of the sub-
committee :
5395
My name is Roger McClure Dunwell. I am a member of the bar of
the State of New York.
For the last 11 months, I have been working with the United Farm
Workers Organizing Committee and Colonias del Valle, Inc. in the
Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas, particularly in Hidalgo County.
The testimony I have been asked to present comes from our expe-
riences in the valley.
My testimony takes two forms. First, I am submitting a prepared
statement which totals about 80 pages. Because of its length, I prefer
not to read the statement in its entirety. I propose, instead, to empha-
size those portions of the statement which the Texas branch of the
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee feels most important.
You heard yesterday in chastening detail, of the disease a group of
visiting doctors found in Hidalgo County, Tex. The stoiy they told, as
poignant, as tragic as it was, could scarcely have taken any of us by
surprise. We know, have known for years and decades, that such
disease exists. The simple truth is, as you said yesterday. Senator
Mondale, that those who care have not had the power to make
any difference.
A doctor said to you yesterday that only you could help. I am not
convinced that this is true. We need the assistance and support of
Government officials now more than ever, and know that we can count
on honest men, like yourselves, to stand by our side.
We also know now that success will only come from the efforts of the
farmworkers themselves. Only a strong, brave, and independent orga-
nization of farmworkers can forge the very basic changes that must
come about. There is no more eloquent example of the truth of this
than the increasingly successful struggle of the United Fann Workers
Organizing Committee. They must succeed. They will succeed.
THE POLITICS OF EXPLOITATION
If we look at the problem of poor health in isolation, we would be
forced to conclude that disease persists for a lack of sufficiently funded
intelligent programs and personnel. To do so would be a mistake, for
although such conclusions may inevitably follow from yesterday's
testimony, we have only been talking about disease. We haven't de-
tailed the lack of housing, food, clothing, sanitation and education
upon which a healthy and productive life must be based.
We could hold hearings on any one of these areas, concluding in
each that new or better governmental programs will do the trick,
lliquestionably, they would help in varying degrees, but the one factor
underlying each deprivation, underlying, too, what is gloriously re-
ferred to as the American way of life, is money in a man's pocket.
Until the farmworkers earn a decent wage, no fundamental changes
will be seen.
Food is big business. Though the small farmer is being caught, like
the farniwoi-kei-, by the growth of agribusiness, many people are mak-
ing a lot of money by producing food. Food is such big business that
even the most naive must be forced to ask himself, "If agribusiness
is so profitable, why hasn't the farmworker prospered with the big
growers?''
Quite obviously, he could have. He hasn't because the large growers
have decided that they would rather live in imperial luxury, sur-
5396
rounded by want, than give their employees a fair wage. x\lso apparent
is that far from seeking to help the farmworker in his efforts to right
the imbalance, Federal, State, and local government has consistently
abetted and encouraged the large growers.
Consider the variety of State and Federal laws which exclude or
discriminate against the farmworker. He was excluded from the Wag-
ner Act. He is given a considerable lower wage under Federal and
Texas minimum wage laws.
Despite the alarming accident rate, he is excluded from workmen's
compensation, forced to rely on archaic, employer- weighted tort law.
He isn't entitled to unemployment compensation if laid off from field
work.
To qualify for coverage under any social security program, he must
earn twice as much per quarter. (Compounding the problem, some
growers will not send in social security deductions.) As far as the
Social Security Administration is concerned, a farmworker who
reaches retirement age, his body gnarled from farm work, may never
have earned a dollar in his life.
The catalog could go on. Rather than explore each example in de-
tail, I should prefer to concentrate on Texas' occupational health and
safety laws.
The most basic protections do not exist. The Texas Occupational
Safety Act, which should and could be developed to provide safety
standards for the transportation of migrants, for field sanitation, for
drinking water, for protective devices for pesticide applicators, lies
virtually dormant. There is no incentive to protect the farmworker,
since it is solely upon him that the burden of accidents falls.
Then there is the border. Wetbacks and persons holding resident
cards (who really reside in Mexico), commute daily into Hidalgo dur-
ing the winter, and fill the crewleader's trucks going north in the
summer. Growers encourage the permeable border, for the Mexicans
will work for much less, since they cannot complain if they are paid
below the minimum wage. Labor contractors know this and set up re-
cruiting stations and shapeup stations at the bridge.
When work becomes very scarce, even American citizens, living in
Hidalgo County, will go to the shapeup station attempting to pass as a
resident of Mexico.
The border is doubly satisfactory to the growers, for while it con-
tributes enormously to the already swollen labor market, it also forces
the American Chicano to see his Mexican brother as the source of his
problem. There is only so much work ; the work must be fairly paid,
no matter who does it.
Tlie growers have been successful until recently in playing off
brother against brother to drive wages down because there is no pen-
alty for using illegal labor. (Tony Orendain has suggested that if
growers were fined $1,000 for every illegal laborer found in their fields,
the use of illegals would quickly end.)
That the grower-incited internecine suspicion is not what it once
was is due to no change in the border, or in the competition, but rather
the growing awareness among Mexicans and Mexican Americans that
they have a common interest in fair wages.
Well-meaning Government officials have tried to help. HEW staff
members came to the valley in a series of visits designed to develop
5397
comprehensive health planning. The visits came to naught. On the
other hand, other officials clearly don't care.
At a recent meeting of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development
Council, 25 people attended. There was an active discussion for 1 hour
on an emergency road service grant, plus a pitch from a Motorola
salesman selling communication equipment. Then there was a 20-
minute discussion of health care.
Free clinics in McAllen and Weslaco were proposed. The Weslaco
hospital administration said they didn't want the clinic, unless it could
be guaranteed that there would be no cost to the hospital.
Meanwhile, incredible crop subsidies pour into the valley; $16
million annually, $8 million into Hidalgo alone. One wonders who is
really driving the welfare Cadillac. None of the $8 million is going to
farmworkers as wages. If the growers' subsidies had instead been di-
rected to the farmworker in the form of a health insurance program,
100,000 persons could have received $80 apiece, and we w^ouldn't be here
today discussing health.
The men and women who have consolidated great fortunes in the
valley have been able to do so because of a variety of factors. Some I
have touched on — the border surplus labor dynamic which has made
labor a forced subsidy, strong lobbies emasculating legislation which
would have treated fann labor like any other kind of labor. Heavy
rural representation in Congress was equally central.
Only a sophisticated, detailed history of the growth of Hidalgo
County would fully explain how the exploiters built their fortunes.
For present purposes, it is enough to remember that it was done in a
relatively short time, mostly since the 1920's and the development of
the grower-dominated Government funded irrigation districts which
made possible intensive use of land. Armies of cheap Mexican labor
were encouraged to come and work the fields. Cheap labor and in-
expensive land fostered two other developments — the real estate specu-
lation, in which the Bentsen family has figured prominently, and
winter tourism.
I have often referred to growers as exploiters, but I have used the
word loosely and, perhaps, inaccurately. The exploiters are not the
maiority of the growers. The number of farm units in each of the four
valley counties is diminishing. The small grower is caught in a squeeze.
Little profit accrues in a small growing operation, particularly in the
crops grown in the valley.
Packing sheds, shippers, and marketers receive the greater part of
the return on the produce. Increasingly successful are the growers who
also have packing and marketing facilities, like the Schuster family.
Parenthetically, Frank Schuster received $77,244 in subsidies during
1969. Carl Schuster i-eceived $65,151. (Mrs. Carl Schuster remarked to
an interviewer that welfare was destroying the initiative of the poor
to work, and that the poor were unwilling to work when welfare is
available.)
Shary Land Farm, recipient of one of the largest USDA subsidies
($125,000 in 1967; $115,000 in 1968), has its own shipping interest.
Former Governor Alan Shivers married into this family. Marialice
Shivers, with the same address as Shary Farm, is recorded for 1968 as
receiving $26,000 in ASCS payments.
Another successful grower, packer, and marketer is Griffin and
Brand. Griffin and Brand, a nationwide corporation with scAcral sub-
36-513 O — 71— pt. 8B — —2
5398
sidiaries, is a salient example of a burgeoning trend to grow in Mexico,
pack and ship from the United States.
Attracted by cheap land and even cheaper labor, the agribusinesses
like Griffin and Brand are deserting the labor force they once induced
into the country. The movement to Mexico is substantial enough to
worry even the Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association which, like
California growing concerns, has heretofore managed to compete suc-
cessfully with south Texas due to higher efficiency and superior trans-
portation facilities.
Nevertheless, agribusinesses such as Griffin and Brand, Elmore and
Stahl, John B. Hardwick, Louisiana Strawberry and Vegetable Co.,
and Rio Farms, continue to keep substantial land holdings in the val-
ley. They anticipate the demise of their smaller competitors, and con-
tinue to exploit the workers.
An interesting example of the lengths that even an operation as large
as Griffin and Brand may go to gouge their employees occurred last
fall. Workers were picking peppers for G. & B. at 30 cents a basket.
At about 11 a.m., the field man came in and dropped the price to 25
cents, retroactive. Three workers came to us to complain.
We called the Department of Labor in McAllen, and were referred
to the Harlingen office. The Department of Labor pointed out that it
was Friday, and that nothing could be done until Monday. But on
Monday the investigators had a meeting upstate and would be tied
up for a week or more. We called the Houston office of the Department
of Labor. Two hours later, Harlingen called back and announced
that investigators were coming over because they had received authori-
zation for overtime.
A packing shed ran afoul of the Department of Labor last year for
the same type of minimum wage violation. The Department of Labor
found that the company owed its workei*s approximately $10,000. On
information, most of the money is still in the bank because the shed did
not have to mail out the checks to the workers affected. Each worker
must ask for his own check. Many did not even know that the Depart-
ment of Labor had found the violation.
The kind of statement made by Mrs. Schuster, that growers cannot
find labor in the valley any more, is interesting in the context of the
exodus to Mexico. Increasingly, labor is used in very high concentra-
tions, often in conjunction with machinery, but for very short periods
of time.
A typical harvesting operation on, say, a 40-acre field, may involve
six or eight large trucks full of workers, perhaps over 100. They will
harvest the field in short order, each worker earning $3, maybe $4.
Then the work is finished. The produce is hauled to the sheds, and there
is no more work for the harvesters. The trucker takes a cut from the
worker's pay, and he is left with almost nothing to show for his work.
Despite Mrs. Schuster's complaint, I had never seen a day go by
when there weren't workers available at the bridge, or in the shape-up
stands in town.
The low utilization of labor and low wages also raise interesting
questions about the labor cost to the grower and the consumer. A grower
sjDends about 0.4 to 0.8 cent per pound to pick tomatoes, including a
margin for waste. Repackaging flats adds slightly over 1 cent, for a
total labor input of 1.9 cents per pound. Sold in local markets for 29
cents a pound, labor accounts for only 7 percent of retail cost.
5399
A 25-cent head of lettuce costs 2.2 cents to pick and pack ; a 1-pound
bag of carrots, selling for 19 cents a pound, costs only 1.2 cents to pick
and pack.
Higher wage scales would hardly be a disaster to anyone. Tripling
wages Avould result in only a 2.5-cent increase in the market cost of
carrots, assuming that agribusinesses tried to pass on the whole cost
to the market. If all growers, packers and shippers were forced to
pay the tripled wage, none would suffer a competitive disadvantage.
i am not suggesting that merely tripling current wage scales would
be fair, but that there is no general public interest in denying the
worker a fair wage. Indeed, there is reason to believe that the poor and
the middle-income consumer have interests which dictate a friendly
alliance.
A successful organizing effort among farmworkers would substan-
tially reduce the need for Government programs that may cost a lot,
but offer little. By supporting the farmworker, the consumer is avoid-
ing the waste of his income.
No analysis of the valley power structure would be complete with-
out a reference to the Bentsen family.
The elder Lloyd Bentsen came to the valley from Minnesota in the
1920's and built an extensive land business. In the intervening years,
the family diversified its holdings and interests. It owns now a drug-
store chain. Medico, banks, real estate companies, and even an agri-
chemical business affiliated with ITnion Carbide. The family still owns
extensive citrus acreage, but its primaiy influence is in the capital mar-
ket, where, with the Xewhouses, it dominates the valley.
Although a Chicano-oriented bank would undoubtedly be a success,
local Chicano businessmen have been frustrated in their attempts to
organize such a venture by the Bensen-Newhouse hegemony. One mem-
ber of the Bentsen family sits on both the McAllen School Board and
the board of the hospital. (Othal Brand, of Griffin & Brand, sits
with Calvin Bentsen on the school board. Both are especially reac-
tionary. )
Though less so today, the town of Mission has long been a kind of
Bentsen patrimony, ruled by the Bentsens for the privileged Anglo
minoritv.
The Benstens, the Schusters, the Griffins, and the Brands are but a
few striking examples of Anglo domination in the valley. Four hun-
dred and ninety-five persons or corporations received subsidies in
excess of $5,000 in 1967 ; 466 in 1968— less than 10 percent of the
recipients had Spanish surnames.
In 1969, there were 80 payees receiving in excess of $25,000. Only
one had a Spanish surname, Guerra Bros. One expects to see even
larger operations emerge. Tenneco, for example, has agricultural acre-
age in the valley.
Worse than ithe large subsidies is the attitude of the elite toward
their serfs. The most charitable point of view is that the Chicano's
lot is attributable to ignorance. Educate people and they will know
that they should wash their hands before preparing food, that they
should drink fresh water.
Such arguments are ridiculous. Most people know they should wash
their hands, but there is no clean water to wash with, because the
sewage systems foul the already brackish well water. Most colonias,
5400
and many houses in cities, don't even have any water. Sewage systems
are expensive to build ; water beyond the reach of all but a few.
One colonia pays taxes on a bond issue for a water system that runs
near their boundary. They will be paying 34 more yeare. They can't
drink a drop of it, can't even use it to w^ater their gardens, because the
water is only for the irrigation of large farms.
Many colonias have been waiting for years for the FHA to approve
loans for water systems. One colonia, Colonia Nueva, has sought for
3 years to get water. An Anglo real estate dealer sold the people the
land without any water rights. The well wat«r is undrinkable, and
the people have to truck in water from nearby Donna. After a long
struggle to get temporally water rights, the Colonia sought to join a
local water corporation. Mid-Valley, which would have applied for a
loan, constructeid, and administered the system.
Mid- Valley refused to let them join because their allotment was only
temporary, not permanent, though there was virtually no chance that
the allotment would have been lost. Now the Colonia is going ahead on
their own. If they are lucky, FHA will approve their loan, and they
will have water to drink. (In the meantime, they are dry. We recently
had a 3-day rainstonn which flooded many areas. A few residents of
the Colonia had built cisterns. Not a drop from the deluge fell on
Colonia Nueva.)
The frustrations in dealing with the Anglo power structure repli-
cate the frustrations of the sick migrant seeking a government service
which would help him. At times, he is met with a smile, always with a
"No';.
Still, the valley has its ironies.
A Catholic priest was visited early this year by representatives of
one of the members of the hospital board. The board member was
thinking of starting his own hospital, and wanted a few nuns around
to give it aura. The hospital was to be a first-class establishment calcu-
lated to take the most affluent clientele away from McAllen General.
Irony, however, is infrequent.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Numerous recommendations have been offered for easing the crisis
in health. One such recommendation comes from the committee formed
at the suggestion of the medical society and meeting under the direc-
tion of Dr. Copenhaver, director of the county health department.
The plan, estimated to cost $1 million annually, would seek, in Dr.
Love's words, to fill "a gap in delivery of health care to certain eco-
nomicallv depressed segments of our population." (Corpus Christi
Caller, June 11, 1970.) Information and referral centei*s would be set
up, a^ong with outpatient clinics in Weslaco, Edinburg, and McAllen.
I thing Dr. Love would acknowledge that even with a $1 million
annual budget, we will not have a comprehensive health service for
all the county's pooi-. If, as is proposed, 12,000 persons will be treated
annually, service will still fall far short of county needs. Serious cases
will need hospitalization, apparently not a part of the committee's
plan. More important, health will continue to deteriorate as long as
water, sewage, and food remain problems.
I have continually stressed what the Texas branch of the union feels
will contribute most to good health — fair wages. We do not want new
5401
l)i'o^ranis which create complacent, tenure-oriented bureaucracies, and
don't deliver. We want no new leg:islation, unless it is designed and is
l)assed to support the fai-mworker in his struggle to gain a fair wage.
We do not want legislation which purports to help, but really traps
the workers in a maze of restrictions which would vitiate the farm
movement.
The Government and the American people can help, and should. The
American people pay for a dual system of welfare ; the agribusinesses
wax fat on subsidies, expensive public welfare systems fail to meet
the needs of the poor. We appeal to our fellow citizens to consider
that by supporting the union they will be helping: themselves. The
Hidalgo farmworker who lavishes our tables with food and the con-
sumer in New Jersey, in Minnesota, in California, Iowa, or Massa-
chusetts, have a real stake in each other's health and well-being. The
consumer boycott of grapes is a positive start. It must continue and
grow until every farmworker has the rights most of us take for
granted.
Donne wrote, "No man is an island, entire of itself." The plight
of the farmworker diminishes us all. Let us join together and support
him, like the part of us he is.
Senator Moxdale. Thank you, Mr. Dunwell, for an excellent state-
ment.
I will turn now to Mr. Fernandez.
After hearing from both, we will open up the discussion for ques-
tions.
Mr. Dunwell. Thank you, Senator Mondale. For reasons of time,
I have presented orally only a summary of my full statement. I would
like to submit for the record my entire statement.
Senator Moxdale. Without objection, I order printed at this point
in the I'ecoid your full statement.
(The prepared statement of Mr. Dunwell follows:)
Prepared Statement of Roger McClure Dunwell, Member, Bar of the State
OF New York
Senator Mondale, honorable members of the Subcommittee :
My name is Roger McClure Dunwell, I am a member of the Bar of the State of
New York. For the last almost eleven months I have been working with the United
Farm Workers Organizing Committee and Colonias del Valle, Inc. in the Lower
Rio Grande Valley of Texas, particularly in Hidalgo County.
The testimonv I have been asked to present comes from our experiences in the
Valley.
My testimony takes two forms. First, I am submitting a prepared statement
which totals about 80 pages. Because of its length, I prefer not to read the state-
ment in its entirety. I propose, instead, to emphasize those portions of the state-
ment which the Texas branch of the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee
feels most important.
You heard yesterday in chastening detail, of the disease a group of visiting doc-
tors found in Hidalgo County, Texas. The story they told, as poignant, as tragic
as it was. could scarcely have taken any of us by surprise. We know, have known
for years and decades, that such disease exists. The simple trutli is, as you said
yesterday, Senator Mondale, that those who care have not had the power to make
any difference.
A doctor said to you yesterday that only you could help. I am not convinced
that this is true. We need the assistance and support of government officials now
more than ever, and know that we can count on honest men, like yourselves, to
stand by our side. We also know now that success will only come from the efforts
of the farmworkers themselves. Only a strong, brave and independent organiza-
tion of farmworkers can forge the very basic changes that must come about.
5402
There is no more eloquent example of the truth of this than the increasingly suc-
cessful struggle of the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee. They must
succeed. They will succeed.
THE POLITICS OF EXPLOITATION
If we look at the problem of poor health in isolation, we would be forced to
conclude that disease persists for a lack of suflBciently funded intelligent programs
and personnel. To do so would be a mistake, for although such conclusions may
inevitably follow from yesterday's testimony, we have only been talking about
disease. We haven't detailed the lack of housing, food, clothing, sanitation and
education upon which a healthy and productive life must be based.
We could hold hearings on any one of these areas, concluding in each that new
or better governmental programs will do the trick. Unquestionably they would
help in varying degrees, but the one factor underlying each deprivation, under-
lying, too, what is gloriously referred to as the American Way of Life, is money in
a man's pocket. Until the farmworkers earn a decent wage, no fundamental
changes will be seen.
Food is big business. Though the small farmer is being caught, like the farm-
worker, by the growth of agribusiness, many people are making a lot of money
by producing food. Food is such big business that even the most naive must be
forced to ask himself, "If agribusiness is so profitable, why hasn't the farmworker
prospered with the big growers?"
Quite obviously, he could have. He hasn't because the large growers have de-
cided that they would rather live in imperial luxury, surrounded by want, than
give their employees a fair wage. Also apparent is that far from seeking to help
the farmworker in his efforts to right the imbalance, federal, state, and local
government has consistently abetted and encouraged the large growers.
Consider the variety of state and federal laws which exclude or discriminate
against the farmworker. He was excluded from the Wagner Act. He is given a
considerably lower wage under federal and Texas minimum wage laws. Despite
the alarming accident rate, he is excluded from workmen's compensation, forced
to rely on archaic, employer-weighted tort law. He isn't entitled to unemploy-
ment compensation if laid off from field work. To qualify for coverage under
any Social Security program he must earn twice as much per quarter. (Com-
pounding the problem, some growers will not send in Social Security deductions. )
As far as the Social Security Administration is concerned, a farmworker who
reaches retirement age, his body gnarled from farm work, may never have
earned a dollar in his life.
The catalogue could go on. Rather than explore each example in detail, I
should prefer to concentrate on Texas' occupational health and safety laws.
The most basic protections do not exist. The Texas Occupational Safety Act,
which should and could be developed to provide safety standards for the trans-
portation of migrants, for field sanitation, for drinking water, for protective
devices for i^esticide applicators, lies virtually dormant. There is no incentive
to protect the farmworker, since it is solely upon him that the burden of accidents
falls.
Then there is the border. Wetbacks and persons holding resident cards, (who
really reside in Mexico), commute daily into Hidalgo during the winter, and fill
the crew leader's trucks going North in the summer. Growers encourage the
permeable border, for the Mexicans will work for much less, since they cannot
complain if they are paid below the minimum wage. Labor contractors know
this and set up recruiting stations and shape-up stations at the bridge. When
work becomes very scarce even American citizens, living in Hidalgo County, will
go to the shai)e-up station attempting to pass as a resident of Mexico. The border
is doubly satisfactory to the growers, for while it contributes enormously to the
already swollen labor market, it also forces the American Chicano to see his
Mexican brother as the source of his problem. There is only so much work ; the
work must be fairly paid no matter who does it. The growers have been success-
ful until recently in playing off brother against brother to drive wages down be-
cause there is no penalty for using illegal labor. (Tony Orendain has sug-
gested that if growers were fined .$1(XX) for every illegal laborer found in their
fields, the use of illegals would quickly end.) That the grower-incited inter-
necine suspicion is not what it once was, is due to no change in the border, or
in the competition, but rather the growing awareness among Mexicans and
Mexican-Americans that they have a common interest in fair wages.
5403
Well-meaning government oflBcials have tried to help. HEW staff members
came to the Valley in a series of visits designed to develop comprehensive health
planning. The visits came to naught. On the other hand, other oflBcials clearly
don't care. At a recent meeting of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development
Council twenty-five people attended. There was an active discussion for one
hour on an emergency road service grant, plus a pitch from a Motorola salesman
selling communication equipment. Then there was a twenty minute discussion
of health care. Free clinics in McAUen and Weslaco were proposed. The Weslaco
liospital administration said they didn't want the clinic, imless it could be
guaranteed that there would be no cost to the hospital.
Meanwhile incredible crop sxibsidies pour into the Valley ; $16 million annually,
$8 million into Hidalgo alone. One wonders who is really driving the welfare
Cadillac. None of the $8 million is going to farmworkers as wages. If the
growers subsidies had instead been directed to the farmworker in the form of
a health insurance program, 100,000 persons could have received $80.00 a piece,
and we wouldn't be here today discussing health.
The men and women who have consolidated great fortune in the Valley have
been able to do so because of a variety of factors. Some I have touched on — the
border surplus labor dynamic which has made labor a forced subsidy, strong
lobbies emasculating legislation which would have treated farm labor like any
other kind of labor. Heavy rural representation in Congress was equally central.
Only a sophisticated, a detailed history of the growth of Hidalgo County
would fully explain how the exploiters built their fortunes. For present purposes
it is enough to remember that it was done in a relatively short time, mostly
since the 1920's and the development of the grower-dominated government funded
irrigation districts which made jKtssible intensive use of land. Armies of cheap
Mexican Labor were encouraged to come and work the fields. Cheap labor and
Inexpensive land fostered two other developments — the real estate speculation,
in which the Bentsen family has figured prominently, and winter tourism.
I have often referred to growers as exploiters, but I have used the word loosely,
and i^erhaps inaccurately. Tlie exploiters are not the majority of the growers.
The number of farm units in each of the four Valley counties is diminishing. The
small grower is caught in a squeeze. Little profit accrues in a small growing
operation, particularly in the crops grown in the Valley. Packing sheds, shippers
and marketers receive the greater part of the return on the produce. Increasingly
successful are the growers who al.so have packing and marketing facilities, like
the Schuster family. Parenthetically, Frank Schuster received $77,244 in sub-
.sidies during 1969. Carl Schuster received $65,151. (Mrs. Carl Schuster remarked
to an inten'iewer that welfare was de.stroying the initiative of the i>oor to work,
and that the poor were unwilling to work when welfare is available.)
Shary Land Farm, reicpient of one of the largest USDA subsidies ($125,000 in
1967, $115,(X)0 in 1968) has its own shipping interest. Former Governor Alan
Shivers married into this family. Marialice Shivers, with the same address at
Shary Farm, is recorded for 1968 as receiving $26.(XX) in ASCS payments.
Another succe.sisful grower, packer and market.er is GriflBn and Brand. GriflSn
and Brand, a nationwide eoriwration with several subsidiaries, is a salient ex-
ample of a burgeoning trend to grow in Mexico, pack and ship from the United
States. Attracted by cheap land and even cheaper labor the agribusinesses like
GriflSn and Brand are deserting the labor force they once induced into the coun-
try. The movement to Mexico is substantial enough to worry even the Florida
Fruit and Vegetai)le Association which, like California growing concerns, has
heretofore managed to compete succe.ssfully with South Texas due to higher
eflSciency and superior transportation facilities.
Nevertheless, agribusinesses such as GriflSn and Bland, Elmore and Stahl,
John B. Hardwick, Louisiana Strawberry and Vegetiible Company, and Rio
Farms continue to keep subsitantial land holdings in the Valley. They anticipate
the demi.se of their smaller comi)etitoTS, and continue to exploit the workers.
An interesting example of the lengths that even an operation as large as Griffin
and Brand may go to gouge their employees occurred last Fall. Workers were
picking i^eppers for G & B at 30(* a basket. At about 11 A.M. the field man came
in and dropi^ed the price to 25^*, retroactive. Three workers came to us to com-
plain. We called the Department of Labor in McAllen, and were referred to the
Harlingen oflice. The Department of Labor ix)inted out that it was Friday, and
that nothing could be done until Monday. But on Monday the investigators had a
meeting upstate and would be tied up for a week or more. We called the Houston
ofiice of the Department of Labor. Two hours later Harlingen called back and
5404
announced that investigators were coming over because they had received
authorization for overtime.
A packing shed ran afoul of the Department of Labor last year for the same
type of minimum wage violation. The Department of Labor found that the com-
pany owed its workers approximately $10,000. On information, most of this
money is still in the bank because the shed did not have to mail out the checks to
the workers affected. Each worker must ask for his own check. Many did not
even know that the Department of Labor had found the violation.
The kind of statement made by Mrs. Schuster, that growers cannot find labor
in the Valley any more, is interesting in the context of the exodus to Mexico.
Increasingly, labor is used in very high concentrations, often in conjunction with
machinery, but for very short periods of time. A typical harvesting operation on,
say, a forty-acre field, may involve six or eight large trucks full of workers, per-
haps over a hundred. They will harvest the field in short order, each worker earn-
ing three, maybe four dollars. Then the work is finished. The produce is hauled
to the sheds, and there is no more work for the harvesters. The trucker takes a
cut from the worker's pay, and he is left with almost nothing to show for his
work. Despite Mrs. Schuster's complaint, I have never seen a day go by when
there weren't workers available at the bridge, or in the shape-up stands in town.
The low utilization of labor and low wages also raise interesting questions
about the labor cost to the grower and the consumer. A grower spends about .4 to
.8 cents per pound to pick tomatoes, including a margin for waste. Repacking
fiats adds slightly over 1 cent, for a total labor input of 1.9 cents per pound.
Sold in local markets for 29 cents a pound, labor accounts for only 1% of the
retail cost. A twenty-five cent head of lettuce costs 2.2 cents to pick and pack, a
one pound bag of carrots, selling for 19 cents a pound, costs only 1.2 cents to
pick and pack. Higher wage scales would hardly be a disaster to anyone. Trip-
ling wages would result in only a 2.5 cent increase in the market cost of carrots,
assuming that agribusiness tried to pass on the whole cost to the market. If
all growers, packers and shippers were forced to pay the tripled wage, none would
suffer a competitive disadvantage. I am not suggesting that merely tripling cur-
rent wage scales would be fair, but that there is no general public interest in
denying the worker a fair wage. Indeed, there is reason to believe that the poor
and the middle-income consumer have interests which dictate a friendly alliance.
A successful organizing effort among farmworkers would substantially reduce
the need for government programs that may cost a lot, but offer little. By sup-
porting the farmworker, the consumer is avoiding the waste of his income.
No analysis of the "Valley power structure would be complete without a refer-
ence to the Bentsen family. Tlie elder Lloyd Bentsen came to the valley from
Minnesota in the 1920's and built an extensive land business. In the intervening
years the family diversified its holdings and interests. It now owns a drug store
chain, Medico, banks, real estate companies, and even an agri-chemical business
aflSliated with Union Carbide. The family still owns extensive citrus acreage, but
its primary infiuence is in the capital market where, with the Newhouses, it
dominates the Valley. Although a Chicano-oriented bank would undoubtedly be a
success,, local Chicano businessmen have been frustrated in their attempts to
organize such a venture by the Bentsen-Newhouse hegemony. One member of
the Bentsen family sits on both the McAllen school board and the board of the
hospital. (Othal Brand, of BriflSn and Brand, sits with Bentsen on the school
board. Both are especially reactionary.) Though less so today, the town of Mis-
sion has long been a kind of Bentsen patrimony, ruled by the Bentsens for the
privileged Anglo minority.
The Bentsens, the Schusters, the Griffins and the Brands are but a few striking
examples of Anglo domination in the Valley. 495 persons or corporations re-
ceived subsidies in excess of $5000 in 1967, 466 in 1968— less than 10% of the
recipients had Spanish surnames. In 1969 there were eighty payees receiving
in excess of $25,000. Only one had a Spanish surname, Guerra Brothers. One ex-
pects to see even larger operations emerge. Tenneco, for example, has agricul-
tural acreage in the Valley.
Worse than the large subsidies is the attitude of the elite towards their serfs.
The most charitable point of view is that the Chicano's lot is attributable to
ignorance.
Educate people and they will know that they should wash their hands before
preparing food, that they should drink fresh water. Such arguments are ridicu-
lous. Most people know they should wash their hands, but there is no clean water
to wash with, because the sewage systems foul the already brackish well water.
5405
Most colonias, and many houses in cities, don't even have any water. Sewage sys-
tems are expensive to build ; water beyond the reach of all but a few. One colonia
pays taxes on a bond issue for a water system that runs near their boundary.
They will be paying thirty-four more years. They can't drink a drop of it, can't
even use it to water their gardens, because the water is only for the irrigation of
large farms. Many colonias have been waiting for years for the F.H.A. to approve
loans for water systems. One colonia, Colonia Nueva, has sought for three years
to get water. An anglo real estate dealer sold the people the land without any
water rights. The well water is undrinkable, and the people have to truck in water
from nearby Donna. After a long struggle to get temporary water rights, the
Colonia sought to join a local water corporation, Mid-Valley, which would have
applied for a loan, constructed, and administered the system. Mid-Valley refused
to let them join because their allotment was only temporary, not permanent,
though there was virtually no chance that the allotment would have been lost.
Now the colonia is going ahead on their own. If they are lucky F.H.A. will
approve their loan, and they will have water to drink. ( In the meantime, they are
dry. We recently had a three-day rainstorm which flooded many areas. A few
residents of the colonia had built cisterns. Not a drop from the deluge fell on
Colonia Nueva.)
The frustrations in dealing with the Anglo power structure replicate the frus-
trations of the sick migrant seeking a government service which would help him.
At times he is met with a smile, always with a "No."
Still, the Valley has its ironies. A Catholic priest was visited early this year by
representatives of one of the members of the hospital board. The board member
was thinking of starting his own hospital, and wanted a few nuns around to give
it aura. The hospital was to be a first class establishment calculated to take the
most affluent clientele away from McAllen Gfeneral. Irony, however, is infrequent.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Numerous recommendations have been offered for easing the crisis in health.
One such recommendation comes from the committee formed at the suggestion of
the medical society and meeting under the direction of Dr. Copenhaver, Director
of the County Health Department. The plan, estimated to cost $1 million annually,
would seek, in Dr. Love's words, to fill "a gap in delivery of health care to certain
economically depressed segments of our population." [Corpus Christi Caller,
June 11, 1970). Information and referral centers would be set up, along with
out-patient clinics in Weslaco, Edinburg and McAllen.
I think Dr. Love would acknowledge that even with a $1 million annual
budget, we will not have a comprehensive health service for all the county's
poor. If, as is proposed, 12,000 persons will be treated annually, service will still
fall far short of county needs. Serious eases will need hospitalization, apparently
not a part of the committee's plan. More important, health will continue to
deteriorate as long as water, sewage and food remain problems.
I have continually stressed what the Texas branch of the Union feels will con-
tribute mo.st to good health — 'fair wages. We do not want new programs which
create complacent, tenure-oriented bureaucracies, and don't deliver. We want no
new legislation, unless it is designed and is passed to support the farmworker in
his struggle to gain a fair wage. We do not want legislation which purports to
help, but really traps the workers in a maze of restrictions which would vitiate
the farm movement.
The government and the American can help, and should. The American people
pay for a dual system of welfare; the agribusinesses wax fat on subsidies, ex-
pensive public welfare systems fail to meet the needs of the poor. We appeal to
our fellow citizens to consider that by supporting the Union they will be helping
themselves. The Hidalgo farmworker who lavishes our tables ^^^th food and the
consumer in New Jersey, in Minnesota, in California, Iowa, or Massachusetts,
have a real .stake in each other's health and Avell-being. The consumer boycott of
grapes is a ix)sitive start. It must continue and grow until every farmAvorker ha.«i
the rights most of us take for granted.
Donne wrote, "No man is an i.sland, entire of itself." The plight of the farm-
worker diminishes us all. Ivet us join together and support him, like the part of
us he is.
! VIVA LA CAUSA !
5406
SUPPLEMENTAI, STATEMENT OF ROGER McClURE DUNWELL, MEMBER, BAR OF THE
State of New York
introduction
My name is Roger McClure Dunwell. I am a member of the Bar of the State of
New York. For the last almost eleven months I have been working with the United
Farm Workers Organizing Committee and Colonias del Valle, Inc. in the lower
Rio Grande Valley of Texas, particularly in Hidalgo County.
The testimony I have been asked to present comes from our experiences in
the Valley. Much of what follows is dry figures, descriptions of labyrinthian gov-
ernmental attempts to deal with poverty, disease, or exploitation and their conse-
quent failures. Implicit in the numbers, the programs, the explanations, the
shameful history of private and public neglect is something, someone, very
human, a tiny baby already crippled for life from polio, a young boy going blind,
a worker poisoned by pesticides, an old man twisted with arthritis for whom no
welfare program exists. The story is more than one of human disease, it is
fundamentally one of a diseased society, which has grown by devouring the spirit
and health of the Chicano, and given nothing in return.
My testimony, is a product of the efforts of many people ; my colleagues at the
United Farm Workers, Colonias del Valle, and the National Farm Workers Serv-
ice Center, the staff of ! Ya Mero !, a local Spanish-language newspaper, and Mr.
David Leonard, of the Field Foundation, whose assistance in research and
preparation were invaluable. I need hardly add that any errors or omissions are
entirely my own.
PROFILE OF HIDALGO COUNTY AND THE FARMWORKER POPULATION
Hidalgo County lies in the southernmost reaches of the continental United
States, across the Rio Grande from Mexico. Travelling along the rectilinear farm
roads south towards the river, one sees the great expanses of cattle ranches,
among them a portion of the King Ranch, giving way to the softer, seemingly
more yielding semi-tropical farming and citrus lands on which the majority of the
farmworkers are employed. To the West, towards Starr County, rolling desert
terrain appears, where the moist Gulf easterlies have become dry and scalding
like the breath from a blast furnace.
With its climate, which, except for a few chilly months in winter, is stiflingly
hot, one would expect that Hidalgo County would be a sleepy, though prosperous
county (for there is oil, in addition to the rich soil). In fact, the county can boast
oif few who are truly prosperous. The majority of the population lives in abject
poverty. As for sleep, the county has never been quiet. Once the scene of bloody
bor.der wars, and genocidal massacres of Mexicans, it is now the battlefield in a
struggle between the few who have and the many who have not. In 1967 Texas
Rangers poured into Hidalgo and Starr counties to crush a strike of melon
pickers. Today those workers, and thousands like them, are organizing again,
and waiting.
Hidalgo County has about 200,000 residents, (the exact number is currently a
subject of some dispute between local mayors and the Bureau of the Census).
Approximately 30% of the population is "Anglo", that is, of any extraction but
Mexican or black. The attitudes of this distinct minority are faithfully reflected
in McAllen's Monitor, one of several Valley dailies owned by R. C. Holies of Santa
Ana, California, whose Freedom editorials promote the doctrine that solely by
self -responsibility is any good produced and, accordingly, that not only all wel-
fare measures, but even public education and taxation are corrupting. Great
wealth, as a correlary, should be a virtue.
Belying the county's poverty, Hidalgo had Texas' largest crop income in 1960,
close to $51 million. About 100,000 acres of vegetables are harvested annually,
with 65,000 acres in citrus, and 135,000 in cotton (1964-1965 Texas Almanac).
Nearly all the large farms are owned by Anglos. [See Appendix A]
It is the Ohicanovs, numbering over 130,000, Who work the fields and pick the
crops. Living in small colonias, unincorporated settlements which usually have
nio drinking water, never have isewage systems, in many instances no electricity
or telephones, or living in the urban barrios, they are desperately poor. 54% of
Spanish-surname families have incomes less than $3000. according to a s^tudy
made at Texas A&M in October, 1965. A study made at Texas A&M a year later
revealed that half the Spandsh-sumame families had incomes under $2000 per
year. [See Appendix B for comi>arative figures from O.E.O.]
5407
The median family inlcome for Spanish-'sumame per'sonis in tlie McAllen area,
which is relatively developed, was $2027, (less than half of the U.S. or Texas
populations), according to the 1960 census, and there is little reason to suspect
that figure has risen 'significadtly. Median sdhool years completed were 3.3.,
compared with 10.6 nationally and 10.4 for Texas. 'Standard Metropolitan iStatis-
tieal Area figures rank three Hidalgo cities, McAllen, Pharr and the county seat,
Bdinhurg, as among those with the lowest income in the nation.
Hidalgo lianks first in tlie nation in the number of resident migrants, estimated
to be about 37,500. Adjacent counties, Wallacy, 'Starr and Cameron, contain about
50,000 moi-e. I recall looking at a Depairtment of Labor map showing patterns of
migration. Lines of migration like saplings rose from California and Florida.
Out of South Texas grew a liuge tree, stretcliing its limbs into virtually every
major agricultural area in the United States. The migrants may begin leaving
the Valley as early as Aprtil depending on the work available. By late June, all
have left for the North. They will return to their homes from September to
November, after the harvests. If they are lucky, work will be available in the
citrus groves, or in itruck crops — predominantly cabbages, onions, carrots. Later,
in the Spring, there is a short, intense harvest of melons and tomatoes. But for
many, there is no work. Long lines form outside employment commission oflSces,
and the shape-up sitabions at the bridge. Unemployment in all occupations reaches
6.8% during November ; it never falls much below 6% in any month. It is diffi-
cult to ascertain what the unemployment in agriculture may be at any given
time. An official at the Texas Elmploymenlt Commission told me that it might be
as high as 10% in December. Actually, the number of persons unable to find full-
time employment in agriculture during the winter is probably much higher than
ten percent.
The oversupply of farm labor, the reasons for which are discussed more fully
below, have resulted in a disastrously low wage scale. A dish washer in a cafe
complained to me once that he had been cheated. His employer owed him $15 for
working a fifty hour week. The dish washer had received only $12. Cas station
attendants may earn well under $l/hour. The average hourly wage in agri-
culture, despite the federal minimum wage of $1.30, and the new Texas minimum
wage pegged twenty cents below (and which does not yet cover piece work),
amounts to 98^/hour. The farm worker may earn as little as $922 for eighty-five
days of employment during the year.
The migrant's life expectancy is an unsurprising forty-nine years. Infant mor-
tality is 125% above the national rate, as is maternal mortality. Influenza and
pneumonia are 200% above the national rate, tuberculosis and other infectious
diseases 250%. Accidents are 300% above the national rate.
In a sense, wage data and disease and accident figures tell the whole story. A
handful of people are extremely wealthy, the majority paupers. It is the few who
are wealthy who employ the poor. The wealth is simply not being distributed
fairly. Concomitantly, the exploited fall victims to the age-old negative feedback
system of poverty. Without money, you cannot buy sufficient food, ca-nnot get
drinking water, cannot build sewages systems, cannot see a doctor for checkups.
Illness and accidents follow inevitably. One has no money to see a doctor, disease
becomes chronic, the body dies.
A variety of governmental programs, federal, state, county and municipal, have
been devised to meet the needs of the poor. The doctors have already told in
chastening detail of their failure. A review of the programs themselves, and of
the economic and political milieu in which they operate, explains why.
GOVERNMENTAL RESPONSES TO THE CRISIS IN HEALTH
At first, the variety of health services available through governmental agencies
would seem paradoxical ; demonstrably egregious health conditions exist in a
county which is serviced by Social Security, federal-state categorical assistance
and Medicaid, county-state programs, a Migrant Health program, an OEO emer-
gency food and health program, a county welfare program, and city hospitals. Be-
cause the Social Security programs are uniquely standard in the operation and
eligibility, it is the remaining programs which I would like to review. Social
Security will be discussed later, in an analysis of legislation and public respon-
sibility.
The Texas State Department of Public Welfare is directed in the county by Mr.
James Covey. If a person in need turns here for help lie will encounter a pleasant,
concerned and knowledgeable staff. If his situation happens to fit within the three
protective services, children, adoption studies or assistance, he may receive aid.
5408
But in Texas aid is limited to four categories : old age, aid to the blind, aid to the
permanently and totally disabled, or aid to families with dependent children.
There is no general assistance, as in California. Also in Texas welfare payments
are limited by the constitution to a ceiling. Even if the four categories are broadly
construed, the percentage of the Valley poor who are eligible is very small. Many
otherwise eligible indigents are resident aliens, who, though they may have lived
in the Valley for many years, are still ineligible for lack of citizenship, the re-
quirements for which include a working knowledge of English. Citizens children
are eligible for AFDC, and certain aliens may receive OAA. The poor with few
exceptions are excluded. In 1968, only 5225 children in 1607 families received
AFDC ; 4715 elderly persons received OAA : 98 received Aid to the Blind ; 276
received APTD. Many more children need AFDC, but are barred by statutory re-
quirements. Because relatively few elderly are eligible for Social Security retire-
ment benefits, OAA, the obvious alternative, should similarly be much expanded.
APTD represents only a fraction of the thousands of persons who are disabled,
but barrpd by rigid statutory requirements or lack of citizenship.
Mr. Covy has privately deplored the state system of welfare, but snys he is
obliged to administer it the way the people of the state directed through their
elected representatives. The county has seven branch ofiices located in the main
cities ; if people call in a social worker will be sent out. But Mr. Covey complained
that because the salaries are low ($5100-8000), his agency has great difficulty in
retaining social workers, many of whom move into teaching positions because the
salary is better and extensive travelling not required. Hidalgo County has sixty-
five positions, but twenty-eight vacancies. He defended women on AFDC as
responsible. The average tenure is eighteen months. Most have good credit rat-
ings. When asked what he deemed to be the most critical problem in the county,
he replied : "Lack of continuous, stable employment, due to lack of industry.
Money gives status and power. You cannot cover the waterfront with categorical
assistance."
For those eligible, Medicaid is clearly a valuable medical resource. Unfor-
tunately, it can take more than a month to receive a Medicaid card. I visited a
man who had just lost a leg in a field accident. He had been waiting almost two
months to be medically certified by the state for AFDC, and would have waited
much longer for certification and a card. Our ofiice called the state oflice in Austin.
They had mi. solaced his file.
Dr. John Copenhaver administers and directs the County Health Department.
(An organization chart of the County Health Department is included as Appen-
dix C.) His office coordinates a variety of preventative, curative and diagnostic
services, including city clinics. His oflace also administers migrant health funds.
An interviewer found him to be :
"An elderly, personable gentleman, near retirement who spelled out in con-
siderable detail the county's acute health needs. He made no effort to conceal the
serious deficiencies in all the programs. In every instance the immediate cause
was lack of funds to make the programs more than token ; but the underlying
cause, he stated very bluntly, was the local political situation where those in
office reflect the dominant economic interests. To public officials, the County
Commissioners and the judge, health is a very low priority. The county hospital
was closed down because 'it lost money.' 'The worst problem here is the doctors
and the medical association. The state will not approve programs until the County
Medical Association pushes for it.' Every program needs more funding, more per-
sonnel. 'But human needs are subordinate to political and economic interests.' 'I
do not know how to obtain more money. You need a professional advocate.' 'What
we need most in the valley is population control. Next, seeing to it that the really
sick receive treatment. We need a clinic for the poor.'
"Migrant Health funds for the county were $185,000 for fiscal '69. $139,000 is
added as local matching funds. But this figure is obtained by adding local sal-
aries and operating outlays, and so does not represent additional appropriations
by the state or county. The money is spent primarily for hospitalization for
migrants, then outpatient fee for service, since the latter is deemed the most
important. The Health Department has 3 Sanitarians whose job it is to give
people advice on sanitary procedures, water supply, housing, rodent control. But
they are grossly overburdened and 'don't get below the surface.' There is one
health educator for three counties. 'The non-migrant farmworker is out of luck
here, he receives no aid until near starvation. The only salvation is to train these
people for industry and to have fewer children.' Dr. Copenhaver is aware of many
pressing needs, but feels oflScials do not understand public health needs. Health
5400
gives the County Commissioners less trouble and so receives less money. Only
emergency situations get attention.' "
Lack of money and support from county officials is not, however, the whole
story. It is true the 1970 county appropriation is only $170,881, and that the
depai-'tment asked $18,000 more, that exi^enditures run only slightly above county
expenditures for their jail and correctional facilities. It is also true that there
is a real failure within the department itself. Though Dr. Copenhaver is by no
means solely responsible for County Health's failure, a statement he recently
made is instructive.
Hidalgo County has been suffering a polio epidemic. Fourteen children have
been struck by the disease, all but one under the age of two. Three have died.
Commenting on the epidemic, Coi^enhaver said :
" 'Polio is still around because of apathy . . . / don't think financial status has
anything to do ivith polio', except for the lack of money to i>ay for regular visits
to a pediatrician. . . 'The sanitary conditions or closeness of individuals might
be involved.' " Valley Morning Star, July 12, 1970, attached as Appendix D.
(emphasis added)
Equally unsettling examples of the attitude prevailing in the department, and
the failure of initiative come to mind. Until an N.B.C. film crew came to docu-
ment the Field survey team's work in the Weslaco labor camp, which is op-
erated by the county, there had been no visits by a public health nurse. Fol-
lowing the attending publicity on the evening news, a nurse made an appearance.
In passing, I should mention that conditions in that labor camp, though not
the worst in the county, are terrible. There is no interior plumbing. Drinking
water comes from public spigots sometimes over one hundred feet away. Com-
munal toilets are similarly located. Overcrowding, perhaps what Dr. Copen-
haver had in mind, and deteriorating "apartments" are the order of the day.
Some new housing has been added, but it is beyond the reach of most of those
who have been forced into the migrant camp.
Another example of the gaps in the county's program is a child wiio came into
our office covered with sores. He had mis.sed the dermatology clinic by two days,
and would have to wait twenty-eight days for the next.
The Department is, of course, oven\x)rked. Mrs. Ruth McDonald, the dedicated
Director of Public Nursing, commented in an interview :
"We have seventeen Registered Nurses and eight Licensed Vocational Nurses,
or twenty-five for this population of nearly 190,000. We do only a skimming job.
Time and pressure oblige the nurses to make referrals, and that is the end of it.
Most of our work is with the migrants, but we are out of money for the year by
March 1st., for drugs and hospitalization. We have a Pre-Natal Clinic, but have
to limit the number to twelve a week. The doctor spends two hours a week for
the clinic. We cannot do follow-up because the number needing sernce is so great
and our staff so limited. The USDA Supplemental Food Program is predicated on
need, which means a visit by a public health nurse. We have no social workers.
We try to coordinate our Family Planning with OEO Planned Parenthood, but
there is inevitable fragmentation."
Mrs. McDonald's critique, like Dr. Copenhaver's emphasis on a lack of fund-
ing, is well taken. Still, as examples show, people continue to .slip through the
interstices of a system which should be coping with their needs. Finally, the
failure of the County Health Program comes down to a lack of strong leadership
and only token support by the Court of County Commissioners, which governs
Hidalgo.
In examining the County Health Department, a number of references have been
made to the Migrant Health program. If any program can be singled out as a
spectacular failure, it is Migrant Health. The program is by definition aimed
solely at migrants, those who have migrated within the lasit two years.* The
program's report estimates its target population as high as 45,000. In the year
beginning June, 1969, Migrant Health served 1817 migrants in family service
clinics, and through its referral system made fee-for-service arrangements with
doctors for 3527. Thus, under 15% of the migrant target population was reached
by Migrant Health.
Migrant Health began the year with $160,799. By March 24, 1970, the out-
patient service was discontinued, since the drug budget ($18,000 — ^see budget
attached as Appendix E) had been overdrawn. Hospitalization (funded at
$27,767) had been discontinued on March 16, with the intention of transferring
♦Eflfective March 12, 1970, the act was expanded to cover non-migrant seasonal
workers.
5410
those funds to out-patienit services. Eimpihasi's is to be changed from referrals to
family clinics. Because iblie Health Department has been unable to find even one
of the projected two doctors for their out-patient clinics, the program is at a
virtual standstill. The balance as of July 1, 1970 was down to $37,663.11. To this,
a new stairt supplement of $230,750.00 has been added, which will give a working
balance of $268,413.11. The new funds may revitalize the Migrant Health pro-
gram. We can only hope it •w^ill.
It is difficult to desccribe the dashed expectations of the migrant community,
It was hoped, following the Yarborough hearing in Edinburg in November, that
the added funds would quickly put Migrant Health back on its feet. Although
the new funds cannot fail to help, the program suffers from real political and
structural problems.
First, we have mentioned that the state and local matching funds do not
in fact match HEW money. The matching funds represent a figure obtained by
adding salaries, buildings, and other assets. This practice is doubly bad. New
money is not added, and less services are available for other county needs.
Texas and Hidalgo County appear not to care.
In the past, limits have had to be placed on the number of visits per patient,
and even with the new funding, will undoubtedly have to be continued. As Tony
Orendain once remarked, "The migrant worker here is allowed only three times
a year to be isick." Due to these restrictions, families have often sent a child
to the doctor's office (there are no house visits) and asked for three times the
amount of medicine prescribed, on the assumption that other children, who are
also sick, will need the same prescription.
The confusion that resulted from the discontinuation of Migrant Health's
major programs has resulted in suspicion and distrust among the migrant com-
munity. Referrals were made, but no money was available to pay for drugs or
service. The i>atient knew he was sick, knew what he needed, had been told he
could get it, and found that in fact he would not be helped. Expectations were
raised, then dashed. The program appeared doubly fraudulent, because the
migrant knew the program was federal, and that the government had money.
From their point of view, to say that the United States has run out of money
seemed less than candid. I, who had no connection with the program whatever, felt
embarrassed to try to explain to clients who came asking, "Why?"
The O.E.O. Emergency Food and Medicine program is a rather small program,
which provides services only where no other health services are available. The
program is budgeted, according to Mr. Eliseo Sandoval, its director, at about
$200,000. About 6000 to 8000 persons come in for services each month, about 3000
of these seeking medical attention. Because of the limited funding, few of these
are served.
O.E.O. officials appear to view their job as one of acculturating a resistant
Mexican-American population to Anglo attitudes and values. That perspective
has inevitably clashed with the new Chicano militancy. Whether a much-ex-
panded program could be effective, under the circumstances, is therefore difficult
to assess. For the moment, O.E.O. services remain circumscribed.
Hidalgo provides, through its own welfare office, about $64,000 in hospitaliza-
tion payments for the indigent. The appropriation for 1970, significantly, is
$59,000, $5000 less than the amount spent last year. There is also a $10,000 ap-
propriation for hospitalization of the mentally retarded, $7,661 under the actual
1968 expenditures, $8056 under the estimated 1969 expenditures.
The Welfare Department has been the center of a small but growing storm
of protests aimed, primarily, at the almost cynically negligent attitudes of its
director, Mr. Tom Wingart, and his staff. Mr. David Leonard, reporting on an in-
terview with Mr. Wineart, wrote :
"The director of Hidalgo County Welfare is Mr. Tom Wingart, who had been
for many years the county sheriff, but when defeated at the polls had been ap-
pointed by County Judge Richardson to this post. A gaunt, elderly man from East
Texas farm country, Mr. Wingart grew up in the depression era and remembered
proudly how he had refused 'handouts' even though he made only $7.00 a week.
His outlook on the valley poor was conditioned by his past. He administers the
county commodity as though it was a business. He complained bitterly that it
cost the county $250,000 a year to administer because of the need to truck
food from warehouses in Cornus Christi. 'There's nobodv stqrvinsr in this county.
Anyone who needs food can get it. There's really no problem here in the valley.
What we don't handle, O.E.O. takes care of.' Since April, 1969, three sub.stations
had been opened in Pharr, Weslaco and Mission. The four offices are open one
5411
day a week ; all are closed Fridays 'for records, reports and Federal auditors.'
Only since February, 1970 had the program been extended to cover resident
aliens who could prove residence of five years, though children born in the states
could receive food. (In April, as a result of the Un.ted Farm Workers Service
Center lawyers filing suit, the county has eliminated the residency requirement ;
that is, is now in line with USDA policy.) Since January, I'Jtjy, baoies can re-
ceive supplementary food, juices, farina, canned milk, when need is certified by
a county Health Nurse. Mr. Wingart opposes food stamps as too expensive. 'We
would have to increase the payroll.' By his attitude, experience and training, this
man is fit for his position only in a county where poverty is held to be the fault of
the poor and where saving public funds, or their use for "more important' things,
is the higher priority."
County Welfare will pay up to $25.00 for the first day of hospitalization, and
$17.50 for each day thereafter. According to Mr. Wingart, the county is going to
•stop payments for obstetrics.
Despite the attitudes of the .staff, which from our experience in bringing the
county into conformity with USDA commodity regulations, reflect the attitudes
of their masters, the County Commissioners Court headed by Judge Richardson,
the hospitalization program could be useful. That the program is not available
to a much greater extent is due to the Commissioners Court and the local hos-
pitals.
As Dr. Copenhaver pointed out, in quotation above, there is no longer a county
hospital because "it lost money." Hospital facilities are now limited to Edinburg's
hospital, the Knapp Memorial Hospital in Weslaco, a small hospital in Mission,
and McAllen's General Hospital, which a visiting doctor described as quite
spectacular.
It is. A large, imposing building in downtown McAllen, thanks to Hill-Burton
aid, it always seems to be adding something new. The care one can receive at the
hospital is impressive, and by Northern standards, reasonable in price. My
daughter was delivered in the hospital this Spring, and I have only praise for
the medical staff.
For the poor, McAllen hospital presents quite a different picture. Although
the hospital had an excess of revenues over exiienditures of almost $174,000 last
year, according to their audit, they are extremely reluctant to take charity pa-
tients. They claim to do a substantial amount of charity work (see attached
Hill-Burton correspondence, Appendix F), but as a local doctor has said, it keeps
such care to a minimum. In our exiierience, the hospital has never simply ad-
mitted a pateient, even from McAllen proixr, as a charity case. There is thus
some reason to believe that services claimed as free by the hospital may be simply
uncoUectable accounts.
"When one looks at the hospital in more detail, the already disappointing pic-
ture begins to look frightening, almost nightmari-sh at times. Although a local
attorney has described the hospital's operating principles as like those of a "used
car lot," the hospital attempts to coerce the poor in ways w^hich even the most
unscrupulous car .salesman would fear to use.
The system works basically as follows : in order to be admitted to the hospital,
you must pay a deposit, which varies according to the probable treatment, but is
generally in the neighborhood of $150.00. Unless you are referred by a doctor (and
the deposit is demanded regardless) you will not be admitted unless you pay,
or are in need of immediate, drastic treatment. A women in labor will not be
admitted unless she has either paid her deix)sit, or her bag of waters has broken
and delivery is imminent, in which case she may be lucky enough to be admitted
through the emergency room.
By way of example, a Mrs. H. was pregnant. Her husband visited the hospital
to arrange for the delivery. Our office, Avhich had helped the family in a number
of legal matters, was happy to see Mr. H. attempt to get hospital services for his
wife. The family had long been living in execrable conditions, without even the
fundamental sanitary facilities. Clearly this was a case where a sanitary trained
delivery was especially desirable. But the ho.spital wanted too much money as
deposit. When Mrs. H. entered labor, she had to .seek a midwife for help. The
delivery was complicated, Mother and baby survived, but Mrs. H. had to pay
$100 for treatment by untrained, unsupervised and unlicensed midAvife, (Texas
does not license its midwives.) Thus, for lack of money, Mrs. H. was left to a
system discouraged by doctors and unsanctioned by law.
5412
Had Mrs. H. been admitted, she would have found that getting out was even
harder. One of our first clients was a man who came to me and complained that
the clerk at the hospital had told him that he could not take his one-day-old baby
and his wife out of the hospital until he paid. I rushed to the hospital, where I was
met by a profusion of denials. Of course Mr. G. could take his wife and baby, but
first, how was he going to pay? I suggested to the business manager, Mr.
McKellar, that the hospital might simply send the bill, and Mr. G. would pay as
he could. Alternatively, a monthly billing arangement might be worked out. Mr.
McKellar was uninterested. Instead, he wanted to know why I myself wouldn't
pay, since I was in the charity business, or why Mr. G wouldn't sign a promis-
sory note. Many poor people, he advised me, were "deadbeats." Perhaps because
it might never have happened before that somone would come to the assistance of
a poor patient, Mr. McKellar eventually relented. Mr. G. didn't .sign a note, he
simply took his wife and child and left. I would be surprised if he can pay the bill
for a long time, because his family has scarcely enough for food.
Although Mr. McKellar is quick to deny, indeed expres.ses concern over, reports
that personnel are telling patients that they cannot leave until their account is
paid, it does happen. When I took my wife and child out of the hospital (after
paying) a nurse told me just that : unless I had paid I couldn't take my family
out. I replied that I hoped she was mistaken.
Some patients are induced to sign the promissory note. A Mr. P., thirty ^f our
and married with five children, migrated last in 1968. He has a sixth grade edu-
cation and an income of $3000, $2400 under the OEO poverty line for a family of
his size. He receives OEO emergency food. Mr. P. brought his daughter to
McAllen General Hospital for emergency treatment. The girl was admitted,
although Mr. P. didn't have the $150 deposit demanded.
The final bill came to $223.60. As an indigent, Mr. P. was entitled to county wel-
fare assistance, which would have paid $95.00 towards the account. Welfare was
willing to help, but Mr. McKellar refused to accept the money. He insisted
that Mr. P. pay off the balance before the hospital wonld accept the remaining
$95 from county welfare.
Mr. P. signed a promissory note, which appears on the following page. The
annual interest rate is 18%. The practice is to take such a note to a bank, par-
ticularly the First National Bank of McAllen (controlled by the Bentsen family,
a member of which sits on the hospital's board). Mr. McKellar informed Mr. P.'s
attorney, David Hall of our office, that in Mr. P.'s case this would not be done,
as Mr. P. was too poor to be a good risk for the bank. When ]\Ir. Hall had occa-
sion to take his own child to the hospital to treat a ease of pneumonia, Mr.
McKellar asked him to sign such a note for the bank.
PROMISSOEY NOTE
January 21,, 1970.
(City) : McAllen.
(State) : Texas.
For value received, undersigned maker (s), jointly and severally, promise to
pay to the order of McAllen General Ho.spital at the above place Two hundred
forty-five dollars and ninety -six cents ($245.96) in 25 consecutive monthly pay-
ments of $10.00, and one of $5.96 each beginning one month from the date hereof
and thereafter on the same date of each .subsequent month until paid in full. Any
unpaid balance may be paid, at any time, without penalty and any unearned
finance charge will be refunds! based on the "Rule of 78's". In the event that
maker (s) default (s) on any payment, a charge of 5 percent may be asse.s.sed.
1. Proceeds $223. 60
2. (Other charges, itemized) 0
3. Amount financed (1+2) 0
4. Finance charge $22. 36
5. Total of payments $245. 96
Annual percentage rate 18
(Sign) :
5413
The hospital claims that if it accepts the county welfare payment on charity
cases, it runs the risk of noit collecting the balance. The undiminished bill becomes
a kind of lever in the hands of the hospital to put increased pressure on the
patient. These payments have long been a bone of contention betAveen the County
Commis-siioners and tlie hospitial which is of course a city-owned hospital, thougli
in fact the main hospital of the county. The former are unwilling to pay more
per diem. The hospital is unwilling to accept the present amount because it falls
below the $52.19 average per diem exi>enses of the hospital. To my knowledge, no
one has ever insisted that the 'hospital accept welfare payments in satisfaction of
the full bill. Further, the hospital does not even seem to take into account
whether, in an individual case, the welfare payments might approach the actual
cost of treatment.
To continue with Mr. P., Mr- McKellar suggested he go and find a job. In fact,
he said, the construction company woi-king on the new hospital addition was
having difficulty finding laborers. I checked the next day Avitli the Texas Employ-
ment Commission, who told me this was simply not true, and that work of any
kind was hard to find. To conclude Mr. P.'s story, I should point out that legally
the hospital has no right to demand that a person sign a note. If the account is in
default, the hospital can simply demand payment, sue if refused, and collect the
legal interest rate of 6%, which is of course one-third of the interest rate on the
hospital notes.
The people are well aware of the peril of becoming entangled with the hospital.
One woman, a Mrs. D., had scraped up the deposit money for a serious operation.
Her doctor was anxious to do the operation promptly, but Mrs. D. hesitated, fear-
ing she would not get out of the hospital imtil she paid in full. She did go for the
operation, but only after we advised her of her rights, and promised to assist her
if the hospital tried to coerce her.
Many people are also afraid of notes, because they represent a commitment on
i»aper. They fear reprisals through loss of their jobs, welfare, or the possibility
that if they cannot pay they will never again succeed in getting treatment from
doctors, or from the hospital.
The fear of signing is well-founded. Even an open account can be a distinct
liazard. The hospital will give their accounts to a collection agency, which then
harasses the patient with dunning notices. Some of the collection practices are
overtly illegal.
Mr. P., another Mr. P., owed the hospital $105.16. The hospital gave the account
to a collection agency (see a copy of a letter from Mr. McKellar to a patient
advising him of the use of a collection agency. This particular note is another
case.)
McAllen General Hospital,
McAlTen, Tex., March 16, 1970.
Re Hospital Account for in the amount of $95.60.
Dear Mr. : In our recent letter we advised you of our method of assign-
ing accounts to a professional collection agency when our efforts of collection have
failed.
If you will please come in to properly settle this account before the twentieth
of this month, this costly collection process can be avoided.
Yours very truly,
H. A. McKeller,
Credit Manager.
The account was handed over to the collection agency, the Central Adjustment
Bureau, Inc., of San Antonio. In late April, Mr. P. received two interesting docu-
ments. One was something on green pai>er, legal-sized paper. It was titled, in
block letters, PREPARATORY LISTING FOR CIVIL COURT.
36-513 O— 71— pt. 8B 3
5414
PIEPAPiATO^Y imm FOR CIVIL COURT
April ;7.197f)
(OrtiT
Before the creditor files suit against you, which would show your
name on the court records as a defendant in an action involving
non-payment of a debt and having citation issued, we are taking
this final step to strongly recommend that you mail your check to
this office immediately. Should funds not be readily available, may
we suggest that you contact a reputable lending institution to se-
cure the entire amount to pay this indebtedness.
Should we not hear from you within 72 hours, it will be presumed
that you do not have defenses or counterclaims to such a court ac-
tion and we will be forced to recommend to our client that proceed-
ings be started at once.
CE^STRAL ADJUSTf;/lENT BUREAU, INC.
COLIECTION DIVISION
1222 N. Main * San Antonio, Toxat * CA 6-1341
May ^,iq7n
DETACH HERE — And Enclose With Payment in |
Our Self Addressed Envelop* TODAY
To. CENTRAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU — COllEQION DIVISION
Gentlemen!
Please do not recommend suit — I am enclosing J in full.
/
~1
Sign l-lere
Your Address
Phone
Creditor McAllen Hosp
Amount ( 105.16
DO NOT WRITE
IN THIS SPACE
D CANCEL
O RECOMA\END
D FULL
D PART
5415
n —
5416
The document was unsigned, but the name of the collection agency appeared
on the reply form and on the document itself. The second piece of paper was
roughly the size of a checli. Labelled "Notice of Draft Intent", it advised Mr. P.
that "A SIGHT DRAFT AGAINST (HIS) BANK (WOULD) BE ISSUED
MAY 30, 1970." Again payment was directed to be made to CAB., Inc. Mr.
Williamson, an attorney in our office, was puzzled by the documents. There is
no such thing as preparatory listing for civil court, though the document ap-
peared to be of legal significance. Still, the document, for all its legal demeanor,
was not signed by an attorney. Similarly, the sight draft was puzzling. How
could the collection agency issue a "sight draft" on Mr. P.'s bank account even
had he had one? Mr. Williamson was puzzled enough to refer the matter to the
Texas State Bar (Committee on Unauthorized Practice. A letter from the Com-
mittee, included below with the two documents, indicates that there has been
a probable violation of Texas law.
A Miss S. has been receiving correspondence from the same outfit. She is not
as concerned, as she is only two years old. But her father was concerned, and
came to us with the papers. At the risk of duplication, they too are reproduced
below. Especially interesting to us as attorneys is a card from C.A.B. which asks
"Must I call your employer? If so do not call me at CA 2-8065 (signed) Robert
Youngman." This case came to our office less than three weeks ago.
Beckmann, Stanaed, Wood & Keene,
San Antonio, Tex., May 28, 1910.
24759 — ^State Bar of Texas (Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee).
Hon. Ted Butleb,
District Attorney, Bexar County Courthouse,
San Antonio, Tex.
Dear Ted : As Chairman of the Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee of
the State Bar of Texas, I am enclosiing herewith correspondence involving this
Committee and a complaint received from Mr. Peter D. Williamson of McAllen,
Texas.
The complaint against Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. of 1222 North Main
Avenue, San Anton.o, Texas, ( CA 6-1341 ) , is obvious when you see the so-called
"Preparatory Listing for Civil Court" dated April 27, 1970. It is our opinion that
this character of document is not only an unauthorizied practice of law, but is
further in violation of Article 438c of the Penal Code of Texas.
As Mr. Davis Grant, the General Counsel for the State Bar of Texas, points
out, this is usually handled by the local District Attorney's Office under Article
438c of the Penal Code and the use of this article of the Penal Code has been very
effective in curtailing this practice throughout Texas.
Any assistance you can give us in this respect will be sincerely and deeply
appreciated.
I send my best wishes to you, your family and your fine staff. I also take this
opportTyiity to compliment you on the fine job you are doing as District Attorney
of our County and extend my besit wishes to you for your new four year term.
With every cordial best wish, believe me to be
Sincerely yours,
John Wood, Jr.
Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc.,
San Antonio, Tex., March 13, 1970.
Re McAllen Hospital ; amount 160.71-
You have chosen to ignore our many requests for payment covering the above
account and this is our final demand.
We would have been happy to have arranged a monthly schedule of payments,
but being unable to obtain your cooperation forces us to pursue this indebtedness
in a more drastic manner.
5417
A copy of this letter has been prepared for forwarding to your employer, in
the event that you fail to come to our office to make full payment within the
next five days.
This method is distasteful to us, however, it has been broug-ht about by your
negligence. Remember five days.
Very truly yours,
J. R. Hall.
Franz & Franz,
San Antonio, Tex., April 9, 1970.
Dear Mrs. : The above account has been transferred to my office for the filing
of suit. Litigation in the court of comi)etent jurisdiction can oniy be avoided by
your immediate attention to this matter, and I am not referring to idle con-
versation. This case has already been placed in my preparatory court listings, and
suit will be filed against you without further notice if payment is not made
within 72 hours.
It has been through your unconcern that this matter has to be handled in
court. I have instructions from my client, and I am determined to collect this
account at whatever expense and inconvenience.
You are doubtless aware that interest, court costs, and attorney fees will be
added to the present indebtedness at the moment this suit is filed. Every known
legal process will be used against you as it becomes necessary.
If you desire to avoid the additional expense and inconvenience of trial you
may mail full payment to : 1019 Camden St, San Antonio, Texas 78215.
Your very truly,
Charles L. Franz, Jr.
Franz & Franz,
San Antonio, Tex., June 8, 1970.
Balance due $160.71.
Dear Mrs. : The above account has been transferred to my office for the filing
of suit. Litigation in the court of competent jurisdiction can only be avoided by
your immediate attention to this matter, and I am not referring to idle conversa-
tion. This case has already been placed in my preparatory court listings, and suit
will be filed against you without further notice if payment is not made within 72
hours.
It has been through your unconcern that this matter has to be handled in court.
I have instructions from my client, and I am determined to collect this account
at whatever expense and inconvenience.
You are doubtless aware that interest, court costs, and attorney fees will be
added to the present indebtedness at the moment this suit is filed. Every known
legal process will be used against you as it becomes necessary.
If you desire to avoid the additional expense and inconvenience of trial you
may mail full payment to : 1019 Camden St., San Antonio, Texas 78215.
Yours very truly,
Charles L. Franz, Jr.
Franz & Franz,
San Antonio, Tex., July 9, 1970.
Balance due $160.71.
This claim has been transferred to my office with instructions to liquidate the
balance within the next five days or file suit in the court of competent jurisdiction.
It is strongly recommended that you mail your check to this office immediately.
If funds are not readily available may I suggest that you contact a reputable
lending institution to secure the entire amount to pay this indebtedness.
If you desire to avoid the unnecessary cost and inconvenience of litigation you
will comply with this request.
Yours very truly,
Charles L. Franz, Jr.
5418
.'.', i' < i ?■ •{''^'''■» '•';■'* is " Vi"* '^<':. I
h' [^' ; ■
/ i ''r .n !5 \ ®
li.tfiliftViMii;.li'i' II ■fii-l.^.;j':Jf>..-::^.^v..\.; ^iVlV],
SUITE 313
1222 NORTH MAIN
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 78212
FIRST CLASS
ADDRESS CORRECTION REOUESTKO
o
?.0 6 :
<?
JV
o
^iMm^om.
5419
ISim FOE! CIVIL COURT
T„ij ? iQ7n
Before the creditor files suit against you, which would show your
name on the court records as a defendant in an action involving
non-payment of a debt and having citation issued, we are taking
this final step to strongly recommend that you mail your check to
this office immediately. Should funds not be readily available, may
we suggest that you contact a reputable lending institution to se-
cure the entire amount to pay this indebtedness.
Should we not hear from you within 72 hours, it will be presumed
thct you do not hove defenses or counterclaims to such a court ac-
tion and we will be forced to recommend to our client that proceed-
ings be started at once. I
CEMTKAL ADJUSTfi^EMT Bm^AU, INC.
COLLECTION DIVISION
1222 N. Main * San Antonio, Texas * CA 6-1341
1 July 9. 1970
■:
IFinol Ooltl
1
DE7ACH HSRE — And Enclose With Payment in
Our Set; Addressed Envelope TODAY
To: CENTRAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU — COLlEaiON DIVISION
Gentlomen:
Creditor McAllen Mun Ho
1 Please do not recommend suit — 1 am enclosina S in full.
160.71 1
Amount % |
Sign Here
Your Address
DO t^OT VV^iTE {
IN THIS SPACS I
a CANCEL D FUl
D RECOMAAENO Q PAJ
5420
We have reports from two sources, a local doctor and a priest, who informed
us that, at least until recently, the hospital would demand the i>atient's visa, if
he was an alien, as collateral for payment. The priesit also told us of the hos-
pital's practice of demanding that the i>atient sign a blank check, even though
he had no bank account. The "hot check" would then be given to the district
attorney if the patient failed to pay. The priest said that late last Fall, the D.A.
had some seventy-six "hot checks" forwarded by the hospital, but that he was
unwilling to prosecute, to be a collection agency for the hospital. The hospital
promised to stop the "hot check" racket at the time of the Yarborough hearings.
The priest believes it may still be going on.
There are other examples of harassment : A Mr. R., hospitalized after an
accident in the fields, was told by someone that he had to leave the hospital
because his insurance company was not going to pay. A Mrs. L., who went to
the hospital to make an application for welfare assistance for a child hos-
pitalized by polio, was told she couldn't make her application there. I checked
with state welfare, who said she was to make an initial application at the hos-
pital. When I sent Mrs. L. back to the hospital, the woman at the de?k told
her she couldn't apply because the child wasn't eligible. I called the hospital,
reminding them that it wasn't their job to decide eligibility, simply to accept the
completed application. Reluctantly, the hospital accepted the application.
I have mentioned the problem with pregnant women. The hoSi)ital policy is so
notorious that it is common practice for OEO and other service workers to advise
women to stay away from the hospital until labor is well under way and delivery
is imminent, tJien to go to the emergency room and hope for the best.
Finally, and to no one's surprise, the Public Health Department has been unable
to persuade McAllen General to set up a referral system.
For the most part I have discussed the institutional structure of health services
in Hidalgo. Dr. Love, the chairman of the Hidalgo-Starr medical society will
undoubtedly answer in finer detail than I could your questions respecting the
attitudes and position of the local doctors. Suffice it to tio^'nt out that there are
3265 potential patients i)er doctor in Hidalgo, and 7206 per dentist ( Starr has no
dentists). (See Appendix B for CAP figures extracted f'-om a "Forr Corn'y
Rural Health Survey" prepared by Louise N. Fischer under Dr. Copenhaver's
direction).
Desnite the statistics, a few doctors who already have enormous practices (Dr.
Casso's office may see from 80-100 patients per day) are doing an outstanding
job in handling charity cases. More might help were there a system that brought
concerned doctors into contact Avith poor patients seeking treatment. The city
clinic system, which could operate to that end, doesn't because according to
reports local doctors are not taking their turns at the clinic. An additional factor,
omnipresent in the Valley, is that patients are reluctant to approach doctors for
fear that they will only add more debts to their already crushing burdens.
There also seems to be a fundamental conflict in the philosophy of the delivery
of health services among med'cal personnel. While the doctor's home visit has
become almost unknown, public health nurses are moving in the opposite direc-
tion towards greater preventative and outreach service. If coordinated, the
divergent approaches could become complimentary ; at present, they are counter-
effective.
I spoke of the lack of a system for bringing the needy patient and the con-
cerned doctor together. There is also a lack of a clearinghouse to guide patients to
the prooer agency. The multiplicity of programs over-lap and are redundint to an
astonishing degree, yet there are nnny who cannot find heli>— diabetics like Mr.
R. who cannot find the treatment wh'ch he will need for the rest of his possibly
abbreviated life, a mother who cnnnot find a Probana formula for her baby aller-
gic to all other foods. For the poor, minor medical problems become a cris's, an
emergency, a catastrophe. To be sent from agency to agency and turned down at
each beciuse you are ineligible, because funds have run out, or because you came
the wrong diy makes, as one observer has said, for "a world made to the mind
of Franz Kafka, who alone could make it seem reasonable and normal, if not
entirely just."
The system has failed to such a degree that our clinic at the National Farm
Workers Service Center hns been netting referrals from public agencies. At first
patients wouVl arrive with a referral slip sis^ned, for eximple. by OEO. After
calling O.EO. to determine why they were referring patients to us, the referral
slips hegan to come in blank, unsip-ned. Our cMn'c is sninii. It nmorites on^v thre.?
days a week, two hours a day, because we must depend on whatever time Dr.
5421
Oasso, the 'Service Center physician, can spare from his own practice. With one
exception, no dther local doctors have offered to help. The clinic is a ten by twenty
foot space framed by movable partitions. Most of last winter we had no heat.
During the summer it is chokingly hot. Nevertheless, for many our meager,
almost ridiculously small clinic is the best and only available medical resource
in the county and entirely unrelated to any government program.
THE POLITICS OF EXPLOITATION
If we look at the problem of poor health in isolation, we would be forced to
conclude that disease persists for a lack of sufficiently funded intelligent programs
and personnel. To do so would be a mistake, for although such conclusions may
inevitably follow from the preceding analysis, we have only been talking about
disease. We haven't detailed the lack of housing, food, clothing, sanitation and
education upon which a healthy and productive life must be based.
We could hold hearings on any one of these areas, concluding in each that new
or better gove'rnmental programs will do the trick. Unquestionably they would
help in varying degrees, but the one factor underlying each deprivation, under-
lying, too, Avhat is gloriously refen-^d to as the American Way of Life, is money
in a man's pocket. Until the farm Avorkers earns a decent Avage, no fundamental
changes will be seen.
Food is big business. Though the small farmer is being caught, like the farm-
worker, by the growth of agribusiness, many people are making a lot of money by
pi-'oducing food. Food is such big business that even the most naive must be
forced to ask himself, "If agribusiness is so profitable, Avhy hasn't the farmworker
prospered with the big groAA'ersV"
Quite obviously, he could have. He hasn't because the large growers have de-
cided that they would rather liA-e in imperial luxury, surrounded by want, than
give their employees a fair wage. Also apparent is that far from seeking to help
the farmworker in his efforts to right the imbalance, federal, state and local
government has consistently abetted and encouraged the large growers.
Consider the variety of state and federal laws which exclude or discriminate
against the farmworker. He was excluded from the Wagner Act. He is given a
considerably lower wage under federal and Texas minimum wage laws. Despite
the alarming accident rate, he is excluded from workman's compensation, forced
to rely on archaic, employer-weighted tort law. He isn't entitled to unemployment
compensation if laid off from field work. To qualify for coverage under any So-
cial Security program he must earn twice as much per quarter. (Compounding
the problem, some growers will not send in Social Security deductions. ) As far as
the Social Security Administration is concerned, a farmworker who reaches re-
tirement age, his body gnarled from farm work, may never have earned a dollar
in his life.
The catalog could go on. Rather than explore each example in detail, I should
prefer to conclude with Texas' occupational health and safety laws. A memo pre-
pared bv Kitty Schild, a law student working in our office this summer, is attached
as Appendix G. The thrust of the memo is that basic protections do not exist.
The Texas Occupational Safety Act, which should and could be developed to
provide safety standards for the transportation of migrants, for field sanitation,
for drinking water, for protective devices for pesticide applicators, lies virtually
dormant. There is no incentive to protect the fannAvorker, since it is solely upon
him that the burden of accidents falls.
Then there is the border. Wetbacks and persons holding resident cards, (who
reaUy reside in Mexico), commute daily into Hidalgo during the winter, and
fill the crew-leader's trucks going North in the summer. Growers encourage the
permeable border, for the Mexicans will work for much less, since they cannot
complain if they are paid below the minimum wage. Labor contractors know this
and set up recruiting stations and shape-up stations at the bridge. When work
becomes very scarce even American citizens, living in Hidalgo, will go to the
shape-up station attempting to pass as a resident of Mexico. The border is doubly
satisfactory to the growers, for while it contributes enormously to the already
swollen labor market, it also forces the American Chicano to see his Mexican
brother as. the source of his problem. There is only so much Avork ; the work must
be fairt>' paid no mntter Avho does it. The growers have been successful until
recently in playing off brother against brother to drive wages down because there
is no penalty for using illegal labor. (Tony Orendain has suggested that if
growers were fined $il(X)0 for every illegal laborer found in their fields, the use of
illegals would quickly end.) That the grower-incited internecine suspicion is not
5422
what it once was, is due to no change in the border, or in the competition, but
rather the growing awareness among Mexicans and Mexican- Americans tliat they
have a common interest in fair wages.
"Well-meaning government officials liave tried to help. HEW staff members came
to the Valley in a series of visits designed to develop comprehensive liealth plan-
ning. Ray Finney prepared a memorandum of the visits, (they have come to
naught), which appears as Appendix H. On the other hand, other oflScials clearly
don't care. At a recent meeting of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Development
Council twenty-five people attended. Tliere was an active discussion for one hour
on an emergency road service grant, plus a pitch from a Motorola salesman selling
communication equipment. Then there was a twenty minute discussion of health
care. Free clinics in McAllen and Weslaco were proposed. The Weslaco hospital
administration said they didn't want the clinic, unless it could be guaranteed that
there would be no cost to the hospital.
Meanwhile incredible crop subsidies pour into the Valley ; $16 million annually,
$8 million into Hidalgo alone (See Appendix A). One wonders who is really driv-
ing the welfare Cadillac. None of the $8 million is going to farmworkers as wages.
If the growers welfare liad instead been directed to the farmworker in the form
of an insurance program, or direct payments, 100,000 i>ersons could have received
$80.00 a piece, and we wouldn't be here today discussing health.
The men and women who have consolidated great fortunes in the Valley have
been able to do so because of a variety of factors. Some I have already touched
on — ^the border surplus labor dynamic which has made labor a forced subsidy,
strong lobbies emasculating legislation which would have treated farm labor
like any other kind of labor. Heavy rural representation in Congress was equally
central.
Only a sophisticated, a detailed history of the growth of Hidalgo County would
fully explain how the exploiters built their fortunes. For present purposes it is
enough to remember that it was done in a relatively short time, mostly since the
1920's and the development of the grower-dominated irrigation districts which
made possible intensive use of land. Armies of cheap Mexican labor were encour-
aged to come and work the fields. Cheap labor and inexi>en.sive land fo.stered two
other developments — the real estate speculation, in which the Bentsen family has
figured prominently, and winter tour'ism.
il have often referred to growers as exploiters, but I have used the word loosely,
and perhaps inaccurately. The exploiters are not the majority of the growers. The
number of farm units in each of the four Valley counties is diminishing. The
small grower is caught in a squeeze. Little profit accrues in a small growing
operation, particularly in the crops grown in the Valley. Packing sheds, shippers
and marketers receive the greater pant of the return on the produce. Increasingly
successful are the growers who also have packing and marketing facilities, like
the Schuster family. Parenthetically, Frank Schuster received $77,244 in subsidies
during 1969. Carl Schuster received $65,151. (Mrs. Carl Schuster remarked to an
interviewer that welfiare was desitroying the initiative of the poor to work, and
that the poor were unwilling to work when welfare is available. )
Shary Land Farm, recipient of one of the largest USDA subsidies ($125,000 in
1967, $115,000 in 19(>8) has its own shipping interest. Former Governor Alan
Shivers married into this family. Marialice Shivers, with the same address at
Shary Farm, is recorded for 1968 as receiving $26,000 in ASOS payments.
Another successful grower, packer and marketer is Griffin and Brand.
Griffin and Brand, a nationwide corporation with several subsidiairies, is a
salient example of a burgeoning trend to grow in Mexico, pack and ship from
the United States. Attracted by cheap land and even cheai>er labor, the agri-
businesses like Griffin and Brand are deserting the labor force they once induced
into the country. The movement to Mexico is substantial enough to worry even
the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association which, like California growing
concerns, has heretofore managed to compete successfully with South Texas
due to higher efficiency and superior transportation facilities.
Nevertheless, agribusinesses such as Griffin and Brand, Louisiana Strawberry
and Vegetable Company, and Rio Farms continue to keep substantial land hold-
ings in the Valley. They anticipate the demise of their smaller competitors, and
continue to exploit the workers.
An interesting example of the lengtths that even an operation as large as
Griffin and Brand may go to to gouge their employees occurred last Fall. Workers
were picking peppers for G&B at SOtj' a basket. At al)Out 11 A.M. the field man
came in and dropped the price to 25(i', retroactive. Three workers came to us to
us to complain. We called the Department of Labor in McAllen, and were referred
to the Harlingen office. The Department of Labor pointed out that it was Friday,
5423
and that nothing could be done until Monday. But on Monday the investigators
had a meeting upstate and would be tied up for a week or more. We called the
Houston office of the Department of Labor. Two hours later Harlingen called
back and announced that investigators were coming over because they had
received authorization for overtime.
A packing shed ran afoul of the Department of Labor last year for the same
type of minimum wage violation. The Department of Labor found that the
comi^any owed its workers approximately $10,000. On information, most of this
money is still in the bank because the shed did not have to mail out the checks
to the workers affected. Each worker must ask for his own check. Many did
not even know that the Dei>artment of Labor had found the violation.
The kind of statement made by Mrs. Schuster, that growers cannot find labor
in the Valley any more, is interesting in the context of the exodus to Mexico.
A number of growers have made the same observation, and it deserves a reply.
Increasingly, labor is used in very high concentrations, often in conjunction
with machinery, but for very short iieriods of time. A typical harvesting opera-
tion on, say, a forty-acre field, may involve six or eight large trucks full of
workers, perhaps over a hundred. They will harvest the field in short order,
each worker earning three, maybe four dollars. Then the work is finished. The
produce is hauled to the sheds, and there is no more work for the harvesters.
The trucker takes a cut from the worker's iiay, and he is left with almost
nothing to show for his work. But despite Mrs. Schuster's complaint, I have
never seen a day go by when there weren't workers available at the bridge, or
in the shape-up stands in town.
The low utilization of labor and low wages also raise interesting questions
about the labor cost to the grower and the consumer. A grower siiends about .4
to .8 cents per ix)und to pick tomatoes, including a margin for waste. Repacking
flats adds slightly over 1 cent, for a total labor input of 1.9 cents per pound.
Sold in local markets for 29 cents a pound, labor accounts for only 7% of the
retail cost. A twenty-five cent head of lettuce costs 2.2 cents to pick and pack,
a one pound bag of carrots, selling for 19 cents a ix>und, costs only 1.2 cents
to pick and pack. Higher wage scales would hardly be a disaster to anyone.
Tripling wages would result in only a 2.5 cent increase in the market cost of
carrots, assuming that agribusinesses tried to pass on the whole cost to the
market. If all growers, i>ackers and shipix^rs were forced to ixiy the tripled
wage, none would suffer a competitive disadvantage. I am not suggesting that
merely tripling cui-rent wage scales would be fair, but that there is no general
public interest in denying the worker a fair wage. Indeed, there is reason to
believe that the poor and the middle-income consumer have interests which dic-
tate a friendly alliance. A successful organizing effort among farmworkers
would substantially reduce the need for government programs that may cost
a lot, but offer little. By supporting the farmworker, the consumer is avoiding the
waste of his income.
No analysis of the Valley power structure would be complete without a refer-
ence to the Bentsen family. The elder Lloyd Bentsen came to the Valley from
Minnesota in the 1920's and built an extensive land business. In the intervening
years the family diversified its holdings and interests. It now owns several
national drug stores, banks in the county, real estate companies, mortgage and
loan companies, large insurance companies, and even an agri-chemical business
aflaiiated with Union Carbide. The family still owns extensive citrus acreage,
but its primary influence is in the capital market where, with the Newhouses, it
dominates the Valley. Although a Chicano-oriented bank wouUl undoubtedly
be a success, local Chicano businessmen have been frustrated in their attempts
to organize such a venture by the Bentsen-Newhouse hegemony. One member
of the Bentsen family sits on both the McAllen school board and the board of
the hospital. (Othal Brand, of Griffin and Brand, sits with Bentsen on the
school board. Both are especially reactionary.) Tliough less so today, the town
of Mission has long been a kind of Bentsen patrimony, riiled by the Bentsens for
the privileged Anglo minority. A partial list of Bentsen holdings appears as
Appendix I.
The Bentsens, the Schusters, the Griffins and the Brands are but a few striking
examples of Anglo domination in the Valley. 495 persons or corporations received
subsidies in excess of $5000 in 1967, 466 in 1968 — less than 10% of the recipients
had Spanish surnames., In 1969 the^e were eighty payees receiving in excess of
$25,000. Only one had a Spanish surname, Guerra Brothers. One exi>ects to see
even larger operations emerge. Tenneco, for example, has agricultural acreage
in the Valley.
5424
Worse than the large subsidies is the attitude of the elite towards their serfs.
The most charitable point of view is that the Chicano's lot is atttributable to
ignorance. Educate people, and they will know that they shou'd wash their hands
before preparing food, that they should drink fresh water. Such arguments are
ridiculous. Most people know they should wash their hands, but there is no
clean water to wash with, because the sewage systems foul the already brackish
well water. Most colonias, and many houses in cities, don't even have any water.
Sewage systems are expensive to build ; water beyond the reach of all but a
few. One colonia pays taxes on a bond issue for a water system that runs near
their boundary. They will be paying thirty-four more years. They can't drink
a drop of it, can't even use it to water their gardens, because the water is only
for the irrigation of large farms. Many colonias have beeen waiting for years
for the F.H.A. to approve loans for water systems. One colonia, Colonia Nueva,
has sought for three years to get water. An Anglo real estate dealer sold the
people the land without any water rights. The well water is undrinkable, and
the people have to truck in water from nearby Donna. After a long struggle to
get temporary water rights, the Colonia sought to join a local water corporation,
Mid- Valley, which would have applied for a loans, constructed, and administered
the system. Mid-Valley refused to let them join because their allotment was
only temporary, not permanent, though there was virtually no chance that the
allotment wou'd have been lost. Now the colonia is going ahead on their own.
If they are lucky, F.H.A. will approve their loan, and they will have water
to drink. In the meantime, they are dry. We recently had a three-day rainstorm
which flooded many areas. A few residents of the colonia had built cisterns. Not
a drop from the deluge fell on Colonia Nueva.
The frustrations in dealing with the Anglo power structure replicate the
frustrations of the sick migrant seeking a government service which would help
him. At times he is met with a simile, always with a "No."
Still, the Valley has its ironies. A Catholic priest was visited early this year
by representatives of one of the members of the hospital board. The board mem-
ber was thinking of starting his own hospital, and wanted a few nuns around
to give it aura. The hospital was to be strictly first class, calculated to take the
most affluent clientele away from McAllen General. Irony, however, is infrequent.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Numerous recommendations have been offered for easing the crisis in health.
One such recommendation comes from the committee formed at the suggestion
of the medical society and meeting under Doctor Copenhaver's leadership. Tlie
plan, estimated to cost .$1 million annually, would .seek, in Dr. Love's woirds,
to fill "a gap in delivery of health care to certain economically depressed seg-
ments of our population." (Corpus Christi Caller, June 11, 1970). Informa-
tion and referral centers would be set up, along with out-patient clinics in
Weslaco. Edinburg and McAllen.
I think Dr. Love would acknowledge that even with a $1 million annual
budget, we will not have a comprehensive health service for all the county's
poor. If, as is proposed. 12,000 persons will be treated annually, service will
still fall far short of county needs. Serious cases will need hospitalization, appar-
ently not a part of the committee's plan. More imnortant. health will continue
to deteriorate as long as water, sewage and food remain problems.
I have continually stressed what tlie Texas branch of the Union feels will
contribute most to good health — fair wages. We do not want new programs
which create complacent, tenure-oriented bureaucracies, and don't deliver. We
want no new legislation, unless it is designed and is passed to support the
farm worker in his struggle to gain a fair wage. AVe do not want legislation
which purports to help, but really traps the workers in a maze of restrictions
which would vitiate the farm movement.
The government and the American can help, and should. The American people
pay for a dual system of welfare ; the agribusinesses wax fat on subsidies,
expensive public welfare systems fail to meet the needs of the poor. We appeal
to our fellow citizens to consider that by supporting the Union they will be
helping themselves. The Hidalgo farmworker and the consumer in New Jersey, in
Minnesota, in California, Iowa, or Mas'-achu.setts, have a real stake in each other's
health and well-being. The consumer boycott of grapes is a positive start. It
must continue and grow until every farmworker has the rights most of us take
for granted.
Donne wrote, "No man is an island, entire of it.self." Tlie plight of the farm-
worker diminishes us all. Let us join together and support him, like the part of
us he is.
Viva la causa.
APPEOS^DIXES
EXHIBIT A
TABLE 1— 4 COUNTIES OF THE LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY DATA
County
Area
1967
population
Number of
farms, 1959
Number of
farms, 1984
Total farm
income, 1967
Total income,
all sources,
1967
Hidalgi
Cameron
Starr
Willacy
1,541
883
1,207
595
182, 192
151,098
20, 624
20, 084
3,575
2,338
559
637
2,868
1,754
520
547
$48,903,880
32,292,625
4,951,570
16, 490, 695
$224, 242, 000
209, 738, 000
16,371,000
23, 848, 000
Total..
4,326
373, 998
7,145
5,589
102,638,771
474, 199, 000
Source: Texas Almanac, 1968-69.
TABLE 2.— AGRICULTURAL STABILIZATION AND CONSERVATION PROGRAM PAYMENTS OF $5,000 OR MORE IN
1967 AND 1968
County
Number of
recipie ts,
1967
Number of
Spanisf)
names of
these
Total
amounts
Number of
recipients,
1968
Number of
Spanisfi
names of
these
Total
amounts
Hidalgo
Cameron
495
466
24
32
3
7
$8. 720, 380
7,733,118
517, 857
3, 198, 000
466
402
19
207
33
28
5
5
$7,654,978
6,326,346
Starr...
Willacy
21
226
489, 324
2,748,373
Total
1,218
66
20, 269, 355
1,094
71
17,218,373
Note: In 1960 68 individuals or companys received $3,400,000 of the total payment to Hidalgo County of $7,654,978. In
the 4 counties 7 farms received more than $100,000 apiece. Of the total 4-county population of 373,998, 254,766, or more
than 68 percent, are Spanish-surname people.
EXHIBIT B
OEO CAP 5 FORM, SOUTH TEXAS COUNTIES
Total
Cameron
County
Hidalgo
County
Starr
County
Willacy
County
Total population 372,123 151,098 180,904 20,037 20,084
Percent population in rural areas 28.6 25.6 28.8 60 17.9
Total number of families 75,201 31,370 36,431 3,339 4,061
Families, income less than $3.000 38,924 14,821 19,623 2,384 2,096
Percent families, income less than $3,000. _ 51.7 47.2 53.8 71.4 51.6
Families with income less than $1,000 _. 11,225 4,262 5,444 1,005 514
Families, income $1,000 to $1,999 15.273 5,628 7,785 949 911
Families, income $2,000 to $2,999 12.396 4,931 6,394 430 671
Males Hand over in labor force 81,658 31,321 42,627 3,002 4,708
Percent of such males unemployed 7.1 8.7 5.8 13.8 3.5
Females Hand over in labor force... 36,363 15,914 18,290 1,348 1,811
Percent of such females unemployed _. 7.7 7.9 7.3 13.8 .6
Persons under 21 years of age 178,658 76,709 82,776 8,532 10,641
Percent under 21 VI//AFDC payments 3.4 2.4 4.6 .06 4.0
Persons aged 65 years and over 16,566 8,093 6,477 972 1.024
Percent persons 65 and over, old age assistance 41 24 60 69 31.7
Percent persons in school (14 and 15) 87.3 88.3 86.8 90.7 80.8
Percent persons in school (16 and 17) 66.1 69.5 64.1 68.1 57.6
Number of persons 25 years and older 160,006 65,994 77,971 7,513 8,528
25 and over, less than 8th grade education 87,280 33.223 45,160 3,809 5,088
Percent 25 and over, less than 8th grade education 54.7 50.7 57.9 50.7 59.6
Persons 18 to 25 examined by selective service 2,201 288 1,527 109 277
Persons rejected by selective service 1.152 158 751 73 170
Percent persons rejected by selective service 52.3 55 49 75 61.1
Births per year 10,442 4,523 4,824 675 420
Deaths per year, infants under 12 months... (200) 179 C) .4 4.2
All housing units 100,059 42,083 47,711 4,489 5,776
Housing units substandard 45,667 17,224 23,488 1,567 3,388
Percent of housing units substandard 45.7 40.9 49.2 35 58.3
Population with Spanish surname 254.766 96,474 129,092 15,196 13,734
Percent population with Spanish surname 68.4 64 71.3 76 68.4
> Not available.
(5425)
5426
Population — Towns
HIDALGO
Alamo 4,010
Cypres 20
Donna 7,650
Edcouch 2,805
Edinburg 19,500
Elsa 3,847
Faysville 50
Hargill 100
Hidlago 800
La Blanca 75
La Joya 110
La Villa 1,261
Linn 150
Los Ebanos 100
McAllen 38,600
McCook 100
Mercedea 11, 143
Mission 14,281
Monte Alto 650
Monte CristO' 60
Penitas 250
Pharr 14, 806
Progreso 185
Puerto Rico 350
Relampago 100
Samfordyce 95
San Carlos 150
San Juan 4,550
Sharyland 350
Stockholz 50
Sullivan City 275
Wellichville 25
Weslaco 16,550
Weslaco (North) 1,049
STAKE
Ark. City 40
Delminta 100
El Sauz 75
Escobares 250
Falcon Hts 150
Fronton , 350
Garceno 175
Garciasville 250
GruUa 1,436
La Gloria 50
La Reforma 30
Los Barreras
Rio Grande City.
Roma-Los Saanz.
Rosita
Salineno
San Isidro
Santa Ana
Santa Catarina_--
Santa Blena
Sun Oil Camp
Viboras
La Union
Lasara
Lyford
Porfirio
Port Mansfield-
Raymondville -
San Perlita
Sebastian
Willamar
WILLACY
CAMERON
Bayview
Bluetown
Brownsville
Carriatos
Combes
Harlingen
La Feria
Laguna He
Laguna Vista
Landrum Station
La Paloma
Laureles
Los Fresnos
Los Indios
Lozano
Moistown
Olmito
Port Isabel
Primera
Rangerville
Rio Hondo
San Benito
Santa Maria
Santa Rosa
125.
6,435
1,549
215
255
140
30
20
60
100
20
20
150
1,554
40
525
10, 200
348
500
40
268
100
52, 800
25
510
41, 100
3,970
840
260
125
150
20
1,500
300
200
25
200
4,000
1,066
80
1.344
16, 650
281
1,572
Counties
Cameron
Hidalgo
Starr
Willacy
Texas
National
Population 1 160,000
Persons per physician 1,684. 2
Physicians per 100,000 population 59. 3
Persons per dentist 9,411.7
Dentists per 100,000 population. 10.6
Persons per R.N 894. 1
R.N.'s per 100,000 population 118. 1
Persons per P.H.N. 16,000
P.H.N. 's per 100,000 population 6.3
Persons per sanitarian 40, 000
Sanitarians per 100.000 popilation .4
Persons per registered pharmacist 2, 161. 6
Pharmacists per 100.000 population. . . 46. 3
Hospital beds per 1,000 2.5
Median family income (1960)4 $3, 216
209, 000
20, 000
3, 265. 6
6, 666. 7
30.6
15
7,206.7
(2)
13.9
(2)
823.2
2, 857. 1
119.1
35.0
13, 062. 5
10, 000
7.6
10.0
34, 833. 3
20, 000
2.8
5.0
2, 518. 07
1,818.1
39.7
55.0
2.3
2.1
$2, 780
$1,700
22,000 10,711,743
4,400.0 _.-_ _
22.7 119 1,508
11,000.0
9. 1 36 54. 1
1,571.4
63.6 173 325
22,000 6,211 5,376
4.5 16.1 18.6
0)
0)
5,500.0
18.2
1.3 3.8
$2,902 $5,660
1 Population used by 4 local health departments.
2 No dentist.
3 No sanitarian.
* U.S. census, 1960.
5427
o
O At
H
Z Q
1— t
c^ U
< <w >J
M O <
X
W
^ r
o
^
o
en
ct:
[>]
u
(.3
z
Q
o
C>
M
<n
>-
^
^
o
c-j
o
o
z
<■■>
z
(-
o
<:
M
M
«
C?
>
t/5
«
J z
<; o
C_) r-4
oi n
[J >
U Q
o
Di
m
z '
o
L,
5428
EXHIBIT D
[From Valley Morning Star, July 12, 1970]
Apathy Still Factor in Battle of Polio
Weslaco. — Anna Isabel Trevino has full brown eyes that brim with the special
shine of a 2-year-old.
And she has that special smile that carries a child through happy or hard times.
Her grin never really changes. But the times have. And they are bad for the
tot from Rio Bravo, Tex.
iShe lies in a bed at Knapp Memorial Hospital in "Weslaco. She does not move
her arms or legs. She has a fever, a stiff neck and sore muscles and she doesn't
understand why.
Anna Isabel has polio.
The disease that was a houseihold horror until Dr. Jonas Salk and his miracle
vaccine made it rare in the late 1950s, is making a deadly comeback in the Rio
Grande Valley of Texas.
STRIKES VERY YOUNG
It Strikes the helpless and the innocent. It strikes the very young.
Pourt^n cases of polio have been reported in Cameron and Hidalgo counties
which border Mexico. Three children have died so far this summer.
"Polio is still around because of apathy," said Dr. John R. Gopenhaver, health
director for the two Texas counties and the man in the eye of the epidemic.
Most of the 14 polio victims were under one year of age. The oldest was 3. None
of the children was immunized against the disease.
"The only way to overcome apathy is to force people to be immunized and to
reward then^ if they do," Copenhaver said. "For instance, in order to travel or
goto school or to receive welfare."
POOR HIT HARDEST
Polio can strike the rich or the poor. But in the Rio Grande Valley it has
Qbosen the poor. Federal, state and local health oflScials have started an immu-
nization campaign, dispensing 54,000 doses of oral polio vaccine in a four-county
ajea.
The epidemic prompted state legislators and health oflScials to consider legal
methods to force parents to have their children immunized.
"It certainly has been called to my attention," said Gus F. Mutscher, speaker
of the Texas House of Representatives. "I think the best thing I could do at
this time is to have a conference with the head of the Texas Education Agency
and the Health Department."
Many cities and school boards have required polio immunization. But Dr. J. E.
Peavy, state health commissioner, said school programs would not help the
current outbreak.
"All but one of the children involved are under 2 years of age," Peavy said.
URGES EARLIER START
Copenhaver said school programs do not attack the disease early enough in
children.
"We can't afford to wait until they are school age," he said. "They should be
immunized in the first year of birth. It could be made mandatory for a birth
certificate."
Anna Isabel Trevino got her birth certificate and was struck down by polio in
her second summer because she was not immunized.
The Texas State Health Department now sends to county health departments
lists of infants born in their areas. County ofl5cials then mail letters to all
mothers, urging them to have their children inoculated.
ADDRESS PROBLEM
"But the address is so frequently wrong. It makes it awfully diflScult," Copen-
haver said. "We are now recommending that more information be given so
children can be accurately followed up.
5429
"When they come into the clinic, they receive all the immunizations — diptheria,
whooping cough, tetanus, measles and smallpox — as many as two at one time."
The treatment is free for those who cannot afford it.
Despite the free clinics, door-to-door campaigns this summer and warning
letters, polio continues to pop up, especially among the poor.
"I don't think the financial status has anything to do with polio" except for
the lack of money to pay for regular visits to a pediatrician, Copenhaver said.
"The sanitary conditions or the closeness of individuals might be involved."
CROWDED LIVING CONDITIONS
Many Mexican-Americans in the Rio Grande Valley, including thousands of
migrant farm workers, live crowded together with substandard sanitary
conditions.
The upper respiratory virus that causes polio can be inhaled through cough
droplets from another person or transmitted directly by body filth, found in all
economic levels, Oopenhaver said.
He said sur\'eys indicate the large migrant families are immunized better than
nomnigrant families "because we put more emphasis on our migrant program
here and there is emphasis up and down the migrant streams."
EXHIBIT E
HIDALGO FEDERAL MIGRANT HEALTH 1970 BUDGET, UNOFFICIAL «
Balance Feb.
Categories Approved January February 28, 1970
Salaries
P^sician fees
Office supplies
Drugs --
Clinic supplies
Travel
Equipment
Printing _
X-rays _
Lab
Hospitalization
Physician care_
Ambulance
Postage and communication
Total
> County medical program given to NFWSC by Dr. Copenhaver, director. January 1 to December 31.
2 Over.
$53,716
$3,782.00
4, 899. 00
$4,435.00
4, 995. 00
$45,499.00
19, 000
9,106.00
500
0
26.59
473.41
18, 000
5,616.61
13,916.49
J -1,533.10
120
0
0
120. 00
7,896
479.83
358.27
7,057.90
0
0
0
0
400
0
112.65
287. 35
3, 000
535.00
463. 50
2, 001. 50
3, 000
563.00
750. 50
1,686.50
27,767
0
0
27, 767. 00
26, 000
300.00
40.00
25, 660. 00
1, 000
0
0
1, 000. 00
400
0
0
400. 00
160, 799
16,175.44
25,098.00
119,525.00
EXHIBIT F
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee AFLr-CIO,
Mc Allen, Tex., April 11, 1910.
Dr. J. E. Peavy,
Commissioner of Health, Austin, Tex.
Dear Sir : The "Monitor," a local newspaper, reported on Tuesday, April 7
that the McAUen General Hospital is applying for additional Hill-Burton funds
for the construction of more patient's rooms.
We support, without reservation, the need for additional funds. We would ask.
however, that in processing the McAUen application, state and federal oflQcials
scrutinize with great care McAUen's assurances that it will provide a reasonable
volume of services to persons unable to pay for them, assurances required by
the Act and supporting regulations.
A recent medical survey conducted in this area of the Rio Grande Valley
showed an alarming lack of medical services for the poor. There is no question
but that our hospitals, McAllen General included, must be vastly expanded to
handle the critical medical problems we know exist. Unhappily, we are not
convinced that McAllen General' takes seriously its obligation to serve the poor,
as it serves the rich. The hospital has received Hill-Burton funds in the past and
will, we hope, receive more at this timf;; but testimony at a senate Subcommittee
hearing in Edinburg last Fall afid .our own experience show that the hospital
is turning away ingi^iy of those who cannot .'afford -entrance deposits and harass-
ing the indigent for payments.
- S6-513 0-r-71.-r-pt.8B -4
5430
Under the circumstances, we would ask that the mandatory assurances be
spelled out in great detail and made easily available to the public. Among other
questions we would ask are : What percentage of indigents applying for admis-
sion and treatment have been admitted as charity patients? How many have
been turned away? What percentage of the proposed rooms will be available
to those unable to pay? Will the hospital treat such patients as true charity
patients, or will it continue its apparent policy of hari*assing the medically in-
digent? Will other services of the hospital be made available to indigents on
an expanded basis?
I wish to make it perfectly clear once again that we do not oppose an addi-
tional grant of Hill-Burton funds ; we support such a grant. Our concern is that
the spirit and the letter of the Act, that the poor have a right to share in
federally assisted medical programs, be met. The hospital, by its own admission,
is in good financial shape. McAllen General can and should, comply with the
responsibilities that go with Hill-Burton funds.
Thousands of the Valley's poor are suffering from critical medical problems,
some of which have gone beyond the point of cure only because they were too
poor to get the treatment they know they need. Hill-Burton dollars will make
no difference to the destitute, waiting in their agony, until and unless Texas and
the United States government stand behind and guarantee the promises Con-
gress made to the poor when they passed Hill-Burton.
Very truly yours,
Antonio Orendain.
Texas State Department op Health,
Austin, Tex., April 16, 1910.
Mr. Antonio Orendain,
United Farm Workers Organizing Committee AFL-CIO,
McAllen, Tex.
Dear Mr. Orendain : I appreciate very much your letter to me, dated April 11,
1970, expressing your interest in and approval of a Hill-Burton grant to the
McAllen General Hospital. We regret very much that we did not have sufficient
funds to make an allocation to this project. We realize that this facility is badly
needed in the area and perhaps, if the hospital reapplies next year, we might
receive a larger sum under the Hill-Burton program and be in a position to make
allocations to a larger number of hospitals than we were able to this year.
Very truly yours,
J. E. Peavy, M.D.,
Commissioner of Health.
Department op Health, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service,
Health Services and Mental Health Administration,
Rockvillc, Md., June 2, 1970.
Mr. Antonio Orendain,
United Farm Workers Organising Committee AFL-CIO, Texas Branch,
McAllen, Tex.
Dear Mr. Orendain : This is in further reply to your letter of April 11, 1970,
to Dr. Harold Graning, with reference to the McAllen General Hospital's request
for Hill-Burton funds and your questions pertaining to assurances for service
to persons unable to pay.
We have received a report on the matter, through our Dallas Regional Office,
from the State Department of Health, the administering authority for the Hill-
Burton program in Texas. We are advised that due to the limited funds allotted
to the State of Texas, the State agency was not able to make an allocation to the
McAllen General Hospital, and therefore the assurance pertaining to patients
unable to pay for services does not apply in this instance.
With reference to your questions concerning the admission of indigent patients,
we have been advised that the McAllen General Hospital from October 1, 1969,
through April 30, 1970, furnished 348 patients (9 percent of the admitted pa-
tients) with services amounting to $73,914 (5 percent of the gross patient
revenue), and the hospital's estimate is that it will furnish over $100,000 in free
service to local citizens before the current hospital fiscal year is ended.
Sincerely yours,
Ted L. Bechtel,
Director, Office of State Plans.
5431
June 24, 1970.
Mr. Ted L. Bechtel
Director, Office of State Plans,
Deparitment of Healtih, Education, and Welfare,
Public Health Service,
Health Services and Mental Health Administration,
Roekville. Md.
Dear iSib: Thank you for your interesting letter. It is reassuring to hear that
McAllen Hospital may be offering charitable services to local citizens. At the
risk of sounding skeptical, I should like to ask if you know, or can find out,
whether the "free ser\ace" is indeed free, or represents indigent patients who
have been harassed for payments, but who have no money.
lOur experience with the hospital has revealed a number of instances of patient
harassment, and no instances of true charity. I would be ready to applaud the
hospital for charity work, if I were sure that it is providing it. You will imder-
stand my hesitancy in accepting ithe hospital's figures until sudh time as we
can be sure they represent real charity.
Very truly yours,
Antonio Oeendain.
EXHIBIT G
Texas Provisions for Health of Farm Workers and Packers
(By Kitty Schild)
Texas safety and health statutes, or the lack of them, contribute direcftly to
poor farmworker health. Huge gaps exist in legislation, the few laws existing
are unenforced. The basic statute involved is the Occupational Safety Act,
V.A.CJS. Aft. 5182 a. It applies to all employers (defined as anyone in control
of any employment, place of employment, or employees, with the exception of
domestic help or those employed on carriers regulated iby the IOC.) It merely
requires that such employers must maintain a reasonably safe and healthy place
to work. They must use any processes or devices, including methods of sanitation
and hygiene, as are reasonably necessary to protect the life, health, and safety
of itheir employees.
However, any more si>ecific rules or regulations must come from the Occupa-
tion Safety Board, comix)sed of the Commissioners of Labor Statistics and
Health and a public member appointed hy the governor. The Board may also
exempt any individual or group from any of its rules or regulations. The Board
has not yet promulgated rules covering agricultural workers, and probably will
not for several years, if ever.
Besides this very general statute, there are a series of statutes that apply to
any factory, mill, workshop, mei-cantile estaWis^hmenit, laundry, or other estab-
lishment which employs females. These would apply to packing sheds and prob-
ably agricultural work, though this latter is not listed and would have to be
considered as "other establishments." (On an earlier statute. Art. 5172a, con-
cerning hours for female emi)loyees, those involved in the "first processing" or
in canning or packing fruits or vegetables were specifically exempted, so one
could argue that since they weren't so exempted in these articles, they were
meant to be included. )
These statutes provide that such establishments should take adequate meas-
ures for maintaining a reasonable, and if possible, equable, temi^erature, con-
sistent with the reasonable requirement of the manufacturing process. There
shall also be no gas or eftiuvia from sewers, drains, privies, etc., and iX)isonous
or noxious gases and dust must be removed as far as practicable. V.A.C.S. Art.
5(174. Floors shall be cleaned at least once a day and if the manufacturing process
wets the floor, there should be adequate drainage and grates or dry standing
room where practicable. V.A.C.S. Art. 517.5. Exits should o^ien outwards and be
easy and quick to open. Handrails and adequate lighting must be provided for
any stairs. V.A.C.S. Art. 517G. As can be seen by reading the above statutes, a
specific rule will be set and then watered down with such phrases as "as far as
practicable" or "consistent with the reasonable requirements of the manu-
facturing process."
The only statute without such provisions (and one which also applies to male
employees) is Art. 5177 which requires toilets in proportion of one to twenty
female employees, and one to twenty-five male employees. There must be separate
5432
toilets for males and females, and they must be constructed in an approved man-
ner and properly enclosed. They must be kept clean and sanitary, disinfected and
ventilated at all times and lighted during working hours.
All the above statutes (Arts. 517a-5178) are to be enforced by the Commis-
sioner of Labor Statistics.
Strikingly absent are provisions protecting laborers in transit to and from
the fields. As many as twenty migrants — men, women, and children — may be
loaded into the open, unprotected cargo space of a flatbed truck. There are no
seats, overhead protection, or safety belts. With this lack of protection, an
otherwise minor accident can turn into a major tragedy.
Also lacking, as yet, are provisions for water and toilets in the field. Failing
basic sanitation and comfort standards, the workers cannot be blamed for
excreting in the fields. Some of the more modest, particularly women, have suf-
fered kidney and bladder disorders from long hours of working without urinating.
EXHIBIT H
Visits by Federal Officials to the Lower Rio Grande Valley the Past
18 Months
It should be noted that there have been a steady stream of federal and state
officials coming through the Valley this past 18 months. They have held meetings,
promising things, then vanishing, and nothing happened. Basically there is no
follow-up.
The following is a list of visits by Federal officials to the Farm worker groups
in the Valley over the past 18 months.
VISITS
Anril 1969.— Dr. Bud Shenkin, USPHS. Wash. D.C. and Dr. Tom Newman
USPHS Dallas Regional office. They discussed with Colonias del Valle the
possibility of a health grant. Either a clinic or a community health aide program
that could refer people to existing facilities.
August 1969. — Colonias people wanted a clinic to deliver services and there-
fore during July and August a survey was done to develop a clinic serving 12
rural colonias and a research project to develop a comprehensive plan for the
whole Valley. (4 counties). Aides would do no good because there were no
services available to refer to.
September 1969. — A 12 colonia survey was done and a proposal submitted to
USPHS for a clinic and planning grant. This proposal was supported by the
Farm Workers Service Center.
October 1969. — Tlie submitted proposal was reviewed by the USPHS, con-
sumer review committee, and action was postponed until Jan. 1970.
November 1969. — Discuussion of health problems with Miss Helen Johnson
of USPHS Migrant Health branch. No real results could be seen due to no funds
available to Migrant Health branch.
Hearings on Migrant Health by Senator Yarborough's Committee in Edin-
burg. Much effort was made to develop good and true testimony. There was
much distrust of the value of these hearings especially on the part of the young
migrant people, because these hearings had been held before and no real ad-
vantage or gain to the poor.
In Feb. of 1970 more money was allocated but this did no real good because
the majority of the funds did not go to Texas. Also most of the money went to
support clinics. To most of us, migrant clinics are like Bingo if you live near
one, you win until the money runs out. If you don't live near one you loose. The
money never goes directly to the farm workers either via stamps or insurance,
so he has to accept what over he can get after the health Bureaucrats, Adminis-
trators, and Health providers have taken their cent.
December 10, 1969. — Farm Workers Clinic opens.
December 1969.— Glenn Bell, and Bob Winston of the Dallas Regional Office
plus Bud Shenkin of USPHS in D.C. came by to discuss the October proposal,
plus the newly opened Farm Workers Clinic staffed voluntarily by 1 local doctor
and several nurses.
It should be noted that on each of these trips the Federal people promised
support and assistance in whatever we wanted. They told us, they were for us
and would help in every way. It was only much later that we found out, they
were saying these same things to the doctors, pharmacists, and county health
workers and other community groups.
5433
Feiruiry 1970. — Another meeting was held with representatives from USPHS.
This time in D.C. with people from the D.C. oflBce. Again promises of assistance
March 1970.— Mv. Glen Bell and Dr. Tom Newonan of USPHS Dallas came to
the Valley to aslc for proposals for the new Migrant Money (Yarborough's
money). They were selling clinics as "the thing D.C. USPHS wanted to fund".
The farm workers asked for Health Stamps (a food stamp, insurance type pro-
gram). We did not find out until later (June 5), but the pharmacists asked Bell
and Co. for a Medical insurance program and the doctors were split some want-
ing fee for service insurance and some wanting a government run welfare clinic
attached to hosuMtials. The last of these choices gained favor with the government
people and was funded in June. It is interesting to note that the majority of
those involved (Farm workers, pharmacists, and doctors) wanted almost the
same thing.
Following Bell and Newman's visit a proposal for 3.2 million to cover farm
workers specifically in the four counties and generally in the mid western states
was submitted to USPHS. Except for one phone call from Dallas, this proposal
was completely ignored. In June we learned that the Medical Society Clinic was
to be funded. The amount of $230,750 was allocated to Hidalgo Co. (our cut of
the $7,000,0(X) Yarborough appropriation for Migrant Health, the benefits of the
Nov. hearings). The interesting thing, is that this money is to be spent and super-
vised by a .small committee made up of ^Medical Society and government people.
The ideas and proposal which the farm worker groups submitted was never taken
even as far as the national review committee. Another tragedy is that the money
presently is not being spent because the doctors and government people can't
find a $30,0(X) doctor to staff their own brain child. The farm worker groups had
asked first for a Health Stamp or insurance type plan that spread the poverty
medicine practice around. One reason being this would avoid the direct recruit-
ment of one doctor for a government tyi>e charity clinic and possibly attract
more private practitioners.
The best lesson that can be learned by all of this, the Yarborough hearings in-
cluded, is that the people should never expect much from the government.
There are too many obstacles between the Halls of Congress and the rural areas,
such as the Valley. The fight for individual rights, for better pay and better public
services has to be carried on at the local level. All we can hope is that the majority
of the American people and the Congress will help us by being aware of the plight
of the rural poor and stop helping the agri-business men and the entrenched
government agency people.
As long as the agri-business men receive a double subsidy first via direct crop
support or said bank payments and second via subsidized labor (Health projects,
food commodity distribution, private charity to impoverished workers) it will be
impossible to make economic and social progress in rural areas. The poor have
no choice but to migrate to the urban centers. In most cases this migration only
adds to frustration, despair and unrest.
EXHIBIT I
Bentsen Family Holdings (Non-Land)
bentsen companies
Bentsen Development Company-Real Estate-Investments: holdings include
about 200 acres of farmland ; unirrigated land used for niilo, irrigated land all
citrus.
Bentsen Groves Corporation — land holding corp.
Bentsen \yhittenger Oil : Calvin R. Bentsen, President.
Tip O' Tex Realty Company : owned by Elmer C. Bentsen and Bentsen De-
velopment Company in partnership composed of Lloyd M. Sr. and Elmer C. Devel.
Dixie Mortgage Loan Co. : owned by Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., President of the
company is Dan Winn (2022 N. 10th, McAllen), who is Secretary and a director of
Lincoln Liberty Life Insurance (a Bentsen Company), and President of Medico
Drug Stores. The company also owns a lot of land.
Lincoln Liberty Life Insurance : formed out of a merger of Lincoln Liberty
Life Insurance, of Omaha, and the Bentsen owned Consolidated American Life
Insurance.
5434
Mid-American Investment Company : organized by Elmer Bentsen and Dixie
Mortgage Loan.
Tide Products, Inc. : Don L. Bentsen, President. Subdivision of Union Carbide.
Liquid & Dry fertilizers, insecticides, agricultural chemicals.
MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY
Lloyd Bentsen, Sr. : Partner in Bentsen Development Co., Chairman of Board
of First National Bank of McAllen ; Chairman of Board of Jefferson Savings and
Loan of Texas; Director of Lincoln Liberty Life Ins., largest stockholder; Presi-
dent of First National Bank of Mission ; Owns Dixie Mortgage and Loan ;
Board Member of Frst National Bank of Mission, McAllen, Edinburg, Raymond-
ville, and Security State Bank of Pharr.
Lloyd Bentsen, Jr. : Partner in Bentsen Development Company ; Chairman of
the Board and Director of Liberty Life Insurance ; President of Lincoln Con-
solidated ; Director of Continental Oil Company ; Director of Bank of Southwest
National Association (Houston) ; was a Director of Trunkline Gas Company
before campaign ; Director of Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co. before campaign.
Donald Bentsen : Director of Sommers Drug Stores Co., 3130 E. Houston, San
Antonio; President of Tide, San Antonio; President of Tide Products, Inc. (Div.
of Union Carbide) ; President Investors Syndicate; Secretary of Jefferson Sav-
ings and Loan Association of Texas.
Elmer Bentsen : President of First National Bank of McAllen.
Calvin R. Bentsen : President Bentsen-Whittengen Oil Company ; Member
McAllen Hospital Board, McAllen School Board.
EXHIBIT J
[From the Texas Observer, Apr. 3, 1970]
The Senate Contest — Lloyd Bentsen's Fortune
Austin. — When Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr., retired from the U.S. Congress at the
age of 33, he explained that he was leaving politics because he wanted "to
establish financial independence" for himself and his family. Seventeen years
later, his business interests include banking, insurance, farming, oil, gas, and
defense contracting. He may or may not be independent, but he certainly is
wealthy.
Many Tej^ans are under the impression that Bentsen, Senator Yarborough's
Democratic opponent, has always been rich. "Well, that's not true," he quietly
told the Observer during a telephone interview. That was all he offered on his
early financial status. One hears estimates that he is worth as much as $20
million, but the candidate is reticent about his wealth. He says he will make
public his financial statement when he is elected, and not before. "I assume the
reason we want to give financial statements is to show what a man's worth is
when he is elected and what his financial losses and gains are when he gets
out," Bentsen said, as a means of explaining why he sees no reason to reveal
his net worth during his candidacy.
Bentsen is the son of a millionaire. His father, Lloyd Senior, made a fortune
selling land in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. When Lloyd Junior abandoned
politics to launch a career in business, "Big Lloyd," as his father is known around
the hometown of McAllen, most assuredly provided some ballast for the venture.
Today Bentsen is president of Lincoln Consolidated, a holding company with
ofiices in Houston. His father is chairman of the board. The company was
foruied in 1967 as a parent for Lincoln Liberty Life Insurance Company ; Funds,
Inc., (which manages five mutual funds) ; Compensation Programs ("specializing
in deferred compensation planning and administration," according to Standard
& Poor's exchange stock report) ; and Benjamin Franklin Savings Association.
Ben Franklin, a Texas concern with $58.7 million in total assets and $53.9 mil-
lion in total savings, was purchased by Lincoln Consolidated in June of 1969. In
mid-1969, Lincoln Consolidated reported a total income of $1,482,848 and $765,982
in net income. According to Standard and Poor's Lincoln Consolidated paid
$32,000 in federal income tax in 1969, and no income tax in 1968. Bentsen told
the Observer that the company paid "substantially" more in income tax in 1969
but that he did not have the records handy.
5435
Lincoln Liberty Life is headquartered in Lincoln, Nebr. It writes a variety of
ordinary life insurance on a non-participating basis plus accident and health
insurance and group life insurance. Bentsen, bis father, and four other Bentsens
are on Lincoln Liberty's board of directors. In 1969, the company's total assets
were $75,617,295.63. Its net gain for the year was $444,293.49.
The insurance company is a prime example of the type of bank holding com-
pany that Texas Congressman Wright Patman has been working to bring under
more stringent federal control. According to Lincoln Liberty's anniial report for
1969, the company owns stock in the following Texas banks :
First National Bank of Edinburg— 1,498 shares worth $112,353.60.
First National Bank of McAllen— 16,601 shares worth $222,184.48.
First National Bank of iMis.sion— 4,560 s^hares worth $110,345.15.
Security State Bank of Pharr — 5,750 shares worth $68,717.
Texas City National Bank— 2,310 shares worth $69,300.
In July of 1967, the House Banking and Banking Committee issued a report
on control of commercial i)anks and interlocks among financial in.sititutions. The
report cites as its most interesting ca.se "Lincoln Liberty Life Insurance Co. of
Houston, which has between 15.1% and 41.28% of the shares in each of .sax
Texas banks. All of these banks except Texas City National Bank are in the same
geographic airea known as the Lower Rio G-rande Valley. ... It is interesting
to note that this insurance company has in all except one case kept its percentage
of bank stock holdings in these banks below 25%, thus avoiding the necessity of
subjecting itself to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act. How close
Lincoln Life has become to a regular bank holding company is seen in that if
it owned just one more share of First National Bank of Bdinburg, it would come
under the Bank Holding Company Act. If it bad one more share, it would be
required to dive.st itself of the bank ot the insurance company operation."
At the time of the report, the company had 24.9% of Edinburg bank stock
and 41.28% of the stock of the Firsit National Bank of Raymondville. The
Raymondville stock may have been sold during 1969.
iThe UJS. House recently pa.Svsed Congressman Patman's revi.sed One Bank Hold-
ing Company Bill, and it is awaiting a hearing in the 'Senate Committee on
Banking and Currency. If the measure pa.sses, Lincoln Liberty Life may be
required to get out of tlie banking or the insitrance business. The new bill allows
the Federal Reserve Board to break up bank holding companies when it can
establish that a company controls a bank, even if it owns le.ss than 25% of the
stock.
Jake I^ewis of the House Banks and Banking Committee told the Observer that,
if the Patman bill passes the Senate, the interlocking directorates among the
Rio Grande Valley banks, Lincoln Liberty Life, and Lincoln Consolidated could
lead the Federal Reserve Bank to conclude that the Bentsens do indeed control
the banks. The boards of directors of the banks, tlie insurance company, and the
parent company are saturated with Bentsens. According to the Texas Banking
Rcdbook, Lloyd M. Bentsen (it does not. say whether it is junior or senior, but
is presumably senior) belongs to the boards of five A^alley bank.s — ^the first
national ])anks of Raymondville, Alission, McAllen, and Edinburg, and the
Security State Bank of Pharr. Both Lloyd Senior and Lloyd Junior are on the
boards of directors of Lincoln Consolidated and Lincoln Liberty Life.
Elmer Bentsen, a brother of Lloyd Senior, is on the boards of three of the
Valley banks in which Lincoln Liberty has stock, and he also is on the boards
of Lincoln Liberty and Lincoln Consolidated. Calvin P. Bentsen, Donald Bentsen,
and Ted A. Bentsen are Itoard members of both Lincoln Liberty and the McAllen
bank. And R. Dan Winn is a member of the boards of both Lincoln Liberty
and the McAllen bank.
Bentsen told the Observer he will resign from Lincoln Consolidated if he is
elected. "When I went to Congress before, I withdrew from my law firm and
never accepted another legal fee again," Bentsen said. "That's the sort of ethics
I think should l)e displayed when you enter into public office."
Bentsen also has a financial interest in the U.S. farm subsidy program.
Althougli the candidate has endorsed a limitation of $20,000 a year in cash
subsidies to individual farmers for not growing certain crops. Bentsen was one
of 331 farm owners in 1967 to receive more than $50,000 a year in crop subsidies.
The government paid him $108,901 that year for reducing crop production on
his property in Hidalgo County. In 1966. Bentsen received $152,352 in farm
payments. The 1968 list of farmers in the over $50,000 category does not include
Bentsen, and the 1969 list is not yet available.
5436
The day before Bentsen announced his candidacy, he quietly resigned from
the boards of directors of Continental Oil, Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co.,
Trunkline Gas Co., Houston's Bank of the Southwest, and Lockheed Aircraft
Corporation. Bentsen said he sold 1,000 shares of Lockheed stock at the time
he resigned from the board. "I resigned because I wanted to make a total com-
mitment to this race," the candidate said.
Bentsen told the Observer that his resignations leave him free from any
conflict of interest. Still, he might be expected to be sympathetic to the prob-
lems of his former companies. His relationship with Lockheed might be par-
ticularly sticky, since the aircraft company is in considerable trouble over its
$600 million cost overrun on the military contract for the C-5A jet transport.
Lockheed, which is this country's leading defense contractor, recently asked the
Department of Defense for conditional release of more than $500 million in
contract disputes. Lockheed's financial crisis will not be solved overnight. It is
bound to be a topic of debate in the Senate next year, and so are crop subsidies,
bank holding companies, insurance, oil and gas.
[From the Texas Observer, Apr. 17, 1970]
A Historical Inquiky Into the Origins of the Bentsen Fortune
Rio Grande Valley, Corpus Christi, Fort Worth, Waoo. — There is a tradi-
tion, adapted here to fit these circumstances, that the vulnerabilities of the
father should not be visited on the son. With Lloyd Bentsen, Jr., running against
U.S. Senator Ralph Yarborough, this tradition, grounded in simple human
justice, should be kept foremost in one's mind.
"You know, my father is not running," Bentsen, Jr. told the Observer in a
telephone interview from Corpus Christi. He said that events in his father's and
uncle's business career before 1955 and the fact that the two men are now the
largest stockholders in the insurance company of which he was president have
"no relevancy to my candidacy." In a different connection, he remarked, as to his
father's holdings, "I have no land interests with him. He has his and I have mine."
The Bentsen fortune originated in the "immigration land business" conducted
by Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., and his brother Elmer Bentsen in the Rio Grande Valley.
These men are the candidate's father and uncle.
Early in the 1950's, this land business was assailed by a raft of civil law-
suits alleging that the elder Bentsens and others had conspired to defraud buyers
by selling them dry farm land as irrigated citrus land worth four or five times
as much as it actually was. One judgment went against the elder Bentsens and
their associates, another ended in a hung jury and dismissal, and out of court
there were cash settlements and trade-backs of deeds. The United States Supreme
Court ruled in yet another of the cases that the Bentsen interests and others
could properly be sued to ascertain whether they had violated the federal secu-
rities act.
Perhaps the most serious blow to Lloyd, Sr., and Elmer Bentsen, as far as the
public appearance of things goes, came in the midst of the Texas gubernatorial
campaign of 1954 between Gov. Allan Shivers and Ralph Yarborough. A federal
judge ordered his clerk to unseal a deposition Shivers had given in connection
with five of the land fraud cases two years before. The deposition showed that
Shivers had paid Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., $25,000 for an option to buy some of the
land that became involved in the suits and then seven months later, just after
having been elected lieutenant governor, sold it for a $425,000 profit in a transac-
tion handled by the same Bentsen, Sr.
Lloyd Bentsen, Sr.'s son, Lloyd, Jr., was not at any point known or alleged
to have been a participant in his father's and uncle's land transactions or his
father's deal with Shivers. Lloyd. Jr., had been elected the county judge in
Hidalgo County in 1946, the year of the $425,000 transaction between his father
and Shivers in Hidalgo County, but Shivers did not record the instruments at
the Courthouse. In 1948 the young Bentsen was elected to Congress with the
copious lubrication of his father's money, but in this he was no different from
many prominent American politicians of wealth who come to mind.
However, in 1953 Bentsen, Jr.. introduced a bill to provide for federal fund-
ing of "non-federal irrigation projects." Waterworks thus built for irrigation
districts would have been given, under Congressman Bentsen's bill, the "benefits
[and] privileges under reclamation laws, including repayment provisions." This
5437
evidently meant interest-free loans, in effect a federal subsidy. It is unclear,
and Beiitsen, Jr., left it unclear, whether the most important limitation under
the federal laws, limiting the distribution of the federally-subsidized water to
160 acres per landowner, would continue under his plan. His bill specified that
the local water-users' associations or irrigation districts would operate the water-
works and would "at all times" own them. This legislation, if passed, evidently
would have been of substantial potential benefit to the irrigation districts of the
kind that his father and uncle controlled in the lower Texas Valley.
In December, 1953, however, Bentsen, Jr., announced that he would not seek
re-election. When he returned to private life in January, 1955, the Bent.sen family
fortune change its form and the substance of its concerns. The money flowed out
of land into insurance.
Lloyd. Sr., and Elmer Bentsen and their companies owned many valuable
mortgages on real estate. With about $5 million worth of real estate notes —
including some on land that had been involved in some of the civil lawsuits —
and with blocks of their stock in Valley banks, they formed Con.solidated Ameri-
can Life Insurance Co. of Houston, a new Texas company (hereafter, "Calico").
Naturally this made Lloyd, Sr., and Elmer Bentsen principal stockholders of
Calico, with other Bentsens, including Lloyd. Jr., participants in the owner-
ship to the extent they had been owners of the land companies. As District Judge
Reynaldo Garza said later in a tax ruling on the shift-over, the net result was
that all the assets that had been owned by three of the elder Bentsens' companies
were then owned by the insurance company, and "Tlie same individuals who
had owned stock in the transferor corporations now owned the stock of the
insurance company."
The Internal Revenue Service ruled that the exchange was taxable because the
insurance company was in a different business from the land companies, but
Garza ruled, to the contrary, that there was "a continuity of the business activity"
from the land enterprises to the insurance company that made the exchange not
taxable.^
From the first, young Lloyd Bent.sen, Jr., was the president of Calico and its
principal executive oflJcer. In 1958, not having made much business progress, the
company merged with Lincoln Liberty Life Insurance Co. of Lincoln, Neb., and
thereafter expanded its business at a better rate.
The company president's father and uncle continued to be the largest stock-
holders of the merged company. Late in 1964, a 1965 prospectus for the firm
showed, Bentsen, Sr., owned 17% of the stock and Elmer Bentsen owned 14%.
According to the prospectus, "Lloyd M. Bentsen [Sr.] and Elmer C. Bentsen may
be deeme<l parents of the comi>any." Bentsen, Sr., was chairman of the board.
Lincoln Liberty Life engaged in land transactions with certain of its own of-
ficers— notably Lloyd, Sr., and Elmer Bentsen. According to the 1965 prospectus :
"During the past three years the company [Lincoln Liberty] has purchased
mortgage loans in the ordinary course of its business from Tip O'Tex Realty
Co., Dixie Mortgage Loan Co., and Bentsen Development Company in the aggre-
gate principal amount of $601,227 at an average interest rate of 5.9%. Tip O'Tex
Realty Co. is owned by Mr. Elmer C. Bentsen and Bentsen Development Com-
pany in a partnership composed of Messrs. Lloyd M. Bentsen [Sr.] and Elmer C.
Bentsen."
In addition, it was reported, Lincoln Liberty had made direct mortgage loans
to Elmer Bentsen and his company aggregating about $100,000 at 6%. The inter-
est rates, said the prospectus, were comparable to, but not less what the company
could have obtained "from unafliliated parties." And, it Avas added, Lincoln
Liberty "intends to continue its practice of doing business with companies con-
trolled by certain directors, officers, or holders of 10% or more of the voting
securities" of Lincoln Liberty.
The 27-story Lincoln Liberty Life Building in downtown Houston, the pros-
pectus explained, Avas completed in 1962 by Mid- American Investment Co. for the
insurance company and the Sheraton Hotel, the company headquarters occupying
floors five through twelve, the hotel the others. Elmer Bentsen and Dixie Mortgage
Loan Co., owned by Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., and members of his family, organized
Mid-American in 1959. Said the prospectus, "The persons who controlled Mid-
American also controlled [Lincoln Liberty] and therefore were able to control
affiliated transactions." The Lincoln Liberty building was constructed by Mid-
American at a cost of $15.1 million and was sold to Lincoln Liberty "for $598,660
in excess of the net book value at the time of sale," the prospectus reported.
^Donald L. Bentsen, et al. v. Robert L. Phinney, 199 F. Supp. 363 (1961).
5438
As president of Calico, Lloyd Bentsen, Jr.'s compensation and emoluments
started at $20,000 and rose to $26,000 a year. After the merger he received be-
tween $34,0ioO and $51,000 a year. He was provided valuable stock options (the
right to buy stock in Lincoln Liberty Life in the future at a pegged price, even
though the going market price when the option is exercised might have become
much higher than the pegged price). Such stock options are customary for
high-up insiders in the corporate world. In 1965, for instance, Bentsen, Jr., had
the right to buy 35,000 shares of the company's stock for $14.05 a share, although
the stock had not dropi^ed lower than $20 a share at any time in the preceding
year.^
Bentsen, Jr., has therefore been in business with his father since 1955, and
their company has had important transactions with Lloyd Jr.'s uncle, Elmer
Bentsen, who is also a large stockholder in Lincoln Liberty.
The Bentsen brothers, Lloyd, Sr., and Elmer, came to the Valley about 1920
from Brookings, S.D., a couple of broke Danes looking for work. At first they
drove cars on tours through the Valley. Learning the land, they began to sell
it. By 1930 they had their own ireal estate business. After two more decades they
were directing the operations of at least a score of corporations. They figured
in eight Valley banks and had a fortune some Valley people estimated as high
as forty million dollars.^
The brothers' basic business was selling land to people who did not live in the
Valley. Many of them came from distant places in the northern Midwest.
Testifying in the consolidated trial of five suits alleging land fraud brought
against him and others, Bentsen, iSr., said early in 1952 :
"We have operated in the immigration business on the development basis, and
in the immigration biisiness we have paid brokerage of 25% on any sales made."
Garland Smith, the Weslaco attorney who, with his partner Ed Mcllheran,
filed mosifc of the actions in wlhich land buyers alleged fraud against the Bent.sen
interests and others, said in his next question that the immigTation land business
was "bringing people in from outside the Valley to sell them on Valley land."
Bentsen, Sr., testified, "our volume had started, of course, at practically noth-
ing, when we started in the immigration business, and our volume increased to
where that at times we were running as high as a million dollars a month in
sales." *
Allan iShivers, the sitate senator from Port Arthur, had married the daughter
of John Shary, a wealthy Valley landowner who lived near Bentsen in the Valley.
In November, 1945, Shary died. Shivers, as general manager of the Shary estate,
began making arrangements to pay off the inheritance taxes on the Shary land
and other interests.
Shivers also ran for lieutenant governor in 1946. Nominated in the spring
primary, he was elected in the November voting. When the facts came out eight
years later (to the extent they did), this sequence of events suggested a damag-
ing ix>litical interpretation of his land transactions in 1946. Because of the con-
text of arrangements for estate taxes, there was another plausible explanation,
but it was in the nature of this alternative explanation that if it was correct
Shivers would have been prevented from availing himself of it.
The Shary estate sold about 16,000 acres, the Jackson Pasture, to a Bentsen
corporation at about $50 or $60 an acre on March 1, 1946. Shivers said in his
deposition later that the money just about i>aid all the estate taxes. A sale thus
timed, and with such a low per^aere price, might naturally affect the valuation,
for tax purpo.ses, of the rest of the Shary land.
Mcllheran, questioning iShivers, asked him point-blank if his $425,000 profit
on a second transaction later the same year was not explained in that he had
sold Jackson Pastures to Bentsen, Sr., for less than Bentsen was willing to pay
for it, and "this option contract was his [Bentsen, Sr.'s] method of i>aying you
back." Shivers replied, "No, of course, that isn't true, Mr. Mcllheran."
On May 31, 1946, before being nominated lieutenant governor. Senator Shivers
bought from Bentsen Development Co. for $25,000, payable "on or before one
year" from the date, an option to buy 13,000 acres of land later commonly known
as Texan Gardens.
^Prospectus, Lincoln Liberty Lifo Insurance Co. (offering O.'?2,000 shares of its common
stock to holders of stock of Gulf-Southwest Capital Corporation under certain circum-
stances). Feb. 5. 1965.
* Des Moines Slundnij Register, Ma.v 6, lO.'l.
* Testimony of Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., in Civil Action 846, federal district court in Corpus
Christi. 1952. The records in the land fraud cases discussed in this article ys'ere examined
at the Federal Records Center in Fort Worth.
5439
In Dec. 16, 1946, Shivers sold this same option to Texan Realty Co. for $450,000
in eighteen monthly notes of $25,000 each, payahle through the first year and a
half of his term as lieutenant governor. Presxmiing his $25,000 cost of the option
should be deducted, his profit on this transaction was $425,000.
In his later deposition, he said the second sale was consummated in discus-
sions with Bentsen, Sr., and the papers were signed in the later's office. Shivers
denied the transaction was part of any other debt with Bentsen, Sr. The gover-
nor also said in 1952 that he considered the first half of the transaction the sale
of an option contract and that he bought the option intending to develop the
land for re-sale. He sold the option, he said, simply to turn a profit.^
The developers of Texan Gardens naturally wanted to get river water to it
and applied to the Board of Water Engineers for a permit to take water from
the Rio Grande. Water districts are often best understood as legal instruments
which work the will of the dominant landholders within their jurisdictions.
Texan Gardens fell within Hidalgo County water district 16. A public hearing on
this district's water application was held April 15, 1949, when Shivers was still
lieutenant governor. There was a flood of protests from existing water districts
against this application. The simple rule of the river is, if you let someone new
have water out of it, everybody else who already has a right to do it will have
less water to share. Shivers became governor on July 11, 1949, with the death
of Beauford Jester. The permit to district 16, encompassing Texan Gardens and
other land, was granted on Aug. 3, three weeks later. It was, however, a severely
hedged permit, in effect authorizing the district to take river water only after
everybody with a prior claim got theirs. These matters are of record in the old
files of the board.
(It is a twist to be noted here as well as at any other point that by the ruling
by the late Judge James Norvell and his two colleagues on an appellate court in
the Valley-wide 1956 water suit, this piece of paper has, in the long run, enhanced
the value of the Texan Gardens acreage, for instance, by roughly four million
dollars, having been made, by Norvell's ruling, the basis for a first-class water
right. An appeal is still pending.)
In June, 1950, there began in earnest the lawsuits alleging that the Bentsen
interests and others had defrauded buyers by selling them dry farm land, pre-
pared to resemble much more expensive irrigated citrus land. The test case (rec-
ords of which fill two cardboard boxes in the Fort Worth federal records center,)
was Polmateer v. Bentsen, Sr., et al.
An Iowa couple, Mr. and Mrs. Alvy Polmateer of Shell Rock, filed suit in fed-
eral court in Brownsville, trying to cancel the contract under which they had
bought a ten-acre tract in Ramseyer Gardens north of McAllen for $525 an acre.
They claimed that a land-selling group, Interstate Investment Co. ; Lloyd, Sr.,
and Elmer Bentsen and associated companies and persons ; and Homer Ramseyer,
who had owned the land, conspired to defraud them.
They said they were put up free at a clubhouse near McAllen, shown the land,
and told it was irrigated by water conducted through underground tile, that the
land would grow citrus trees, that it was in an irrigation district, and that the
$525 was standard. These representations, they said, were false.
In irrigated economies, run-off irrigation water, or "drainage water," is car-
ried off in ditches. It is sometimes re-used, but is saltier than river water and is
not considered as good for irrigation. The Polmateers said this was the water
they were shown and which, when it was used on their citrus trees, killed them.
The land was only worth $90 to $125 an acre, they contended.
They .said the clubhouse was furnished by the Bentsen group as part of a plan
to lead them to think Interstate was a reliable, established company when it was
not. They alleged that the Bentsen group bought and cleared the land in "the
conspiracy with Ramseyer and the Interstate group to sell it to persons from
distant places at prices far in excess of its actual value." Corporations em-
ployed were "dummy corporations," they said. "No sales were made to persons
residing in the Rio Grande Valley."
Bentsen, Sr., introduced a letter to him and the Bentsen group from Ramseyer
saying there was "no obligation or responsibility on you" because of relationships
between Ramseyer and the Interstate group. But this did not impress attorneys
for the Polmateers, who argued that "these expert land operators, who have
5 Deposition, Allan Shivers, Sept. 29, 1952, in Lloyd Behringer and wife v. Lloyd M.
Bentsen, Sr., et al., C.A. 7.54, and four other cases, S.D. Tex., Brownsville division. This
historically famous deposition lies in the Behringer case file in the Fort Worth records
center.
5440
reduced their selling practices to a refined art, have been taking advantage of
strangers."
A water expert testified that the water available was drainage water with a
high quantity of toxic salts that prevented it from supporting commercial citrus
growth. Bentsen, Sr., testified tliat while drainage water is not as good as regular
river water, it will grow citrus. Explaining a system of collateral, mortgages,
and notes, he said he was not connected with the retail sale of tracts in Ramseyer
Gardens. A farm caretaker said he has raised citrus with water from the same
ditch used for the Polmateers.
Asked if he owned the clubhouse, Bentsen, Sr., said no. Tip O' Tex Realty Co.
owned it. There then ensued this "Q and A" between a lawyer and Bentsen, Sr. :
"Who owns Tip O'Texas Realty Company ?"
"My brother."
"Your brother?"
"Yes, sir."
And:
"Now, is it not true that you hold an interest in a two and a half million dollar
mortgage that that company owes, the Tip O'Texas Realty Company?"
"That they owe the Bentsen Development Company?"
"Yes, sir."
"Yes, sir."
In sum the Polmateers said they had been had by a conspiracy. The defendants
vigorously denied the charges. Bentsen, Sr., said the record did not sliow he had
profited, there was no showing he had an lUterior motive ; indeed, he said,
everything he had done was "normal, ordinary, everyday business transactions —
perfectly lawful in character."
The judge ruled that the Polmateers were entitled to get back somewhat
over $5,000 they had put in and to the cancellation and rescission (nullification)
of the transaction. Attorneys for the Bentsens sought to get the judgment limited
to Interstate, but the judge said it applied to the defendants "jointly and
severally." But the judge refused the Polmateer lawyers' request for findings
of fact. This meant that the allegations of Polmateers were not explicitly ratified
or invalidated ; the Polmateers simply got a judgment for damages from the
court*
After this test case, others were filed, the charges following the pattern of
the Polmateer case. It is said that about fifty in all were filed. There were cases
in the Valley, Austin, Lubbock, and Amarillo. References to about 20 have been
foimd in newspapers, and records of most of those have been examined.' No
point would be served reviewing them here. Be it remembered that Lloyd Bent-
sen, Jr., was not involved in any of these litigations and tliere was never any
showing or representation that he participated in his father's or his uncle's land
transactions.
This general situation was taking its early, post-Polmateer forms, and a trial
of five consolidated ca.ses was pending in Corpus Christi, when some of the elder
Bentsen's friends invited several hundred of South Texas' leading business and
civic figures to a dinner honoring Lloyd, Sr., and Elmer Bent.sen. The principal
speaker was Governor Shivers. Photographs of Shivers, the honorees, and Cong.
Lloyd Bent.sen, Jr., together at the banquet appeared in Valley newspapers.
Shivers was quoted :
"Elmer and Lloyd Bentsen we appreciate not because they have accumulated
wealth — a lot of men have done that ; not because of their social jmsition — lots
of i>eople have done that. . . . They have accumulated friends. Nothing man
can do is any greater than to acquire true friend.ship." *
In the consolidated trial in Corpus Christi, in which nine plaintiffs sought
$46,877 in damages and recovery of some land, Bentsen, Sr., testified that at no
time in his career had he been convicted of any land fraud. The jury found
in these cases that no conspiracy had existed, but hung on the question of
«Alvi/ Polmateer and icife v. Llovd M. Rentsev, Sr., et ah, C.A. 652. and many associated
newspaper stories — e.p.. BrownKvUle Herald, Valley Evening Monitor, and Corpus Christi
Caller-Times, during the months of February. April, and May, 1951. The case attracted
wide attention for a private suit. The Brownsville Herald on April 15, 1951. carried a five-
column page one headline, "Court Rules Against Bentsens in Land Fraud," and the decision
was major front-page news as far north as San Antonio.
^ See eg C A 752 754 777 742, 7fiR. in the Brownsville division of the Southern
District, and C.A. 846,' 847, 848, 849, and 850 in the Corpus Christi division (Fort Worth
rpcorfis CPU tor)
^Valley Morning Star, Dec. 22, 1951 ; Valley Evening Monitor, Dec. 21, 1951 ; Edinhurg
Daily Review, Dec. 22, 1951.
5441
fraud. Later Federal Judge James AUred dismissed tlie allegations of fraud
against the Bentsens in these eases.*
Settlements of some of the other eases were occurring. Terms of such agree-
ments do not usually become public, but it is rumored in the Valley that in many
of the settlements, plaintiffs got back not less than half of the cash they had
put in, along with cancellation of the deals.
AUred also ruled that in the case of Blackwell vs. Bentsen, Sr., et ah, brought
under the federal securities act, the federal law was not applicable ; he dismissed
the case before any consideration on the merits. The Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals reversed him, saying the law did apply to the facts as alleged. The U.S.
Supreme Court declined to go further into the matter, which was interpreted as
validating the appeals court order that the matter be returned to Allred's court
and adjudicated further. This telling development at the highest court level oc-
curred in the spring of 1954. Blackwell and his associated plaintiffs were asking,
of the Bentsen interests and others, damages totaling $353,332.38."
The political ramifications of these events cannot have been missed by those
in the know. When, in October, 1951, Grady Hazlewood, the long-time senator
from Amarillo, became one of the attorneys in a lawsuit from there alleging
fraud in land sales by the Bentsen group and others and asking $716,000 in
damages, and the Amarillo Globe ran a black-caps page-one eight-column head-
line about it, "Valley Land Swindle Charged," the matter mig'ht still be passed
off." But in September, 1952, Smith & Mcllheran took Shivers' deposition in con-
nection with five lawsuits brought by buyers in the Texas Gardens development.
Their allegations in their suits took the familiar pattern set in the Polmateer
case, with variations for circumstances. The Shivers deposition records on its
face that it was taken in connection with these five cases. Although the deposi-
tion never figured directly in any of the land fraud litigation, presumably there
was some thought that the $450,000 transaction might have some relevance to
these plaintiffs' claims."
Such explosive stuff as the governor's $525,000 profit on an option for which he
was to pay $25,000 in connection with land that subsequently became involved in
charges of land fraud — that was not to be kept secret for long.
Only a month before Shivers gave his deposition in 1952, he had bolted the
national Democratic ticket against Stevenson and Valley newspapers reported
that Cong. Lloyd Bentsen, Jr., went along with him, as reported elsewhere in
this issue. As the intense political feelings engendered by the Shivercrat revolt
built toward the 1954 elections, stories began circulating about the Shivers
deposition.
In his questioning of Shivers, attorney Smith had pursued lines of questioning
predicated on curiosity whether Shivers knew anything about the methods of
selling land used by Texan Development Co., had seen to the sufficient enforce-
ment of the state real estate law. and had had anything to do with the i.ssuing
of water district 16's 1949 water permit hy the state. In general Shivers' answers
had parried Smith's questions harmlessly. The rudimentary political implica-
tion of the deposition abided in the terms of the option transaction, itself, and
the timing of the issuance of the water permit.
The deposition, taken in Austin, had been mailed to Allred's court sealed and
had not been unsealed. J. R. Parten, the wealthy Houston oilman, a leading
loyalist Democrat, and a Yarborough backer, wanted Yarborough to demand
publicly that Shivers open the deposition and explain it.
"Parten knew all about it when we started these discussions, probably in the
summer of 1953," says Pat Beard, a Waco attorney who, at that time, was a key
figure in Central Texas pro-Yarborough politics. "Certainly he knew about the
deposition, he knew every detail of it. Cullen Smith [another Waco attorney]
knew about it — hell, they took the deposition. It was not a question of what
was in it. That was well known. The purpose was to fix it so it could be published.
As long as it was under seal, it was not privileged."
9 See the Corpus Christi CaUer-Times, February and earl.v March, 1952, and July 2, 1952.
^"Blackwell et al. v. Bentsen (8r.) et al., 208 Federal Reporter 2d Series 690 (1953) ;
,S46 US 908, 98 L ed 406 ; 847 US 925, 98 L ed 1078. Of course many newspaper stories
can be consulted in association with this litlRation. See, e.g.. Valley Evening Monitor,
June 28, 1951, and Corpus Christi Caller, March 10 and 16, 1954.
11 Amarillo Globe, Oct. 11. 1951.
" The five plaintiff groups are styled, on the face of the Shivers deposition, as Lloyd
Behringer and wife; Harold Hrdlicka, et vx : Charles Landergott, et uxj S. R. Jennings
and wife ; and Melvin C. Sims and wife. In each case the defendants are styled Lloyd M.
Bentsen, Sr., et al. The defendants included Texan Development Co. and Texan Realty Co.
5442
Cullen Smith had practiced with Smitli and Mclllheran, then liad moved to
Waco.
Early in February, 1954, the Valley Evening Monitor ran a story headlined
"Bentsen Land Suits Involving $70,000 in Damages Settled." The cases were
the five with which the Shivers deposition was concerned.
Beard says that he was to be Yarborough's state campaign manager that year,
but quit when Yarbo rough decided against blasting Shivers publicly on the
sealed deposition. As Beard recalls, he drafted such a statement for Yarborough,
but after it had been typed Yarborough asked the secretary who had typed it
what she thought about it, and she said she didn't think it was very nice, where-
upon Yarborough tore it up.
"I told him, 'Well, if you we're going to have so much disagreement on how to
run the campaign, I'll just quit and go open the thing myself,' " Beard says. He
continued as Y'^arborough's Central Texas campaign manager.
Beard's first ploy was an attempt to get the deposition sent to the trust depart-
ment of a Waco bank for delivery to an unnamed person, namely, himself. Shivers'
lawyers opposed this and took the bank oflScer's deposition to show Beard's hand
in it.
Beard next reasoned that if one of the five plaintiffs would ask the court to
unseal the deposition and provide a copy of it, there would be no basis for
refusing the request. "I had to find me a plaintiff to get the thing opened," he
says. "Cullen Smith assisted me in persuading Mrs. Landergott." Knowing that
politics was the purjwse, Mrs. Charles Landergott of Cedar Rapidi?, Mich.,
formally asked Judge Allred to give her a copy of the deposition.
Beard says :
"The clerk took it to Allred, and he kept it a long time, and he could hear
Allred just laughin' back there !"
There then ensued a comic opera of lawyers' motions the like of which Texas
had not seen since the 1948 Johnson-Stevenson senatorial election contest.
Formally opposing the opening of the deposition. Shivers' lawyers declared they
would take Mrs. Landergott's deposition. Lawyers for her replied, well, they
would take Shit'ers' depos)ition. With that, the law^^ers all agreed there would
be no further depositions.
Allred, not wanting to rule on Mrs. Landergott's request, kicked the matter
over to his colleague on the bench in Houston, Judge "r. M. Kennerly, who, on
June 24, 1954, abruptly ordered that the deposition be unsealed.
Yarborough made some political capital out of the deposition. Shivers said,
"All that the deposition shows is that in 1946 I made some money on a land
deal. There is nothing wrong with that."
Parten was a supporter at that time of Lyndon Johnson, as were most of the
anti-Shiver Democrats. It would be difficult to believe that Johnson did not
know of the deposition as Shivers considered whether to oppose Senator John-
son in 1954. Johnson's principal political concern at thalt time, in light of his
controversial 87-vote election in 1948, was whether Governor Shivers would
take him on. Shivers did not, bult ran again. Whether or not Bentsen, Jr., had
meant to run for governor if there was an opening, there was not, and he left
Congress.
Bentsen, Jr., told the Observer from Corpus Cristi that he did not intend to
run for governor in 1954. "I never did give it any consideration. Frankly, I
felt I wanted to come back and develop my financial independence."
Shivers was re-elected but he had been weakencKl by the deposition, and when
the land and insurance scandals broke in his administration in the ensuing year
and a half, his day in Texas politics was done. Johnson and Yarborough defeated
him in the 1956 spring conventions. Bentsen, Jr., sided with Johnson, who, with
John Connally, backed Mrs. Bentsen, Jr., for Democratic national committee-
woman. But Yarborough backed Mrs. R. D. Randolph of Houston, who was
chosen.
The Hidalgo County land records show many of the transfers of Lloyd, Sr.,
and Elmer Bentsen's land interests to Consolidated American Life Insurance
Co., which the Bentsens formed on Jan. 31, 1955. From the first, they and Lloyd
Bentf*en, Jr., and other of ithe Bemtsens — Calvin, Donald, later Ted and Kenneth
Bentsen — were directors in the insurance enterprise. The company's annual
reports to the Texas Insurance Comsn. indicate, before and after the merger
with Lincoln Liberty Life, an ordinary story of a slowly growing life insurance
enterprise, paying little and sometimes no federal income tax, steadily enlarging
its business gains from operations and investment income. Late in 1963 Bentsen,
5443
Jr., considered running against Yarborougli in 1964, but decided not to. In 1968,
witli tlie appearance of a holding company on tlie scene, Bentsen, Jr. ceased
being tlie president of Lincoln Liberty Life, continuing in his dominant oflBcial
role through the holding company.
This, then, is some of the background to the political and business interrela-
tionships that have culminated this year in the candidacy of Lloyd Bentsen, Jr.,
against Sen. Ralph Yarborougli in the Democratic primary three weeks hence.
The father is not the son and the son is not the father, but the subject is per-
plexing, even so. R.D.
The Stevenson Question
McAllen, Harlingen. — Just four days after then-Gov. Allen Shavers an-
nounced for the first time that, although a Democrat, he would not vote for Adlai
Stevenson in 1952, a black eight-column headline in the Valley Evening Monitor
said of tlie Valley's congresisman at that time, Lloyd Bentsen Jr., "Bentsen Won't
Support Stevenson." The story reported that Congressman Bentsen had said
he would go along with Shivers in not supporting Stevenson. The next morning
the Valley Morning Star down in the Valley in Harlingen reported the same thing.
The Observer asked Bentsen about the position as to Stevenson that was
attributed to him in the Valley newspapers in 1952. He said it "is not correct"
and added :
"I voted for Stevenson and sent a telegram to Sam Rayburn in which I said
I was going to support Stevenson, and if I recall right the answers of all of us
[in the Texas delegation] were published."
In 1956, as reported last issue, Bentsen, Jr., said at the May state Democratic
convention that he had always voted for Democratic presidential nominees,
although he had had varying enthusiasms for them.
The Valley Evening Monitor is the newspaper in Bentsen, Jr.'s home town of
McAUen. On Aug. 24. 1952, that pai>er reix)rted "Shivers Turns Do\\'n Adlai."
Shivers had gone to Springfield, 111., and been told by the Democratic presiden-
tial nominee that he did not support the state's claims on tidelands oil. Shivers
flew back to Texas the same day and told a press conference he would not vote
for Stevenson. The papers were filled, the next few days, with reports of a
growing "Democratic revolt" in Texas again.st Stevenson. Atty. Gen. Price Daniel
announced that he, too, would oppose Stevenson.
In this context, naturally, reporters were confronting every prominent Demo-
cratic oflBcial they could find for comment, and on Aug. 27, Bent.sen, Jr., arrived
in Edinburg to attend a chamber of commerce meeting and was interviewed.
The Valley Evening Monitor of Aug. 27, 1952, carried, on the front page, the
eight-column headline, "Bentsen Won't Support Stevenson." The Observer learned
this simply by going to the offices of the Monitor in McAllen and consulting the
microfilmed back issues there. Tlie sub-head said, "Representative Hits Adlai's
Tidelands Talk."
Time has caused the type in the story beneath these headlines to blur and
become difficult to read. Nevertheless, this much can be made out, under an
Edinburg dateline :
"Representative Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr., of McAllen joined Gov. Allan Shivers
in a split away from support of Democratic Presidential Candidate Adlai Steven-
son but said he wouldn't try to tell the rest of the people how to vote.
"Interviewed by the Monitor as he arrived here to attend a Valley Chamber
of Commerce . . . meeting . . ., Congressman Bentsen said he would not per-
sonally support Stevenson because of his stand on the tidelands issue but 'I — "
(at this point the type becomes unreadable).
This appears on Microfilm Roll No. 15, Valley Evening Monitor, July 1 to
August 31. 1952, prepared by Micro Photo, Inc., Cleveland 3, Ohio.
The next morning, Aug. 28, 1952, the Valley Morning Star in Harlingen fea-
tured under an eight-column headline. Shivers' speech on the night of Aug. 27
attacking "more Trumanism," "socialized medicine," and other Democratic pro-
grams, along with the tidelands position of Adlai Stevenson. Also on the front
page of this edition, and on the microfilm perfectly readable, was this story, under
the headline, "Bentsen Breaks With Stevenson" :
"Edinburg, Aug. 27 — Rep. Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr., will go along with Gov.
Allan Shivers and Atty. Gen. Price Daniel in splitting with Gov. Allan Shivers
over the tidelands issue, but said he would 'not attempt to tell the rest of the
people how to vote.'
5444
"Bentsen said he could not personally support Stevenson but that 'I have every
confidence in the voters of Texas to make their own choice.
" 'I wouldn't be presumptuous enough to try to tell the people of Texas how to
vote.'
"Bensten said this morning that lie had seen very little of what Gov. Steven-
son had said on the tidelands question, but that he was 'anxious to hear the
report Shivers will make in his report on the talk with the Democratic nominee.' "
Bentsen Bank Still Dealing With Pro-Yarborough Paper
Mission, Edinburg. — ^The First National Bank of Mission has continued to
advertise in the Mission Times despite that newspaper's endorsement of Sen.
Ralph Yarborough and the re^ported remark by one of the bank's oflScials to the
paper's editor that if they did so, there might be orders from "higher up" in
the bank to pull all advertising from the Times.
Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., fatheir of the senatorial candidate against Yarborough in
the primary, is president of the bank in question. Bentsen, Sr., and his brother,
Elmer C. Bentsen, are directors of it. Papers on file in 1966 showed that at that
point the largest single stock holder in the bank was Lincoln Liberty Life In-
surance Co., Avhieh held 456 of the bank's 1,122 and '% shares. Bentsen, Jr., is
president of Lincoln Consolidated, a holding company that controls Lincoln
Liberty Life.
James Mathis, publisher of the Edinburg Daily Review and three other Valley
papers including the weekly Mission Times, said to the Observer that he under-
stood that a vice-president of the bank made the remark to the editor of the
Mission paper, Tom Fatheree. It is not represented that it was more than a
remark, and Mathis says that pressure may not have been intended, but pressure
was the result because Tom was "shook up."
Mathis took the decision to challenge the remark as Avell as the removal of
papers containing the offending editorial from the Fontana Motor Hotel in
Mission, and his published complaints were amplified by Yarborough. "The
time has come," the statement from Yarl)orough's campaign headquarters said,
"when politically eoeentric border barons and financial giants must be prevented
from using their money clubs against the freedoms of the people."
Bentsen, Jr., said of the accusation, "They're reaching pretty far." John Mobley,
Bentsen's state campaign manager, issued a statement that "no one . . . con-
dones coercion against anyone who supports our opponent, including these two
newspapers. We have no control over private citizens who might get unhappy
with a newspaper endorsement."
The bank's weekly three-column-by-eight-inch ad has continued to run in the
Mission Times without interruption.
Bentsen, Jr. : Record Wrong on Farm Payments
Austin, Washington. — Lloyd Bentsen, Jr., has taken issue with the Obser-ver's
report that he received more than $100,000 in federal crop subsidies in both 1966
and 1967 (O&s.. April 3).
"I received no payments of that size or even approaching it. If the records
say that I received those kinds of payments, they're wrong," he said.
The senatorial candidate added that he has received soil bank payments, but
they were "substantially less" than $20,000 a year— the maximum payment he
has recommended for individual farmers. Asked if the payments cited in the
story could have gone to his father, he said that this was pos.sible.
The Observer rechecked the list of farm subsidies printed in the Congressional
Record at the requesit of iSen. John Williams of Delaware. In the June 19. 1967
Record, S 8414, Llovd M. Bentsen, Jr., of Houston is cited as receiving $152,3.52
in payments for 1966. The Record for May 23, 1968, lists payment of $108,904 to
Lloyd M. Bentsen, P.O. Box 593 in Mission for 1967. Subsidies for both years
went for land in Hidalgo County.
The payment for 1967 could possibly have been to Lloyd Bentsen, iSr., who
lives in McAllen.
The Congressional Record, however, says the 1966 payment went to Bentsen
Junior of Hou.ston. If there has been an error, as the candidate believes, it is on
the part of Senator Williams or the Department of Agriculture.
5445
Response Solicited
Austin. — Last week, the Observer told Lloyd Bentsen, Sr., in McAllen that
it was doing an inquiry into how he built his fortune and asked for an inter-
view with him on the subject. He declined.
Tlie Observer recognizes that the subject here undertaken, the origins of
the Bentsen fortune, is many-faceted and difficult to grasp. Regarding it as
especially important that our work on the topic be fair and correct, we invite
anyone, including, of course, any of the Bentsens as well as anyone else, to
advance to us promptly any additions or corrections of information, perspective,
or interpretation.
With respect to the forthcoming Democratic primary, we note that our next
issue will be delivered about a week before the voting, which would be plenty
of time for any inadvertent errors of fact or fairness in this present report to
be corrected in the minds of our readers.
STATEMENT OF EERAIN FERNANDEZ, THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY,
TEX.
Mr. Fernandez. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, my name
is Efrain Fernandez. I have been working in the Rio Grande Valley
in Texas for the last 2 years. I have been working with the United
Farm Workers Organizing Committee, Colonias Del Valle, and the
]Mexican- American Youth Organization. Before I came to the Valley,
I worked with MAYO in Kingsville, Tex.
Hidalgo Comity has about 200,000 residents. Approximately 71
percent of the population is Mexican- American.
Hidalgo has Texas largest crop income in 1960, close to $51 million.
About 100,000 acres of vegetables are harvested annually with 65,000
acres in citrus, and 135,000 in cotton.
Fifty-four percent of Spanish-surname families have incomes less
than $3,000, according to a study made at Texas A. & M. in October
1965. A study made at Texas A. & M. a year later revealed that half
the Spanish-surname families had incomes under $2,000 per year.
The median family income for Spanish-surname persons in the Mc-
Allen area, which is relatively developed, was $2,027 — less than half
of the U.S. or Texas populations.
Median school years completed were 3.3 compared with 10.6 nation-
ally and 10.4 for Texas.
Hidalgo ranks first in the Nation in the number of resident mi-
grants, estimated to be from 37,000 to 45,000. Adjacent counties,
Wallacy, Starr, and Cameron, contain about 50,000 more.
Unemployment in all occupations reaches 6.8 percent during No-
vember. It never falls much below 6 percent any month. It is difficult
to ascertain what the unemployment in agriculture may be at any
given time. An official at the Texas Employment Commission told us
that it might be as high as 10 percent in December. Actually, the
number of persons unable to find full-time employment in agriculture
during the winter is probably much higher than 10 percent.
We are here to testify before the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor,
an average of 85 days of labor.
Accident rates are 300 percent above the national rate.
We are heret o testify before the Subcommittee on Migratory Labor,
not because we feel that the outcome will be productive for we have
learned to put more faith in our own organizational efforts in our local
communities than in the endless promises of the U.S. Congress.
36-513 — 71 — pt. 8B 5
5446
For, you see, we are movino; in the valley; we are organizing,
regardless of the fact that these hearings are being held. We are orga-
nizing while these hearings are going on.
In looking at the health picture in the valley, I find that there are
two parts : the physical problems and the psychological. Nutrition is
one of the most serious physical problems and the doctors' testimony
yesterday has adequately described it.
One aspect of the nutrition problem that I would like to describe
is the distribution of surplus commodities in Hidalgo Coimty.
The person in charge of the program is Tom Wingert who had
served as sheriff of Hidalgo County for over a decade. The treatment
which is given to welfare recipients by Mr. Wingert is more punitive
and harassing than rehabilitative. For example, Mr. Wingert seems
to take pleasure in having wives bring their husbands to collect the
commodities. Their unemployment is the proof he wants but it is
also a way to humiliate the husband who may be unable to provide
for his family. Mr. Wingert is still a sheriff, watching to make sure
that no one steals these luxuries.
Hungry school children fare no better, for the school lunch pro-
gram in Pharr-San Juan Alamo reaches only one out of every 100
needy children. The reason for this is that Mr. Stockstill, the admin-
istrator in charge of applying for Federal school lunch funds, is
deliberately negligent in carrying out his responsibilities.
Where we could have hot lunch and breakfast programs, he has
either failed to apply for funds or submited unsatisfactory appli-
cations for funds.
The area of housing and sanitation, the availability of drinking
water is a major problem. Babies have been known to die of diarrhea
from drinking the impure water that is available in the Colonias. In
many cases, people drink raw water out of the canal which is con-
taminated water out of the Eio Grande River. We have had dogs die
from drinking this water, which is filled with garbage, fecal material,
insecticides, and other pollutants.
Another serious problem is the presence of water wells within 10
feet of outdoor latrines. "VVTien the floods come, the wells and latrines
overflow and the grounds become covered in mud and fecal materials.
This may be 10 feet away from a house in a barrio.
Lack of sewers becomes a major problem in many areas. In the city
of Pharr, there are 10- to 20-block sections which have no sewer lines
whatsoever. I was startled the other day to find that people were hav-
ing trouble with their sewers right in the center of the business dis-
trict. "V\'Tiien the residents confronted the mayor, Mr. Bowe, he refused
to help them. He said he had no money but he's building a civic center
for the tourists.
In a little Colonia, called La Hielera, the sewer problem is com-
pounded with some deadly complications. Since people do not have
any sewers, they have many outdoor latrines. When the rains come,
the Colonia, which is in a deep depression, becomes completely flooded.
The area then becomes infested with fecal material. This is a whole
village I am telling you about.
The added sad part is that the land developer who sold the people
these lots knew that the area would become flooded when the rains
5447
came. Incidentally, the area was under water for 3 months after the
last hurricane.
The Mexican- Americans in Hidalgo County have a disproportion-
ately high accident rate. This is caused by the negligence of manage-
ment who does not care about putting in safety measures in the pack-
ing sheds of the fields. Children, for example, have fallen out of trucks
without guardrails. People get sick in the fields when the planes come
over and spray insecticides while they work.
Since we live with these environmental conditions every day, we
were not surprised what the doctors found.
The psychological damage to our people comes primarily from the
complete disregard by Anglos of the bilingual, bicultral phenomena.
Our children fall behind in school, not because they cannot learn, but
because the schools do not teach in our language.
Our people are taught to believe that our cultural heritage is not
worthy of respect. They are taught to be ashamed. To be in the main-
stream, they come to think that they must act like the Anglos and the
Anglos except this of us. One striking example is the fact that the
CAP board meetings are conducted in English, which many of our
people cannot understand very well. This is so, even though the ma-
jority of the board is Mexican- American. This is a psychological
stigma that hurts the spirit of our people and which we, in the union,
are trying to correct.
Who or what is responsible for these conditions? Unquestionablj^,
a major aspect is a pervasive racism mixed with economic discrimina-
tion which is used to exploit the people on the poor side of the track.
The dominant group, which includes most affluent Mexican- Americans,
uses the old cliches of individualism, the protestant ethic, and patriot-
ism as the rationale for blaming the poor for their poverty — no matter
how hard the poor work or no matter how few jobs are available, no
matter how low the pay. They shift the responsibility to us, when it
is these people who keep us down.
Some institutions must be mentioned that perpetuate the status quo.
The schools are an example.
First, teachers are prohibited by law from running for office. This
prevents the most educated Chicanos from assuming political leader-
ship. School reform is blocked since the superintendent in Pharr, Dean
Skiles, has conveniently lost records of school dropout statistics.
Segregation is achieved by busing. An Anglo school may be close to
a Colonias, but the Chicanos are bused across town to a school which
has few^ Anglos. Anglos close to the Chicano school are bused to the
predominantly white schools.
The power structure remains the same because of a calculated sys-
tem of rewards and punishments. If you vote right, a traffic ticket will
be dismissed. If you don't play ball, your rent will go up, or you may
be evicted, or denied welfare or other benefits.
The mayor of Pharr, Mr. Bowe, does not announce city council
meetings. When asked when they are held, he replies, spasmodically.
In the county, the county judge is the chief administrator. His
name is Milton Richardson. Richardson was a dictator in terms of
the power he wielded over the county's affairs. He would do such
things as arrest someone for complaining about surplus commodity
distributions. He would charge him with contempt of court for fail-
5448
ing to give his name. Now he has been defeated and a Chicano will
take office. Perhaps things will get better.
Here in Washington, this is only a story. Perhaps you feel bad
about it. But we don't see much that you can do from here to end this
local exploitation. We think the solution is in our own efforts to
organize and gain power over our own affairs.
We don't want paternalism. We want the right to organize and the
laws that will support our efforts.
To us, this is just another hearing. Maybe it is helpful. It can't
hurt us. How can we be hurt more ? We are the bottom already. If you
can protect and support our organizing efforts, you would be helping.
Let's face it. Without that, we are wasting each other's time.
Senator Mondale. Thank you, Mr. Fernandez, for that very fine
statement.
You make the point that whatever may have been true in the past,
the organization and the people you represent today no longer look
to Washington for help.
I gather that underscores the feeling of pessimism about any possible
Washington response that would improve the lives of the people in
your area. And also the feeling that Washington aid distracts attention
from what you regard to be the real efforts that offer hope. Basically,
that hope lies at the community level, through community and union
organization.
Do I understand you correctly ?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes; that is essentially what I am trying to say.
Senator Mondale. At this point I would like to enter into the record
a personal letter I received this morning from Mr. Tony Orendain,
who is the Texas director of the United Pannworkers Service Center
in McAllen, Tex. I know Mr. Orendain personally and respect him as
one of the great leaders of the nonviolent movement for farmworker
justice and dignity. I think his letter reiterates an important point
(The information referred to follows :)
United Farm Workers,
Organizing Committee/AFL-jOIO, Texas Branch,
McAllen, Tex., July 15, 1970.
Senator Mondale,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, B.C.
Dear Senator : Tiiis letter is being sent in order to explain my true motives
for not being present at tliese important hearings, although who is to "hear"
them and what is to be done is hard to tell.
It was by luck that I was asked to help a group of medical specialisits in the
study they made in the Valley, in which they found what I have lived for twenty
years, but due to our very different analyses, because of our differences in edu-
cation, the interpretations were very different. They were surprised by the find-
ings, but we wei'e strengthened by them because it represents a victory in our
fight, a victory of the soul, since we see that we have gained ground, although
at first sight one doesn't notice it, due to the materialistic world in which we
must show our accomplishments. The federal government has been converted
into a modern Don Quixote de la Mancha : it comes, it has hearings, it pronounces
a sentence, and then it allows someone local, a "compadre" for the growers, to
administrate the programs. But it has the same result as what happened to the
shepherd lad who was tied to the tree when Don Quixote came upon him : his
boss had been beating him for failing to take good care of the flock, and the boss
promised Don Quixote that he would treat the shepherd better, but as soon as
Don Quixote left, the boss began to beat him harder than ever. Perhaps the
comparison is not so good, but the results are the same, since we, the poor, have
5449
no way to guiar;intee that our rights will be respected, and the rich can protect
themselves by the heat of their money.
Day by day, we see how the poor worker of Texas blames his parents and
brothers who come from Mexico — because of the influx, they have to migrate
to the North, to Illinois, California, Colorado, and so on, and the workers of
these states complain that the Texans undercut their minimum wages. In this
way, we see that a worker blames another brother for working for the "American
Way of Life : — free enterprise system — which consists of : anyone wlio w^orks
cheaper, has the right to live. . . . The problem is that the growers take
advantage of this "American Way of Life", and make the ones who are hungriest
work cheaper, or in other words the "free enterprise system" lowers the wage
so much that it even plays my necessity against the hunger of my parents. In
the past election, President Nixon lied to the American public and especially to
the farm workers when he said that the National Labor Relations Board does
cover every worker in America, and so the xmion should not use an illegal
method like the grape boycott, and then reinforced his point by eating grapes
in front of the national TV cameras. He knows that the boycott is not illegal,
but a real American way to accomplish things ; he is a lawyer by profession
so he must also know that the N.L.R.B. does not cover the farm worker. Presi-
dent Nixon also said that it would be a shame to the public to have to freeze
prices and salaries. But it is not a shame, evidently, to tell farm workers they
have to live with a minimum wage of $130 an hour or less. Any other new law
would even be more violated, because of the lack of enforcement.
The only thing which remains for me to say is to affirm two ways in which
the modern "Don Quixote" could help us : Since he cannot be everyv.-here to
keep all the promises or enforce all the laws which he has made to his "Dulcinea
de Toboso", if he really wants to do something he should leave us to unite our-
selves, or give us collective bargaining rights. This is similar to what Teddy
Roosevelt said, "Talk softly and carry a big stick", and the unity of the poor
is the only stick which they have. The second thing would be to impose a fine of a
thousand dollars or more on all the employers who give work to the "wetbacks"
or illegals, and not continue the present method of dealing with illegals, which
is to jail them for over six months, while the employers just laugh and go on look-
ing for more wetbacks who are willing to commit the great crime of looking for
work at the risk of going to prison because of Ins great need.
In conclusion, then, I must state that we of the Union here in South Texas
have abandoned hope in the worth of one more hearing in remote Washington.
There have been too many hearings from which, with all good intentions, no real
improvements have come to the farm workers. But my faith in our government
remains firm. When will it allow us to help ourselves by our own collective
effort — simi)ly by specific legislation to permit us to bargain collectively for con-
tracts which will guarantee the farm workers a decent wage? All the other
programs only increase our dependency at the expense of our dignity. I will
continue to work here at the bottom of the barrel, waiting for the government
to help us rise upward.
A^iva la Ciiusa,
Antonio Orendain.
Senator Mondale. One of the key tools that you want is coverage
under the National Labor Relations Act, proposed by Senate bill 8.
The right of farmworkers to organize in the unions and choose collec-
tive bargaining agents jnst as most industrial workers generally have
been permitted in the country for well over 40 years under the National
Labor Relations Act is presently denied.
Do I understand that correctly ?
Mr. Fernandez. That is correct, except we have very prohibitive
State laws at the time which make it very hard to organize the union
in the valley.
Senator Mondale. One point which has plagued us in this effort has
been the fact that you are so close to the United States-Mexican border,
I suppose if there were any group in the world that has a difficult time
organizing, even if you had coverage under the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, it would be people in your area because, as you know, workers
5450
can come in and take jobs of strikers even under the National Labor
Kelations Act.
I think if UAW had to organize Ford Motor Co. in McAllen, Tex.,
they would still be trying to organize the plant 35 years later, because
of the almost unlimited supply of strikebreakers and scabs. I hate to
call border crossers that because they are so desperately poor and dis-
advantaged. But, in fact, there are millions of unskilled, impoverished
Mexican nationals who can, no matter what anybody says, freely cross
that border when they want to. This is happening every day, and it
contributes to tragically depressed living and working conditions to
the detriment of both the United States and Mexico.
Do you not see the need, in addition to the right of organization
under Federal legislation, the need to do something about illegal en-
tries and the unlimited practice of farmworkers and others crossing
that border? Don't you see that as an essential part of this effort?
Mr. Fernandez, Yes; I definitely do. I think that the need is in
keeping the international border situation from being used by the
power structure in times of strike, especially in times of strike, that
this situation is used to bring workers across and break the strike.
Senator Mondale. Do you have any doubt that they are used in that
way now ? That it in fact happens today ?
Mr. Fernandez. I have no doubt that that happens. It definitely
does. The power structure in the valley depends on a very large labor
supply. The larger it is, the better it is for them.
Senator Mondale. I think, as a result, that there is a good deal of
evasion by farmers and growers of the laws that we of the States have
passed — unemployment insurance, workmen's compensation, social
security, and others these workers are entitled to are not enforced, and
there is no way to develop the power to insist on enforcement.
My impression is that those laws are being widely violated today
in southern Texas, where there is virtually free passage of foreign
nationals into the United States.
Mr. Fernandez. I would prefer to have Mr. Dunwell answer that
question.
Senator Mondale. Mr. Dunwell, would you like to respond ?
Mr. Dunwell. I think you are correct. Senator, that there is whole-
sale evasion of certain of these laws.
As I said before, of course, unemployment compensation and work-
men's compensation just don't cover the farmworker. It is a matter
of discrimination per se, fundamental discrimination.
You are quite correct on the part of the social security law and
minimum wage laws which require reporting.
Senator Mondale. It is my impression that the minimum wage law
is being widely violated.
Mr. Dunwell. Yes ; that is correct.
Another violation that I might mention in terms of an organiza-
tional violation is at the Texas Employment Commission in the valley.
There are some concerned people in the employment commission office
but there have been placed in the valley, and you saw last fall the TEC
recruiters at the bridge referring people to trucks going north. The
north is flooded with wetbacks and green carders at this moment.
TEC is involved in that.
5451
TEC is also in its fair hearing procedures very strongly weighted
against the worker. We had a case where a man was applying for
unemployment compensation and was turned down by the hearing
officer because the man had sought the aid of an attorney. What kind
of decision is that ? It doesn't make any sense.
Senator Mondale. It is impossible to recreate here the feeling along
the border in that shapeup period in the early morning. There are flat-
bottom trucks with no guardrails, that are used to pick up and haul
these workers, almost like cattle. These young people, many of them
children, are picked up for a day's work just after crossing the border;
they risk their lives, really, driving around on open highways in these
unsafe trucks.
I spent time talking with some of the kids who had congregated in
the shapeup area. It is amazing. Some of them had worked a week and
been paid $2 or $3. They said that a social security deduction was taken
out of their pay. Sometimes they would take 50 cents out of every dol-
lor ; no checks, no receipts, no records, nothing.
It is really the "Grapes of Wrath'' very much today. So, when you
talk about improvement, I am in no position to believe that there has
been much, if any. If there has been improvement, it really is not
significant improvement.
You talked about the election of a new judge ?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. Was that in Hidalgo County ?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes; it was.
Senator Mondale. Has this been the result of some of your efforts ?
Mr. Fernandez. Some of it due to our efforts. A large part of it
through the union. The union has its own following, very large follow-
ing, in the valley now. There are some publications which have arisen
as a result of the union and a radio program which is very sympathetic
to the union cause. In times when elections come up, these things
always help.
Senator Mondale. Do you see any hope in the growing political
power in many of these communities ? There are many communities in
which Chicanos are in the majority, are they not?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes ; I do hope very definitely ; as a matter of fact,
one of the solutions we are seeking right now or one of the methods
we are seeking to get more political power is the formation of a new
third party, largely because of the disillusionment with the two major
political parties of the United States.
As a matter of fact, to run for county commissioner or county
judge, one has to pay filing fees upward of $2,000 there in Hidalgo
Countv.
Senator Mondale. $2,000?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. That is more than you have to pay to run for
Senator in Ohio.
It is more than it is worth.
In the hands of a creative judge, though, that could be just a small
downpayment. [Laughter.]
Do you see some hope of a growing political awareness and activity
in some of these counties ?
5452
Mr. Fernandez. Yes; I do except that because of the low rate of
education, the low amount of education, it is very difficult and because
of the fact that the State of Texas does make a deliberate, conscious
effort to make the ballots as complicated as they can make them, the
electoral process is difficult.
Senator Mondale. Do you have annual registraition in Texas ?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. The rolls are entirely purged annually. It is the
only 'State in the union where that is true. You have to go back every
year to register.
Mr. Fernandez. Yes; every year, we have to have a registration
drive.
Senator JMondale. One point you made which I think may not be
fully understood by the committee is the way they have personalized
the welfare program down there.
In order to get, for example, food stamps or commodity foods, you
have to go to the local community judge and he signs a slip. If you
are not a "good Mexican," you do not get the slip ?
Mr. Fernandez. That is the way they do it ; yes.
Senator Mondale. So, in many places the welfare system is used as
a tool for political control ?
Mr. Fernandez. Yes ; it is.
Senator Mondale. Would that be an unfair characterization ?
Mr. Fernandez. No ; it would not. Not only is the welfare surplus
commodity program used for political leverage but the police depart-
ments, the issuance of license plates by justices of the peace, the hous-
ing projects, are especially used in city elections. All sorts of programs
that should be neutral by law are used for political purposes.
There seems no way to follow due process in order to prosecute the
people who are doing this. There seems to be no solution.
In the city of Pharr, we saw many violations during the absentee
voting period in the recent city elections. For instance, the absentee
votes were higher than the amount of votes cast during the election
day, itself.
Senator Mondale. Does that happen in Ohio, Senator Saxbe ?
Senator Saxbb. Could that be because the people who are Mexican-
Americans move north to work ?
Mr. Fernandez. No, sir; it would not, because the elections are held
in April. The migrants really do not begin to leave in strength until
about May.
The reason is that the people were prodded in some ways, intimidated
into voting early, to vote absentee ; I think the main reason being that
when you vote absentee is is much easier to see how you voted than it
is when you vote by machine on election day. This is the predominant
feeling of the community that people do not really vote secretly.
Senator Saxbe. They voted early rather than go in on election day ?
Mr. Fernandez. There is even a feeling that some were fictitious
people. Not only a feeling but we have fomid what I feel to be evi-
dence that substantiates this : except that we can't do anything about
it because there is no, shall I say, no way out, no way to solve this.
Senator Saxbe. Do you recall last year we had the so-called tomato
war at Laredo along the border when the Department of Agriculture
tried to shut off the flow of tomatoes because of grower pressure at
that time, the Florida growers and others ?
5453
Now, as we hope we can improve the farmworkers' condition, is
this going to drive more of this truck produce into Mexico and, if it
is, how can we combat that ?
Mr. DuNWELL. On my first trip to the valley, I was in a plane, and
I talked to Ike Griffui, Jr., whom I didn't Imow at the time. We had
a delightful chat. He was telling me that Griffin and Brand were al-
read}'- moving to Mexico, I think it is inevitable that that is g"oing to
continue. I just don't know what can be done about it. Ultmiately,
I think what is going to happen is that labor will be organized north
and south of the border.
Senator S axbe. Is there any hope of that ?
Mr. DuNWELL. I think there is. I think if we are successful in
Texas, in Florida, in California, the very fact that we have unionized
labor that close to the border is going to work in reverse the process
we have seen before, where we had large numbers of surplus labor
south of the border which was working against organizing attempts.
Yes ; I do. We have a very large labor audience for our radio pro-
gram in Mexico. It is larger even than our audience in the United
States.
Senator Saxbe. If you are capable of organizing and you do have
a union, one of the things you would require would be that a worker
get a day's work, is that right, or would you say a half day?
Mr. Fernandez. Many times it varies.
Senator Saxbe. I know today they don't get a day's work. They will
get 2 or 3 hours, maybe, or if it rains, the grower will just haul them
out and haul them back.
Will requiring a full days work necessitate changes in growing
practices ? You talk about a 40-acre field. If you haul two truck loads
of people out there and harvest for 4 hours, that would be an uneco-
nomical practice if they had to pay the people for a full day, would
it not?
Mr. Fernandez. I am not so sure I understand what you mean.
Senator Saxbe. Mr. Dunwell talked about the practice where there
would be a 40-acre field ready for harvesting. They will go and get
two truckloads of people, haul them out there, and harvest the fields
in 3 or 4 hours. Then that is all the pay the workers get.
Now, if they would require the farmers to pay a day's pay, once
they shaped them up, would that not require a substantial change in
some of their growing and harvesting practices down there ?
Mr. Dunwell. I don't think it would. Senator. Obviously you can
harvest a field a couple of ways. There is only a given quantum of
work. You can harvest a field in 2 hours with a lot of people, and that
is the end of it ; or you can harvest a field with a minimum number of
people and give them a day's work.
As it stands now, a larger number of people are getting less hours of
work. Unless the wages are much, much higher than they are now,
they just can't live that way. It makes no sense to go out into the field ;
by the time the trucker has taken his cut you have nothing to show.
Senator Mondale. Senator Schweiker do you have any questions?
Senator Schweiker. In your statement you refer to the case in the
field, as I recall, where they lowered the pay rate of the picker
retroactively.
5454
What pretext or what basis or what rationale was used in this par-
ticular case and does this happen frequently ? Is this an unusual oc-
currence ? Will you give a little more background to something which
I think has been unheard of ?
Mr. DuNWELL. Typical in the valley is the absence of rationale. A
field man came in and said the wages are 5 cents less per basket that
you picked this morning. There is no rationale. Nobody feels com-
pelled to give you the reason.
Would you refresh my memory as to the second part of your
question ?
Senator Schweiker. What rationale was used or what was the en-
vironment that gave them an excuse to do something like that ? How
frequently did it occur ?
Mr. DuNWELL. As I said, there is no rationale. The environment is
one in which the field man feels utterly confident that he can do this
sort of thing. Until the United Farm Workers get sufiiciently power-
ful to begin to protect these people, and we are not as powerful as we
would like to be, nothing can be done. It just happens and we have no
redress.
I cannot tell you whether this particular kind is frequent or not. It
is just one of the cases that has come in. We have heard of two or
three others like it but there is a variety of more or less similar kinds
of things.
Very often you see people going up North on a written contract.
They have a piece of paper but they get up there and find that all the
terms of the contract are meaningless. There are wholesale deductions
for food, for transportation; the money goes to the trucker. People
can go up North on seemingly fantastic contracts, some of them writ-
ten by very, very large canning companies that produce the food you
buy here in Washington ; big names.
Senator Schweiker. In the next paragraph of your statement, as I
recall, you then referred to this violation of the minimum wage.
I am just curious as to what kind of violation this was. Was this a
violation of the State law? Was it a violation of any Federal law
that would apply? What specific law did they violate and how are
workers protected ?
Mr. DuNWELL. At the time of that incident I spoke to you about and
the one last year, there was only the Federal minimum wage law ap-
plicable in Texas. These people were covered under the piecework
side. By reducing the wages retroactively they made, in addition to
breaching the contract, they also pushed the wage below the Federal
minimum wage. It was only January 1, 1970, that Texas had a mini-
mum wage law.
Senator Mondale. Does that apply to farmworkers ?
Mr. Dunwell. It does.
Senator Mondale. What is the minimum ?
Mr. Dtjnwell. The minimum for agricultural workers is $1.10 an
hour. It is pegged 20 cents below the Federal minimum. As of yet,
there is no piecework rate in Texas. I am not sure that the majority of
the fieldworkers are piecework but a substantial amount is. At least
for the next year, there is no coverage.
5455
Senator Mondale. Would it not be fair to say in response to Senator
Schweiker's question that the environment is one in which the workers
have no power to protect themselves ?
It is entirely up to the grower, himself, as to what he wants to do,
what he wants to pay them, what kinds of sanitary facilities, pesti-
cide protections, and working conditions he is going to provide in
the field?
And the environment is one where there is an unlimited supply of
workers. I think it is fair to say every morning there are workers who
can't find work, standing at the border looking for work.
Mr. Fernandez. It seems like it is really useless to analyze or try
to cope with the myriad of laws, minimum wage laws, and the Texas
Employment Commission and the other agencies, Eeally the person
that has all the information that has all the power, is the grower.
It becomes futile to try to do something with the existing situation.
Senator Schweiker. In your testimony, too, you also mention the
grower subsidies. You cited several growers and their subsidies.
"Wliat phase of the agricultural subsidy program would cover
this particular case ? In other words, what crop subsidies were they ?
We just voted, as you well know, a $20,000 ceiling on subsidies. I think
all of us here voted for that ceiling. I am just curious under what mech-
anism of law they are getting subsidies.
Mr. DuNWELL. Cotton.
I was reading in the Post on the way over that President Nixon
agreed $55,000 might be a fairer figure.
Senator Schweiker. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mondale. I just want to ask one question, Mr. Fernandez.
You referred to segregation of schools. I am glad you did because I
have been trying to persuade the Justice Department that, if they are
really interested in getting rid of segregation, they will find just as
much official discrimination against the Chicano in Texas and many
other communities as they will find against the blacks, say, in
Louisiana.
Would you agree with that? Would that be an unfair
characterization ?
Mr. Fernandez. I will agree that you will find very much discrimi-
nation against the Mexican- American. I don't think you will find as
much as you would against Negroes but almost nearly as much, really.
The fact we do not have any bilingual education and we are further
hampered by the language problem would put it in the same shape as
the Negroes, educationwise.
Senator Mondale. One of the standard techniques in dealing with
the Spanish-speaking Chicano is to put him in a special education
class where he is treated as subnormal. This is a very standard and
recurring phenomenon. He may be very bright, but because he can't
understand the English language they put him in a special education
class. That is another way of discrimination.
Mr. Fernandez. Yes ; it is. The fallacy of that is that many times
the testing is Anglo-oriented; therefore, the child, if he is brought
up in a Chicano way, is bound to flunk the test; therefore, he will be
put in special education.
The attitude that surrounds these little special education programs
is that this is the crazy school. Even among teachers, there is the
attitude.
5456
Senator Mondale. Just one final question, Mr. Dunwell.
You are an attorney and admitted to practice in New York.
Are you admitted to practice in Texas ?
Mr. Dunwell. No, Senator, and I don't represent clients individ-
ually in cases.
Senator Mondale. Have you practiced at all before the Federal
bench ?
Mr. Dunwell. No ; you have to be admitted for a year to do that.
None of the three attorneys in our office, there are two Texas attorneys,
has been admitted to the Federal bar, but we have filed two suits with
cooperating attorneys in the court.
Senator Mondale. Thank you very much for your most useful
testimony.
Our next witnesses are Mr. Joseph Segor and Rudolf o Juarez.
"Wlio wishes to begin ?
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH C. SEGOR, EXECUTIVE BIEECTOR, MIGRANT
SERVICES FOUNDATION, INC., MIAMI, FLA.
Mr. Segor. Senator, I will begin.
Senator Mondale and members of the committee, my name is Joseph
C. Segor. I am the executive director of the Migrant Services
Foundation, Inc.
I am a lawyer and for the past several years have concentrated my
efforts on the probclms of farmworkers. From May 19G7 to September
1969, I was the executive director of Florida Rural Legal Services,
Inc., an OEO-funded legal services program operating in seven south
Florida counties.
The Migrant Services Foundation is privately financed and pro-
vides legal and other services to farmworkers in Florida. We are
headquartered in Miami, but operate throughout the State.
My companion is Rudolfo Juarez, executive director of Organized
Migrants in Community Action, Inc. (OMICA), the largest farm-
worker organization in Florida. He was born and raised a migrant,
eventually' becoming a crew leader.
Recognized the exploitation of migrants by crew leaders as well as
others, he quit, at great financial sacrifice, to work for several OEO
rural programs prior to becoming; the operating head of OMICA.
OMICA maintains a full-time office in Homestead, Dade County,
Fla., and has cliapters in a number of locations throughout the State.
I will present a short prepared statement, after whicli we will both
be happy to answer questions.
]Mr. Chairman, the newspapers and news programs have been filled
with accusations by growers, agribusiness organizations, and political
leaders in our State that the recently aired NBC Migrant White
Paper produced by Martin Carr and narrated by diet Huntley was
biased.
These individuals and organizations were so certain of their posi-
tion that they made their accusations even before they saw the show.
Our Governor, whose protests were among the loudest, appeared to
be trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy of bias by declining to
appear on the program.
5457
The dictionary teaches that bias implies unreasoned and unfair dis-
tortion of judgnient in favor of or against a person or thing. It is
the thesis of my remarks that the State of Florida, through its govern-
mental institutions at all levels, as well as its social and economic
structures, is biased against the f ai'mworkers.
I would modify the dictionary definition somewliat, however, be-
cause in my opinion the bias which oppresses farmworkers is in many
instances not unreasoned, but a deliberate, calculated and purposeful
attempt to maintain an economic advantage regardless of the cost in
human misery.
Also, inextricably connected to the economic motivation is a deep
and pervasive racism that penneates all of rural and much of urban
Florida. Present, too, is a hypocritical selfishness that masks itself in
a philosophy of radical individualism and surfaces as an extreme hos-
tility to programs, especially Federal programs, intended to aid the
needy, the helpless and the powerless, particularly when these are
black, Chicano, or Puerto Rican. xVt the same time, every effort is made
to obtain Federal largesse which benefits the dominant economic,
political and social groups.
The abuse heaped upon NBC was only one minor manifestation of
the foregoing characteristics. To an3^one familiar with migrants, the
NBC show understated rather than overstated their problems.
Senator Mondale. Mr. 'Segor, one of the issues that has arisen is that
very issue of the NBC documentary.
Am I correct that efforts were made by certain interests in Florida
to encourage local television outlets not to carry the documentary in
that State?
Mr. Segor. One of our local papers in Miami, I think it was the
News, carried an article that the Fort Myer station, for instance, was
not going to carry the show. Ultimately, it did. We don't know what
pressures may have caused it to change its mind.
We do know that the show was pre-aired on channel 5 at Palm
Beach. So far as we know, it was not kept off the air in our State, but
I think pressures were there.
Senator Mondale. I also was told that the Grovernor of the State
of Florida sent a statement to each of those stations insisting that it
be read following the program.
Do you know if that is correct ?
Mr. Segor. I am not sure of that, Senator.
Senator Mondale. I am also told — as a matter of fact, Mr. Huiitley
said — ^that the Governor was offered a chance to participate in the
program but declined to do so.
Mr. Segor. That is correct. I know that for a fact.
Senator Mondale. That is not unusual for the Nation's most ex-
traordinary Governor.
Mr. Segor. It is unusual for him to miss any opportunity to be on
a television program.
[Additional information about the television documentary appears
in the hearing of July 24, 1970.]
Senator JNIondale. We were in Collier County where we saw hunger.
Mr. Juarez testified there, where we saw some of the most abysmal
human conditions I have ever seen. The Governor came in and told us
it was none of our business, to get out of there.
5458
Mr. Segor. That is rather typical of the activities and the attitudes
in our State.
As my prepared statement indicates, there are places in Florida that
have worse housing conditions, worse conditions of every kind, than
were shown on that show. In fact, I was present when NBC filmed
a little place called Jerome, which is far worse than anything they
finally put on the air.
The feeling really of oppressiveness that occurs in rural Florida
among farmworkers is something that even the art of a very good TV
show cannot fully bring across. It is something that you can only live.
Of course, I even live it vicarously. I can go back to Miami to my
middle-class home, but Mr. Juarez, his people, and the blacks, they
live it all the time.
The conclusion of the NBC show, I believe, was wrong because it
concluded that all Americans are responsible. That may be rhetorically
true but there are men and institutions that are at fault and I believe
that they should not be allowed to hide in the crowd.
A specially good example of institutional hostility to farmworkers
was the State response to their pleas in the spring of this year that
they be accorded the unemployment benefits provided in the Disaster
Relief Act of 1969.
A complete account of this shameful episode is contained in my
report to the board of directors of the Migrant Services Foundation,
Inc., a copy of which it attached as an appendix to these remarks.
Senator Mondale. That will be included in the record at the con-
clusion of your testimony.
Mr. Segor. Perhaps the best short summary of what happened is
contained in a headline from the Fort Myer (Fla.) News-Press of
April 10, 1970, which read, "Disaster Relief: Farmers Get It, Mi-
grants Want It."
Unfortunately, or, more properly, I should say, tragically, they did
not get it, despite our best efforts and your help in Washington to
obtain it.
The motives that lead growers and State officials to combine to
prevent the migrants from receiving assistance specifically provided
by the Congress for their benefit must inevitably remain conjectural,
but the consistently repeated viewpoint that migrants won't work if
they learn that they can get something for nothing is, no doubt, at
least part of the answer.
It is never explained why, if migrants are paid as well as growers
claim, they would want to continue on a dole providing a maximum of
$40 a week. Nor why, in other contexts, they would prefer to get com-
modities, food stamps or welfare assistance, rather than work for the
bountiful wages claimed to exist. ( See Miami News article of July 17,
1970.)
This managerial philosophy of "starve 'em or else they won't work"
appears to be a rationalization that allows the growers and their allies
to live with the exploitive system they control. This rationalizing
process takes another and perhaps more pernicious form in the "let's
appear to do something for them" syndrome. This takes two primary
forms. The first involves the making of promises without any attempt
at delivery. A good example of this was (jovemor Kirk's "action plan,"
5459
unfolded in the spring of 1969. Some of the target dates contained in
the plan are interesting and, in a morbid way, amusing.
April 15, 1969 — "GO" — typical of the public relations gimmickery
of our State.
April 16, 1969 — State Advisory Commission on Migratory Farm
Service appointed.
April 21, 1969 — Joint meeting in Tallahassee of Federal, State, and
local officials to create task forces.
May 1, 1969 — June 15, 1969 — "all existing migrant programs in
State evaluated by on-sight inspection of specialist."
July 16, 1969 — report and recommendations to Governor and Fed-
eral agencies.
August 15, 1969 — coordinated program underway.
Well, we are still waiting for that boat to come down our river. We
don't expect it ever will.
Senator Mondale. Wlien we heard testimony at Immokalee, I be-
lieve the Governor had some complicated charts about an interstate
compact.
Mr. Segor. That was the action plan. The legislature took it over
from the Governor. So we have both branches of our State govern-
ment exercising gimmickery on behalf of the migrants.
The other manifestation of the "let's appear to do something for
them" is actual creation of an institution that will appear to do some-
thing, but either because of its basic design or its manner of opera-
tion, or both, will in fact do nothing.
A fine example of this purposefully bad kind of engineering is the
recently enacted statute creating "the Florida Legislative Commis-
sion on Migrant Labor and an Advisory Committee Thereto." The bill
makes a pass at recognizing that there is a problem by stating
that "* * * the most economically and socially deprived segment of
population in the United States of America consist of those persons
generally referred to as migrant farmworkers * * *"
It goes on to create a commission composed of three members from
each house of the legislature. The commission is authorized to enter
into "agreement for the establishment of cooperative arrangements"
with other States. The Governor is authorized to enter into an "inter-
state migrant labor compact" in substantially the form set forth in
the statute.
The compact would set up an Interstate Migrant Commission which
would only have the power to do research, suggest proposals, and co-
operate with other agencies. In essence, the Commission would be
powerless and would be dependent for financing upon State appropria-
tions to be requested by it. This toothless tiger is only one illusion con-
tained in the bill.
The other is an advisory committee composed of representatives of
five State agencies, four enumerated grower organizations and, pre-
sumably for balance, a representative of the Florida State Federated
Labor Council. This latter choice is unique in that if there is one place
the farmworkers are not represented it is the labor council.
There are also positions open for not less than two, nor more than
four, other persons selected and appointed by the Commission. There
is not the slightest guarantee that the farmworkers will be directly
or even indirectly represented by anyone close to them.
5460
The legislative conunission was created without any consultation
with farmworker organizations of their allies, although these are
well known to the legislature. Three of the grower organizations were
added at the demand of a grower lobbyist. It can be expected that the
additional representatives will be "safe" people not likely to cause
controversy by strong and persistent advocacy of farmworker rights.
Even if good people are added to the committee, the whole focus
of the bill is outward toward an amorphous alliance of States to occur
at some miknown and inevitably far distant date when a dozen or more
State legislatures can get around to ratifying the pact. It completely
avoids the need to turn and look at the problems within Florida and
to devise solutions for them. In sum the bill is a cruel and preposterous
hoax.
Having dealt with the institutional biases of our State executive and
legislative branches, I would like now to turn to the operation of
existing programs at the local level. Naturally, among these there
are substantial variations in how they perform, depending in part
upon the agency concerned and geographic location. Nonetheless, a
few generalizations can be made. From reports given to me as well as
personal experiences, I can say that State and local agencies are: (1)
Not run for the convenience of those they serve the farmworkers, but
for the convenience of the staffs; (2) The local offices are dominated
by grower interests and use the benefits they confer to require the
farmworkers to conform to those interests; (3) There is little, if any,
outreach, so that often those most in need of help do not get it. This
can happen either because the farmworkers have not been informed of
the services offered or the services are dispensed at times or places
which the farmworkers cannot reach ; (4) The agency staffs often have
negative attitudes toward their clients; in many cases these attitudes
are basically racist. The attitudes all too often manifest themselves in
indifference, impoliteness, harshness, and sometimes cruelty; (5)
Agency personnel, instead of earnestly trying to help prove eligibility,
do everything possible to prevent the clients from establishing their
right to aid.
Innumerable cases can be recounted in support of the foregoing.
A few will suffice.
In many counties, welfare and food distribtuion offices are located
in places that the poor cannot reach by any means other than private
automobile. I have been told that in Polk County the commodity dis-
tribution office is located at an out-of-the-way spot, and the cost reach-
ing the place amounts to as much as one-tenth of some welfare clients'
checks.
I think you will hear more about Polk County because it is the
home of Coca-Cola in Florida, and another witness will be discussing
that issue.
AVlien a representative of the Florida Christian Migrant Ministry
approached the director of distribution in this county about opening-
several distribution points, he was told that the county commission
had already turned down the suggestion as too expensive. One county
commissioner was quoted in the press as saying, "The next thing the
poor will want is for us to go to their homes and cook the food for
them" — typical of the kind of attitude we have in our local govern-
5461
mcnt toward farmworkers and other people, particularly when their
skin color is a little different.
When the director was queried about making the hours more con-
venient to farmworkers, the office was open from 8 :30 to 3 :30, Mon-
day through Friday, he asked why he and his staff should be incon-
venienced for the farmworkers' convenience. To the reply that the
reason was that they serve the poor, he said that he had a responsibility
to his employees.
This same man added that if the poor really wanted the food, they
would get to the distribution center when it was open. Many people
applying for food at this center have been turned down three and
four times because the comity employees make no attempt to help
them comply with the regulations.
One requirement is that the farmworker show his last paycheck
or a letter from an employer stating his earnings. This is often im-
possible for people who are paid cash and often work for many
employers. Variations of this theme are heard from sources through-
out the State. Attempts to get mobile food distribution units for rural
areas have generally been rebuffed.
In the same county I spoke of before, Polk County, the welfare
office is located at an old airport which is hard to reach. AFDC
mothers who must go to see their social workers must either pay to
get there or rely on others. As a result, they often come late or miss
their appointments altogether.
In Polk County, there hasn't been a migrant health project for
2 years. The local health department was unwilling to keep sepa-
rate records for migrants and therefore was unable to comply with
Federal regulations. As a result, it pulled out of the program.
The health department's convenience, in this case, was clearly more
important to the county health officer than the health of farmworkers.
No doubt, he would feel very much put upon if he were told his job
depended on getting the project back.
Collier County's food stamp program has proof of income rules
similar to those previously enumerated. Many farmworkers can't
comply with them. In addition, the food stamp personnel will check
eligibility by asking employers what they expect the applicant to
earn the following month. Because of the pervasive hostility of grow-
ers to the program, they will often make high projections, thus leav-
ing the individual and his family ineligible. When a local black and
a Chicano leader went to the county commission to protest this prac-
tice, they were told they could not do so because they had participated
in a peaceful demonstration.
That demonstration was over the failure of the farmworkers to be
able to get the benefits you gave in the Disaster Kelief Act of 1969.
The exercise of elementary political rights is often visited by retalia-
tion in our State.
The director of the American Friends Service Committee migrant
project which operates a housing program has informed me that he
has had to abandon trying to qualify farmworkers for section 235
housing loans because of the use of such middleclass eligibility require-
ments as holding a job for 2 years and providing AV-2 forms. Fann-
worker employment practices, of course, make this impossible. The
AFSC has now switched to the Farmers Home Administration, but
this limits the number of houses that can be built.
36-513— 71— pt. 8B 6
5462
Cheating the farmworker out of a steady wage, of course, makes it
impossible to comply with the program. The AFSC is working with
the Farmers Home Administration but this is unsatisfactory because
the programs of that Administration do not allow it to jDrovide enough
housing.
Ironically, my experience in the housing field is just the opposite of
that of AFSC. In 1968, when I was executive director of Florida Rural
Legal Services, our Belle Glade office began work on a housing project
for Pahokee, a nearby town. After many months of planning, an
application for a large project was filed. It was turned down by Farm-
ers Home Administration with the assertion that the authorizing
legislation did not allow them to make this size loan.
It was our opinion, as well as that of the counsel of a consulting
firm we were using, that this interpretation was wrong. We were
joined in our opinion by Congressman Paul Rogers, who protested,
but to no avail. We finally had to abandon Farmers Home and begin
again with FHA. I ani informed that after two and a half years of
effect the first models will shortly be constructed.
We had to backtrack and refile. And I am informed that the first
models will be up two and a half years after our labor. This will be a
good-sized project for the area, 150 homes, a small drop in the bucket,
and it will not reach the lowest of the poor. It will not help the true
migrant whose wages and mobility make it impossible for him to be
served by this Government program.
Senator Mondale. Is this housing project in Pahokee?
Mr. Segor. Yes.
Senator Mondale. Isn't that the one that was shown on the docu-
mentary ?
Mr. Segor. No; the one on the documentary is a public housing
program.
This is the Housing Act section 235 which is sponsored by a local
citizens' group and the Catholic diocese.
That racism prevails cannot be denied. In Lee County, it has been
necesary to file suit to integrate the county nursing homes. In that
same county, a doctor quit the welfare program after a suit was
brought to require him, among other things, to integrate his waiting
room.
Innumerable instances have been recounted of hospitals which have
received Hill-Burton funds refusing to treat indigents. In Homestead,
I have attended meetings where the feeling of hatred expressed by
blacks and Chicanos against the local James Archer Smith Hospital
was so intense it was almost unbearable.
Their complaints involved both failure to care for the poor and
racism. They feel so strongly that they do not want a federally
funded migrant health project that will shortly open up to even at-
tempt to get services from the hospital. This, despite the fact that the
next closest hospital is 15 miles away by way of a heavily trafficked
road.
Other witnesses have discussed the absence of basic legal protections
for farmworkers and the reports of this committee have collected
valuable data on this point. I will just point out that it is not only
lack of laws that create difficulties, but also the importance of enforce-
ment agencies.
5463
For instance, the health department which is charged with inspect-
ing migrant camps in Florida does not have lawyers to file suit
against violators. It must rely upon county prosecutors who look upon
this type of activity as a nuisance, taking them away from their crime
duties. In those places where a prosecutor has a private practice, there
may actually be conflicts of interest, with the prosesutor representing
some of the grower interests.
Even if the health department had enforcement powers, its regula-
tions are a fraud, being hardly worth the effort to enforce. The same
is true of the Federal regulations on migrant housing.
I am informed that in Palm Beach County the health department
shies away from environmental health problems as opposed to clinical
ones because of the fear of possible political repercussions. This fear
of political retaliation is ever present and affects the activities and
operations of even the most dedicated program and workers.
It is in the context that I come to my next point, which is that
there is an interchange between intransigent institutions and biased
people, back again between biased people and intransigent institutions
that paralyzes efforts to obtain needed change. We are constantly told
the farmworkers are content with their lives, won't work and won't
help themselves. Yet, when there is a chance that farmworkers will
engage in the processes that lead to change, intense efforts are made to
frustrate them.
I have seen a private report, the name of which I cannot reveal,
which I believe to be valid, which told of one large farmer providing
buses for his workers to attend a picnic on election day. This was to
prevent the workers from exercising their franchises.
A black leader in Immokalee told me that the same type of thing
occurred on the day a referendum was held on the question of incor-
porating the town. Naturally, the white farmers and businessmen who
owned property did not want to be part of a city in which the ma-
jority of the voting population was black and Chicano.
The power of agribusiness to thwart the democratic processes in
order to prevent farmworkers from obtaining benefits that other
working people take for granted is notorious. In 1969, agribusiness
was taken by surprise and a bill eliminating the farmworker workmen's
compensation exemption was voted out of committee in both houses
of our State legislature. Despite a last-minute lobbying effort, the bill
passed the Senate by two votes. Unfortunately, it did not get on the
special order calendar in the House and time ran out.
This year, the lobbyists were ready and the few friends of farm-
workers in the legislature, could not even get a watered-down version
of the bill out of committee.
The tragic effects of grower opposition to this most elementary form
of social legislation is set forth in an article that appeared in the July
16, 1970, issue of the Palm Beach Post. The article quotes a vocational
counselor for the Florida Council for the Blind as saying that he sees
as many cases of blindness among glades agricultural workers as there
are in the rest of Palm Beach County, although the agricultural popu-
lation makes up less than 10 percent of the county population.
He attributes the high incidence of eye disease to the swirling muck
dust encountered by the workers. First, it would provide more im-
mediate medical care to the workers who are injured by the dust.
5464
Second, many of our industrial safety practices have resulted from the
pressure of insurance companies on business to get it to upgrade stand-
ards. We could probably expect the same to happen in agriculture,
^were workmen's compensation to be universally extended to the
workers.
Eeturning to the local scene, a classic example of community sabo-
tage of a needed Federal project recently occurred in Immokalee. A
doctor from the University of Miami's School of Medicine became
interested in setting up a major clinic there mider the Migrant Health
Act. With the support of the U.S. Public Health Service, he began to
discuss the proposed project with all segments of the community, not
only in Immokalee, but also in the comity seat at Naples, about 40
miles away. He touched all the bases, and lined up support from grow-
ers, business people, the health department, the county commissioner
for the area and, so he thought, the county medical society. All this in
addition to the enthusiastic support of the intended consumers.
However, when a public meeting was held to discuss the project, he
was shot down by the local doctors by the use of a clever ploy. The
doctors told the people that what they needed was not a clinic but a
hospital. Naturally, everyone became excited over the idea and the
Migrant Health Act clinic was forgotten.
A board was formed under the chairmanship of the one private
physician m Immokalee to begin raising money. This physician, along
with the local druggist, had been prime opponents of the clinic. The
physician had even gone so far as to threaten to quit practice if the
clinic came in.
The upshot of this is that little or nothing has been done to further
the hospital in the year that has elapsed and the clinic will be located
in the more hospitable climate of Dade County.
From public reports and talks with various people familiar with
what occurred, I have been able to come to the following conclusions :
(1) Attitudes toward the project were deeply affected by prevailing
hostility toward Federal projects. Although interestingly enough, this
did not extend to shyness about applying for Hill-Burton funds. It
never does.
This generalized anti-Federal hostility made otherwise hardheaded
people receptive to a pie-in-the-sky hospital plan despite the fact that
the community's small size militated against such a hospital being
successful.
It also blinded people to the possibility that the clinic could be used
as a base upon which to build plans for a future hospital as has been
proposed, and will be done, for the south end of Dade County.
(2) The local physican and druggist were afraid of competition
from the clinic and put their own economic well-being ahead of that
of the people.
(3) The county medical society was afraid that the clinic would
raise the farmworkers' level of expectations concerning medical care
to too high a level.
(4) The dominant community feared extensive consumer partici-
pation on the governing board of the clinic. Both because such par-
ticipation, if successful, will do violence to prevailing racial attitudes
and because any process that might lead to greater ability upon the
part of the non- Anglo population to govern itself is viewed as threat-
eninsr.
5465
(5) The lack of sophistication and powerlessness of the workers
made them incapable of resisting the tactic. Many of them were fooled
into supporting it, thinking it was for real.
(6) The inability of the Federal Government to directly serve
needy, but politically impotent consumers, without working through
hostile local forces, was a prime contributor to the debacle. Once again,
the people were mangled.
In contrast to Immokalee, Dade County was able to muster tre-
mendous community support for the project. The medical school, the
county medical society, tlie health planning council, the urban coali-
tion and, somewhat reluctantly and even truculantly, the local health
department.
The difference, of course, is that Dade County is overwhelmingly
urban and it is therefore possible to circumvent potential opposition
from rural elements. This distinction between urban Dade and rural
Collier Counties, while fortunate for the farmworkers in Dade, is
cause for the deepest melancholy iu tlie remainder of the rural poor.
Nevertheless, the Dade County project does provide a laboratory in
which we can observe a project that has on its board a majority of
consumers.
Hopefully, the clinic will not only provide first-rate medical service
but will also act as a training ground for community leaders.
It is interesting to note that the principal source of discontent with
consumer control in Dade County appeared to be the local health de-
partment and the regional Federal bureaucracy in Atlanta. Perhaps
with experience they will come to also cherish the values attendant upon
consumer control.
I started these remarks by asserting that it is the farmworkers and
not the protesting agribusinessmen who are the victims of bias. The
examples I have recited are merely a few among legions that support
that statement.
When the growers come in and lobby for workmen's compensation,
unemployment insurance, grower responsibility for social security,
more stringent housing codes, better health services, a tenfold increase
in liousing starts with better terms; when they conduct voter regis-
tration drives, finance leadership clinics, provide better wages and
financial incentives and really believe that the word "nigger" is bad,
they will have established some credibility with the farmworkers and
their friends.
In short, wlien the growers believe in the American dream for the
other guy — then their pleas will not have the hollow ring of hypocrisy.
Thank you, Chairman ^londale, and the other distinguished Sena-
tors on the committee for giving me this opportunity to express my
views.
Senator Mondale. Thank you, Mr. Segor, for an excellent statement
and analysis of Florida problems.
(A report submitted by Mr. Segor follows :)
Report to the Boabd of Directors of Migrant Services Foundation, Inc. by
THE Executive Director, Joseph C. Segor, on the Inadequacies of the
Federal Response to the Disaster that Befell the Migrant Farmworkers
IN Florida During March-April, 1970
During March 1970, heavy rains in the farming areas of Florida combined
with previous cold weather, to do serious damage to the farming and livestock
5466
industries. This report will recount the efforts of the Migrant Services Founda-
tion, Inc. and others to obtain federal aid for migrant workers who were dis-
tressed as a result of the disaster. It will concentrate on spotting the reasons why
federal aid was withheld. During the course of our futile battle to obtain help,
I sent two telegrams to Senator Walter F. Mondale, Chairman of the Subcom-
mittee on Migratory Labor of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare,
United States Senate, requesting his aid in determining what help, if any, could
be obtained from federal agencies under the Disaster Relief Act of 1969 which
was then in existence less than six months. The Senator wrote to the various
federal departments and agencies having or appearing to have some authority
tinder the Act.
The replies received by the Senator are most instructive, in that they provide
the opportunity to gain a good deal of insight into the way in which the federal
agencies view their responsibilities. This report is keyed to those responses. As
the story unfolds it will be readily apparent that individually and taken together
the federal agencies suffered from a form of myopia so pathologic that it resulted
in a total paralysis of the system of disaster aid, thereby frustrating the Con-
gressional intent as well as causing untold misery among the intended
beneficiaries.
The responses to the Senator's query cannot be misinterpreted, they show that
no attempt was made to implement those sections of the Disaster Relief Act of
1969 that were intended by the Congress to provide aid to migrant workers vic-
timized by a disaster. Since the Act can become operative only if triggered by a
request to the President from a Governor of a State asking for a declaration of
disaster, lack of federal implementation of its provisions can be attributed to
the failure of Governor Kirk to make such a request. While it is undeniable that
the Governor's inertness prevented formal action under the Act by the responsi-
ble federal agencies, it did not preclude them from making an independent in-
vestigation of the situation to determine if the facts warranted a State call to
the President. It can be said at the outset that a federal finding contrary to that
of the State might well have had the political effect of forcing the State to recon-
sider its position. In view of the total exclusion of migrants from the State's
political and social life, the responsibility of the federal government for their
welfare is commensurately greater and this responsibility has been at least par-
tially recognized by the passage of several pieces of legislation including Sections
II and 12 of the Disaster Relief Act of 1969.
This increased federal responsibility would seem to clearly justify a more ac-
tive role for federal agencies than might otherwise be the case under the co-
operative provisions of the Act. Any deference that might normally be accorded
to State determinations regarding the existence of a disaster can reasonably
be set aside when migrant agricultural workers are the chief potential benefi-
ciaries of the Act's largess. It is not too much to expect that federal agencies
view that situation with realism and act with an understanding of the eco-
nomic and political factors that militate against migrants in their reltionship
with State and local governments. I will discuss these in somewhat greater de-
tail further on in this report.
By failing to request a disaster declaration from the President, Governor Kirk
was stating inferentially that whatever the nature of the misfortune that befell
the effected areas, it was not such magnitude as to justify Presidential inter-
vention. The threshold question is thus, was there a disaster of the requisite
magnitude in Florida?
The Disaster Relief Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-79) does not itself define the
term "major disaster". Instead, it states that under its terms a major disaster
is "... a major disaster as determined by the President pursuant to . . . (42 USC
1855-1855g), which disaster occurred after June 30. 1967, and on or before De-
cember .^1. 1970." 42 use 1855a defines a "major disaster" as one ". . . which,
in the determination of the President is or threatens to be of sufficient severity
and magnitude to warrant disaster assistance by the Federal Government to sup-
plement the efforts and available resources of State and local governments in
alleviating the damage, hardship, or suffering caused thereby . . ." The need must
be certified by the Governor of the State in which the catastrophe threatens or
occurs and he must give assurance of reasonable expenditures on the part of
the State and local governments.
This definition of "major disaster" does not require that a particular level of
objectively determinable physical damage has occurred, but rather is geared to a
determination of whether Federal aid is needed to supplement State and local
5467
resources available for the alleviation of "damage, hardship, or suffering." 42
use § 1855a (a)- This determination is wholly the President's. Although it must
be certified to by the Governor, there is no requirement that the Governor's
certification must come prior to the Presidential determination. While under
normal circumstances a State request for help might be a reasonable prerequisite
for a Presidential disaster determination, the presumption should be otherwise
where a powerless and often despised minority, such as migrant workers, is
concerned. Where such a group will be the principal beneficiary, a Federal initia-
tive is imi)erative.
The Florida case gives stunning proof of this contention. After rain and cold
had dealt a severe blow to Florida agriculture, the newspapers began to be filled
with accounts of the extent of the disaster. The Miami Herald of March 28, 1970,
reported that, "The nation's salad bowl was awash Friday in a Spring flood oflB-
cials say may reach disaster proportions.
Farmers watched their vegetable crops drown, cattle waded through water in
search of food and canals gushed the runoff into the sea as the paper work was
started to get nine South Florida counties designated as disaster areas."
On March 31, the Miami Herald reported that Florida Commissioner of Agri-
culture Doyle Conner telegraphed Governor Kirk that, "As much as 20 inches or
more of rainfall within the past three weeks to a month, preceded by severe cold
early in January, have created devasting conditions and immediate need for
relief." The next day, Conner was again quoted by the Herald saying that the
flooding in Palm Beach County was ". . . the worst I've ever seen." The April 2nd
Herald carried an AP dispatch from Tallahassee saying that Governor Kirk had
sent a telegram to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Hardin urging that seven coun-
ties be declared disaster areas. Deputy Undersecretary Galbraith's letter to Sen-
ator Mondale dated April 10, 1970, indicates that by that date the Governor's
request had been implemented to the extent that a reduced price feed grain pro-
gram for five counties had been authorized.
As early as March 30th, I had become concerned that the farmworkers would be
by-passed by both the State and Federal governments when it came time for
relief to be handed out. After doing some research and discovering the existence
of the Disaster Relief Act of 1969, 1 contacted Rudy Juarez, the Executive Direc-
tor of Organized Migrants in Community Action, Inc. We discussed the problem
and he requested that I determine whether the farmworkers were going to be
included in the State's request for aid. On April 1st, I spoke to Frank Pope, Execu-
tive Director of the State Disaster Committee. He said that the Committee was
recommending that a number of counties be declared a disaster area, but that I
should get specific information from the Governor's office. He recommended that
I call James Richardson. Secretary of the Department of Community Affairs. I
did so, and was told by Richardson that a disaster package was being prepared,
but that aid for migrants had not been discussed. I asked about implementation
of the Act of 1969. The Secretary replied that he was not familiar with that law.
I then read it to him over the telephone, whereupon he stated that the State
agencies in charge of securing information had not informed him of extensive
unemployment among farmworkers. The agencies he mentioned were the State
Employment Service, the Division of Emergency Government and the Red Cross.
I said that I had heard otherwise and suggested that the Secretary recheck his
sources while I would inquire of mine.
I then contacted Community Action Migrant Program, Florida Rural Legal
Services, the American Friends Service Committee Migrant Project, OMICA and
Glades Citizens Association and asked that they check the employment situa-
tion. Over the next several days I received back reports from all of these agencies
that there was substantial unemployment and almost universal under-employ-
ment. I then called Secretary Richardson on April 3rd and was told that the
State agencies were not reporting serious unemployment. I was further informed
that such unemployment as might exist in the vegetable areas was being taken
care of by transporting the workers to the citrus areas where there were jobs.
The Secretary also said that the State Farm Labor Employment Ofiices had
plenty of jobs for farmworkers in the vegetable areas. When I subsequently dis-
cussed this claim with people in Belle Glade and Immokalee I Vi^as told that they
had tested the Employment Offices and found the job openings to be non-existent.
The April 3rd claim that workers could be taken care of in citrus is most
curious when compared with the Farm Labor Bulletin of April 2nd put out by
the Florida State Employment Service. The Bulletin states under the topic
"Central Florida Summary" that "Lull in citrus harvest continues." Under
5468
"South Florida Summary" it said that "Heavy rains in most areas resulted in
decreased labor demands." Regarding jobs for displaced workers in the citrus
areas it stated ". . . arrangements have been made to help these vporkers find
employment vphen Valencia harvest becomes active in mid-April." Thus, there
would be a two-week hiatus before the citrus harvest could take up the slack. No
doubt, it was expected that the migrants could draw upon their extensive savings
in the meanwhile. Unstated, was the hardship that would be caused hundreds
and perhaps thousands of children who would have to be pulled out of school
midway in the term. It would seem that at this point the State preferred to see
the farmworker families uprooted in preference to allowing them to receive
the unemployment benefits authorized by the 1969 Act.
On April 13, 1970, the Miami News editorialized : "A Miami News reporter,
who visited migrant camps at the request of the Council of Churches and
Christian Migrant Ministry, was told that when floods destroyed 70% of the
crops, 70% of the migrants were out of woi-k. And when migrants don't work
they don't eat, nor can they pay rent.
Their condition should be the first to receive attention, from the State and from
the Federal Departments which dispense emergency funds."
On Thursday, April 9th, migrants demonstrated in Naples, the County Seat
of Collier County, protesting the lack of work. A larger demonstration occurred
at the County Office Building in Pahokee, Palm Beach County, the following day.
Although it was claimed that the demonstration was planned and put on by a
Federally-funded agency, the demonstration was, in reality, spontaneous and
accurately reflected the feelings of the workers. It resulted in emergency food
supplies being shipped into the area from "West Palm Beach. During the course
of the demonstration, Rudy Juarez of OMICA, met Secretary Richardson and
Secretary James Bax of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
in the parking lot of the County Office Building. When he asked to talk with them
so that he could explain the workers' grievances, he was told by the two officials
that they were in a hurry to see the Mayor of Pahokee and that he should quickly
say his piece while standing in the middle of the parking lot. Juarez angrily de-
clined this demeaning invitation.
Two migrant representatives travelled to Tallahassee and on April 14th pre-
sented Governor Kirk with petitions and affidavits signed by more than 200
farmworkers stating their plight and asking for help. It was reported that the
Governor did not appear interested and resented this attempt to petition the
government for redress of grievances.
The April 14th edition of the Belle Glade Herald reported that Steve Johnson,
an attorney for Florida Rural Legal Services, visited the loading ramps in Belle
Glade the week before and talked to growers about job availability. Johnson
was quoted as saying, "One of the large growers told me there was plenty of work
to be done, but that he had lost 250 acres of celery and was taking four fewer
busloads out to work on his crop."
During my investigations I was told that many of the men in a migrant labor
camp located in the Delray Beach area were about to go to New Jersey to look
for work. This was at a time when the New Jersey crop was not yet ready and
there was no work available. Confirming the report that a number of workers
headed North early is a story in the May 6. 1970, Palm Beach Post, which says
in its first paragraph, "Flooding March rains and a northern asparagus crop
may have lured hundreds of migrants to the northeast, leaving winter vegetable
fai-mers in the Glades with a labor shortage, a farm labor spokesman reported."
This stoi-y quotes Fred Watts, New Jersey Chief of the Bureau of Farm Labor
as saying, "... Florida Farm Labor Bureau officials had reported to him an
over-supply of workers in the Glades several weeks ago caused by the Spring
rains.
A couple of weeks ago they really had disastrous unemployment. . . .
Further evidence of the early departure of some workers from Florida is
contained in the April 24. 1970 issue of the New Jersey Farm Labor Bulletin.
It states, "An over-supply of seasonal farm manpower now exists in southern
New Jersey."
In light of the extensive evidence of unemployment and the distress of many
workers, the lethargic responses of the Federal agencies queried by Senator
Mondale is tragic. The Office of Emergency Preparedness, which has been
assigned the duty of advising the President on declarations of disaster, and
the Labor Department, relied on the State-supplied information and pointed out
that the President had not declared a disaster. The resemblance of the latter
5469
remark to something out of Wonderland, where Alice found everything to be
topsy-turvy, is striking in view of the fact that it was the responsibility of
these departments to decide whether the President should act.
In its reply, the Department of Agriculture said that it was implementing its
end, but that the President would have to act before the Department of Labor
could provide unemployment payments. It then went on to explain the Depart-
ment's food programs without mentioning the liberalizations contained in the
Act of 1969 to assure that disaster victims would receive food even though they
were not previously qualified for this kind of aid.
The Office of Economic Opportunity responded by citing two emergency food
programs that it had funded, one of which it said had $487,000 for the entire
country. Only a small amount of money granted to this agency had been allocated
to Florida prior to the disaster and one organization that I know of (OMICA)
which had been designated a sub-grantee, had distributed its share by January.
OEO also mentioned two manpower training programs for migrants and said
they had been instructed to accelerate their placements. Placing migrants in
non-farm jobs is a slow and tedious task at best. It is hardly the answer to an
emergency situation. One of these programs cooperated with me in my survey
of conditions and the official of the program with whom I had contact did not
remark about any great ability on the part of his agency to alleviate the situa-
tion. Finally, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, reported that
the Florida Department of Public Welfare had assigned additional staff to three
of its regions so that the offices could stay open 24 hours a day. This would
certainly indicate the existence of an emergency. Due to the nature of the
categorical assistance programs funded by HEAV, the Welfare Department could
be of only limited help. Furthermore, there is a question as to whether the
additional availability of welfare services was communicated to the workers.
No one mentioned it to me and at the time I was in contact with a large number
of active and aware people.
It may now be too late to definitely ascertain whether the State agencies
or my informants were correct in their assessments of the effect of the disaster
on farmworkers. Although it appears logical that a disaster which caused im-
mense crop damage must also have resulted in severe unemployment. Never-
theless, what is clear is that there was a substantial controversy and a good
deal of evidence exists that the State spoke out of both sides of its mouth, re-
porting on the one hand that there was no unemployment while requesting Fed-
eral help for farmers on the other. In such a circumstance, where human misery
must be the certain by-product of a wrong decision, the Federal government
should have moved to determine the facts for itself. If the facts were as claimed
by the farmworkers and their supporters, the President, armed with his own
independently gathered information, could have attempted to persuade the
Governor to make the necessary certification and give the required assurances.
In this case, there being no State provision for Unemployment Insurance for
farmworkers and the Disaster Relief Act of 1969 having been si3ecifically de-
signed to remedy that omission, the Governor need only have shown that the
State would administer the distribution of the Federal funds. Since Florida
already has a well-developed unemployment insurance system, the extra burden
of handling farmworker payments could have easily been shouldered at little
or no additional cost to the State.
It should be noted that the State officials carefully distinguished between
unemployment and under-employment. My informants told me that at the time,
under-employment often meant a half day of work twice a week. It al.'^o meant
that many of the farmers took advantage of the situation and reduc-ed both the
hourly and piece-work rates. As a result, the workers received less income than
they would have otherwise gotten for the same amount of labor. Combined with
the severe reduction in the number of hours worked, this cutback in rates must
have had a devasting effect on the income of many farmworkers.
It is spurious to try to distinguish between unemployment and so-called under-
employment for purposes of the Disaster Relief Act of 1969. The Bill provides
that, "The President is authorized to provide to any individual unemployed as
a result of major disaster, such assistance as he deems appropriate while such
individual is imemployed." Payments are limited to the maximum allowed
by State law and by the State durational requirements. Other public or private
income replacement payments received by the individual must be deducted.
The language of the Act is substantially the same as that contained in the
original Senate Bill. The Senate Public Works Committee in analyzing its Bill
5470
said, "This section would relieve the hardship incurred by certain migratory
workers, not covered by State employment laws, who have been deprived of ex-
pected labor and earnings by the ravages of a disaster." The Committee em-
phasized that the aid would be available "only during short-term emergency
periods for those who are in dire need of emergency aid."
Nothing in the language of the Act of 1969 nor the legislative history indi-
cates a Congressional intent to require total weekly unemployment as a pre-
requisite to eligibility for unemployment benefits. Clearly, the Secretary of
Labor did not think so when he promulgated his regulation governing Disaster
Unemployment Assistance. In 20 C.F.R. 625.8(c) (4) the Secretary provided a
deduction from benefits of, "one-half of any wage paid in the week for services
performed in excess of 20 hours." This is in line with the policy allowed by
Florida. Florida Statute 443.04(b) allows an eligible individual to receive par-
tial benefits in an amount equal to that of his weekly benefits less wages paid in
excess of $5.00.
The Florida maximum weekly benefit payable is $40.00. Thus, if a farm-
worker who was eligible for the full benefit worked part of a week and received
$15.00 in wages, he would be entitled under Florida law to a partial benefit of
$40.00 less $15.00 plus $5.00. Such a worker would therefore receive a $30.00 sup-
plement. Apparently, no attempt was made to determine the number of workers,
who, though earning some wages, would still have been eligible for a benefit
under the Act of 1969. Such knowledge would seem crucial to the ultimate de-
termination of the existence of a disaster.
Returning to the question of what is a disaster, it must be stated that the
analysis in this report is based on the assumption that substantial unemploy-
ment and under-employment of migrant workers created by a catastrophy, is,
In and of itself, sufficient basis for the declaration by the President of a major
disaster. There is excellent support for this assimiption. As previously stated,
all that need be determined in order to find the existence of a major disaster
Is a need to supplement State and local resources available for the alleviation of
"damage, hardship or suffering." Obviously, the "damage, hardship or suffering"
required must be of some magnitude but past experience in the Florida area
makes clear that it is not necessary that a majority of the people in a disiaster
a.T&a. suffer from these disabilities. In 1965, Dade County was declared a disaster
area after being struck by a hurricane. Although many people suffered some
type of injury, only a minority were eligible for aid under the then existing Dis-
aster Relief Act when it was invoked.
The fact that the Secretary of Agriculture authorized feed grain aid for five
counties under his authority is evidence that a disaster of major proportions
had struck South Florida this Spring. Had the buildings and equipment of 150
farmers been destroyed, who would doubt tlhat the Governor, in addition to seek-
ing help from the Secretary of Agriculture, would have asked for a Presidential
declaration so that low-cost loans could be made available to the stricken agri-
businessmen? Yet, when the injury was the loss of wages to thousands of migrant
workers, we were assured that there was no problem.
Because the Federal agencies accepted the State determination, the threshold
was never crossed and th? existence of a major disaster was not declared. While
guilt in the fii'st instance lies with the State officials. Federal insensitivity to the
peculiar needs of farmworkers insured that the required aid would not be forth-
coming.
It is clear from our experience in Florida this Spring, as well as from that of
other places (see the report of the American Friends Service Committee and the
Southern Regional Council on the Federal Response to Hurricane Camille) that
it takes more than the objective existence of "damage, hardship or suffering" to
bring about an adequate response. It also takes political clout. If one wants to be
assured of receiving succor in a time of disaster it pays to be part of someone's
political constituency. The act of deciding whether a major disaster exists is not
analagous to judicial fact-finding. Rather, it is part of the political game known
as "who gets the loot?" A cardinal rule of this game is that the poor, the power-
less and the despised must always get the short end of the stick. The implementa-
tion of this rule has given rise to some interesting slogans such as, "Burn, Baby,
Burn !" and "Revolution now !" Perhaps some day it will dawn on enough people
that the slogans will change only when this rule of the game ^ is changed.
1 In this report I have concentrated on exploring the causes of the laclt of Federal
response without proposing means of preventing a similar occurrence in future disasters.
5471
Disaster Relief
newspaper clippings — farm labor bulletin
March 28, 1970— May 6, 1970
[From the Miami Herald, Mar. 28, 1970]
9 Florida Counties Seek Disaster Aid
The nation's salad bowl was awash Friday in a spring flood officials say may
reach disaster proportions.
Farmers watched their vegetable crops drown, cattle waded through water in
search of food and canals gushed the runoff into the sea as the paper work was
started to get nine South Florida counties designated as disaster areas.
"We've had contacts from Lee, Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Palm
Beach, Okeechobee, Martin and Broward counties," said Wyatt Thomas of the
Florida Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service.
"In some counties — Hendry and parts of Glades — 95 per cent of the pastures
are covered in water. The other counties run from 65 per cent on up," he said.
Spring is supposed to be the dry season in Florida.
"The State Disaster Committee has met and they are in the process of
securing information from these various counties regarding the extent of
the damage with the possibility of declaring these areas a disaster," Thomas
said.
"Apparently it's going to be quite bad really," he said. "The vegetable crops are
damaged extensively. I understand the sugar cane crop for 1970 may be damaged
heavily in some spots. There's also some discussion of health problems in the
areas where this water is standing."
Cattle — Florida ranks 16th in the nation in beef production — also are
endangered.
"I understand some cattle are dying because this thing has been going on for
some time in some areas," Thomas said. "It's the non-availability of feed for
the cattle that is the serious problem."
The U.S. Corps of Engineers and flood control districts tried to help by pumping
water from Lake Okeechobee to the Atlantic. But still the lake level was rising.
Some roads were blocked with water and wet cables put several thousand
telephones out of service.
collier
Rainfall that is 20 times normal for March has left Collier County truck farmers
with less than a 30 per cent crop prospect on the third crop of the 1969-70 wintei
season. The two other crops were almost entirely knocked out by past rains and
cold weather.
"We're keeping our fingers crossed and hoping to do better than 30 per cent
but we're shooting in the dark," admitted Don Lander, county agricultural agent,
after a two-day inspection of flooded fields that would normally yield a $50
million annual harvest from 35,000 acres.
A weekend forecast of mild and cloudy weather gave the Lee County farmers
their first break this week, but the crop picture remained bleak.
Record rains of 18..58 inches since ^Nlarch 1 — 16 inches more than normal —
have inflicted "very severe" damage to the county's $26-million agriculture
industry, extension agent Robert Curtis .*aid.
The county's disaster committee Thursday requested federal disaster funds
for farmers facing their third crop failure of the season. Both previous crops
suffered ma.ior setbacks from cold and rain. Flower growers were hard-hit
earlier this year and now the potato crop is almost demolished, Curtis said.
Absent a major overhaul job on our society, complete alleviation is probably impossible.
However, a few avenues of change can be explored. The most obvious is that the President
could be given the power to Initiate aid without a gubernatorial certification. Short of this,
It should be possible for the appropriate Federal agencies to make their own determination.
They should be required to do so when requested by minorities that are in a true sense,
Federal wards, that is ; migrants, blacks in the South, Indians, chicanos, etc. Finally, a
set of Disaster Guidelines should be established that would enable not only the relevant
authorities, but the victims and the interested public, to determine the existence of a
major disaster.
5472 !
PALM BEACH
Tens of thousands of acres in the Palm Beach County Everglades were still
under water, and ranchers and farmers were comparing conditions with the \
1947 flood, which covered 5-million acres.
They said further rain, as forecast, would wipe out farms and pastures.
The corn crops have been the hardest hit, but celery, lettuce and cabbage also
have been endangered.
BROWAED
A spokesman for the Pompano Beach Farmers State Market said about 55
per cent of Broward County's $10-million vegetable crop has been lost.
"About the only thing that can happen to us now is either a tidal wave or
an earthquake," he said. "We've had everything else."
County Agent Lewis Watson said, "We've had a number of setbacks, but to
the best of my knowledge, they wouldn't qualify Broward County to be de-
clared a disaster area."
MARTIN
In central Martin County west of Stuart, the seven floodgates at the St.
Lucie Lock were discharging 10,450 cubic feet of water per second from rain-
swollen Lake Okeechobee.
Road crews were patching washoi:ts while the rest of the county employees
were having an Easter holiday. Water was receding from carports, house
yards and road intersections.
[From the Miami Herald, Mar. 31, 1970]
Damage to Crops Critical, Aid Asked
Pahokee, Fla. — Spring rains have done "e^xtensive and critical" damage to
crops and livestock in South Florida, Agriculture Commissioner Doyle Conner
said Monday.
Conner used an airplane and cars to cover much of the rain-stricken area and
then wired Gov. Claude Kirk asking him to help farmers and ranchers.
"As much as 20 inches or more of rainfall within the past three weeks to a
month, preceded by severe cold earlier in January, have created devastating con-
ditions and immediate need for relief," Conner told Kirk in a telegram.
The areas effected are Martin, Palm Beach, Collier, Lee, Charlotte, Glades and
Hendry Counties.
Conner said that not only would crops that fill the nation's salad bowls in
winter be cut short, but those that survive will be lower in quality. He said
some cattle have almost no grazing room left because of standing water and
added that he will study the livestock problem more later this week.
Conner told Kirk that he will receive requests for disaster relief from the State
Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service Disaster Committee shortly.
Also, the director of the Air and Water Pollution Control Board Monday rec-
ommended a review of the flood control district system in view of the flooding
Itroblem.
In a letter to Gov. Claude Kirk and all Cabinet officers, Director Nat Reed
recommended that Natural Resources Director Randolph Hodges make a study
of the system. He said he wants to know what the flood control districts are
doing to protect "property, croplands, the deer herd and the delicate ecological
balance of the Everglades."
[From the Miami Herald, Apr. 1, 1970]
Crop Damage Rbxief — Farmers Await Word on Loans
(By Dennis D'Antonio)
AVest Palm Beach. — With crop damage in the Glades estimated at nearly $5
million, farmers are awaiting word today on whether Palm Beach County will
be declared a flood disaster area.
Tlie designation will make small farmers eligible for low interest loans to
buy seed and fertilizer for new crops.
5473
County Agricultural Agent Robert Pryor estimated $4.8 million in damages
to the $30 million crop Tuesday. He said 150 to 20O area farmers may need
emergency loans to recoup their losses in destroyed corn, beans and leaf
vegetables.
Under consideration for disaster status, besides Palm Beach, are Martin,
Collier, Lee, Charlotte and Hendry counties.
State Agriculture Commissioner Doyle Conner said he expected word today
from the state disaster committee, which met Tuesday, after being asked to place
the counties on disaster status.
Conner toured flooded farm lands in Palm Beach Monday and described the
scene "as the worst I've ever seen."
"You could have gone water skiing on many of the farms," he said.
A spokesman for one of the largest farms in the county used the words
"fcerious" and "extensive" Tuesday to describe damages to the spread's 3,000
acres of corn and leaf vegetables.
"We've been hurt real bad," said Tom Carpenter of South Bay Growers Inc.
of Belle Glade.
[From the Farm Labor Bulletin, Florida State Employment Service, Apr. 2, 1970]
SOUTH FLOBIDA SUMMARY
Heavy rains in most of area resulted in decreased lahor demands. Crops in
Dade County escaped damage, but crop loss was extensive in most of the area.
It will be several more days before damage can be fully assessed. Jobs are avail-
able for displaced workers in the citrus area, and arrangements have been
made to help these workers find employment when Valencia harvest becomes
active in mid-April.
Belle Glade
All sugar mills closed for season. Most crops suffered damage from flooding.
The extent of damage is not yet known.
Delray Beach-Pompano
Harvest activities in teans and corn slowed hy rains. Some crop damage
occurred due to excessive rainfall. Weather conditions have resulted in under-
employment of some crews.
Immokalee-Fort Myers
Underemployment due to rainy period. Crop yields have been greatly reduced
in quantity, and quality is also below normal.
Princeton-Homestead
Weather conditions favorable for crops. Light to moderate rains have kept
crops in good condition. Harvest is active in beans, tomatoes, squash, potatoes
and com. Labor supply and demand are in good balance.
CENTRAL FLORIDA SUMMARY
Lull in citrus harvest continues. Volume is exjDected to increase rapidly dur-
ing the last two weeks in April. Some concentrate plants plan to open this
week.
Fort Pierce
Citrus condition good. This area also experienced vegetable loss due to heavy
rains, resulting in underemployment of vegetable workers.
Orlando (includes Leesburg, Sanford, and Cocoa)
Seasonal lull prior to Valencia harvest. Grapefruit harvest continues at normal
volume, as well as cabbage, celery and miscellaneous vegetables.
Tampa
Valencia maturity lagging. Volume movement of valencias is not expected
before the first week in May. Several crews are unemployed but refuse to
relocate. Individual crew fill-ins are needed. Tomatoes and celery are moving
well.
5474
Dundee
Citrus lull continues. Some underemployment still exists, but a rapid buildup
in employment is expected during the last two weeks in April. Citrus bloom is
almost finished, and prospects appear good for the 1970-71 season.
NORTH FLORIDA SUMMABY
Orange Heights.— Harvest of cabbage, leaf vegetables and strawberries con-
tinuing. Preharvest is active in potatoes, melons, vegetables and field crops.
Heavy rains during the weekend interfered with the use of workers.
Pensacola. — Land preparation and planting resumed. Rain had previously
hampered preharvest activities.
Tallahassee. — Nurseries reaching peak employment. Nursery employment will
soon begin to decline, and it is expected that these workers will be placed in
peaches, tobacco or other crops.
Perry. — Workers needed in Madison area to thin peaches. Peach crop is in
excellent condition. Tobacco setting continues with smoe replanting necessary
because of unusually heavy rains.
[From the Miami HeraM, Apr. 2, 1970]
Declare Disaster in Se\'en Counties, Kirk Asks U.S.
Tallahassee. — Gov. Claude Kirk recommended Wednesday that seven Florida
counties be declared disaster areas because of recent heavy flooding.
Kirk sent U.S. Agriculture Secretary Clifford Hardin a telegram urging that
the counties be declared disaster areas, meaning they would be eligible for fed-
eral funds.
"The disaster is the result of a series of events beginning with a freeze in
December, 1969. The freeze killed pasture forage. A total of 24 plus inches of
rain has fallen since December which has kept pastures under water," Kirk
said.
Kirk said it is estimated that 90 per cent of the pasture land in Hendry County
is covered by water and 65 per cent is flooded in the other counties.
Counties included in Kirk's recommendation were Hendry, Lee, Palm Beach,
Okeechobee, Charlotte, Collier and Glades.
Some cattle have starved to death in the flooded area because they could not
find food.
The governor said State Health Secretary Dr. James Bax and Community
Affairs Secretary James Richardson will give all possible assistance through
their agencies to residents of the stricken area.
Thousands of deer face death because of flooding in the Everglades converva-
tion area in several of the counties.
Nine counties have been hard hit by the flood but Broward and Martin were
not included in Kirk's request for designation as disaster areas.
[From the Palm Beach Post, Apr. 3, 1970]
Migrant's Legal Aides Charge State Fails the Jobless
(By Mike Abrams)
Belle Glade. — State agencies are not aiding agricultural workers out of work
as a result of heavy rainfall and crop failure, Migrant Legal Service personnel
in South Florida claimed yesterday.
It is estimated up to 70 per cent of Glades agricultural workers are not able
to earn money after the spring floods, and Gov. Claude Kirk has requested seven
counties be named disaster areas.
Florida Rural Legal Services investigator Elijah Boone in Belle Glade said
migrant oflScers were coordinating a fact-finding commission to convince the
state to request special aid to indigent farm workers.
Migrant Services Foundation Executive Director Joe Segor. in Miami, urged
Gov. Kirk to go directly to President Nixon in requests for disaster aid under
the Disaster Relief Act.
Kirk had requested the relief from Secretary of Agriculture Clifford Hardin.
5475
A spokesman for the State Department of Commerce said his oflace would at-
tempt to transport migrants to pick other crops in northern Florida and Georgia,
but has not started the plan.
Segor reported "sympathy" from the state's secretary of community affairs,
James Richardson, on the migrant problem. Richardson is the main advisor to
Gov. Kirk on the disaster situation, but he has not received reports of unem-
ployment in the Glades, Segor said.
"And that's what we're up against," he said.
Legal Service Investigator Boone, a former migrant crew leader, said "about
four or five" buses out of a usual 30 or 40 are at the Belle Glade loading
ramps each morning to take workers to the fields.
"We took a light survey and anywhere from 50 to 70 per cent of farm
workers are unemployed as the result of high water," he said.
"These people are not out on the street corners." he said. "They're shy, de-
jected, and many of them are illiterate. They're in their homes getting hungry."
Boone said the agricultural workers required emergency money which has
not been provided by state agencies. In the past, indigents have been referred
to legal service offices for emergency aid by state and county agencies but the
service doesn't have funds to help them.
Florida Rural Legal Services Belle Glade office manager Tom Carey said
migrants may not be able to travel north to pick citrus, as state government
officials have suggested.
"These people specialize in the crops they pick," he said. "You can't pick
oranges in Orlando right now because they'd just go oflE the market. And who
is going to pay for the cost of them going?"
Officials of the Glades Citizens Association reported they will contact Rep.
Paul Rogers (D-Fla.) about the unemployment problem.
Rogers is scheduled to make a tour of the disaster area this morning.
[From the Miami News, Apr. 10, 1970]
Hunger, Lack of Jobs Stalk Florida's Migrant Pickers
(By Verne O. Williams)
Belle Glade. — Migrant pickers thrown out of work by crop-killing floods that
covered the rich mucklands around Lake Okeechobee in recent weeks complain
bitterly that more attention is paid to the plight of Everglades deer than to
starving people.
Walk through the migrant quarters of lakeside farming towns like South
Bay. Pahokee of Belle Glade and the complaint is the same.
"They get real concerned about deer, but who worries about us?" asked one
man in overalls standing by a fleet of idle farm-labor buses.
Gov. Claude Kirk has asked federal officials to declare seven counties in the
lake farming belt a "crop diaster area" — thus making farmers eligible for govern-
ment loans. But this will do nothing for the farm workers, their spokesmen say.
"According to an official survey, 70 per cent of the crops were destroyed by
flood," says Edward Parker, Florida Council of Churches representative. "This
means that 70 per cent of the people who work in this area have no jobs and
no food."
Parker estimated that 70,000 people — migrant and local farm workers and their
families — are involved.
"Some of these people are in a state of starvation already," he said.
The Florida Christian Migrant Ministry met yesterday and issued a resolution
calling on Gov. Kirk and President Nixon to declare a "disaster area" for people
in the Glades farming area.
At a joint meeting attended by migrant group spokesmen, the FCMM also
decided to send representatives to Tallahassee next week to see Kirk.
The mood of some of the migrants at the meeting was militant. They talked
of marching on Tallahassee.
"Our people are marching now in Naples because we are tired of living this
way," said Ernest Figueroa, member of the "Brown Beret" migrant group.
A tour of the lake area showed that most of the workers were in the fields har-
vesting celery when heavy rains struck in early March. As the water drained ofC
mildew and rot attacked the crop.
5476
More rain came two weeks later and all but finished the celery along with other
leaf crops like endive, escarole and lettuce.
"If I was working in the celery until it got the black spot," said Mi-s. Ruby
Morrison, of Clewiston. "Now there's no work until the tomatoes. And nobody
knows if we gonna work then."
Those who are working say they are making less money because they have to go
slow and clean the mildew-spotted leaves from the crop.
"You got to clean all the 'feather' leaves off the celery," said Mrs. Nellie Byrd,
in Belle Glade. "I'm still working but I don't know how long."
Mrs. Byrd came "a thousand miles" from Hayti, Mo. last September to work
in the Belle Glade fields. She pays $23 a week rent for three rooms for her
family on Joe Louis Avenue here. These quarters are in a "row house," a multi-
family building like a barracks with a tin roof. The only water is outside at a
spigot.
The migrants pointed out double padlocks on some doors. These mean the
occupant is behind in the rent and the "rent man" has added his padlock to the
hasp to keep the tenant out.
Some of the pickers said they would leave the end of this month for Georgia
and the tomato crop there. They are the lucky ones who have saved enough
money to get by.
[From the Miami News, Apr. 13, 1970]
Disaster for Migrants, Too
The Florida Council of Chui'ches makes a good point when it reminds us
that everyone is worrying about the deer and the farmers in the high water
crisis, but very little concern is evidenced over the jobless migrant workers.
Steps must be taken to protect the dwindling deer herds, of course, and the
farmers may well need the loans which the federal government provides for
such lost-crop emergencies.
But as usual, the migrant workers are the last to receive attention.
A Miami News reporter, who visited the migrant camps, at the request of the
Council of Churches and Christian Migrant Ministry, was told that when floods
destroyed 70 per cent of the crops, 70 per cent of the migrants were out of work.
And when migrants don't work they don't eat, nor can they pay rent.
Their condition should be the first to receive attention, from the state and
from the federal departments which dispense emergency funds.
[From the Miami Herald, Apr. 10, 1970]
Collier Courthouse Picketed — Migrants Ask More Aid
(By Tom Morgan)
East Naples. — Eighty-seven Mexican-American migrant workers and their
children picketed the Collier County Courthouse here Thursday to protest what
they said is a lack of federal aid to unemployed after disastrous rains. Their
claims were disputed by county and state oflScials.
The group was led by Ramon Rodriguez, who said he is a sophomore federal aid
student at the University of South Florida but who refused to identify the
program because that's a personal thing, do we have to get into it?"
The migrants carried signs when they disembarked from 11 cars and trucks
saying "Rescue farm workers first, deer second," and "Don't forget us, it's a
disa.ster for us also." Six of the vehicles carried Collier County tags and the
rest were from Palm Beach, Hendry and Lee Counties.
Many of those protesting were the brown berets and brown shirts of Los
Chicanos, an activist Mexican-American group for whom Rodriquez was the
spokesman. They distributed leaflets with cards carrying a John F. Kennedy
statement : "If we make peaceful revolution impossible, we make violent revo-
lution inevitable."
"We are protesting the situation in Immokalee and the five counties of the
disaster area," Rodriquez roared over a jwwerful bullhorn. "The farmers are
getting $3 million and the deers $3,000 while there is nothing done for the worker,
who are contributing to the economy.
5477
"The food stamps are doing nothing. If there is no money for us we might just
take over this government center. Now everybody turn and let the police take
your pictures and then they will know you and can arrest you on trumix'd-up
charges."
After repeated claims by Rodriquez that the food stamps "are becoming more
and more exorbitant, they used to be $100 worth for $30 and now they're nearer
one for one," Gerald Evans, district administrator of that program came forward.
Evans said that in March alone this county has $70,987 in stamps issued for
which migrants paid $20,666, "so that's $50,321 without cost to them that some
.body else paid for or $39 for each of the 1,S06 people that cost them $11 each."
[From the Belle Glade, Apr. 14, 1970]
Commissioners Hear Report ox "Hunger Touk"
At Monday night's regularly scheduled city commission meeting, Mayor Dr.
John Grady presented a report concerning last week's demonstration by migrant
laborers claiming hunger and lack of jobs, and the tour of the area at the same
time by two Catholic priests from the Miami Arih Diocese.
Gi-ady stated that he and a group composed of growers, state employment
agency representatives, welfare department workers, and some other employers
in this area met to di.scuss the situation recently.
"Out-of-town parties have come here and made a tour of our area." Grady
st<ited. "thinking that there were no jobs available for farm labor here and that
families were starving.
"The source of this tour." Grady charged, "originated with the people in the
Florida Rural Legal Services (FRLS) office."
Grady continued, "It appears that this was an organized attempt to cause prob-
lems in the Glades. People with good intentions and the priests were used in the
attempt."
He reported that employers' payrolls in the area have remained steady and
that there are job openings for tractor drivers, sod cutters, and others.
"Some instances of poverty and unemployment do exist here," Grady ad-
mitted, "but there has not been a great increase. And, until the day of the dem-
onstration itself, the welfare office reported no great increase in people applying
for help there. These people supposedly interested in helping the farm labor never
went to the trouble to find out ahead of time about jobs and hunger here."
Grady stated that a man named Segor who u.sed to be with the Migrant Legal
Services office in Belle Glade instigated the whole situation, and Grady further
stated that members of the local Florida Rural Legal Services Staff went on the
tour with the Catholic priests.
In concluding his report. Grady stated "There is free food given away in this
community every Wednesday, and welfare provides emergency help for families
in need. The people in city government here are not going to tolerate this outside
stuff."
THE OTHER SIDE
Tuesday morning the Herald questioned Florida Rural Legal Services Attor-
ney Steve .Johnson concerning the allegations made by Mayor Grady.
"First of all," .Johnson stated, "the tour was not organized by persons em-
ployed in this office. The tour was conducted by the Organization of Migrants
within the Community Action program. Father McMahon one of the priests on
the tour from Miami, was in and out of this office on the day the Incident occurred.
He was using our telephone, attempting to contact Dr. Grady, the employment
service officials, and other community leaders to ask them to go on the tour with
him. so that he would get a complete picture of the situation with all views
represented. None of the people he contacted was willing to go on the tour with
him.
"The Mr. Segor Dr. Grady holds responsible for the tour has not been with
the FRLS for some time. He is employed by a non-government, privately fumled
and operated organization called the Migrant Services Foundation. Pie is in no
way affiliated with the FRLS."
.Johnson stated that he and the FRLS Acting Director both attended the meet-
ing held at the county road department, where Father McMahon read a letter
36-513— 71— pt. 8B 7
5478
from an employment bureau oflScial stating that jobs were available in tbis
area and in the citrus producing areas of the state.
"As an attorney," Johnson explained, "I must take the position my client
chooses. If a client tells me his family is hungry and he can't find work, then
I must represent him to the best of my ability. This includes advising him to
seek help from social and welfare agencies. There seems to be a discrepancy
between the idea that jobs are available and the fact that there are men unable
to find jobs."
Johnson stated that last week he visited the loading ramps to talk to growers
about job availability. "One of the large growers told me there was plenty of
work to be done, but that he has lost 250 acres of celery and was taking four
fewer busloads of labor out to work on his crop."
[From the Belle Glade, Apr. 14, 1970]
Migrant Leaders Given Letter on Labor Cond.
About 50 migrant farm workers were among those demonstrating at the
Welfare oflSces in the Glades Office Building, Friday, following a meeting at the
county barn. Leader of the group was Father John McMahou of the Arch Diocese
of Miami in the office to coordinate church work in the rural community.
Father McMahon said that a proposed tour of the area was changed to a
meeting to accommodate Bryan M. Page, area farm labor supervisor. Repeated
changes in the meeting time however, found Page unable to attend and a letter-
statement on the labor status "at the present time" was delivered to Father
McMahon and read to his group.
The tour was originally planned to investigate the rumor of job shortages due
to unseasonable rains and reportedly ruined crops, said Father McMahon. "When
the tour was changed to a meeting we thought the migrants should hear Pages'
position also." said Father McMahon.
Belle Glade Mayor Dr. John L. Grady, was invited to attend the proposed tour.
"At the planned departure time," said Father McMahon, "there was no repre-
sentative from the city present."
Page's letter stated that "Our Agency Is Strictly a Service Agency," (his
capitalization), The letter pointed out that there was some under-employment, or
workers working on a 3- to 4-day basis, but that the Belle Glade Office "has been
unable to fill all the demands for thinning corn."
Father McMahon was invited to send any workers in need of a job to one of
the local Farm Labor Offices in South Florida, located in Belle Glade, Delray,
Immokalee and Princeton.
"We will be glad to refer them to a local job or to a job in citrus . . . who
need labor badly."
"For your further information, The Belle Glade Office has job openings for
next Monday in celery and sugarcane."
Page again stressed that the Farm Labor Offices were "a service agency, serv-
ing both the workers and the growers. Furthermore, it is our agency's position
that no emergency exists when work is available locally or in the citrus area."
Accompanying Father McMahon were Father Jerry Singleton, who is attached
to the Rural Life Bureau ; August Vanden Bosche, director of Florida Christian
Migrant Ministry, offices in Miami ; and Rudolpho Juarez, representing the
Rural Organization Coalition (ROC) for farm workers and "poor people in
general," and executive director of Organization of Migrants in CommiTuity
Action (OMICA).
[From the Miami News, Apr. 15, 1970]
Migrants Ask Kirk for Heilp
(By Georgia Martinez)
Belle Glade. — Petitions and affidavits signed by more than 200 farm workers
from four counties were sent to Gov. Claude Kirk Tuesday urging him to invoke
the 1969 Disaster Act. .
Enclosed in a thick brown folder and submitted by the Rural Organization
Coalition, the petitions, affidavits and reports signed by farm workers and leaders
5479
of farm organizations in Palm Beach, Hendry, Collier and Okeechobee counties
state that because of the present conditions brought on by freezes and heavy rains
there is large unemployment and hunger among the workers.
"Hunger in a bread basket region is a wrong which is present in the glades,"
Rodolfo S. Juarez, executive director of OMICA, wrote in a cover letter to the
governor.
"It is somewhat unbelievable that those who are employed in feeding the nation
are themselves starving. Only you can aid these poor people.
"We urge you to ask President Nixon to invoke the Disaster Act of 1969 for this
region, which will allow the unemployed farm workers to obtain food for their
bellies and will help them in obtaining shelter."
Juarez says ROC plans to ask everyone to try to get help and that the organi-
zation would like Kirk to come and talk to the people himself.
Juarez said Dr. James Bax, Secretary of Health and Rehabilitative Services,
and James Richardson, Secretary of Community Affairs, visited the area briefly
Tuesday.
Juarez said he invited Dr. Bax and Richardson to read the report ROC has com-
piled, but they refused and would not talk with him or other workers in the area.
[From the Palm Beach Post, May 6, 19701
Faemeks Face Lack of Help
Belle Glade. — Flooding March rains and a northern asparagus crop may have
lured hundreds of migrants to the Northeast, leaving winter vegetables farmers
in the Glades with a labor shortage, a farm labor spokesman reported.
Although a mass migration has not taken place, Glades area farmers face labor
problems with corn, tomato, and watermelon crops, according to Florida Farm
Labor Bureau Statistician Walter Kates.
At the same time, a spokesman for the New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland
areas said farmers were having no trouble getting workers.
•'Some of these migrants came up early," said Fred Watts, New Jersey chief
of the Bureau of Farm Labor in Trenton, N.J.
"We had to give a lot of them odd jobs because our asparagus crop was about
10 days late," he said. "If they had any earlier, we would have had some real
problems up here."
Watts said most of the workers in the Northeast who recently migrated were
Puerto Ricans and Mexican-Americans. He said about 170 bus loads had come
into New Jersey since the beginning of that state's growing season.
He said Florida Farm Labor Bureau officials had reported to him an oversup-
ply of workers in the Glades several weeks ago caused by the spring rains.
"A couple weeks ago they really had disastrous unemployment," he said.
Florida statistician Kates said orders for corn pullers needed by May 13 have
been placed by Glades area farmers. The piece rate pay for corn pulling is about
13 or 14 cents a crate, he added.
The tomatoes and watermelons are located in the Immokalee area, according to
Kates.
Senator Moxdale. Mr. Juarez, I understand you do not have a
prepared statement.
Mr. Juarez. No, I don't.
STATEMENT OF RTJDOLFO JUAREZ, MIGRANT FARMWORKER,
FLORIDA
Mr. JuAKEz. In stating that the documentary failed to show, it failed
to show, for example, the flooding, the constant flooding of people in
the fxeids. And, as we saw, many of our people, because of the January
freeze and because of the flooding in March, have been able to work
only for a period of an hour, an hour and a half, two or three davs a
week. It failed to show a gathering of people of apiiroximately 200,
gathering in a county barn while they were filming 3 miles away.'
5480 :
It failed to show that these people were there seeking assistance in
commodity foods, where they had been refused such food three or
four days before because of the result of flooding.
It fails to show how the State officials and county officials continue to
ignore the pleas of farmworkers in the State of Florida. It failed to
show also the discrimination that we encounter daily. It failed to show
some of our people, for example, such I will give you an example of
what happens in the fields.
A 14-year-old boy poisoned by pesticides, a woman who was scalped
by a machine while working, a child losing her toes while working
along with her parents, and the constant exploitation by crew leaders
and contractors in the process of payroll of the families in the fields.
It failed to show how they are exploited by various businessmen,
local stores, insurance companies. It failed to show many things that:
happen daily that we experience day-by-day in such counties and
States where we harvest the fields.
To give you an example of w^hat Mr. Joseph Segor said about the
James Archer Smith Hospital, there \mve been children with broken
arms brought from the playgrounds of the school, who arrived there
sometimes at 10 o'clock in the morning, seeking medical attention for a
broken arm, with a crying mother, worried mother, and being refused
and referred to the children's hosi)ital in ]\Iiami, and from there being
referred to a private physician, and from there being referred to the
Jackson Memorial Hospital, which is 30 miles away from the area of
Homestead, and there not being taken care of until 9 o'clock or 10
o'clock at night by a doctor at tlie Jackson Memorial Hospital. The
child sutlers all day with the pain in his arm.
In 2 weeks' time we experienced three accidents of this sort, three
children with broken arms, who were unable to obtain medical atten-
tion in any hospital close to the Homestead area, where they ended up
with the Jackson Memorial Hospital, where it is so overloaded with
people.
It failed to show how many children, for example, not being able
to obtain such medical services, especially in the South Dade labor
camp. In the South Dade labor camp, the county health department
operates a small clinic. Of our children who have died of pneumonia —
many of our children lie on the dirty mattresses that are provided,
that have been there, I believe, since the camp was first built. Our
children lie there covered with sores. You cannot even see their sores
because they are covered with flies. Some of these sores have been
produced as a result of so many erosions.
I have such scars on my own arms from the times I have had to sleep
with some of these people in their homes, sometimes not having
enough money to rent my own room, because I live about 150 miles
from where I do most of my work. In some of these homes you cannot
even walk without stepping on roaches, scorpions.
It failed to show also the process in which the farmworkers are
exploited constantly day-by-day through the process of payroll. They
are paid, for example, by tickets when they are doing piecework in
the tomato fields. By refusal to give them a ticket, the person giving'
the ticket which is hired by the contractor and crew leader can merely
say that he did not pick the right tomatoes that should have been
picked. And thus it gives him authority to refuse the ticket, which
5481
sometimes bears the price of $30 or 15 cents or down to 12 cents.
This past season in the beginning of the crop, the price for the
tomato bucket was 30 cents. Immediately after the freeze it went down
to 12 cents a bucket, because there were hundreds of people overflow-
ing the fields. Some of them just merely standing there watching others
work or waiting for the possibility of the farmer producing more
buckets so that they could also try to make a dollar or two, which is
what the others were making, because there was not enough work for
them.
This year most of the farmers enjoyed themselves because they were
able to run people home, to send them home, or keep them standing
there. They were able to fire on the spot any people that they felt were
not capable of doing the job and hire some of those who were standing
on tlie line trving to find a job.
Mr. Josepli Segor mentioned some of this that we suffered on the
floods.
OMICA is a member of RCC, which is a rural coalition organization
composed of various organizations and groups that have been formed
in the State of Florida" in an effort to unify and become stronger to
deal with those who continuously exploit us and discriminate against
us.
AVlien we heard tliat there was a survey made by Riciiardson. the
Secretary for Community Affairs, and that he had not mentioned
one farmworker, although he had mentioned that 70 percent of the
crops had been destroyed in seven comities, he also mentioned that
many of the deer were dying, but not one word was mentioned about
the farmworkers who mainly depend on these crops.
We made a survey and found that the farmers were actually evict-
ing some of the families since they no longer had any jobs for
them. We found that many of the families had nothing to eat, no food
on their tables. We found that many of them were worried as to
where they would go, because they had no money to pay rent, the
excessive rent that is charged by the farmers.
The same people went to the county welfare department to seek
commodity assistance. These families were refused by merely stating
that they had not lived a year there, that they were not informed
that it was no longer so.
So, as a result of the people contacted, various groups, wlio are
also members of ROC, contacted OMICA, for example. OMICA got
active in contacting some organizations. And thus we were able to
develop some facts as to the amount of unemployment that existed.
When these people came to the county barn, the farmers' county
barn, in Belle Glade, we found that Richardson as well as Bax and
a guy from the state unemployment office were there. We confronted
them.
The people pleaded and told them to include them, to try to get
some assistance for them. As a result, they went inside, the people
went inside because this man who was there completely ignored them.
They refused even to sit with local agencies and with local groups,
such as OMICA, to discuss the amount of unemployment because of
tlie floods and to discuss the problems that had been created because
of this.
5482
But this was to no avail, because they refused to speak. We found
out afterwards that they had fiown to Naples, where we again con-
tacted another chapter of OMICA to try to again speak to the peo-
ple so that we might be heard, so that they might listen to the pleas
of the farm workers, so that they might also be informed, just as well
as the farmer, if the farmer lost his crop, then how is the farmwork-
er going to earn his money for the rent, for his food, for his cloth-
ing or for his trip that he was preparing for up North.
As a result of that flood and that freeze and the loss of these crops,
many of the migrants have stayed in Florida because they have no
money to travel. Many of the migrants lost their cars, their pickups,
their means of travel. And many of them lost their homes in Texas.
Right now, yesterday, while the hearings were going on, the same
migrants have returned, because not many jobs are available or have
stayed on because of no money to travel. Their water is being cut off
because they are not needed by the farmer now.
Very few of them are hired. Those who are already hired are those
who have worked for the farmers year-after-year, which are the sea-
sonal farmworkers, or those who drive tractors or thin some of the
crops. But the migrants who have stayed cannot find jobs. And even
those who try to get out of agriculture and try to go through the
employment office to apply for a construction job or a job outside
of agriculture, their applications are never reviewed. They never
hear from the employment office unless a farmer happens to be in need
of somebody to clear a ditch or work in the fields.
My assistant director, Joe Alexander, suffered some brutal beatings
about 3 weeks ago. This I say because on the documentary they
showed where people were run out of the camp at the point of a gun.
We are run out not at the point of a gun but with actual bullets in
many j^laces.
Senator Mondale. In the documentary there were a few examples
shown of where the newsman with a camera was told to get off the
property, not to ask questions of the migrants. But it is your testi-
mony that when community organizers go on the property, they are
often beaten up ; and even shot.
Mr. Juarez. They are beaten up in the camp or followed out on
the lonely roads. They are followed and beaten up on a lonely road.
They are threatened, or their cars are shot up with bullets along those
highways.
Senator Mondale. You say that has happened recently ?
Mr. Juarez. This happens various times.
Senator Mondale. Did you say that your assistant was beaten up
3 weeks ago ?
Mr. Juarez. Yes, sir.
Senator Mondale. What happened to him ?
Mr. Juarez. We have various members who have migrated from
the County of Dade into the Ruskin-Palmetto-Bradenton, area and
Sarasota, which is not far from Tampa. Members of OMICA who
were wearing their OMICA buttons would be fired from their jobs,
or members of OMICA who were merely complaining of the hous-'
ing conditions.
When my assistant director went to see these people, he spent, I
believe, about a month there or a month and a half. He was found
5483
out. He was threatened. He continued to see these people and informed
them and continued to send us information in the office that we have
at Homestead.
Then one day he was followed. He was beaten up. And, as a result,
he suffered injuries, not permanent injuries. But his face was pretty-
well beaten up.
This is done sometimes to our own people, because money is what
talks in this Nation and because some of our people — there are various
tools and means and ways that are used. They can be forced to do
things because they might be in debt with a farmer or contractor, if
the farmer promised to forget about a bill or about a debt, or if he
offers a good amount of money. Some of our own people sometimes
do this.
Senator Mondale. In other words, occasionally they will even hire
Chicanos to beat up community organizers.
Mr. Juarez. Especially Chicanos, who might very well be along the
middle class already, or Chicanos who have been so brainwashed and
since they have never experienced what the migrant farmworker has
experienced, migrating throughout the States, he too does not under-
stand the things that we are trying to show him or the things that we
express.
There are otlier times also when the farmworkers, for example, will
protest in the fields. I know of one incident where three farmworkers
were kept in a watermelon field all night. Tliere was about 15 cars of
Anglos, Gringos, who parked at the edge of this field. If it had not
been that one of them had a rifle — he was supposedly guarding the
watermelon fields — if it had not been that this man shot two shots in
the air, probably all the Gringos would have gone into the field and
done away with those three men who were there merely trying to do
a job.
There are all kinds of things that we experience that you would have
to live them. I have lived them all my life. I sometimes feel ashamed to
claim that I used to be a crew leader. But in a way I am glad, because
I was able to experience in many ways, for example, that the crew
leaders and the contractors cheat our people.
As I look at it now, they cheat them just by the system. Because a
farmworker is not able to work or establish close relations with the
farmer, therefore he loses opportunities, for example, to get a better
job or a better position. Usually those who do get better positions
are the sons or the daughters of the crew leaders, themselves.
Many of the farmers sometimes claim that there are payrolls made
as high as a hundred dollars a week or $150 a week, collected by farm-
workers. But they fail to state the amount of people working on that
same payroll, because our traditions have been that the parent is the
one that collects the whole payroll.
Senator Mond/Vle. How old were you when you first started work
as a migrant ?
Mr. Juarez. About 5 years old.
Senator Mondat^e. How many were in your family at that time ?
Mr. Juarez. Twelve.
Senator Mondale. Did you all work in the fields ?
Mr. Juarez. Those who were — I was the youngest when we did start.
Senator Mondale. The wliole family would go into the fields?
5484
Mr. Juarez. Yes.
Senator MoNDALE. The pay would then 2:0 to your father?
]Mr. Juarez. Yes, th.at is the tradition. It is the tradition of the
Mexican-Americans, the Chicanos. The parent collects the payroll. If
there are any deductions, it is deducted from that one payroll.
Senator Mondale. So that many times when we hear these state-
ments, as we did on the documentaiy, of how much money is made,
very often that is a whole family involved.
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Senator Mondale. It ma}^ be several children, including the wife.
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Senator Mondale. When you break it down to how much that leaves
per capita after deductions
Mr. Juarez. If you break it down, it will amount to about $7 or $8
at the most, or $9 a day, if it was a good day's work.
I know when I took my family to pick cherries in Traverse City,
Mr. Chairman, I would draw $90 to $100 a week. But this was with my
wife and I and seven children that worked. This was the case with so
many other families that worked in the fields.
This past season when I went among the migrants who migrated,
for example, to North Port, Mr. Chairman, the crew leader and the
boss, the farmer, were talking about being investigated by the Social
Security Department or being investigated because they were not
deducting social security.
In an effort to keep from deducting social security, the farmer
asked the crew leader to a])ply for social security numbers or to name
each members of the family separately, so that the amount of payroll
drawn by the parent could never exceed the amount where they
would be able to deduct social security. Thus, if a parent had three or
four sons or daughters, they would all state their social security
number.
Because of the amount of rain and because it is always like that,
they never reach the amount that they have to roach before social se-
curity can be deducted.
Senator Mondale. How many years, Mr. Juarez, have you person-
ally been involved as a farmworker and migrant ?
Mr. Juarez. I don't think I have ever been out.
Senator Mondale. You started when you were 5 years old. How old
are you now.
Mr. Juarez. I am 31.
Senator Mondale. Would you say that the conditions of the farm-
worker and the migrant have improved substantially during this pe-
riod, or not?
Mr. Juarez. No, because I remember the first year that we traveled
from Texas to the sugar beet companies in Ohio with many other fam-
ilies, especially on the highways that we traveled, we could not find
a plac« to stop. We could not find a place to rest. We could not find a
decent place to eat.
I remember that all we ate was bologna and bread, which is the only
thing that you might be able to buy when you are traveling on a .
highway.
Some of these same houses that have been in existence for 15 or 20
years are still there, where we have lived. I visited Arkansas and
5485
Missouri, part of the places where I was raised. And there are liouses
and people still living in them, except for those farmers who burned
their houses because of the migration of the blacks and the Chicanos
who migrated into citrus or other States because of the cotton-picking
machines.
Senator Mondale. It is your testimony that in some 25 years that
you have been a farmworker and migrant, the conditions have not
improved ?
Mr. Juarez. To my way of feeling, no. The farmworker is still
discriminated against. He is unaccepted in the community. He is still
being exploited by farmers, by crew leaders, by contractors, by the
stores from which he buys, by insurance companies. You name it. The
whole society is against us.
Senator Mondale. Did you see the NBC documentary the other
night entitled "Migrant— An NBC IVliite Paper"?
Mr. Juarez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. Would you say that documentary overstates the
plight of the migrant or understates it ?
INIr. Juarez. I would say that it understates it.
Senator Mondale. It understates it ?
IVIr. Juarez. Yes, in many ways.
Senator Mondale. I know your testimony recounted that. But I
Avanted to get your response to the direct question.
Could it not be the case, in fact, that with mechanization, the plight
of the migrant is even worse than it has been ?
Mr. Juarez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. You have recounted the fact that many of the
migrants are returning home early this year.
Mr. Juarez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. Normally, if it is a good crop year, they would
go north and stay in the stream from late spring until sometime in
the fall?
Mr. Juarez. Yes.
Senator Mondale. And they would go from one crop to the next?
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Senator Mondale. But this year many of them are returning home
early ?
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Senator Mondale. To Florida, where there is no employment.
Mr. Juarez. And some of them never left.
Senator Mondale. And some of them never left. And I gather for
some of them it is because of the fact that mechanization is taking over
some of the work.
Mr. Juarez. That is right. I remember, for example, in west Texas,
around the Lubbock area, where I used to stand barefooted or take
along my friend with my parents when we were picking cotton, and
actually the same thing that happened then is happening now in vari-
ous States because of mechanization.
There has already been mentioned tomato-picking machines in Flor-
ida. When that happens, I don't know what the migrant farmworker
13 going to do. They have a lot of cherry-shakers in Michigan now.
They have a pickle machine.
5486
Many of us used to go to work for the Heinz Pickle Co. in Cedar
Rapids and various other pickle companies we used to work with.
They don't have the amount of work available for the migrants that
they used to have.
Senator Mondale. In a situation where a migrant father, wife and
family start north this year for a job, do they know for sure that the
jobs that they had the previous year will be available again to them?
Or is the whole risk of finding out the current labor situation on them ?
Do they get any help from the State employment service, the Fed-
eral Farm Labor Service, or anyone else to help them, and says,
"Wait a minute, there is no point going north this year to pick that
crop, because those jobs are not there anymore"? Are there too many
migrants going north seeking jobs which don't exist any longer, and
are they forced to compete for the few that remain ? What is the condi-
tion?
Mr. Juarez. They get absolutely no help from the State employment
office. They get absolutely none.
For example, if the crops are bad up north, naturally the State
employment office is not going to mention it to the farmworker, be-
cause regardless of how bad the crop is in Michigan or Indiana or Ohio,
or whatever State they travel to, some of these people are still wanted
because they are wanted to gather what little there is. They don't par-
ticularly care about the amount of people. They want to assure them-
selves that they are going to have enough labor.
Some of them, for example, we have gotten information back as far
as Wyoming, where some people have migrated for si^inrar beets . They
found that there was not as many sugar beet fields as there used to be,
as there was last year. Many of them, however, are not informed. The
only ones that are doing anj'^ informing to the farmworker is the farm-
worker organizations, which is themselves. They are informing them
through a nationwide communication, where the work is available or
wherever the bad weather struck or wherever they have established
another machine, where it will be liarder for the f armworkei- to survive.
But it is hard for the migrant to decide to stay in a place where there
is no longer any employment. It is hard for him to decide to stay there.
So he gambles, and he continues to migrate regardless of what some-
times another farmworker will tell him.
This year we experienced the same thing. We informed various
farmworkers about the conditions up North. We informed them about
what was happening in the Florida State, in our comities. Yet what
they would do, they would move sooner in order to try to be there
before anybody else arrived. And they found everybody doing the same
thing.
Senator Mondale. They all arrived much earlier, for far fewer jobs?
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Senator Mondale. As these jobs are disappearing due to mechaniza-
tion, what about the number of migrants in the migrant force? Are
there still new recruits in the migrant stream coming from Texas and
elsewhere to inflate the number of farmworkers ?
Mr. Juarez. Yes. I personally reported approximately about 800
illegals from Mexico who were brought by various crew leaders, who
go all the way to the border and bring them to Florida.
5487
Senator Mondale. In other words, while these jobs are disappear-
ing, they are still going to Texas to recruit illegals to come to Florida ?
Mr. Juarez. Right. They are still bringing in offshore labor, too.
For example, we tried to help some by recruiting, ourselves, some of
the farmworkers, and encouraging them to go to citrus, to work in
citrus. But when they arrived there, there was no housing available to
them or they were just not hired. Some of them returned. Some of
them got hired, and some of them didn't.
Senator Mondale. Would it be fair to say that the desperate condi-
tion of the farmworker along the Texas-Mexican border, and the pos-
sibility of free entrance across that border by poor Mexicans, creates
such a desperate situation that in large numbers they are continuing to
flow to Florida and other places in a desperate search for work.
Mr. Juarez. Riglit.
Senator Mondale. So that as jobs are disappearing due to mech-
anization, the actual size of the farmwork force is increasing, due, in
some significant part, to the desperate conditions resulting from border
crossings. And, in addition to that, they are bringing in more than
nationals — sucli as British West Indians — in large numbers into
Florida for sugar cane. Is that correct ?
Mr. Juarez. I believe they have 1,800 offshore laborers for citrus,
too.
Senator Mondale. For citrus, not for sugar cane ?
Mr. Juarez. Specifically for citrus.
Senator Mondale. Is that larger this year than last year ?
Mr. Segor. It is some hundreds larger.
The worry is what happens in the future. They have their foot in
the barn door, and they are going to kick it open.
Senator Mondale. That is the direction they are going.
So while the farmworker situation becomes increasingly desperate,
the supply of foreign labor is increasing.
Mr. Juarez. Right.
Also, because of this crossing of Mexicans from Mexico into the
State of Texas, it forces other people to migrate from the State of
Texas into Florida.
Senator Mondale. As a matter of fact, most of the Chicanos in
Florida are there because the situation was so desperate along the
Mexican border. Is that right ?
Mr. Juarez. Right. As a result of that hurricane that hit the State
of Texas, we gained more migrants in the State of Florida, and we
continue to gain more migrants because of the conditions in the State
of Texas — and because of the shortage of jobs in States like Wyoming,
Arizona, and even California.
So they will come to Florida. And from there they will migrate to
eastern States.
For example, many farmworkers just 3 weeks ago arrived in the
State of Florida, who had never been there before. But they have
heard from others that there is work available there, as little as there
is, but that there fire jobs available. They found themselves isolated
from their home State. They found themselves jobless. And they
sought assistance, for example, from welfare agencies, being unsuc-
cessful, so that they could continue on their travel up north — Michigan
or Ohio.
5488
Senator Mondale. Is there any evidence that the U.S. Department
of Labor is trying to inform them of the real situation in Florida and
discouraging them from going there ?
Mr. Juarez. I have never seen any efforts made by any State employ-
ment office or the Agriculture Department to inform or assist in any
way the migrants or the farmworkers in any State I have traveled
in. And I have traveled to many of them.
Senator Mondale. I think that is a most scandalous situation.
Senator Saxbe. I think there are efforts. He says he does not know
of them. I am sure there are efforts, because I have seen them.
Senator Mondaue. How many years have you been in the stream?
Mr. Juarez, Twenty-five years.
Senator Mondale. And liow many years have you been a community
organizer ?
Mr. Juarez. Only two.
Senator Mondale. And you have never seen any of this ?
Mr. Juarez. No.
Mr. Segor. Senator, when T was with the GEO program, we had
offices next to Farm Labor Offices in two locations at one time. I used
to get repoT-ts baok that the FLS employees were there sleeping during
the day. All I got were pessimistic reports from everybody about that
situation al>out the employment service.
I think there is a scandal that covild well be opened up to somebody
who has sulipena power to start digging around in there. I think some
of the things that Mr. Juarez is raising points about, not that we
slioiild focus on the farmworkers and tlipir ■plight anymore — to my
memon% I think two ioumalists won tlie Pulitzer Prize on that issue
in the last 15 years. Tlie documentary 10 years after Edward R. Mur-
row again establishes the fact.
Mr. Juarez is beginning to be a professional witness, as are others,
in telling you of their plight. Decisions are being made in this coun-
try at the political level, in the board rooms of large corporations.
And they are being made by labor unions that come in and diddle
with farmworkers, as they did in Florida, and back out without giving
them the resources. They are keeping people in conditions of poverty.
One of our next witnesses, I understand, is really going to delve
into it. He has more facts about this than I do.
I think this is an issue that this committee has to be A^ery concerned
with, where the decisionmaking processes are.
Senator Saxbe. I had information the other day about employment
around Ocala. That is a horse country, not so much the fruit-and-
vegetable country. The local employment office could not provide
peo]>le. They made a contract with Dominicans to come in there in
work gangs. They have these people in there now.
Mr. Segor. In Ocala, Fla., from the Dominican Republic?
Senator Saxbe. Yes.
IMr. Segor. "What kind of vegetables?
Senator Saxbe. It is not for fruit and vegetables. It is baling hay,
building fences, this kind of thing.
Mr. Segor. I really don't know. I requested all requests in Florida .
other than sugarcane for foreign Avorkers. I received nothing from
the Department of Labor indicating that people were being employed
for the horse industry.
5489
Maybe they don't consider that "agriculture," and they played
games with my letter. But I am totally unaware of that.
Mr. Juarez. Our office in Homestead was visited by one person from
the State employment office. I tell you, the day he came into our
office — and this is tlie only time that one of them has ever come to
speak to us — he came, he opened the door, he walked in like ho was
King David. He walked in, he failed to introduce himself. He did
not say anything. All he did was just come up to the desk, and he said,
"I need a hundred hungry people."
There are times when you can hold back in your anger. I try to do
that most of the time. Sometimes I fail. But this man made me so
mad that I asked him what did he want the hungry people for. He
said that he wanted them for okra. He didn't say where.
This was immediately after we were showing the amount of un-
employment because of the flood. He didn't tell us where these people
Avere supposed to go to work. He didn't say wlio he was or where he
was from.
It was later I found he was from the employment office. But he said,
"I want a hundred hungiy people.'"
I told liim I was angry. I said, '"Since when do people have to be
hungry in order to work, in order to cut okra'^"
He did not answer. He started backing out. And, believe me, I was
ready, so that he could mop the floor with me or me mop it with him,
because that is usually the manner in which State and local officials
treat us, by insulting remarks or just merely ignoring us.
In my years of migi'ating and working in the fields, I have never
heard one farmworker claim that he was helped by the employment
office.
Senator Mondale. It is now noon. We have two more witnesses. I
think we ought to complete tlie questions with this panel, and perhaps
come back later for the other v>dtnesses.
Senator Saxbe ?
Senator Saxbe. Mr. Segor, are most of the oranges picked by mi-
grants in Florida ?
Mr. Segor. There are migrants in seasonal agTiculture. Some of
them stay all year in those localities. Others are true migrants and
move on.
Senator Saxbe. Are most of the migrants Mexican-Americans?
Mr. Segor. Not in citrus ; no. They are mostly blacks.
Senator Saxbe. Those blacks are migrants in Florida?
Mr. Segor. That is right. Many of them are, not all.
Senator Saxbe. Most of them ?
Mr. Segor. Figures are hard to come by. Probably the majority are
migrants.
Senator Saxbe. They migrate from Florida or elsewhere?
Mr. Segor. That is right.
Senator Saxbe. Or just around Florida ?
Mr. Segor. They will do both. They will move up into the other
crops in the summer.
Senator Saxbe. This is true for the Claremont-Leesburg areas up
through Lake and Polk ?
Mr. Segor. Certainly true of Polk County.
*5490
Senator Saxbe. I was imcler the impression that most of the har-
vesters there were recruited locally. That is the reason I asked the
question.
Mr. Segor. They consider the local areas their home, so they are
recruited locally. But many of them will also go on the stream. They
may not go the whole summer. Some may go part of the time. Some
may go 1 year and not the next year.
The recruiting processes are somewhat haphazard in that regard.
Senator Saxbe. Is it common for most families to want to work in
citrus groves ?
Mr. Segor. Yes.
Senator Saxbe. Small children ?
Mr. Segor. Yes.
As a matter of fact, there is one camp called Maxey's Camp, owned
by Coca-Cola, where I have had reports of 50 or 60 children out in
the field, not necessarily working, because they can't reach the tree, i
But they can work in vegetables. But they are out there because there
is no other place for them to go.
Senator Saxbe. Are they working ?
Mr. Segor. Some will work.
Of course, the very smaller ones cannot work citrus. It is too much
work.
The University of Miami's statistics indicate there is a heavy drop-
out at the sixth-grade level, which is the age at which a child can begin
to do a pretty full day's work.
Senator Saxbe. Has the minimum wage helped any ?
Mr. Segor. No, I would not say at all. It is all piecework. They get
around the minimum wage.
Senator Saxbe. The minimum wage is not enforced ?
Mr. Segor. No, there is no enforcement whatever.
Senator Saxbe. No interest in enforcement ?
Mr. Segor. I have never seen any interest.
Senator Mondale. Senator Schweiker?
Senator Schweiker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Juarez, you mentioned a case, if I heard you correctly, in one
crop you were being paid 30 cents per unit. And then after that, I
guessbecause of a weather setback, the price dropped to 12 cents per
unit that the workers were paid.
Is my recollection correct ?
Mr. Juarez. Eight.
Senator Schweiker. What crop was that ?
Mr. Juarez. Tomatoes.
Senator Schweiker. When something like that happens, is there any
legal remedy?
In other words, getting back to the minimum wage, is there any legal
remedy that you folks have ? Would that have been below the minimum
waffe, 'for example, under the law in Florida, or whatever Federal law
applied ? Or what resources, if any, did you have to fight that cutback?
Mr. Juarez. We don't, because we don't have any collective bargain-
■ ing. There are enough people waiting there to be hired. What can
you do ?
Senator Schweiker. Would this not violate either the State or some
Federal regulation of the minimum wage we are talking about? Or are
you saying that was not worried about, either ?
5491
Mr. Juarez. I would have to be an attorney to know that.
Senator Schweiker. Is your farm group affiliated with the United
Farm Workers Organizing Committee? Or is it a separate group?
Mr. Juarez. It is a separate group.
Senator Sch^veiker. Is the United Farm Workers Organizing Com-
mittee active in your area or not ?
Mr. Juarez. Not in our behalf.
Senator Schweiker. What progress do you feel you are making in
organizing ?
In other words, Senator Mondale asked you the question of what is
happening in general conditions of the people over the years. Can you
specifically relate what progress you are making in imion organizing?
Mr, Juarez. We are not union organizing.
Senator Schweiker. You are not?
Mr. Juarez. No.
Senator Schweiker. What role do you perform ? What role do you
perform for the OMICA migrants in community action ?
Mr. Juarez. It is a nonprofit corporation. We try to establish enough
information as to services that are available to the migrants, the sea-
sonal farmworker. We try to police the programs that are there which
express so much discrimination toward them. We try to inform them
of newly passed laws that might be available for their benefit. And
we stand up, and when we are asked, we bring it to the attention of
those in power to seek change.
Senator Schweiker. Do your activities diiier from union activitv,
then ?
Maybe this question should be addressed to Mr. Segor, because
he made the statement — "the largest farmworker organization in
Florida." Maybe he can answer that.
Mr. Segor. I think the distinction is that they are not attempting
to be collective-bargaining units at this point, which is, I think, what
a union is. They are working, I think, in the roles they are taking —
what they are trying to do is show the farmworker the benefit of
organization.
Wliether the union comes or not is a separate question, which has
not been answered.
The experience in Florida with unions is very bad, mostly the
unions' fault. The farmworkers took a beating as a result of it. That
was not the union that is active in Texas and California. If they had
come in, I think it would have been a different story.
At the moment, Mr. Juarez is working with his group on what per-
haps the original community-action-program concept was before it
got demolished, and is doing a better job at it.
Senator Schweiker. Mr. Juarez, I realize that you have a lot of
problems with your people. But what, in your judgment, is the most
serious, difficult, or worst problem that you face with your people
today ? Is there any one thing you can put your finger on ?
I realize the whole picture is not very encouraging. But is there
any one thing that stands out in your mind that will go a long way
toward rectifying the situation that could be corrected?
Maybe it is not that easy to oversimplify it.
jlr. Juarez. It is not, because all the problems are just as bad.
The problem of housing, where our people have doubled up and are
5492
living in pigj)ens provided by the farmers. The excessive amount of
rent that is charged for them. Or it might be the wages, that they are
not adequately paid. Or it might be the unemployment that exists in
the State. Each one of tliese problems is just as bad as the other.
Each one relates to the other.
Senator Schweiker. One more question. Mr. Segor's testimony-
referred to a situation relating to blindness among agricultural work-
ers. You said that a vocational counselor attributes the high incidence
of eye disease to the swirling muck dust encountered by the worker-
Can you describe for the subcommittee the physical environment
that ]:)roduces this, and what crops ?
Mr. Segor. The crops range from sugarcane to tomatoes, and the
whole range of vegetable crop that you eat in your salad. That area
is really part of the Everglades. The soil is the tremendously decayed,
rich vegetable matter of the centuries.
So long as it is wet, it stays down on the ground. When it begins to
dry, it just crumbles into powder and can blow.
Of course, the agricultural workers are out in that stuff all day.
Apparently — and this is new information I recently got — it has a tre-
mendous effect on their eyes because of the very fine granulated form.
Doctors could undoubtedly tell you more about that. The statistic,
as I used it, of course, has its own human value and also shows the
really pernicious effect of the farmers lobby in preventing an accepted
and elementary form of social benefit, which is workmen's compensa-
tion, which probably, from the pressure of the insurance companies,
might get portable showers so that the workers could wash their eyes.
It might be difficult to wear goggles all day. But you could get treat-
ment at the beginning of the disease if that was available. But it is
not available for most workers. It is available to the foreign workers.
The Labor Department insists it be available.
Senator Schweiker. It is available for the foreign workers ?
Mr. Segor. It is required by both the Labor regulations and the
contract signed by the foreign employment unit and the farmers, that
they must have State workmen's compensation.
Senator Schweiker. You are saying we treat our foreign workers
better than our domestic migrants in many areas?
Mr. Segor. Far better. The housing is better. Everything is better.
That does not make it very good, but it is better.
Senator Schweiker. It is available because the Secretary enforces
an agreement that he makes on the importation of farmworkers ?
Mr. Segor. That is right. Although it is not the best collective bar-
gaining, the foreign government has a certain bargaining position. The
Government of Puerto Rico has a bargaining position with its
workers up north.
Senator Saxbe. You have testified and others have testified that the
migratory labor has been shamelessly exploited. Wlio is responsible
for this? Is it someone making unconscionable profit? Is it thegrower,
the packer ? Does the product sell too cheap ?
Mr. Segor. I think it is a combination, at least these days. The in-
difference of those who control the industry — that does not mean there
is a monopoly that is planning to exploit the workers in every instance.
Much of it is indifference, failure to exercise responsibility by those
who finance and those buying up the farms.
5493
The small farms are dying out. And agriculture in Florida is more
and more in the hands of big business.
There is also a structure at the lower level which these corpora-
tions superimpose themselves over, without attemptmg to change.
They do not try to change the old attitudes of racism, of personal
indifference to people of different color, and to their welfare.
So if you really want to get down to the responsibility now, 1 thmk
you would have to go perhaps out of the State of Florida to the peo-
ple who own these things as part of their investment and say. Look,
you are making money, but you are not changing the social condi-
tions which have grown up down there."
The politicians in the State receive their benefits, of course, trom
the farmers who have money, not from the farm workers who don-t
have money and don't vote. With some rare exceptions— thank good-
ness for that— the politicians show a great disinterest m helping the
people. At the local level, they may even be the economic exploiters.
The guy on the commission may own the farm.
It is a total social environment. So long as we just focus on misery,
we are not going to end the misery.
I may say that I share the pessimism of others about the h ecleral
Government. I was around in the heyday of optimism. And those of
us who should have known better politically learned our lesson.
Senator Saxbe. I take it, in regard to that, the Agricultural Com-
mittees of both the House and Senate have not shown any great in-
terest in changing the basic concept of this. And I think that we caii
share your pessimism a little bit, too, because while a great deal of this
is a labor problem, there is a lot more of it that is an agricultural
problem, as I understand it.
With the big subsidies and with the attitudes that seem to be ex-
pressed generally in committees, we can't be very optimistic about
any radical change.
I can understand where a small grower, which you say is going out
of business, finds himself between a rock and the other place, because
to compete he has to go along with what he can get at the cheapest
price.
In Ohio we have a somewhat different situation, because ours are
sugar beets and tomatoes primarily. We found, for instance, a few
years ago that there were people who were recruiting labor and they
also managed to recruit about twice as many as were needed. In this
way, of course, when they all arrived, there would be a ready supply.
And then, of course the recruiters from Michigan for the cherries
would come in and recruit for up there and again attempt to get an
over-supply. The shortages would be day-to-day shortages. The over-
supply would be month-to-month.
Now if the Department of Agriculture is not doing something about
this— as I say, the Ohio comniittee that was formed for the purpose
of trying to"^do something for the migratory labor did put out in-
formation bulletins on a monthly basis in trying to level off the tre-
mendous influx of people. Then we found out there were a lot of peo-
ple going through Ohio anyway, because they were going to Michigan
to work. And it was a convenient stopover on their way to Michigan to
pick cherries.
Senator Moxdale. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
36-513 — 71 — pt. SB 8
5494
Mr. Segor we will print your statement in its entirety at this point
in the record.
(The prepared statement of Mr. Segor follows :)
Prepared Statement of Joseph C. Segor, Executive Director, Migrant Services
Foundation, Inc.
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, my name is Joseph C. Segor.
I am the Executive Director of the Migrant Services Foundation, Inc. I am a
lawyer and for the past several years have concentrated my efforts on the
problems of farmworkers. From May 1967 to September 1969, I was the Ex-
ecutive Director of Florida Rural Legal Services, Inc., an OEO funded legal
services program operating in seven south Florida counties.
The Migrant Services Foundation is privately financed and provides legal
and other services to farmworkers in Florida. We are headquartered in Miami,
but operate throughout the State. My companion is Rodolfo Juarez, Executive
Director of Organized Migrants in Community Action, Inc. (OMICA), the larg-
est farmworker organization in Florida. He was born and raised a migrant, even-
tually becoming a crew leader. Recognizing the exploitation of migrants by crew
leaders as well as others, he quit, at great financial sacrifice, to work for several
OEO rural programs prior to becoming the operating head of OMICA. OMICA
maintains a full-time office in Homestead, Dade County, Florida and has chap-
ters in a number of locations throughout the State.
I will present a short prepared statement after which we vnll both be happy
to answer questions.
Mr. Chairman, the newspapers and news programs have been filled with
accusations by growers, agribusiness organizations, and political leaders in our
state that the recently aired NBC Migrant White Paper produced by Martin
Carr and narrated by Chet Huntley was biased. These individuals and organiza-
tions were so certain of their position that they made their accusations even
before they saw the show. Our Governor, whose protests were among the loudest,
appeared to be trying to create a self fulling prophecy of bias by declining to
appear on the program .
The dictionary teaches that bias implies unreasoned and unfair distortion of
judgment in favor of or against a person or thing. It is the thesis of my remarks
that the State of Florida, through its governmental institutions at all levels, as
well as its social and economic structures is biased against the farmworkers. I
would modify the dictionary definition somewhat, however, because in my opinion
the bias which oppresses farmworkers is in many instances not unreasoned,
but a deliberate, calculated and purposeful attempt to maintain an economic
advantage regardless of the cost in human misery. Also, inextricably connected to
the economic motivation is a deep and pervasive racism that permiates all of rural
and much of urban Florida. Present too is a hypocritical selfishness that masks
itself in a philosophy of radical individualism and surfaces as an extreme
hostility to programs, especially federal programs, intended to aid the needy,
the helpless and the powerless, particularly when these are Black, Chicano, or
Puerto Rican. At the same time, every effort is made to obtain federal largess
which benefits the dominant economic, political and social groups.
The abuse heaped upon NBC was only one minor manifestation of the fore-
going characteristics. To anyone familiar with migrants, the NBC show under-
stated rather than overstated their problems. I have seen places such as Jerome
that are worse than any shown on the show. The feeling of oppressiveness that
occurs cannot be shown on TV. It can only be lived. The conclusion of that show
that all Americans are responsible is wrong, particular men and institutions are
at fault, they should not be allowed to hide in the crowd.
A specially good example of institutional hostility to farmworkers was the
State response to their pleas in the spring of this year that they be accorded
the unemployment benefits provided in the Disaster Relief Act of 19G9.
A complete account of this shameful episode is contained in my report to the
Board of Directors of the Migrant Services Foundation, Inc., a copy of which is
attached as an appendix to these remarks. Perhaps the best short summary of
what happened is contained in a headline from the Fort Myers (Fla.) News-
Press of April 10, 1970, which read, "Disaster Relief : Farmers Get It, Migrants
Want It." Unfortunately, or more properly I should say tragically, they did not
get. The motives that lead growers and State ofiicials to combine to prevent the
migrants from receiving assistance specifically provided by the Congress for
5495
if migrants are paid '^^^^^^ /^^//^X ^llaiTw^^ wlw, in other con-
rathe.- than work %"^<^^>^^f^^^JJSS ^^Zotbj ,T'-Lrv-em or else they
l'„'S\™'.?'a^iialftVhra™r.ralLti^,Stl^^^^^
April 10, 19by— ijtu. ^piii J.U, ^ iqf.q_Tnin<- meeting in Tallaliassee of fed-
ix4re"?a«£.:;j|fj£^i^^^^
all existing migrant mogiamsnsta^ to Governor and fe<le™i
^^.^e^^rUrsegC^nt^f^o^^^^^^^^^^^^
IheJomSssionTs authorized to enter into "agreements for the establishment
of ooon?rTti?e arrangements'' with other states. The Governor is aiithorized to
onfarfrftnaT'lSerstS migrant labor compact" in substantially the form set
?mth iS the statute The ^oSJact would set up an interstate migrant commis-
?on which would only have the power to do research, suggest proposals and co-
ooe^nT^with other agencies. In essence, the commission would be powerless and
Xuld brdependent for financing upon state appropriations to be requested by
it This toothless tiger is only one illusion contained m the bill.
The other is an advisory committee composed of representatives of five state
a.^encie'T four enumerated grower organizations and, presumab y for balance
^representa ive of the Florida state federated labor council. This latter choice
fsimiaue in that if there is one place the farmworkers are not represented it is
the Sor Council There are also positions open for not less than two nor more
hL four othei- persons selected and appointed by the commission. There is not
the slightest guarantee that the farmworkers will be directly or even indirectly
represented b^^^ close to them. The legislative commission was created
wK\it any consultation with farmworker organizations or heir aUeai
thouo-h these are well known to the legislature. Three of the grower organiza
tions were added at the demand of a grower ,lobbyi^st. It can be expected tha
the additional representatives will be "safe" people not likely to cause con
troversv by strong and persistent advocacy of farmworkers rights.
Even if good people are added to the committee, the whole focus of the bill is
outward toward an amorphous alliance of states to occ^r at some unknown and
inevitably far distant date when a dozen or more state legislatures can get
around to ratifying the pact. It completely avoids he need « jurn and look
at the problems within Florida and to devise solutions for them. In sum, the
bill is a cruel and preposterous hoax. „„/i i^„5cio
Having dealt with the institutional biases of our state executive and legisla-
tive branches, I would like now to turn to the operation of existing programs
at the local level. Naturally, among these there are substantial variations m
how thev perform, depending in part upon the agency concerned and geographic
location' Nonetheless, a few generalizations can be made. From reports given to
me as well as personal experiences, I can say that state and local agencies are:
5496
(1) Not run for tlie convenience of those they serve, the farmworkers,
but for the convenience of the staffs.
(2) The local offices are dominated by grower interests and use the bene-
fits they confer to require the farmworkers to confoi-m to those interests.
(3) There is little, if any, outreach, so that often those most in need of
help do not get it. This can happen either because the farmworkers have not
been informed of the services offered or the services are disi>sensed at times
or places which tlie farmworkers cannot reach.
(4) The agen: y staffs often have negative attitudes toward their clients,
in many cases tin se attitudes are basically racist. The attitudes all too often
manifest themsehes in indifference, impoliteness, harshness and sometimes
cruelty.
(5) Agency personnel instead of earnestly trying to help prove eligibility,
do everything possible to prevent the clients from establishing their rights
to aid.
Innumerable cases can be recounted in support of the foregoing. A few will
suffice. In many counties, welfare and food distribution offices are located in
places that the poor caimot reach by any means other than private automobile.
I have been told that in Polk County the commodity distribution office is located
at an out of the way spot, and the cost of reaching the place amounts to as
much as one-tenth of some welfare clients checks.
When a representative of the Florida Christian Migrant Ministry approached
the director of distribution in this county about opening several distribution
points, he was told that the county commission had already turned down the
suggestion as too expensive. One county commissioner was quoted in the press
as saying "the next thing the poor will want is for us to go to their homes and
cook the food for them."
When the Director w^as queried about making the hours more convenient to
farmworkers, the office was open from 8:30 to 3:30, Monday thru Friday, he
asked why he and his staff should be inconvenienced for the farmworkers con-
venience? To the reply that the reason was that they serve the poor, he said that
he had a responsibility to his employees.
This same man added that if the poor really want the food they would get to
the distribution center when it was open. Many people applying for food at this
center have been turned down three and foxir times because the county employees
make no attempt to help them comply with the regulations. One requirement is
that the farmworker show his last pay check or a letter from an employer
stating his earnings. This is often impossible for people who are paid cash and
often work for many employers. Variations of this theme are heard from sources
throughout the state. Attempts to get mobile food distribution units for rural
areas have generally been rebuffed.
In the same county, I spoke of before, the welfare office is located at an old
airport which is hard to reach. AFDC mothers who must go to see their social
workers must either pay to get there or rely on others. As a result, they often
come late or miss their appointments altogether.
In Polk County there hasn't been a migrant health project for two years. The
local health department was unwilling to keep separate records for migrants
and therefore was unable to comply with federal regulations. As a result it
pulled out of the program. The health department's convenience, in this case,
was clearly more important to the county health officer than the health of farm-
workers. No doubt, he would feel very much put upon if he were told his job
depended on getting the project back.
Collier County's Food Stamp Program has proof of income rules similar to
those previously enumerated. Many farmworkers can't comply with them. In
addition, the food stamp personnel will check eligibility by asking employers
what they expect the applicant to earn the following month. Because of the
pervasive hostility of growers to the program, they will often make high projec-
tions, thus leaving the individual and his family ineligible. When a local Black
and a Chicauo leader went to the county commission to protest this practice,
they were told they could not do so because they had participated in a peaceful
demonstration.
The Director of the American Friends Service Committee Migrant Project
which operates a housing program has informed me that he has had to abandon
trying to qualify farmworkers for section 235 housing loans because of the use
of such middle class eligibility requirements as holding a job for two years and
providing W-2 forms. Farmworker employment practices, of course, making thig..
5497
impossible. The AFSC has now switched to the Farmers Home Administration,
but this limits the number of houses that can be built.
Ironically, my exi>erience in the housing field is just the opposite of that of
AFSG. In 1968, when I was Executive Director of Florida Rural Legal Services,
our Belle Glade office began work on a housing i>roject for Pahokee, a nearby
town. After many months of planning, an application for a large project was
filed. It was turned down by Farmers Home Administration with the assertion
that the authorizing legislation did not allow them to make this size loan. It
was our opinion, as well as that of the coiuisel of a consulting firm we were
iTsing, that this interpretation was wrong. We were joined in oiu* opinion by
•Congressman Paul Rogers, who protested, but to no avail. We finally had to
abandon Farmers Home and begin again with FHA. I am informed that after
two and a half years of effort the first models will shortly be constructed.
That racism prevails cannot be denied. In Lee County it has been necessary
to file suit to integrate the County nursing homes. In that same County, a Doctor
•quit the welfare program after a suit was brought to require him, among other
things, to integrate his waiting room.
Innumerable instances have been recounted of hospitals which have received
Tlill-Burton funds refusing to treat indigents. In Homestead, I have attended
meetings where the feeling of hatred expres.sed by Blacks and Chicanos against
the local James Archer Smith hospital was so intense it was almost unbearable.
Their complaints involved both failure to care for the poor and racism. They
feel so strongly that they do not want a federally funded migrant health project
that will shortly oi^en up to even attempt to get services from the hospital. This,
despite the fact that the next closest hospital is 15 miles away by way of a
heavily trafficked road.
Other witnesses have discussed the absence of basic legal protections for farm-
workers and the reports of this committee have collected valuable data on this
ix)int. I will just point out that it is not only lack of laws that create difficulties^
but also the impotence of endorcement agencies. For instance, the health depart-
ment which is charged with inspecting migrant camps in Florida does not have
lawyers to file suit against violators. It must rely upon county prosecutors who
look upon this type of activity as a nuisance taking away from their crime
duties. In those places where the prosecutor has a private practice, there may
actually be conflicts of interests.
Even if the Health Department had enforcement powers, its regulations are a
fraud, being hardly worth the effort to enforce. The same i ; true of the federal
regulations on migrant housing.
I am informed that in Palm Beach County the Health Department shys away
from environmental health problems as opijosed to clinical ones because of the
fear of possible political repercussions. This fear of political retaliation is ever
present and effects the activities and operations of even the most dedicated pro-
gram and workers.
It is in this context that I come to my next point which is that there is an
interchange between intransient institutions and biased people, back again be-
tween biased people and intransigent institutions that paralyzes efforts to obtain
needed change. We are constantly told the farmworkers are content with their
lives, won't work and won't help themselves. Yet. when there is a chance, that
farmworkers will engaged in the processes that lead to change, intense efforts
are made to frustrate them.
I have seen a report, which I believe to be valid, which told of one large farmer
providing buses for his workers to attend a picnic on election day. This was to
prevent the workers from exercising their franchise. A black leader in Immo-
kalee told me that the same type of thing occurred on the day a referendum w^as
lield on the question of incorporating the town. Naturally, the White farmers and
businessmen who owned property did not want to be part of a city in which the
majority of the voting population was Black and Chicano.
The power of agribusiness to thwart the democratic processes in order to pre-
vent farmworkers from obtaining benefits that other working people take for
irranted is notorious. In 1969, agribusiness was taken by .surprise and a bill
eliminating the farmworker workmen's compensation exemption was voted out
of committee in both houses of our state legislature. Despite a last minute lobby-
ing effort, the bill passed the Senate by two votes.
Unfortunately, it did not get on the special order calendar in the House and
time ran out. This year the lobbyists were ready and the Friends of Farm-
workers in the legi.slature could not even get a watered-down version of the
T)ill out of committee.
5498
The tragic effects of grower opposition to this most elementary form of
social legislation is set forth in an article that appeared in the July 16, 1970,
issue of the Palm Beach Post. The article quotes a vocational counselor for
the Florida Council for the Blind, as saying that he sees as many cases of
blindness among glades agricultural workers as there are in the rest of Palm
Beach County, although the agricultural population makes up less than 10%
of the county population. He attributes the high incidence of eye disease
to the swirling muck dust encountered by the workers. First, it would provide
more immediate medical care to the workers who are injured by the dust. Sec-
ond, many of our industrial safety practices have resulted from the pres-
sure of insurance companies on business to get it to upgrade standards.
We could probably expect the same to happen in agriculture were workmens
compensation to be universally extended to the workers.
Returning to the local scene, a classic example of community sabotage of a
needed federal project recently occurred in Immokalee. A doctor from the
University of INIiami's School of Medicine became interested in setting up a
major clinic there under the Migrant Health Act. With the support of the
U.S. Public Health Service he began to discuss the proposed project with all
segments of the community, not only in Immokalee, but also In the county
seat at Naples. He touched all the bases, and lined up support from growers,
business people, the Health Department, the County Commissioner for the area
and, so he thought, the county Medical Society. All this in addition to the en-
thusiastic support of the intended consumers. However, when a public meet-
ing was held to discuss the project, he was shot down by the local doctors
by the use of a clever ploy. The doctors told the people that what they needed
was not a clinic but a hospital. Naturally, everyone became excited over the
idea and the Migrant Health Act clinic was forgotten.
A board was formed under the chairmanship of the one private physician in
Immokalee to begin raising money. This physician, along with the local
druggist had been prime opponents of the clinic. The physician had even gone
so far as to threaten to quit practice if the clinic came in. The upshot of this
is that little or nothing has been done to further the hospital in the year that
has elapsed and the clinic will be located in the more hospitable climate
of Dade County.
From public reports and talks with various people familiar with what oc-
curred, I have been able to come to the following conclusions.
(1) Attitudes toward the project were deeply affected by prevailing hostility
toward federal projects. Although interestingly enough, this did not extend to
shyness about app'ying for Hill-Burton funds. This generalized anti-federal
hostility made otherwise hard-headed people receptive to a pie in the sky hos-
pital plan despite the fact that the community's small size militated against
such a hospital being successful. It also blinded people to the possibility that
the clinic could be used as a base upon which to build plans for a future
hospital as has been proposed for the south end of Dade County.
(2) The local physician and druggist were afraid of competition from the
clinic and put their own economic well-being ahead of that of the people.
(3) The County Medical Society was afraid that the clinic would raise the
farmworkers level of expectations concerning medical care to too high a level.
(4) The dominant community feared extensive consumer participation on
the governing board of the clinic. Both because such participation, if successful,
will do violence to prevailing racial attitudes and because any process that
might lead to greater ability upon the part of the non-Anglo population to
govern itself, is viewed as threatening.
(5) The lack of sophistication and powerlessness of the workers made them
incapable of resisting the tactic. Many of them were fooled into thinking it
was for real.
(6) The inability of the federal government to directly serve needy, but
politically impotent consumers, without working tlirough hostile local forces
was a prime contributor to the debacle. Once again the people were mangled.
In contrast to Immokalee. Dade County was aWe to muster tremendous rom-
munity support for the project. The Medical School, the County Medical Society.
the Health Planning Council, the Urban Coalition and somewhat reluctantly and
even truculantly, the local health department. The difference of cour.=!e. is that
Dade County is overwhelmingly urban and it is therefore possible to circiimvent
potential opposition from rural elements. This distinction between urban Dade-
5499
and rural Collier County while fortunate for the farmworkers in Dade is cause
for the deepest melancholy in the remainder of the rural poor.
Nevertheless, the Dade County project does provide a laboratoi-y in which
we can observe a project that has on its board a majority of consumers. Hope-
fully, the clinic will not only provide first rate medical service but will also act
as a training ground for community leaders. It is interesting to note that the
principal source of discontent with consumer control in Dade County appeared
to be the local Health Department and the regional federal bureaucracy in
Atlanta. Perhaps with experience they will come to also cherish the values
attendant upon consumer control.
I started these remarks by asserting that it is the farmworkers and not the
protesting agribusiness men who are the victims of bias. The examples I have
recited are merely a few among legions that support that statement. When the
growers come in and lobby for workmen's compensation, unemployment insurance,
grower responsibility for social security, more stringent housing codes, better
health services a tenfold increase in housing starts with better terms ; when
they conduct voter registration drives, finance leadership clinics, provide better
wages and financial incentives and really believe that the word "nigger" is bad,
they will have established some credibility with the farmworkers and their
friends. In short, when the growers believe in the American dream for the other
guy — then their pleas will not have the hollow ring of hypocri.sy.
Thank you. Chairman Mondale and the other distinguished Senators on the
Committee for giving me this opportunity to express my views.
Senator Mondale. We will now stand in recess and start with the
witness Philip Moore at 2 o'clock.
("V^Hiereupon, at 12 :30 p.m. the subcommittee recessed, to reconvene
at 2 p.m. the same day.)
AFTEKNOOX SESSION
(The subcommittee reconvened at 2 p.m., Senator Walter F.
Mondale, chairman of the subcommittee, presidina;.)
Senator Mondale. Mr. Philip Moore, executive director of the Proj-
ect on Corporate Eesponsibility.
STATEMENT OF PHILIP MOOEE, STAFF COUHSEL, PROJECT ON
CORPOKATE RESPONSIBILITY, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. MooRE. Mr. Chairman, my name is Philip W. Moore. I am staff
counsel to the Project on Corporate Responsibility, a newly formed
organization to seek out and explore the ways in which large private
corporations can be made more responsive to public needs.
Corporate leaders today make decisions that fundamentally affect
the day-to-day lives of citizens. Yet, too often, corporate decision-
makers remain isolated from the voice of the public and free from
public outrage. We felt this was true with General Motors in our first
campaign to make General Motors responsible, a public interest proxy
fight which the Project on Corporate Eesponsibility conducted.
We have just begun an investigation of the agribusiness industry
which shows a similar result — a callous disregard for the welfare not
only of workers but also of the consumer. In addition to planning the
second round of Campaign GM, the project will pursue corporate in-
volvement in the agribusiness industry.
Ten years ago CBS showed a remarkable documentary, "Harvest
of Shame," which depicted the tragic and shameful human conditions
to which migrant workers are subject in their day-to-day lives. Last
Thursday night, NBC showed what appeared to be a virtual repeat of
the CBS film — nothing had changed.
5500
The migrant still lives in daily fear for his survival. He has utterly
no hope for the future, either for liimself or his family. He is locked
into a system in which all of the essential elements of life support —
income, housing, food, health — are controlled by a corporate system of
farming on the one hand and a total lack of public support programs
on the other.
And here we are today — testifying— giving still more evidence of the
obvious. We have heard testimony of inadequate medical and health
programs for the migrant. We have heard testimony of the failure of
local agencies to fill the needs of income and health for these workers.
And we have all heard of inadequate Federal programs which not only
fail the migrant, but ironically give tremendous support to the corpo-
rate farmer who is very much a cause of the migrant's needs.
Tragically, what is most important about this testimony and the
NBC film is not the substance of what was said — those facts have been
known for years — but rather that we've had these hearings and another
documentary at all. One viewing of "Harvest of Shame" should have
been sufficient to create a firm i-esolve to end then the human exploita-
tion of migrant workers.
Instead, it seems, the opposite is true. The leaders of these corpora-
tions apparently saw the CBS documentary in 1960 as depicting an
opportunity for explosive profit, rather than as an appalling story of
human tragedy. Ten years ago, Coca-Cola bought out Minute Maid
orange juice and plunged itself into the Florida citrus industry and
the system of migrant labor which that industry supports.
Ten years ago, the Atlantic Coastline Railroad incorporated Alico
Land Development Co. in Florida to develop some 203,000 acres of
Florida land as a first step toward creating a new agribusiness empire.
In the last 10 years corporate farming has skyrocketed. Since 1960,
close to 7,000 corporations have come into farming and related activi-
ties, many of them as subsidiaries of large conglomerate corporations.
Tenneco in California through the Kern County Land Corp. ; Gulf &
Western in Florida through the South Puerto Sugar Co. ; United Fruit
in Texas (Pan American Freeze) ; Coca-Cola in Florida ; Royal Crown
Cola in Texas (Texsun) ; Union Carbide in Texas; and the railroads —
Penn-Central in Florida, Northwest Industries in the Midwest, Sea-
board and Atlantic Coastline Railroads in Florida, these and many
more corporations have moved into agribusiness.
Agribusiness is complicated enough, involving as it does the use of
human resources to convert land resources into profit. It is made still
more complicated by corporate machinations, tax considerations, and
Federal farm programs, which defy imagination in the way that they
benefit corporations — not people.
But one fact must be clear: Corporations come into farming and
land use because they make money, it is a good investment. It is the
corporations who get the lion's share of the $120 billion that consum-
ers spent last year on food and beverages. But for whatever reason,
corporations are there, and the decisions made by these corporations
at least perpetuate a condition of human misery because of acquies-
cence and at worst create this misery by active contribution to the
system of migratory labor.
5501
It is those corporations and their leaders who derive benefit from
this system either as investors or corporate managers that must ulti-
mately bear the responsibility of this system. ^ J 4.1^
In pointing to the large conglomerate, I do not mean to exclude tne
large local corporations that are primarily into agriculture. These
local corporations participate just as fundamentally in the exploita-
tion of the farmworker— the Collier Corp., Benn Hill (jrrittin, A. f.
Duda & Sons, Griffin & Brand, the Bentson family all own and farm,
and process the produce from thousands of acres of land m t lorida
No one corporation can be singled out as particularly bad, for they
have all failed in the last 10 years to take any meaningful step to
eliminate the conditions which their corporate decisions impose daily
on the lives of migrant workers. (U.S. Sugar has enibarked on a hous-
ino- proo-ram. Our information is not sufficient as to its effects.)
But because all have failed to take responsible measures does not
excuse each one of them from accountability. And indeed, the large
conglomerate farmer has perhaps a special responsibility, having
created a sophisticated chain of corporate structure which isolates the
corporate decisionmakers from public pressures and hiunan misery.
Who in this country knows that Minute Maid orange juice is a
Coca-Cola product? Or who can know that Alico is controlled ulti-
mately by a Baltimore bank? It is precisely this problem of corporate
insulaJtioii through holding company structure or through internal
divisions that makes information gathering extremely difficult and
ultimate remedies almost impossible.
Coca-Cola, especially, seems pained that they have been singled out
on the NBC show. They point to other companies that are also doing
bad things, and they say they have plans for new programs. But just
because other corporations are doing bad things doesn't excuse Coke.
More importantly. Coke is big, it is powerful, and it is visible.
Coke's policies can set the standard for other corporations and as
such Coke has perhaps a special responsibility. If Coke doesn't want to
be singled out, it should not only clean its own house, but also assert
its leadership position on its corporate colleagues to reform their
migratory labor policies.
The Coca-Cola Co. is one of the biggest Florida citrus growers and
distributors. It owns or controls under long-term lease more than
30,000 acres of planted citrus groves in Florida. In addition, it owns
three Florida processing plants with a capacity of T,100 gallons of
citrus concentrate per hour. Through its food division, Coca-Cola
handles all of the distribution of its Minute Maid products.
While the company has numerous subsidiaries and conducts business
in 25 countries, it is run primarily through internal divisions. In
1960, Minute Maid was merged into Coca-Cola and for 7 years was
run as a separte division. In 1967, Coke formed a food division, of
wliich Minute Maid is a subdivision. The food division is based m
Houston, Tex.
Coke's director of farmworker personnel, William Kelly, was until
very recently stationed in Houston where Coke has no farmworking
requirements, far away from the day-to-day misery of the Florida
workers.
5502
One of Coke's Minute Maid groves is at the corner of Route 630 A
and Hobson Road in Frostproof, Fla. The grove is serviced by migra-
tory worker quarters called Maxey Quarters, which is owned and
operated by Coca-Cola. These quarters, which were filmed in the NBC
documentary, house between 200-300 people. They have no indoor
water or plumbing ; there is no hot water, the conditions of the houses
are unquestionably bad.
But what is worse, even, than the housing conditions, is tlie social
control that is maintained over the life style of the migrants and all
of the basic life support systems of the migrants.
In order to live in these houses, a family must work for Coke. If
somebody is sick, the foreman, not a doctor, can decide whether the
person can stay home. If the foreman decides that a worker is not sick,
then he must either work or risk eviction from his housing. With evic-
tion comes total loss of income, housing, medical support, and food.
Coke maintains no day care facilities; children must either go to the
fields or hang around the quarters. The families need the children to
help pack the oranges — the cycle of destitution continues unend-
ing. If one part of the cycle breaks down, the worker's whole life breaks
down.
We have not been able to determine, because there are no break-
downs, how much of Coke's income comes from the food division and
how much in turn comes from. Minute Maid operations. But they do
make monev. The president of Coca-Cola is J. Paul Austin. His salarv
is $150,000"; his retirement benefits are $48,000 and he owns .55,000
shares of Coke, which pays him annually an additional $70,200.
The chairman of the board of directors is Lee Talley. His annual
salary is $61,000; his retirement benefits are $48,000 and he owns
45,000 shares of Coke stock which pays $64,800 a year. Mr. William A.
Coolidge is a former director of Minute Maid and is now a director of
Coca-Cola holding 97,000 shares of Coca-Cola stock which pays
$139,000 a year. Together the directors and officials of Coke own more
than a million shares.
None of these men, nor any of Coke's chief employees, suffers the
slightest bit of income, job, or life support insecurity. Their needs,
all of them, are well taken care of for the rest of their lives and several
generations to come. Yet, a portion of the income that these men
receive from their work and stock ownership comes from the labor
and scandalous insecurity of migi'ant workers in Florida.
It is bad enough that they should be able to make so much money
when workers in their own company make so little. But it is even worse
that the working conditions, the wages, the system of racism and
despair which characterize the life of the migrant worker are a product
of, and perpetrated by, decisions made by these very same men. And
thev bear a major responsibility for curing the defects of their
decisions.
Shortly after this testimony was announced, I received a call from
Mr. Joseph Califano, former aide to President Johnson and now an
attorney with Arnold & Porter, who represent Coca-Cola. He asked to
talk to me about the new programs that Coke was starting. We met ,
and he described new programs which have been in the planning
stages, he said, for nearly 2 years.
5503
Many of the programs sound good. They cover housing, education,
wage scales, working conditions and job security. They seem to recog-
nize needs for upward mobility and commmiity participation. And
they appear to come from a commitment of Coca-Cola to do something
about the problems of migrant workers in Florida.
I understand that Coca-Cola executives will be testifying later in
these hearings. I assume that the specifics of the programs will be
si.ielled out then, and I postpone additional comment until after we
have had a chance to review the specific programs.
But regardles of the benefit of the program, it is appalling that it
took 10 years to embark on any program at all. Ten years have been
lost on an opportunity for a responsible corporation to begin to attack
a fundamental prol^lem encompassing an entire life system. Corpora-
tions should not be permitted such 10-year luxuries.
I would like to ask Mr. Austin or Mr. Talley how long it took Coke
to introduce a new product like Sprite— was that 10 years? Or what
about new methods— a new can— does it take 10 years to develop a new
can« I doubt it. ^YhJ is it that when it comes to profit, corporations
work fast, but when it comes to human conditions, corporations at
best plod along. , ^ ^ ^ ^ / a v \
Another corporation, the Alico Land & Development Co. (Alico)
is a relatively small farming operation in Florida. Indeed, when com-
-pared to other giants like U.S. Sugar (90,000 acres), Collier Corp.
(400,000 acres), and Coca-Cola with 30,000 acres of planted citrus
groves Alico's farming operations are miniscule. But Alico was born
of a large corporate conglomeration, gi^owing out of railroad opera-
tions, most of which I have put in this chart, which to me represents
a new form of corporate "pop-art," if you are willing to look at it
and see the various lines and part of the railroad holding structure.
Perhaps later we can refer to the chart specifically. It represents a com-
mitment of these corporations and their leaders to utilize old rail-
road resources for long term agricultural and land holdings. It repre-
sents a commitment to invest in a system of agriculture, on an in-
creasingly large scale, which participates in the despair of migrant
workers. And it provides an extremely good example of how corporate
structure tends to isolate the actual decisionmakers from the opera-
tion of the farm. T 1 l i. 1
Alico does its business in citrus, cattle, forestry, and land rental.
It owns and controls some 203,000 acres of Florida land. 6,875 are m
citrus, 4,025 of these acres being planted in citrus groves. In 1969,
54.5 percent of its income came from citrus groves. Its citrus groves
are located in Polk Coimty (5,265) and Collier County (1,200).
We have been imable to determine how many migrant workers har-
vest these citrus groves, or anv of their other agricultural products.
Most harvesting is done through a profit-sharing arrangement with
Ben Hill Griffin, Inc., and we have not been able to determine whether
the worker is hired by Alico directlv or by Ben Hill Griffin, Inc. If
the usual practice apuplies, Ben Hill Griffin. Inc., the processor, does
the hiring of migratory workers. Ben Hill Griffin, Jr., is a director
of Alico.
In each of the past 3 vears, Alico's annual report mentions the
unfavorable impact of bad weather on its crops. But in each year
Alico's net return on its citrus increases. In the years between 1967
5504
and 1968, higher income resulted from higher prices paid by the con-
summer. In 1969, the income in net return from citrus ($57,000 — 11
percent over 1968) equals the amount saved in lower harvesting pay-
roll minus the amount lost in gross sales.
While this may be pure coincidence, the company's increase in
citrus net returns appears to come at the expense of the consumer in
higher prices and the worker in less work. Alico appears to be able
to modify its harvesting cost and the worker thus suffers, not only
from corporate disregard but also from the capricious nature of
the agricultural industry.
The company, despite the changing weather conditions, keeps in-
creasing its profits, Alico has retained all of its earnings and has
never declared a dividend to its stockholders.
Alico was incorporated in 1960 as a subsidiary of the Atlantic Land
& Improvement Co., which was then a subsidiary of the Atlantic Coast-
line Railroad Co. It was formed to take over and develop some 203,000
acres of Florida land originally held by the railroad, but then owned
by Atlantic Land & Imj^rovement Co.
Alico was since spun off, and is now a subsidiary of the Atlantic
Coastline Co., a holding company which owns 35.4 percent of the
Alico stock. Fifty-two percent of the stock in Atlantic Coastline Co. is
owned by the Mercantile Safe Deposit & Trust Co.. a Baltimore bank.
The Interstate Commerce Commission has held that the Atlantic
Coastline Co. is controlled by Mercantile Bank. Recently, the Mercan-
tile Bank has announced that it is merging with two other Maryland
banks to form still another holding company called Mercantile Bank-
shares, Inc. The Mercantile Bank currently owns directly 5 percent of
the Alico stock directly so that Mercantile's total stock control of Alico
is slightly more than 40 percent.
The Mercantile, Atlantic, and Alico holding company line was orig-
inally intended to be part of a larger holding company structure
growing out of a - erger between the Atlantic Coastline Railroad Co.
and the Seaboard Coastline Railroad. Seaboard Coastline Railroad is
currently a 100-percent owned subsidiary of the Seaboard Coastline
Industries, the railroad holding company.
The Atlantic Coastline Co. was to have merged into Seaboard Coast-
line Industry, forming one holding company structure. But for tax
considerations, the merger never went through. As it now stands, At-
lantic Coastline owns 15 percent of Seaboard Industries, which pro-
vides almost all of Atlantic's income. The Mercantile Bank owns or
controls directly 2 percent of the Seaboard stock.
The complicated corporate structure and variations in stock owner-
ship should not serve to protect the men who benefit from this struc-
ture and ultimately make the decisions that affect the use of the land
and the conditions of the worker. The fact that there are several corpo-
rate tiers between the Alico farming oj^erations and the corporate
decisionmakers does not isolate the decisionmakers from the impact
of their corporate decisions.
The men that run Alico ultimately bear the responsibility for Alico's
participation in migrant working conditions, and they are part of this
larger corporate structure. Three men especially seem close to the oper-
-ations.
5505
William E. McGiiirk, Jr., is chairman of the board of the Mercantile
Safe Deposit & Trust Co., in Baltimore. He is a director and chairman
of the executive committee and vice president of the Atlantic Coast-
line Co. He is a director and member of the executive committee of
Alico. He is a director, and chairman of Seaboard Coastline Indus-
tries and Seaboard Coastline Eailroad.
In addition to stock options and pension plans lie receives compen-
sation in the following amounts and sources: Seaboard Coastline
Railroad, $62,000; Atlantic Coastline, $1,400; Seaboard Coastline In-
dustries, $600; Mercantile Bank, $79,999; or a total of $144,000 in
direct remuneration from these four companies. He receives no com-
pensation directly from Alico. On retirement, he will receive at least
$70,000 a year from these companies.
William T. Rice is chairman and president of Atlantic Coastline
Co. He is a director and chairman of Alico, and he is chairman and
chief executive officer of Seaboard Industries and the Seaboard Rail-
road. He receives $149,205 in direct compensation from these compa-
nies, in addition to stock options and dividends, $144,000 of which
comes from Seaboard Railroad. On the Atlantic and Seaboard reports
he lists his address as Richmond Va. On the Alico report he lists his
address as Jackonville, Fla., Alico being a Florida corporation.
Prime F. Osborn is a director and president of Seaboard Coastline
Railroad & Industries. He is a director of Atlantic, and he is a director,
member of the executive committee, and vice president of Alico. He
receives as direct remuneration from these companies a total of $90,-
085 — $87,000 of which comes from Seaboard Railroad.
In addition to the interlocks of these three men. Mercantile is well-
endowed with the usual ironies of director interlocks. In view of the
medical problems which daily confront migrant workers, the partici-
pation of Johns Hopkins Hospital in Mercantile is particularly ironic.
Johns Hopkins Hospital owns 3,000 shares of Mercantile. Mr. J. C.
Cooper, Jr., who is chairman of the board of Johns Hopkins Hospital,
is a director of Seaboard and Atlantic as well as Mercantile, and owns
974 shares of Mercantile. McGuirk himself is vice chairman of the
hospital, and Russell Nelson is president of the hospital and on the
Mercantile board. Milton Eisenhower, the former president of Johns
Hopkins University, is on the Mercantile board.
One would hope that these men when confronted with the testimony
at these hearings will exercise their responsibilities as investors and
directors to solve the medical and health problems of the migrant.
They especially should be concerned — being as they are, men of medi-
cine and men of finance.
Messrs. McGuirk, Rice, and Osborn are primarily responsible for the
operations of Alico. They are well plugged into the local agricultural
operations — having several Florida bankers on their board. Ben Hill
Griffin, an important processor — crucial to any farming operation — is
on Alico's board. And they have hired a local man as president of
Alico, whom they pay less than $30,000 for his efforts. While these peo-
ple participate in day-to-day operational decisions, it is Rice, Osborn,
and McGuirk who make the ultimate policy decisions.
And they enjoy fantastic corporate benefits from their railroad hold-
ing company structure — benefits and security which stand in sharp
contrast to the lives of the migrant workers who are affected by their
5506
decisions. McGuirk's salary alone (not to mention liis income from
private investments) is enough to support 165 migrant Avorkers at the
going annual average income of $891.
Indeed, McGuirk or Rice could have financed all of the Federal wel-
fare payments made in Hendry County, Fla., in fiscal 1969, and still
had more than $40,000 a year left over for their personal use. And the
fringe benefits : Thosp men have virtually no worries about health care,
life insurance, and other traditional forms of life support. If these
men stopped working tomorrow, they would have large annual in-
comes; they would still have medical care; they would still have at
least one house; their children would still have their education and
opportunities for the future.
Not so for the migrant worker. If he stops working, if he gets sick,
if he is injured, he loses everything, not gradually, but right away.
Moreover, the fact that these men derive virtually no income directly
from the operations of Alico does not free them from their responsi-
bilities to develop an enlightened agricultural business. Indeed, in some
ways it is more offensive ; for they have created a company for which
they have no economic need. They can afford the luxury of retaining
earnings for future land acquisitions and new mergers such as the re-
cent formation of the Alico Helicopter Co., to get into the chemical
spray business. What is almost a hobby with these corporate leaders is
a day-to-day life struggle with the migrant worker.
I have talked today only of Coke and Alico. There are, of course,,
other corporations and corporate decisionmakers who malce lots of
money and are as responsible for this suffering as Coke and Alico. But
Coke and Alico seem particularly appropriate models for large cor-
porate farming on the one hand and corporate insulation on the other.
Now I could go on and on about corporate conglomerates. Many have,
but I don't think it is necessarj^ Their stories are so similar. Some say
it is extremely complicated stuff — agribusiness — especially trying to
ferret through corporate structures to get to the heart of economic
realities. But in fact, it's very simple; some corporations are making
large investments into a farming industry which wrecks havoc on the
day-to-day lives of its workers.
And I sometimes get the feeling that corporate leaders create the
complexities of subsidiaries, of divisions, and large economics and then
point to those very complexities which they have created in order to
hide simple realities.
Here the reality is simj^le. It's a reality of despair. And it is a
reality that is daily practiced by the agricultural industry. And those
people who run these corporations at least have a responsibility to
alleviate the problem, and may in fact be responsible for creating
the problem.
And the Government, what can you do? Of course you can pass
legislation covering minimum wages, health and welfare, housing,
collective bargaining and the like. I am sure you have many welfare
alternatives. And I think you should consider them all.
But I think we can't let the corporations off so easy, '^^'^ly can't the
grower cooperatives and conglomerates join in and create a common
fund to maintain an annual wage for the migrant worker pool ? Why
can't a similar fund for health, life, and medical insurance be created
by these corporations ?
5507
Indeed, why does the taxpayer have to participate in still another
farm program which will benefit ultimately the private corporations ^
And if the cost of these programs, privately funded, privately created,
must be borne by the consumer, then so be it. According to NHL, a
doubling of wages would add only 1 to 2 cents to consumer costs. But
I think;] udging from the Alico figures, that a good portion ol this
cost can be borne by the real owners and investors.
As I sat here listening to the testimony, I became more and more
offended : Why do these corporate leaders get away with this ]unk
so often? Why are corporations permitted to ignore for so long the
human suffering they cause? Why is it that corporations can PoUute
and rape our land and human resources, and when they are finally dis-
covered, come in and apologize ? _ TV 1,
We expect more from human beings in their day-to-day lives ; why
don't we demand at least the same standard from our corporations m
the day-to-day conduct of their business ? ^
I just know that Austin and other Coke officials are gmg to come
breezing into these hearings and they are going to say : "Boys, we re
sorry We're sorry for raping these people. We're sorry that we don t
pay them enough to live a month, much less a year. We're sorry that
migrant workers die at the age of 49. We're sorry about all these things
we do every day. But now we're going to be better. We re going to
make new houses and we're going to raise wages, and give the worker
some hope. So stay off our backs and give us another chance. Ihat is
what the Coke people are going to say.
Well, I don't think that's enough. We have lost a whole generation
just in the last 10 years because of corporate ignorance. We may have
lost a whole world because of corporate rape of the environment.
We have got to stop this. We have got to stop corporations from
getting away with this kind of irresponsibility in the future. This
Congress has got to find ways in which corporations and their leaders
are accountable not simply for future activities, but for tlieir past
conduct. r>t 1 1 AT
For our part, we will be watching companies like Coke and Alico,
and as many of the others as our resources and dedication permit. We
are going to study these "plans." We will see about a boycott of Coca-
Cola, and Minute Maid, and other companies. Already, we have placed
orders to buy stock in these companies, i^nd we will go to our coowners
like Johns Hopkins and ask them what they will do about Alico.
Someday a migrant worker will look down that complicated cor-
porate maze all the way to Baltimore and see McQuirk as president
of the Mercantile Bank. Someday that migrant worker will set his
sights on that bank, and say, "If I work real hard, I too would be
chairman of the Mercantile Bank." But I hope he chooses not to be
president of the bank, but rather dedicates himself to creating truly
responsible institutions that do not isolate its leaders from the day-to-
day impact of their decisions. Then we won't need hearings and
documentaries.
But as it is now, the workers can't even look beyond the orange tree.
Only when McGuirk and his corporate colleagues are prepared or com-
pelled to give up the luxury of corporate isolation, will that day become
a reality. [Applause.]
5508
Senator Mondale. Thank you, Mr. Moore, for a most impressive
statement. I only regret that more of my colleagues were not with me
to hear it. I order your entire statement printed at this point in the
record.
(The prepared statement of Mr. Moore follows :)
Prepared Statement of Philip W. Moore, Staff Counsel,
Project on Corporate Responsibility
My name is Philip W. Moore. I am staff counsel to the Project on Corporate
Responsibility, a newly formed organization to seek out and explore the ways
in which large private corporations can be made more responsive to public
needs. Corporate leaders today make decisions that fundamentally affect the
day to day lives of citizens. Yet too often corporate decision-makers remain
isolated from the voice of the public and free from public outrage. We felt this
was true with General Motors in our first campaign to make General Motors
responsible, a public interest proxy fight which the Project on Corporate
Responsibility conducted. We have just begun an investigation of the agri-
business industry which shows a similar result — a callous disregard for the
welfare not only of workers, but also of the consumer. In addition to planning
the second round of Campaign GM, the Project on Corporate Responsibility
will pursue corporate involvement in the agri-business industry.
Ten years ago CBS showed a remarkable documentary, "Harvest of Shame."
which depicted the tragic and shameful human conditions to which migrant
workers are subject in their day to day lives. Last Thursday night NBC showed
what appeared to be a virtual repeat of the CBS film — nothing had changed.
The migrant still lives in daily fear for his survival. He has utterly no hope
for the future, either for himself or his family. He is locked into a system
in which all of the essential elements of life support — income, housing, food,
health — are controlled by a corporate system of farming on the one hand and
a total lack of public-support programs on the other.
And here we are today — testifying — giving still more evidence of the obvious.
We have heard testimony of inadequate medical and health programs for the
migrant. We have heard testimony of the failure of local agencies to fill the
needs of income and health for these workers. And we have all heard of inade-
quate federal programs which not only fail the migrant, but ironically give
tremendous support to the corporate farmer who is very much a cause of the
migrant's needs.
Tragically, what is most important about this testimony and the NBC film
is not the substance of what was said — those facts have been known for years —
but rather that we've had these hearings and another documentary at all. One
viewing of "Harvest of Shame" should have been suflBcient to create a firm
resolve to end then the human exploitation of migrant workers.
Instead, it seems, the opposite is true. The leaders of these corporations appar-
ently saw the CBS documentary in 1960 as depicting an opportunity for exploitive
profit, rather than as an appalling story of human tragedy. Ten years ago, Coca-
Cola bought out Minute Maid Orange Juice and plunged itself into the Florida
citrus industry and the .system of migrant labor which that industry supports.
Ten years ago, the Atlantic Coastline Railroad incorporated Alico Land Devel-
opment Company in Florida to develop some 203,000 acres of Florida land as a
first step toward creating a new agri-business empire.
In the last ten years corporate farming has skyrocketed. Since 1960, close to
7,000 corporations have come into farming and related activities, many of them
as subsidiaries of large conglomerate corporations. Tenneco in California through
the Kern County Land Corporation ; Gulf and Western in Florida through the
South Puerto Rico Sugar Company; United Fruit in Texas (Pan American
Freeze) ; Coca-Cola in Florida; Royal Crown Cola in Texas (Texsun) ; Union
Carbide in Texas ; and the railroads — Penn Central in Florida, Nortlnvest Indus-
tries in the midwest, Seaboard and Atlantic Coastline Railroads in Florida, these
and many more corporations have moved into agri-business.^
Why these corporations come in is not totally clear, but it must be the money.
Agri-business is complicated enough, involving as it does the use of human re-
See appendix.
5509
sources to convert land resources into profit. It is made still more complicated
by corporate machinations, tax consideration, and federal farm programs, which
defy imagination in the way that they benefit corix>rations— not people. But one
fact must be clear : Corporations come into farming and land use l)ecause they
make money, it is a good investment. It is the corporations who get the lion's
share of the $120 billion that consumers spent last year on food and beverages.
But for whatever reason, corporations are there, and the decisions made by these
corporations at least perpetrate a condition of human misery because of acquies-
cence and at worst create this misery by active contribution to the system of
migratory labor. It is those corporations and their leaders who derive benefit
from this system either as investors or corporate managers that must ultimately
bear the resiwnsibility of this system.
In i>ointing to the large conglomerate, I do not mean to exclude the large local
corporations that are primarily into agriculture. These local corporations par-
ticipate just as fundamentally in the exploitation of the farm worker — the Collier
Corporation, Benn Hill GriflBn, A. P. Duda and Sons, Griffin and Brand, the Bent-
sen Family all own and farm, and process the produce from thou.sands of acres of
land in Florida and Texas. Xo one corporation or category can be singled out as
particularly bad, for they have all failed in the last ten years to take any mean-
ingful step to eliminate the conditions which their corporate decisions impose
daily on the lives of migrant workers.^
But because all have failed to take respon.sible measures does not excuse
each one of them from accountability. And indeed, the large conglomerate farmer
has created a sophisticated chain of corporate structure which isolates the cor-
porate decision-makers from public pressures and human misery. Who in this
country knows that Minute Maid Orange Juice is a C5oca Cola product? Or
who can know that Alico is controlled ultimately by a Baltimore bank? It is
precisely this problem of corporate insulation through holding company struc-
ture or through internal divisions that make information-gathering extremely
difficult and ultimate remedies almost impossible.
Coca Cola, especially, seems pained that they have been singled out on the
NBC show. They point to other companies that are also doing bad things, and
they say they have plans for new programs. But just because other corporations
are doing bad things doesn't excuse Coke. More importantly. Coke is big, it is
powerful, and it is visible. Coke's policies can set the standard for other cor-
porations, and as such Coke has perhaps a special responsibility. If Coke doesn't
want to be singled out, it should not only clean its own house, but also assert
its leadership position on its corporate colleagues to reform their migratory labor
policies.
The Coca Cola Company is one of the biggest Florida citrus growers and dis-
tributors. It owns or controls under long term lease more than 30.000 acres of
planted citrus groves in Florida. In addition, it owns three Plorida processing
plants with a capacity of 7,100 gallons of citrus concentrate per hour. Through
its Food Division, Coca Cola handles all of the distribution of its Minute Maid
products.
While the company has numerous subsidiaries and conducts business in 25
countries, it is run primarily through internal divisions. In 1960, Minute Maid
was merged into Coca Cola and for seven years was run as a separate division. In
1967, Coke formed a Food Division, of which Minute Maid is a subdivision. The
Food Division is based in Houston, Texas. Coke's director of farmworker person-
nel— William Kelly — was until very recently stationed in Houston where Coke
has no farmworking requirements, far away from the day to day misery of
the Florida workers.
One of Coke's Minute Maid groves is at the corner of Rt. 630A and Hobson
Road in Frostproof, Florida. The grove is serviced by migratory worker quarters
called "Maxey Quarters," which is owned and operated by Coca Cola. These
quarters, which were filmed in the NBC documentary, hou.se between 200-300
people. They have no indoor water or plumbing ; there is no hot w^ater, the condi-
tions of the houses are unquestionably bad. But what is worse, even, than thft
housing conditions, is the social control that is maintained over the life style
of the migrants and all of the basic life support systems of the migrants.
In order to live in these houses, a family must work for Coke. If somebody
is sick, the foreman, not a doctor, can decide whether the person can stay home.
*U.S. Sugar has embarked on a housing program. Our Information is not sufficient as
to Its effects.
36-513 O — 71 — pt. 8B 9
5510
If the foreman decides that a worker is not sick, then he must either work
or risk eviction from his housing. With eviction comes total loss of income,
housing, medical support, and food. Coke maintains no day care facilities ;
children must either go to the fields or hang around the quarter.s. The fam-
ilies need the children to help pack the oranges — the cycle of destitution con-
tinues unending. If one part of the cycle breaks down the workers whole life
breaks.
We have not been able to determine, because there is no breakdown, how
much of Coke's income comes from the Food Division and how much in turn
comes from Minute Maid operations. But they do make money. The president
of Coca Cola is J. Paul Austin. His salary is $150,000; his retirement bene-
fits are $48,000 and he owns 55,000 shares of Coke, which pays him annually
an additional $79,200. The Chairman of the Board of Directors is Lee Talley.
His annual salary is $61,000 ; his retirement benefits are $48,000 and he owns
45,000 shares of Coke stock which pays $64,800 a year. Mr. William A. Coolidge
is a former Director of Minute Maid and is now a Director of Coca Cola hold-
ing 97,000 shares of Coca Cola stock which pays $139,000 a year. Together
the directors and officials of Coke own more than a million shares. None of
these men, nor any of Coke's chief employees suffer the slightest bit of income,
job, or life support insecurity. Their needs — all of them — are well taken care
of for the rest of their lives and several generations to come. Yet, a portion of
the income that these men receive from their work and stock ownership comes
from the labor and scandalous insecurity of migrant workers in Florida. It is
bad enough that they should be able to make so much money when workers
in their own company make so little. But it is even worse that the working
conditions, the wages, the system of racism and despair which characterize the
life of the migrant worker are a product of, and perpetrated by, decisions made
by these very same men. And they bear a major responsibility for curing the
defects of their decisions.
Shortly after this testimony was announced I received a call from Mr. Jo-
seph Califano, former aide to President Johnson and now an attorney with
Arnold and Porter who represent Coca Cola. He asked to talk to me about
the new programs that Coke was starting. We met and he described new programs
which have been in the planning stages, he said, for nearly two years. Many of
the programs sound good. They cover housing, education, wage scales, working
conditions and job security. They seem to recognize needs for upward mobility
and community participation. And they appear to come from a commitment of
Coca Cola to do something about the problems of migrant workers in Florida.
I understand that Coca Cola executives will be testifying later in the.se hear
ings. I assume that the specifics of the programs will be spelled out then, and
I postpone additional comment until after we have had a chance to review the
specific programs. But regardless of the benefit of the program, it is appalling
that it took ten years to embark on any programs at all. Ten years have been
lost on an opportunity for a responsible corporation to begin to attack a
fundamental problem encompassing an entire life system. Corporations should
not be permitted such ten year luxuries.
I would like to ask Mr. Austin or Mr. Talley how long it took Coke to intro-
duce a new product like Sprite — was that ten years? Or what about new
methods — a new can — does it take ten years to develop a new can? I doubt it.
Why is it that when it comes to profit, corporations work fast, but when it comes
to human conditions, corporations at best plod along.
Another corporation, the Alico Land and Development Company (Alico) is a
relatively small farming operation in Florida. Indeed, when compared to
other giants like U.S. Sugar, (90,000 acres in Collier County) ; and Coca
Cola with 30,000 acres of planted citrus groves — Alico's farming operations are
miniscule. But Alico was born of a large corporate conglomeration, growing out
of railroad operations. It represents a commitment of these corporations and
their leaders to utilize old railroad resources for long term agricultural and
land holdings. It represents a commitment to invest in a system of agriculture,
on an increasingly large scale, which participates in the despair of migrant
workers. And it provides an extremely good example of how corporate struc-
ture tends to isolate the actual decision-makers from the operation of the farm.
Alico does its busine.ss in citrus, cattle, forestry and land rental. It owns and
controls some 203,000 acres of Florida land. 6,875 are in citrus, 4,025 of these
acres being planted in citrus groves. In 1969. 54.5% of its income came from citrus
groves. Its citrus groves are located in Polk county (5,265) and Collier county
5511
(1,200). We have been unable to determine how many migrant workers harvest
these citrus groves, or any of their other agricultural products. Most harvesting
is done through a profit sharing arrangement with Ben Hill Grilfin, Inc., and we
have not been able to determine whether the worker is hired by Alico directly
or by Ben Hill GriflSn, Inc. If the usual practice applies, Ben Hill GriflBn, Inc.,
does the hiring of migratory workers. Ben Hill Griflin, Jr., is a director of
Alico.
In each of the past three years Alico's annual report mentions the unfavor-
able impact of bad weather on its crops. But in each year Alico's net return on Its
citrus increases. In the years between 1967 and 1968 income resulted from higher
prices paid by the consumer. In 1969, the income in net return from citrus
($57,000 — 11% over 1968) equals amount saved in lower harvesting payroll minus
the amount lost in gross sales. While this may be pure coincidence, the com-
pany's increase in citrus net returns appears to come at the expense of the con-
sumer in higher prices and the worker in less work. Alico appears to be able
to modify its harvesting cost and the worker thus suffers, not only from corpo-
rate disregard but also from the capricious nature of the agricultural industry.
The company, despite the changing weather conditions, keeps increasing its
profits. Alico has retained all of its earnings and has never declared a dividend
to its stockholders.
Alico was incorporated in 1960 as a subsidiary of the Atlantic Land and Im-
provement Company, which was then a subsidiary of the Atlantic Coastline Rail-
road Company. It was formed to take over and develop some 203,000 acres of
Florida land originally held by the railroad, but then owned by Atlantic Land
and Improvement Company. Alico was since spini off, and is now a subsidiary of
the Atlantic Coastline Company, a holding company which owns 35.4% of the
Alico stock. 52%, of the stock in Atlantic Coastline Company is owned by the
Mercantile Safe Deposit and Trust Company, a Baltimore bank. The Interstate
Commerce Commission has held that the Atlantic Coastline Company is con-
trolled by Mercantile Bank. Recently, the Mercantile Bank has announced that
it is merging with two other Maryland banks to form still another holding com-
pany called Mercantile Bankshares, Inc. The Mercantile Bank currently owns
directly 5% of the Alico stock directly, so that Mercantile's total .stock control
of Alico is slightly more than 40%.
The Mercantile, Atlantic, and Alico holding company line was originally in-
tended to be part of a larger holding company structure growing out of a merger
between the Atlantic Coastline Railroad Company and the Seaboard Coastline
Railroad. Seaboard Coastline Railroad is currently a 100% owned subsidiary
of the Seaboard Coastline Industries, the railroad holding company. The Atlantic
Coastline company was to have merged into Seaboard Coastline Industry, form-
ing one holding company structure. But for tax considerations, the merger never
went through. As it now stands Atlantic Coastline owns 15% of Seaboard Indus-
tries, which provides almo.st all of Atlantic's income. The Mercantile Bank owns
or controls directly 2% of the Seaboard stock.
The complicated corporate structure and variations in stock ownership should
serve to protect the men who benefit from this structure, and ultimately make
the decisions that affect the u.se of the land and the conditions of the worker.
The fact that there are several corjwrate tiers between the Alico farming oper-
ations and the corporate decision-makers does not isolate the decision-makers
from the impact of their corporate decisions.
The men that run Alico and ultimately bear the responsibility for Alico's
participation in migrant working conditions, are part of this larger corporate
structure. Three men especially seem clo.se to the oi^erations.
William H McGuirk, Jr., is Chairman of the Board of the Mercantile Safe
Deposit and Trust Company, in Baltimore. He is a Director and Chairman of
the Executive Committee and Vice President of the Atlantic Coastline Comi>any.
He is a Director and member of the Executive Committee of Alico. He is a Direc-
tor, and Chairman of Seaboard Coastline Industries and Seaboard Coastline
Railroad. In addition to .stock options and pension plans he receives comi>en-
sation in the following amounts and sources : Seaboard Coastline Railroad,
$62,000: Atlantic Coastline, $1,400; Seaboard Coastline Industries, $600; Mer-
cantile Bank, $79,999, or a total of $144,000 in direct remuneration from these
four companies. He receives no compensation from Alico. On retirement, he will
receive at least $70,000 a year from these companies.
William T. Rice is Chairman and President of Atlantic Coastline Company. He
is a Director and Chairman of Alico, and he is Chairman and Chief Executive
5512
OflBcer of Seaboard Industries and the Seaboard Railroad. He receives $149,205
in direct compensation from these companies, in addition to stoclc options and
dividends, $144,000 of which comes from Seaboard Railroad. On the Atlantic and
Seaboard reports he lists his address as Richmond, Va. On the Alico report he
lists his address as Jacksonville, Fla.
Prime F. Osborn is a Director and president of Seaboard Coastline Rail-
road and Industries. He is a Director of Atlantic, and he is a Director, member
of the Executive Committee and Vice President of Alico. He receives as direct
remuneration from these companies a total of $90,085 — $87,000 of which comes
from Seaboard Railroad.
In addition to the interlocks of these three men, Mercantile is well-endowed
with the usual ironies of director interlocks. In view of the medical problems
which daily confront migrant workers the participation of Johns Hopkins Hos-
pital in Mercantile is particularly ironic. Johns Hopkins Hospital owns 3,000
shares of Mercantile. Mr. J. C. Cooper, Jr., who is Chairman of the Board
of Johns Hopkins Hospital is a Director of Seaboard and Atlantic as well as
Mercantile, and owns 974 shares of Mercantile. McGuirk himself is vice chair-
man of the hospital, and Russell Nelson is president of the hospital and on the
Mercantile Board. Milton Eisenhower, the former President of Johns Hopkins
University is on the Mercantile board. One would hope that these men when
confronted with the testimony at these hearings will exercise their respon-
sibilities as investors and directors to solve the medical and health problems
of the migrant. They especially should be concerned — being as they are men
of medicine and men of finance.
Mssrs. McGuirk, Rice and Osborn, are primarily responsible for the operation
of Alico. They are well plugged into the local agricultural operations — having
several Florida bankers on their Board. Ben Hill Griffin, an important proc-
essor— crucial to any farming operation — is on Alico's board. And they have hired
a local man as president of Alico, who they pay less than $30,000 for his efforts.
While these people participate in day to day operational decisions, it is Rice,
Osborn and McGuirk who make the ultimate policy decisions.
And they enjoy fantastic corporate benefits from their railroad holding
company structure — benefits and security which stand in sharp contrast to
the lives of the migrant workers who are affected by their decisions. McGuirk's
salary alone (not to mention his income from private investments) is enough
to support 165 migrant workers at the going annual average income of $891.00.
Indeed, McGuirk or Rice could have financed all of the federal welfare
payments made in Hendry County, Florida, in fiscal 1969, and still had more
than $40,000 a year left over for their personal use. And the fringe benefits:
These men have virtually no worries about health care, life insurance and other
traditional forms of life support. If these men stopped working tomorrow, they
would have large annual incomes ; they would still have medical care ; they
would still have at least one house : their children would still have their edu-
cation and opportunities for the future. Not so for the migrant worker — if he
stops working, if he gets sick, if he is injured, he loses everything, not grad-
ually, but right away.
Moreover, the fact that these men derive virtually no income directly from
the operations of Alico does not free them from their responsibilities to develop
an enlightened agricultural business. Indeed, in some ways it is more offensive ;
for they have created a company for which they have no economic need. They
can afford the luxury of retaining earnings for future land acquisitions and
new mergers such as the recent formation of the Alico Heliocopter Company, to
get into the chemical spray business. What is almost a hobby with these cor-
porate leaders is a day to day life struggle with the migrant worker.
I have talked today only of Coke and Alico. There are, of course, other cor-
porations and corporate decision-makers who make lots of money and are as
responsible for this suffering as Coke and Alico. But Coke and Alico seem par-
ticularly appropriate models for large corporate farming on the one hand and
corporate insulation on the other.
Now I could go on and on about corporate conglomerates. Many have, but I
don't think it is necessary. Their stories are so similar. Some say it's extremely
complicated stuff — agri-business — especially trying to ferret through corporate
structures to get to the heart of economic realities. But in fact, it's very simple ;
5513
some corporations are making large investments into a farming industry which
wracks havoc on the day to day lives of its workers. And I sometime get the
feeling that corporate leaders create the complexities of subsidiaries, of divi-
sions, and large economics and then point to those very complexities which
they have created in order to hide simple realities.
Here the reality is simple. It's a reality of despair. And it is a reality that is
daily practiced by the agricultural industry. And those people who run these
corporations at least have a responsibility to alleviate the problem, and may in
fact be responsible for creating the problem.
And the government, what can you do? Of course you can pass legislation
covering minimum wages, health and welfare, housing, collective bargaining and
the like. I am sure you have many welfare alternatives. And I think you should
consider them all.
But I think we can't let the corporations off so easy. Why can't the grower
co-operatives and conglomerates join in and create a common fund to maintain
an annual wage for the migrant worker pool? Why can't a similar fund for
health, life and medical insurance be created by these corporations? Indeed, why
does the taxpayer have to participate in still another farm program which will
benefit the private corporations? And if the cost of these programs, privately
funded, privately created, must be borne by the consumer, then so be it. Accord-
ing to NBC, a doubling of wages would add only 1-2^ to consumer costs. But I
think, judging from the Alico figures, that a good pontion of this cost can be borne
by the real owners and investors.
As I sat here listening to the testimony I became more and more offended — ^why
do these corporate leaders get away with this junk so often? Why are corpora-
tions permitted to ignore for so long the human suffering they cause? Why is it
that corporations can pollute and rai^e our land and human resources — and they
are finally discovered, come in and apologize. We expect more from human beings
in their day to day lives — why don't we demand at least the same standard from
our corporations in the day to day conduct of their business ?
I just know that Austin and other Coke oflicials are going to come breezing into
these hearings and they are going to say : "Boys, we're sorry. We're sorry for
raping these people. We're sorry that we don't pay them enough to live a month,
much less a year. We're sorry that migrant workers die at the age of 49. We're
sorry about all these things we do every day. But now we're going to be better.
We're going to make new houses and we're going to raise wages, and give the
worker some hope. So stay off our backs and give us another chance." That is
what the Coke people are going to say.
Well, I don't think that's enough. We have lost a whole generation just in the
last 10 years because of corporate ignorance. We may have lost a whole world
because of corporate rai>e of the environment. We have got to stop this. We have
got to stop corporations from getting away with this kind of irresponsibility in
the future. This Congress has got to find ways in which corporations and their
leaders are accountable not simply for future activities, but for their past
conduct.
For our part, we will be watching companies like Coke and Alico, and as many
of the others as our resources and dedication permit. We are going to study these
"plans." We will see about a boycott of Coca Cola, and Minute Maid, and other
companies. Already, we have placed orders to buy stock in these companies. And
we will go to our co-owners like Johns Hopkins and ask them what they will
do about Alico.
Someday a migrant worker will look down that complicated corporate maze
all the way to Baltimore and see MeGuirk as President of the Mercantile Bank.
Someday that migrant worker will set his sights on that bank, and say, "If I
work real hard, I too would be Chairman of the Mercantile Bank." But I hope
he chooses not to be president of the bank, but rather dedicates himself to creating
truly responsible institutions that do not isolate its leaders from the day to
day impact of their decisions. Then we won't need hearings and documentaries.
But as it is now, the worker can't even look beyond the orange tree. Only when
McGuirk and his coriwrate colleagues are prepared or compelled to give up
the luxury of cori)orate isolation will that day become a reality.
5514
2i
5:
to
c^
V
^i
V
w
A
t=)
<>
rs;*
^4
5515
APPENDIX II
Federal grants
Federal grants to welfare
to corporations programs
Texas counties:
Starr 1,211,000 1,788,000
Cameron.. 13,719,000 4,027,000
Hidalgo.. --- 20,854,000 5,184,000
Willacy 4,952,000 499,000
Total 40,736,000 11,498,000
Florida counties:
Palm Beach 5,353,000 3,585,000
Hendry 506,000 101,000
Collier _ 118,000 283,000
Total 5,977,000 3,969,000
Grand total 46, 713, 000 15, 467, 000
1969 Federal grants to cotton (Texas).... 20, 137,000
1969 Federal grants to sugar I (Florida) 2,524,000
1 1969 Federal grants to sugar alone, 1,181,195 under the Sugar Act.
Senator Mondale. You mentioned at the outset of your testimony
that since 1960 close to 7,000 corporations have been created and have
gone into farming or related businesses. I could not help but be struck
by the fact that as the number of corporate farms seem to be dramati-
cally increasing, the number of family-operated farms seem to be
dramatically decreasing.
Do you see a correlation between the growers of the large well-
f unded corporate farms and the future of family farming ?
Mr. Moore. I definitely do. My statement refers to an appendix,
which I believe was prepared and added to the record.
That appendix does cover precisely this point. That is, it appears
to be the corporate conglomerate moving into farming mostly at the
processing level. What that means is that the corporation comes in as
a processor, it deals with the individual farmer, usually dictating the
terms at a flat or consignment rate.
The processor then goes to the trucker, who in turn goes to the
migrant, hires the migrant, and then they haul the stuff to the process-
ing level. That is one cycle of the economics of it.
Distribution is another cycle. At that cycle, most of the profit is
being made in the farming operation. What is happening is that the
small farmer has no bargaining power, he has no control over ultimate
prices. Those prices are set by the corporate leaders further down the
line. He is being rubbed out.
In Texas, I understand, processors are going to Mexico, much at the
expense of the local family farmer there.
Senator Mondale. Could it be that one of the side effects of this
exploitation of the farmworker is a subsidy to the large corporate
farms, which in turn permits them to outcompete the family farmer ?
Mr. Moore. I must say that I have tried— we are very new in the
agricultural business at this stage of the game— I tried very quickly
to understand all the farming programs. Most of it goes way above my
head, so far as I can see.
What I find offensive in the people I have talked to about these
programs is that corporations do seem to get the benefit of them.
5516
Tliey do seem to be able to use the kind of benefits that are made
available by these Federal programs much better than the small
farmer, for whom, in fact, most of these programs were intended.
Senator Mondai.e. Do you know what the approximate dollar re-
turn to Coca-Cola was last year or a recent period on agricultural sales
produced in whole or in part through the use of migrant farm-
workers ?
Mr. MooRE. No, as I said, I cannot find that figure. It is not broken
down that way. It is a gross figure.
I suspect if it were possible to look inside, I am sure Coca-Cola has
that broken down and might make it available to the subcommittee.
Senator Mondale. Do you know how many acres they farm?
Mr. Moore. In Florida they farm 30,000 acres, most of which is
owned, some of which is held under long-term lease.
Senator Mondale. Do they have other farm operations ?
Mr. Moore. I don't believe so, but I am not positive of this. I think
almost all of the citrus operations — as you can see in that chart, there
are several other divisions : Hi-C, Snowcrop, and a few other fairly
well-knoAvn products also come from citrus products. I think all of
that comes from Florida. I am not totally positive of that.
Senator Mondale. Do you have any estimate of how many employees
or farmworkers they hire?
Mr. Moore. I have an estimate, they are figures given to me by
Mr. Califano. I am sure they will be very specific on it. They had 700
out-of-State migrant workers; if I remember correctly, 166 in-State
Florida migrant workers, what they call floaters, I think, and an ad-
ditional 100 or 200 that come from offshore islands.
They also have a category of employees called the grove worker,
who is a permanent employee of Coke and he has supervisory func-
tions for the grove, and I believe that there are approximately 300 of
those. They are in a different category, the grove worker, than the
harvesting category which I mentioned earlier.
Senator Mondale. From your information, there are something: like
1,400 farm workers, whether they came from out of State or within
the State or foreign nations, and about 300, approximately, supervi-
sory full-time year-round employees, working for Coca-Cola, farm-
ing some 30,000 acres of land.
You do not know what the dollar volume is ?
Mr. Moore. No, I do not.
Senator Mondale. And they are primarily in citrus?
Mr. Moore. Yes.
Senator Mondale. Is that exclusively with Minute Maid ?
Mr. MooRE. They have Hi-C, Snowcrop and Minute Maid is their
biggest product from the citrus industry.
Senator Mondale. How about Alico ? Do you have the comparable
figures, the amount of acreage, the dollar volume, the number of farm
employees, so that we get a notion of its scope?
Mr. MooRE. Alico has a total of 209,000 acres in Florida. Their
citrus is 6,465 in Florida. It is a relatively small citrus operation.
As I mentioned in the testimony, all of their earnings are being
re^tained. Last year they did buy another 600 acres of citrus groves.
They are planning, and the whole ])attern of that company is to
increase its land holdings, especially in the citrus industry.
5517
Senator Mondale. Do you have any idea what their dollar volume
was last year?
Mr. Moore. The dollar volume in what?
Senator Mondale. Sales in agricultural products produced by
farmworkers. Or do you have any estimate of the number of em-
ployees, farmworkers ?
Mr. Moore. No, they have no estimate there. It could probably be
broken down on some formula of how many people it takes to harvest
X number of acres.
Senator Mondale. We will try to develop some of this when Coca-
Cola is here on Friday.
In any event, these are large corporate farms that either are run
directly or through complicated conglomerate ownership patterns.
In your discussion with the representatives of Coca-Cola, did the list
of things that they hope to do with their plans, include the right of
these workers to organize into a union?
Mr. MooRE. That right was never mentioned. I kind of doubt that
that was part of their plan.
Senator Mondale. I listened to your testimony and I was wonder-
ing what your strategy is, what your approach is, to try to achieve
what you call corporate responsibility in the treatment of the farm-
worker.
How do you intend to go about it ?
Mr. Moore. Well, we have just begim. We started early by doing
some research in some of the major agricultural industry companies.
One of them was Tenneco. Tenneco has very little involvement as we
know, so far, in Texas and Florida, at least in farming.
As we review the Coke plan specifically, and as we unwind more of
these corporate structures, probably what we will do is two things:
With a company like Coca-Cola, which is highly visible, which is
using the proceeds, really, of a very popular pop drink to divert it
and use it to develop land resources, we might very well consider a
boycott of Coke products as a way of applying citizen pressure on
them.
There is another possibility, a shareholders' proxy fight of some
kind. From my discussion with Mr. Califano, I am sure Coke wants
to do something to avoid this problem. I suspect when they come in
here at the end of this week, they will try to unfold the plan that this
committee and the rest of the public will hope is sufficient.
We, of course, will wait and give them that hearing and see what
kind of plan it is and how well they plan to implement that before
we embark on anything specifically with them.
With Alico it is quite different. 'Control is so tight both by indi-
viduals and by institutional shareholders, and its visibility is so low,
they have very little contact with the public generally, there is no
way of developing specific public pressure, so I suspect what we will
do is buy some shares of stock and then go to institutions like the
Johns Hopkins Hospital and others like it, and ask them, as coowners
of the corporation, what they intend to do. Will they join with us in
some effort as coowners of the corporation, in some effort to reform
Alico's migratory worker problem, or even more importantly, really,
to set up Alico, perliaps because it is relatively new, as a model of the
kinds of things a corporation can be doing, to l)egin to experiment
5518
with the sorts of things that corporations and their leaders ought to
be trying out.
Senator Mondale. Corporations are in business for a profit. These
large corporate farms by and large are almost completely beyond the
reach of modern unions, even though their corporate counterparts,
industrial counterparts, have been unionized for 40 years or more.
I think it is fair to say that since unions have represented workers
in industrial plants, wages have gone up, security provisions have
been included, seniority protection, health and welfare protection,
pesticide protection, retirement benefits. In other words, the workers
who have obtained their own representative procedure and their own
remedy have proven to be far better in protecting their rights than
any of us have been.
Strangely, most of these corporations profit a great deal neverthe-
less. What has been unique is that the National Labor Relations Act
does not extend to the agriculture industry, and we see many of these
huge corporations now in agriculture that are far more like General
Motors than they are like the small family farmer. Yet they are still
beyond the reach of the normal labor-management laws.
Would you not think that perhaps the best remedy is to extend the
National Labor Relations Act to such employee units and to accord
them the same right to organize and bargain collectively, to strike,
as is found in every other sector of American life? Wouldn't they
then be far more able to assert their interest than otherwise?
Mr. Moore. I think that the right of the farmworker to organize
in a labor union, to form imions and receive all the other benefits, is a
necessary precondition to anything else that can develop, both in de-
veloping an articulate farmworking community, to developing roots
in a community, and other kinds of benefits that are important to them.
I think there are other areas both of legislation and kinds of pro-
grams that a corporation should get into. I don't know, for example,
who is responsible for Maxe^ Quarters and the dilapidated quarters
these people end up staying in. Is it the corporation's responsibility
as opposed to the union ?
If that is so, should the corporation be permitted to pass that cost
on to the consumer ? In some instances I think they might be able to.
Or would the corporation start insisting on taxing the worker, the
union, in the form of dues or something else ?
I think there are all kinds of other problems that have to be antic-
ipated in developing legislation for the farmworker, the very first of
which is to allow them to organize and to bring those workers under
the scope of normal Federal labor protection that is available to many
other workers.
Senator Mondale. It is not generally known that, among farm-
workers, homeownership is very rare, simply because they are rootless.
They have no way of being sure of jobs from season to season or from
day to day, and therefore, the normal programs, even the self-help
housing program, where they can build good, solid, sanitary housing
for $7,000, IS beyond their reach.
One of the few places I have seen this housing development, in-
terestingly enough, is in California, where there have been union con-
tracts entered into with the wine grape growers. As a result, these
5519
employees for the first time have job security, have seniority, and can
make plans for their families.
That is why it seems to me that one of the key answers to this cor-
porate responsibility problem in agriculture is the capacity of the
worker to sj^eak up effectively, to assert their own rights. I wonder if
that is not a better long-term solution than what I gather is the part of
your strategy, to prevent the real profiteers from ignoring their re-
sponsibility for what is hapj)ening.
Mr. MooRE. Our posture, which is to continually remind corpora-
tions that they do have a responsibility in these areas, does not mean
to exclude some of the long-range goals that you have mentioned.
I would add that I think we all have a tendency, and have histori-
cally had the tendency to let the corporation have their mistakes and
then try to cure those mistakes through some other route, rather than
directly holding the corporation accountable for it.
I think some areas of accountability simply have to be explored. It
is a very tough problem because I don't quite know, myself, exactly
what form this accountability should take and how finally these cor-
porations should be brought into line.
Senaor Mondale. How long have you been studying Coca-Cola
and Alico? How long did it take you to develop these figures that
we have heard today ?
Mr. Moore. Back in May is when we looked into agri-business; at
that time we were looking into businesses other than Coca-Cola. We
in this part of the country had not realized that Minute Maid was a
product of Coca-Cola, and Coca-Cola was all tied into the Florida
citrus industry.
It was not until 2 weeks ago in fact that we heard about these hear-
ings, and possible Coca-Cola involvement with the documentary, and
we looked into Coca-Cola. It was extremely hard to pierce through
these books. AVe have gone through, as well as we can, charts like
those two up there for every corporation we have known about.
United States Sugar, Tenneco, and others. It is extremely difficult to
be able to go through these lines.
Senator Mondaue. Did you find them cooperative when you asked
questions ?
Mr. Moore. Some are. Alico we have had no direct contact with.
The Coca-Cola people, as you know, have initiated conversations
with us. At the moment they appear open. I would just like to see
their plan. I would like to see their own plan and their own program
before determining how cooperative they really are.
Senator Mondale. You are making a pioneering effort in seeking
to unravel these conglomerates, trying to understand them, if that
IS possible. I think this is the first time the Migratory Labor Subcom-
mittee has had any information like this, and this committee has been
in existence for 10 years.
It is my impression, for example, that in the wine graj>e industry
it was only when one of the big corporations that sell wine in this
country became embarrassed over the conditions of the farmworkers
who pick their grapes, that the union contracts followed.
That may happen with citrus, but I would hate to have this responsi-
bility if I were president of the Baltimore Bank. I think I would
feel a lot more comfortable if there were changes in the national laws
5520
permitting the union and introducing into this area the same labor-
management concepts that we are used to elsewhere.
After all, this is pretty late in America's history to argue that
unionization is a dangerous thing. I am personally convinced that if
farmworker unions were organized, we would all be better off and we
would have justice.
And the costs, if they were truly competing industries, would be
the same.
Mr. MooRE. If you imposed it on all of them directly.
Senator Mondale. Yes.
Mr. Moore. Yes, we would have to do that. No company that we
would single out, would be in an effort to single it out at the expense
of others, but rather to try to develop models for others to follow.
And certainly other legislation, that would apply across the board
to all the companies.
Senator Mondale. I think the key problem to pollution, for example,
is that there is a lot of money in dirty water.
Mr. Moore. There is a lot of money in cleaning out the dirty water.
Senator Mondale. Not as much as there is today in making dirty
water.
Mr. Moore. That is right.
Senator Mondale. It seems to me that when we shift the incentive
so that you can make more money with clean water than with dirty
water, they will find a way pretty fast to shift their emphasis; the
same with air. And it is the same way with poverty. There is a lot of
money in poverty, apparently.
You can get rich on hunger in this country. I don't mean that they
make that deliberate choice, but that is the result of what is going on.
It ought not to be possible to do that. The cost of a decent life ought
to be incorporated in the price of every product. I don't think that is
revolutionary in this day and age.
Texas passed a $1.10 minimum wage — you can't live on $1.10. Even
if you get year-round employment, you cannot live on it. Many of
them, I am sure, are not earning that kind of money and certainly
don't have year-round employment.
In testimony this mommg from Mr. Juarez we learned that he thinks
things have been getting worse during the past 25 years.
Another thing, I am personally convinced that rural America has
paid a big price for this strategy of cheap labor, for the money has gone
elsewhere. If the citizens of those communities were making decent
wages, the local stores would be doing better, public revenues would be
more readily available, the schools would be better, and the other serv-
ices that the community depends upon, which the residents have to pay
for, would be far better.
I think it has been a very costly strategy.
I would hate to have to live with my conscience. I think this must
damage them in a psychological way, knowing that people live this
way. They know their responsibility. They pay a psychological price
that must be enormous. As much as they might try to rationalize, there
are very few human beings who can live with what they are doing to
these people and can feel comfortable about it.
How else can you justify their going to these networks and asking
them not to use the television documentary ? If they thought they were
5521
so right, how come they did not want the folks in the community to see
the show ? It sounds to me like they felt guilty.
Mr, Moore. It seems to me worse than guilt. If they felt guilty, they
would do something about it. Hopefully, guilt is sufficient motive to
get them to do something about it.
Obviously it is not. What they are concerned with, by response to the
NBC show, is something more than guilt : public pressure, new legisla-
tion, whatever else that might come.
It is too bad that guilt and those kinds of personal feelings are not
sufficient to make those corporations and corporate leaders conduct
truly responsible management. The most galling thing about the
migrant worker, opposed perhaps to the pollution problem, is that
it is so clear and obvious on the one hand.
It is so simple in one sense in its solution, when you talk about some
of the superficial aspects of it anyway. The housing is terrible. They
can go down there and look at it and see it is terrible.
It would cost Coca Cola a hundred thousand dollars, maybe, to fix
up their housing to a habitable condition in all of the State of Florida,
and they still have not done even that. It obviously will take a lot more
than guilt to make these guys do it.
Senator Mondale. Very well stated. Thank you very much, Mr.
Moore, for your most useful statement and for the appendices sup-
plied, all of which will be included in the record.
Our final witness today is Clay Cochran, who is the executive direc-
tor of the Rural Housing Alliance, Washington, D.C.
Mr. Cochran, we are delighted to have you here this afternoon. We
wish to express our appreciation for the schedule complications
created by your having to wait as long as you have.
I was told you were the first manager of the Weslaco Labor Camp.
STATEMENT OF CLAY COCHRAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RURAL
HOUSING ALLIANCE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
Mr. Cochran. Thirty-one years ago. And it sounds like things
have not changed a bit in Weslaco.
Senator Mondale. That was built in 1939 or 1940. It opened in early
1940.
Was that a Federal program ?
Mr. Cochran. Thte only thing approaching a decent farm-labor
housing program that the country ever had was the old farm security
migratory labor program.
Senator Mondale. That was a national program that went around
building decent housing, decent by those stajidards then, for migrants.
That is why we still see some of that housing in migrant communities
that are uniformly dirty and 35 years old. It was built under that
program ; is that correct ?
Mr. Cochran. Yes. Some of them were poorly constructed when
they were first built, and 30 years has not done them any good.
As I will indicate a little later, it was a great program as far as it
went and lasted about 10 years.
I am Clay Cochran, executive director of the Rural HousiLng
Alliance.
5522
Lee Reno, of our staff here, has been doing a study of the farmers
home labor camp program. I thought we had our migrant housing co-
ordinator here, Pat Sabelhaus, but he went to the telephone. Maybe he
w411 show again.
I want to thank you for inviting us to be here, Mr. Chairman. We
have watched your work with great concern and pleasure for a long
time, because there do not seem to be many people plowing in this area
except you and your subcommittee.
I am going to omit the reference to the Rural Housing Alliance,
since, if I may, we will put the whole statement in the record and I
will highlight it.
Senator Mondale. We will include the full statement as though
read, and you can summarize it, if you wish.
(The prepared statement of Mr. Cochran follows :)
Statement of Clay L. Cochran, Executive Director, Rural Housing Alliance,
Washington, D.C.
My name is Clay L. Cochran and I am the Executive Director of the Rural
Housing Alliance. With me is Lee Reno, a Farm Labor Housing Specialist on our
staff who has been making a study of the FMHA farm labor housing program.
I would like to thank the Chairman, Senator Mondale, for inviting us here today
to give what assistance we can to this Subcommittee.
The Rural Housing Alliance is a private non-profit corporation formed to
help low-income rural Americans obtain decent housing. We do this by doing
research, disseminating information and providing technical assistance and
training. FV^r the past several months we have been studying some of the problems
involved in delivering decent housing to migrant and seasonal farm workers.
Before discu,ssing some of the findings of that study, I think it is necessary to
offer some general statements so that the housing picture can be put in per-
spective.
I believe it is recognized by everyone here that the problems of farm workers
cannot be solved by any one program. In other words, the lot of farm workers
would not be greatly improved with higher wages alone, or by bringing them
fully under the Fair Labor Standards Act alone, or providing them full Social
Security coverage alone, by providing them Unemployment Compensation or
Workmen's Compensation alone, or providing every farm worker with a decent
house, or by insuring them decent medical care or -adequate food alone. Not one,
but all of these changes must be made before farm workers — migrant or sea-
sonal— or fully employed year around — will have first class citizenship.
Therefore, housing is only one of many things which must be improved. I
might add, however, that it is an especially expensive item. If adequate and
decent housing could be obtained by farm workers for a sum they could afford,
a great deal of their misery could be overcome. Health problems caused by lack of
sanitary facilities, polluted water, and undesirable overcrowding could be al-
leviated, along with less spoiled food and more adequate diets, if one can assiune
that decent housing including a refrigerator. Enough studies and surveys have
been made, enough hearings have been held, enough farm workers have died
from diseases caused by their insanitary environment to document the tremen-
dous need for improved housing. Traditionally, much of the housing used by mi-
grant farm workers has been furnished by the growers who employ them, or
they found for them,selves, whatever housing was available near their jobs. [But
these sources of housing (especially bousing which is anything like decent) have
dried up.] Generally, growers have never provided decent and sanitary housing
for migrant workers. Good, privately owned housing is not available to farm
workers when and where it is needed. In short, the private sector has failed to
supply the needs of these or other poor people.
The blame rests on all of us, the community, the Congress, the President
and the Bureaucracy for failing to make a full commitment to eliminate all sub-
standard housing in the nation. Instead, the programs ostensibly designed to
provide decent housing for low-income people have been little more than token
programs. The leadership of this country has closed its eyes when the various
5523
Administrative Agencies fail to perform because of insufficient funds, insuffi-
cient legislative authority, or intentional perversion of the legislation. But worst
of all, the Government has perpetuated the myth that somehow, someday, in-
dustry and the lending institutions will and can solve the housing problem
provided we furnish them a few, but uneconomical, incentives such as interest
subsidies, insured loans, incentive grants and the like. Farm workers will get
decent housing only when a comprehensive attack is made on the total housing
problem for all low-income people. An all-out attack, with billions of dollars
of direct government aid, will be required to put an end to the rural and urban
ghettoes and company camps and towns which flourish today.
FmHA Farm Labor Housing Program
Let us look at the major federal government program ostensible designed to
solve the farm labor housing shortage. In 1961, Congress amended the Housing
Act of 194:9, authorizing the Farmers Home Administration within the U. S. De-
partment of Agriculture to make available insured loans at an interest rate of
5 percent. These loans could be made to farmers, associations of farmers, non-
profit organizations and States and their subdivisions for the purpose of construct-
ing or repairing housing and related facilities for use by farm workers. From the
beginning of this program through 1965 only 29 loans totaling 1.2 million were in-
sured. These loans provided housing for 256 families and 816 individual farm
workers. It was evident that insured loans alone, was not sufficient incentive to
entice farmers and organizations to construct or repair the needed housing.
FmHA Changes in 1965
In 1905, Congress expanded the Farm Labor Housing Program by authorizing
the Farmers Home Administration to make available grants to States and their
subidivisions and to broad-based nonprofit organizations for up to two-thirds
the cost of a rental housing project. The balance of the cost of the project
could come from an insured loan. Although the grant program can be credited
for increased construction of housing for farm workers the sad truth is that it is
still not an attractive enough program to stimulate local organizations to use it.
From 1962 through March, 1970, the loan and grant program has obligated just
over $28 million ($16 million in loans and $12 million in grants). This money
has produced just over 4000 units to house families and an additional number
of units to house 3300 individual farm workers, meeting possible 2% of the total
need. Only 26 percent of the funds available for loans and 74 percent of the funds
available for grants was obligated.
Why Failtire?
Several things account for the failure of this program. First, even with a grant
of two-thirds of the capital cost of a project, the subsidy is not deep enough. It
is practically impossible to adequately operate and maintain a project on rental
income that farm workers are able to afford and still repay a third of the capital
cost. One need only look at the experience in the field of public housing to see
that even with a capital cost subsidy of 100 i)ercent, rental income is often inade-
quate for operation and maintenance. So, from its inception, the present farm
labor housing program was doomed to failure because it did not provide enough
subsidy.
Given an inadequate piece of legislation and an agency which for a number
of reasons is unable to administer it efficiently, the results could hardly have
been much. It is not my purpose here to fault the Farmers Home Administra-
tion, for the basic blame lies with the legislation itself. However, it is necessary
to describe the problems the program has had in that agency. First of all, FmHA
is incredibly understaffed to handle properly all of the programs it has been
assigned and the Farm Labor Housing Program has a very low priority. In
1969, its biggest year, expenditures for Farm Labor Housing accounted for about
one-half of one percent of the total operation of the Agency. No formal lines of
responsibility exist for the administration of this small but important program
except that it is grouped along with other housing programs within the Rural
Housing Division.
The application process for a labor housing loan and grant is a lengthy and
complex thing, requiring sophisticated documentation of need and a plan of
operation. Often local organizations are unable to untangle the process and are
intimidated by it so that they do not apply. Farmers Home Administration's
County Offices are often so overburdened with work and inhibitions that they are
5524
unable or unwilling to encourage applications and assist in the application
process.
The Farmers Home Administration has no funds for research so grants and
loans are not necessarily made where the need is greatest. Overall need is not
known and decisions on applications are made on an ad hoc basis from informa-
tion furnished by the applicant and supported by FmHA County personnel.
Only 16 organizations have received grants since the inception of the pro-
gram. Of these, only three have received maximum grants (two thirds of the
cost of the project) and only two others have received grants exceeding one-half
the cost of the project. For the other projects, higher grants could have resulted
in lower rents for the tenants. Rents are generally over $50 a month plus utilities
and in at least one project, rent is $85 a month plus utilities. The House Appro-
priations Committee has voiced its opposition to grants exceeding 50 per cent
of the cost of Farm Labor Housing projects. The fact that Farmers Home Ad-
ministration has limited the majority of its labor housing grants to that level
or below, doubtless reflects FmHA's deference to the power of the Appropriation
Committee.
Recently, the Farmers Home Administration limited eligibility for grants: to
public bodies purportedly due to its bad experience with repayment by other
types of sponsors. By doing this, it ignores its statutory authority for making
grants to broad-basied nonprofit organizations. This severely limits any expansion
of the present program since in many areas where there is a need for labor
housing, public bodies do not exist which are willing to use the program. Of the
16 organizations which have received grants, six of them are private, nonprofit
organizations and the rest are public housing authorities. It should be added
here that these nonprofit organizations are not broad-based in the sense that they
adequately represent the entire community. Rather, they generally consist of local
farmers, growers associations, businessmen, and local governmental oflScials.
Churches, poverty agencies, and most important, farm workers themselves are not
represented. Groiips representing these later organizations have become in-
creasingly interested in participating in the program but are now excluded be-
cause of the recent Farmers Home Administration ruling.
The Main Pro'blem is Legislation
Again, I wish to emphasize that the major reason for the failure of the program
lies in the legislation. It places the decision making power as to whether to build
farm labor housing in the hands of local individuals and organizations and
excludes farm workers themselves from the process. Thus, if there is no local
initiative the farm workers must suffer and the Federal officials can do little
if anything, except to obscure the reasons for failure. In the 1930's and early
1940's the Farm Security Administration assumed the responsibility for meeting
the needs of hired farm labor within the funds available. It undertook to
ascertain the need, administer, and subsidize the housing it constructed. In six
years it furnished enough shelter to house 19,000 families. The present program
is far more limited and the hands of Federal officials except for veto ixxwer —
are firmly tied.
Farm Labor Housing in Florida
On July 16, 1970, NBC aired on nationwide T.V. a documentary entitled
"Migrant — NBC White Paper". In part, it showed the wretched housing in which
farm workers in Florida must live. In the film an official from a Public Housing
Authority told much the same story about housing programs for migrants that we
are telling today. It is ironic that the documentary exposing lousy housing wa.s
miade in Florida where more Federal money has been spent for farm worker
housing under the FmHA program than in any other State. In fact, organiza-
tions and individuals in Florida have received over $14 million, or 51 percent of
all Farm Labor Housing loans and grants since the inception of the program.
Nearly 2,000 family units (50 percent of the U.S. total) and units for over 1,600
individuals (49 percent of the U.S. total) have been built for use by Florida
farm workers. Half the total of a totally inadequate program leaves housing con-
ditions still deplorable. Expenditures in Florida under this program not only
are the highest of any state, but represents the highest expenditures per capita
of farm workers. Even so, expenditures add up to a pitiable $85.35 per worker
over a period of nine years, or less than $10.00 per worker per year. Given this
level of responsibility in Florida — which ranks first — one can imagine how much
more is required in other States.
5625
The Florida State Office of Economic Opportunity tells us that there are still
332,403 substandard houses in that state. There are 17 counties where substandard
housing comprises more than 40 per cent of all the housing. I might add that
the term "substandard" is a bureaucratic euphemism for the type of housing
shown in the NBC Documentary.
In a study done last year by E. John Kleinert of the University of Miami,
housing for migrants was surveyed using a sample of over 9,000 migrants within
the state of Florida. This survey indicated that 5 per cent of the houses did
not have electricity, 31 per cent did not have a working sink, 18 per cent did not
have screens, 41 per cent did not have a functioning toilet, and 42 per cent did
not have a shower or tub. Moreover, the survey showed that the average migrant
family had Ave members and lived in a three room unit.
Who is the oppressor here? Who is responsible for this tragedy? It must be
the Federal Government for it is the only institution with the power and the
funds to solve the problem. We believe that Congress has the responsibility for
seeing that a comprehensive program to provide decent housing for farm workers
is initiated. For it is the body that controls the authority of administrative
agencies ; it is the body that controls the purse strings ; and it is the body that
can establish the watch-dog committees to see that an effective program is car-
ried out. Congress need only look back at the programs it has already enacted
for providing farm labor housing to discover what direction it should take in
establishing a new, comprehensive program. Congress should realize that a pas-
sive loan and grant program (at least one not deeply subsidized) like the present
FmHA Farm Labor Housing Program cannot work effectively. It should realize
that labor camp code enforcement program is not enough (though needed). For
guidance, Congress should look at the Camp Program administered by The Farm
Security Administration in the late 1930's and early 1940's. The lesson to be
learned there is that terrible conditions existing in the 1930's for farm workers
were not significantly different, in a relative sense, than they are today. It re-
quired direct action on the part of government then : it requires the same today.
Title III-B — Office of Economic Opportunity
In emphasizing the shortcomings of the FmHA farm labor housing program,
Mr. Chairman, we do not wish to overlook the operations of OEO in the field of
Farm Labor Housing. We do not have much detail on the extent to which OEO's
legal services have been able to put resources into working toward solutions of
this problem, but we know they have been active in several states and that addi-
tional funds should be made available for this purpose. They can be helpful in
many ways, from knocking out the unconstitutional barriers erected around pub-
lic housing in California to the enforcement of health and sanitary laws and
regulations, and the protection of workers against the plethora of ills which any
group of poor people suffer who do not have access to socially oriented legal
council.
Directly, OEO's contribution to the solution of the housing problems of hired
farm workers has been almost wholly the resuU of the operations of the Migrant
Division funded under Title III B of the OEO Act. With only about 1 per cent
of the total funds available to OEO. the Migrant Division has pioneered in the
development of self help housing in this country, leading to congressional author-
ization of the present FmHA land revolving and sponsor grant fund programs.
In the last 5 years the migrant division's activities have resulted in the construc-
tion of about 1.200 homes under the self help program using FmHA loans for
financing (the niimber inchides those completed) which is equal to 25% of those
constructed thru the FmHA labor housing program. Under this program a familv
gets to own a home for 2.5 to 40 percent less than the same home would be
available for on the private market. In effect this means that the family fjet/t a
decent home because they could not afford anything like the same house, if any.
Without the self help program.
The Migrant Division has also moved into the area of attempting to establish
rental and other housing, possibly including self help hou«!ing under the Turn-
key III program which would enable an agency to reach very deep into the
lower income groups. With funds available, it is the migrant division which
mieht well move mo.st effectively into an advocacy and coordinating program
which could encourage more action on the part of state and local government in
farm labor hou.«?ing.
The Migrant Division of OEO is the closest thine the F^^deral government now
has which concerns itself with the housing problem of hired farm workers. The
3&-513 O— 71— pt. 8B 10
5526
problem is the penny ante funds available under Tilte III B and the failure of
OEO as an agency to lay down a clear policy on housing for low income people.
We are convinced, Mr. Chairman, that whatever the migrant division has been
able to accomplish with its limited funds and staff is very directly related to the
fact that it has been and remains a national program. We are very concerned
about the recent rumor that OEO is contemplating regionalizing the migrant
program, and we hope you and the Congress oppose any such plan. If there is
anything we know about a program dealing with hired farm workers, and
particularly migrants, it is that when the problem is turned over to regional
state or local groups without overall Federal leadership and controls, the
vested interests emerge triumphant, actually or by exercising a veto power over
anything creative and progressive.
HTJD and Rural Housing
There is little point in discussing HUD and housing for hired farm labors,
as it is diflScult enough to get HUD into the rural housing program at all,
without bringing in the complication of narrowing the focus to hired farm
workers.
With the exception of public housing and possibly one or two sections of the
newer legislation, the HUD agencies are not going to deal with hired farm workers
under existing structures and law. We are hopeful that a re-invigorated public
housing program, including Turnkey III, can be used to assist in housing farm
workers. In general, however, we think it is going to take a new kind of public
housing program, and possibly a new farm worker housing agency to get the
kind of action out of public housing which farm workers have a right to expect.
Here again, the Federal government have established programs and left states
and local governments a total veto power over whether their low income citizens
benefit from Federal legislation. We think this is bad government.
We are convinced that HUD has authority to fund self help housing projects,
but so far their lawyers are busy exchanging memos on the matter and we await
some weighing of the poundage of verbosity to bring forth a decision. Under
Section 160(b), if HUD would get about the task of funding self help housing,
coupled with the Section 235 interest subsidy program, they might make a
very considerable impact on the farm labor housing problem. The "might" how-
ever is a big word because HUD's finances originate with private money lenders
and as our letter to the Chairman recently indicated, those lenders are not en-
thusiastic about marginal credit cases. Outside public housing, we doubt that
HUD has much of a potential for solving this problem under existing legislation.
No existing agency of the Federal Government is currently capable of
administering a comprehensive program to improve the housing conditions of
all farm workers. Historically, the two major programs (FSA Camp Program
and FmHA Farm Labor Housing) were placed within the Department of
Agriculture. But the provision of decent housing for farm workers can no
longer be considered an "agricultural problem." It is a human problem. It re-
quires an agency whose primary function is meeting the housing needs of
farm workers and not the needs of farm owners. One hesitates to advocate that
it be made a part of a larger, comprehensive housing agency as the record of
subordination of measures to improve the lot of farm workers when included
in broader groupings is all too clear. Thus, for now, a new independent agency
is required, freed of the shackles of myths and prejudices that have kept the
farm workers the most poorly housed of any group of workers in the country.
The new agency should be authorized to do a complete survey of the need
for farm labor housing. This survey is not to be just another study of the
deplorable conditions of farm labor housing; but a program survey upon
which the agency will decide where the housing will be located and how
much and what type it will be. Such a survey should discover where new hous-
ing should be located what type of housing is needed, what effects mechaniza-
tion will likely have on the need for a large farm labor force in all locales,
and the possibility of diversification of the existing farm labor force into
the general labor market. In addition, it should discover the extent to which
existing local institutions are capable of receiving large Government sub-
sidies to provide housing for farm workers in a manner compatible with over-
all needs of farm workers.
The Agency shoud be authorized to provide total financial assistance for
the planning, development, and construction, purcha.se, lease or rehabilitation of
the needed housing and related facilities in any area for use by farm workers
5527
In addition, the Agency should be authorized to provide supplemental funds
for operation and maintenance when project income is insufficient to provide
for it.
In most cases, permanent housing, capable of year-round occupancy, should
be provided, Housing of this type should be considered even in areas where
most of the farm workers are migrants, in an effort to eliminate the need for
traveling long distances.
In areas where it is considered totally impracticable to build permanent type
structures because of (a) very brief periods of occupancy, (b) a rapidly de-
clining need for farm labor (c) a foreseeable end for the need of farm labor
and (d) a showing that permanent housing is not needed for other low-income
persons in the immediate future, temporary housing should be provided. Such
housing should include adequate space for the occupants, indoor plumbing,
cooking facilities, furnishings, and recreation areas. Whenever possible, it
should be designed so that it will have some future use to the community in
which it is located.
Institutions eligible to receive Federal funds to provide housing and related
facilities for farm workers should be States, public organizations within States
organized specifically to meet the needs of farm workers, and private, non-profit
organizations of farm workers. Where no State, public or private organization
makes application for funds within a reasonable time after the Agency has docu-
mented the need for farm labor housing within a state, or portion of it, the
Agency, itself, should have the authority and obligation to develop, construct
and operate the needed housing.
The Agency should make available a number of alternative programs similar
to those in existing Public Housing legislation. Thus, in addition to funding the
development and construction of new projects, the Agency should allow for the
purchase of existing housing for immediate occupancy or for rehabilitation ; the
purchase of new housing from private developers after it is completed ; and the
leasing of housing. Rents for the housing should be based upon the tenants in-
come, based on a sliding scale up to 20 percent (the lower the income, the lower
the percent of income for rent). In all cases, the tenants should be given the
option or having a portion of their rent (in the case of permanent year-round
dwellings) go into an "equity fund" for the eventual purchase of the house.
The Agency should be appropriated funds for the purpose of training all man-
agers of projects to enable them to efficiently operate the project and to be sensi-
tive to the needs of the tenants.
Each project should have a tenant's council, democratically elected, to advise
the management and assist the organization in setting local policy. An appeal
apparatus should be established, with the Director of the Agency as the final
arbiter, to settle differences between the tenant's council and management and
local organizations.
The agency should be authorized to exercise the power of eminent domain in
areas where building sites are not readily available.
The Agency should make available to applicant organizations planning services
and technical assistance in order that all housing needs might be met in the
local area.
The Agency should be authorzied to preempt local zoning regulations and
building codes in appropriate circumstances.
The Agency should be authorized to enforce a strict national code concerned
with housing provided for farm workers who travel across states lines, or hous-
ing used by farm workers which is owned or operated by or for the benefit of
growers or corporation farms engaged in interstate commerce.
Permanent housing shoixld not be built in a compound or labor camp type
setting. Rather, scattered sites should be used, or at the very least, subdivisions
should be developed. Sites should be carefully selected, to provide for integration
within the existing community and proximity to existing jobs and community
services.
Finally, the Agency should be authorized to make payments to the local gov-
ernments and school districts for any increased burden on services rendered by
them caused by the location of housing for low income persons in a particular
area.
These are some of the measures, then, that must be taken if hired farm workers
are to be decently housed this side of heaven. The persons that need the help
are nearly powerless. If many of us hope that farm workers themselves, cur-
rently engaged in the process of awakening to their own potential strength will
5628
soon be able to exercise self determination. But until that potential strength
becomes reality, and until this discrimination ceases, dilapidated housing, ill-
health, pollution, disease, lack of equal opportunity and the shame and degrada-
tion of farm workers rests on the conscience of the total community and makes
the moral pretense of this country ugly and hypocritical.
Mr. Cochran. The Kural Housing Alliance is a private, nonprofit
organization that has been trying to do something about bad housing
in all the small towns and rural areas, because two-thirds of the bad
housing is there and most people, when you tell them that don't even
believe it, because it has been something that has been so well con-
cealed.
I want to make it clear that when the representatives of the union
and others were speaking this morning, saying that the most impor-
tant thing for farm workers is unionization that we certainly agree to
that — ^but it is going to take a lot more than unionization a lot faster
to do anything for a lot of the people who are out there.
But we do not want to be put in a position of doing anything but
saying "Hurrah" when they say that Christian paternalism and pub-
lic concern are no substitute for putting enough power in the hands
of the people out there to do something for themselves.
These hearings remind me of old Mr. Peacham in the "Three Penny
Opera" who said, patting a huge Bible "This is a great book full of
great slogans, but people being what they are, the best slogan won't
last more than 3 weeks."
From the "Grapes of Wrath," to the old Melvin Douglas group, that
exposed this in the thirties and forties on through "The Harvest of
Shame" and all the work of this subcommittee, the horrors that are
brought out seem to last about 3 weeks. And then people forget it. The
only people who will not forget it are those out there with the cock-
roaches. And there, of course, is where the power has to be put.
I hope that is going on at a rapid pace. But apparently it is not,
not in Florida. We need to do something from where any of us stand,
to do anything we can on workmen's compensation, housing, and so
forth.
Our concern has been housing. I don't believe, despite what I am
going to say here and what is in the written statement — I don't be-
lieve we are going to do much for housing for hired farmworkers until
we do something for housing for all the low-income people. I don't
believe that this Congress or any of the administrations that I have
known lately are going to really get behind a special program focused
on hired farm labor. I think it has to be part of a bigger thing.
Yet, when you are confronted with it and asked what can be done,
one comes up with a program and says, "Just in case you don't know
what is needed, we will tell you." But we still think it is going to come
up as a part of the broader program.
One Senator asked me last week in another hearing, shouldn't the
farm operators provide the housing ?
My response basically is that I don't think they will, and I don't
think they should, because they build company towns.
The next question, if we get a decent welfare program, can they
buy decent housing ? Not under any welfare program I see coming up.
The housing is not there to be bought. It has to be built.
If we succeed in getting through some welfare reforms and getting
assistance out there, all the poor people can do is bid up the price of
5529
the houses with a few less cockroaches in them, unless we do something
about building.
So far, we have been remarkably clever people on closing our eyes
to this and in maintaining the myth, both in the area of farm labor
housing and other low-income housing, that sooner or later, some way
or another, the free enterprise system and the market, with some in-
sured loans or this or that gimmick that comes along, are going to take
care of this problem. They are not. It is going to take a massive input
of Federal money directly to do anything about housing of farm-
workers or any other poor group.
The point you touched on, Mr. Chairman, the old farm security
program, I think is worth touching on, because by contrast with what
we have and in terms of where we ought to be going, it is important.
It started when the Dust Bowl immigrants hit California in a flood
in the thirties and were piling up in the ditch banks in even larger
numbers, and the children were starving, and there were enough of
the Steinbeck types who were exposing this to view that even in those
grim depression days, there was some public concern, and there was
an ear in Washington, there was even an ear in Sacramento at the
time.
The California "Welfare Department started those old camps, and
resettlement picked up the program. First they were nothing but plat-
forms with tents and sanitary facilities and telephones, where you
could call a doctor — and some grant money for food and medical care.
As the program evolved, it came under attack every year in the con-
gressional committees and on the floor ; charged with everything from
unionization of farm workers to Communism (Senator Russell even
condemning them for subsidizing the big corporations by housing their
workers). Nevertheless, it evolved in to a pretty remarkable program.
In the latter days the camps, so-called, that were being built were very
well planned communities, with circular drives, community centers
for recreation, for meetings, for nursery schools, which we did operate
in them, a clinic, which was staffed full-time with a nurse, and by con-
tracts with doctors in the area.
In the Southwestern area, the greatest medical co-op the country has
ever had for low-income people operated with funds from Farm Se-
curity. They covered three States there. They built their own hospital.
Senator Mondale. I remember Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath, where
the children talked about Government camps, the relief that those
children felt when they finally got placed in one of those camps. In
those days in the midst of all that devastation, they must have been
quite remarkable at that time.
Mr. Cochran. They were really sanctuaries. As a camp manager,
I had the authority of a Deputy U.S. Marshal. And, among other
things, I stopped the Chief of Police of Weslaco from coming out and
collecting for the loan sharks by telling him that I would throw him
in jail, so far they would have to pump sunshine to him if he showed
up again, because the camp was not even in the city of Weslaco. Never-
theless, he was still collecting for the local loan sharks.
There were relief funds available and medical care. There was a
place where they could get together. Those camps were run by an
elected council. They even had their own judiciary, which used to sit
5530
in their overalls and hand out work sentences for people who dirtied
up the garbage racks.
That program was wiped out by the Farm Bureau Federation in
1947, moving in the background all these fine agri-business forces, who
feared most of all that the farm workers would organise out of the
camps, although they had not. But, also, they set a bad example for
the community. They were a pain in the psychological neck of agri-
business.
I don't believe these people suffer so much from guilt as uneasiness
that something will happen to the racket.
In any case, Congress abolished the program, turned the camps
back in some cases to the local housing authorities, and in some cases
to grower associations. And the program was eliminated. Two years
after that the Congress passed the Housing Act of 1949, but farm-
workers don't show up in it.
Senator Mondale. The Weslaco Camp and others like them were
paid for with 100 percent by Federal money, were they not ?
Mr. Cochran. The land, the buildings, the medical care, the staff
were all Federal in all cases.
Senator Mondale. When these buildings were sold, I assume that a
county or some operation bought them rather cheaply at that time.
Mr. Cochran. So far as I know, they were turned over without
cost.
Senator Mondale. Free ?
But the local agency then has continued to charge substantial rents,
even though they got the camps free. It has been, I would gather, a
major revenue producer for some of these counties.
Mr. Cochran. Possibly. Assuming they have maintained them the
way I think they probably maintained them, they were revenue pro-
ducers, meaning they have not maintained them. But if you are main-
taining decent facilities, which are as over crowded as the Weslaco
Camp was, for poor people, a lot of whom are transients, the cost of
maintenance and care is going to be considerable.
That is the reason that the Farm-Labor Housing program we have —
and even to some extent the one prepared in your and Senator Hart's
bills providing for a 90-percent subsidy — are deficient because people
that poor cannot afford to pay enough to cover maintenance and opera-
tion and defray any capital cost. The subsidy really ought to be as
much, as we point out in our written statement, as much as we give
public housing, that is, 100 percent of capital cost plus a part of the cost
of operations. Otherwise, you deny the neediest people admission. Or,
alternately, you gouge them for money, which they have to take out of
shoes and medical care and the other necessities of life.
For 12 or 14 years after that program was eliminated, the Congress
did nothing. Then in 1961 it passed legislation which permitted loans at
5 percent to associations of farmers and other nonprofit organizations,
States, and subdivisions.
Under that program, practicallj nothing happened. There were 29
loans in 4 years to house 256 families and 816 individual farmworkers.
The program wasn't working.
In 1965 the law was amended to make possible grants up to two-
thirds of the cost of the project, and the balance of the cost to come
out of insured loans. But this was still not an adequate program.
5531
particularly since the Appropriations Committees immediately ruled
that the grant should not be over half. Farmers Home Administration
knows where its bread is buttered, and I don't think they have funded
five projects where they allowed more than half the cost through
grants.
In March of this year the loan and grant program had obligated just
over $28 million, $16 million in loans, $12 million in grants, and has
produced the magnificent total of 4,000 units to house families and
barracks units for 3,300 individual workers, very generously, as we
computed yesterday, 2 percent of the total need.
At the same time. Farmers Home only put out 26 percent of the
funds it had available for loans and 74 percent of the funds available
for grants. Even with this drop in the bucket, the money did not go
out.
The question is, "Why ?"
In the first place, the subsidy wasn't deep enough. Groups that
wanted to do it couldn't make the books balance. They could not prove
that the thing was practical without greater subsidy.
In the second place, it was given to an agency which had pretty
well deteriorated in the 1950's, was short handed, understaffed.
The Congress began to dump additional increments of programs
and new programs on Farmers Home. This is a hard program to
administer. It is a controversial program to administer. It is a com-
plex loan to put through. And the program didn't ^et very far.
On another occasion, I would like for the committee to bring the
State director of New Jersey in here, if the record does not already
show it, to tell what happened when a Farmers Home supervisor spent
2 years trying to set up a migratory labor camp in New Jersey, thought
everything was set to take care of several hundred families, and sud-
denly the middle-class community says, "We don't want them to live
there."
They were already living in hovels and shacks, but they did not want
to recognize them enough to create a decent community. This bias runs
across the land. This is one of the reasons why I don't think local
communities left to themselves are going to take care of this problem.
It will take a Federal agency that can say to the local community,
"We will pay the cost for you. We will pay the cost of the impact on
the community, providing decent schools. But if you don't do it, we
will do it for you."
It is going to take something like that to make it work.
During all these years. Farmers Home had no funds for research.
The old Farm Security used to have a fair-to-good research depart-
ment. We knew where the migrant streams were and where the con-
centrations were and where the housing was worst. We had a pretty
good picture of what was going on in the field.
I am sure there is nobody in the Farmers Home Administration
today that knows that because they have nobody assigned to it. So
they do it on an ad hoc basis from the information furnished by the
applicant.
Only 16 organizations have received grants since the inception of
the program. The rents are generally over $50 a month plus utilities.
At least one project is $85 a month plus utilities.
5532
Eecently, Farmers Home had such bad luck with nonprofit bodies
that it announced it would not make grants to any more of them. It
would only make grants to public bodies.
Not much of a program. Although there are two great things in the
bill that was put in last week, one increases the subsidy, but not enough,
and the other authorizes Farmers Home to lend that money to orga-
nizations of farmworkers themselves. If farmworkers could receive,
not 90 percent but 100 percent of the cost of housing, they could build
communities, and we might see something happen in some of the areas
of the country.
The main problem on the existing program is legislative. The law
was defective. The agency was undermanned. The Appropriations
Committees inhibited the agency, and they knew they were operating
like a poor country bank under the surveillance of the Subcommittees
on Appropriations and of Agriculture, knowing they had better not
get in trouble subsidizing farmworkers.
With reference to the migrant NBC white paper, sadly enough, in
Florida, organizations and individuals have received over $14 million
under this program, which is 51 percent of all the farm labor housing
loans under the program. Nearly 2,000 units, 50 percent of the U.S.
total, have been built.
In other words, half of the total of a totally inadequate program
leaves housing conditions still deplorable, which should not be sur-
prising.
Since I saw a press release from one of the Coca-Cola front groups,
giving these same figures here, I will point out that over a period of 9
years, the life of the program, the average per worker outlay is $85.35
or less than $10 per worker per year ; $10 per worker. That would not
supply the kids with the caffeine they get out of Coca-Cola, let alone
housing.
Incidentally, why could you not legislate and prohibit any corpora-
tion selling drugs to children from owning agricultural land? That
might take care of one problem.
The Florida State OEO office says there are still a third of a million
substandard units in the State's 17 counties, where substandard hous-
ing comprises over 40 percent of the total.
Professor Kleinert of the University of Miami, in a study of 9,000
migrants, came up with such figures as you can imagine. I will leave
them to be read into the record.
But 41 percent of them did not have a toilet that would work, and
42 percent did not have a place to take a bath.
No wonder that kid in the documentary, stood and shuffled his feet in
shame and described himself as a bum. He probably went to school
dirty or ragged and then slugged the first kid that said something to
him about it.
One has to talk about nailing down the responsibility for this. In
our society you can talk about the growers being delinquent and the
corporations being greedy, but when it comes to law and order in the
community and some sense of justice, the responsibility is right here.
The buck has to stop somewhere, and the Congress is the place that
it ought to stop.
If Coca-Cola is getting rich out of lousy housing and low wages,
sure, they may go to bed uneasily at night, which I doubt, or load the
5533
plate down a little more on Christmas gifts, which I doubt. But that is
not going to solve the problem. The problem has to be solved by the
Congress making resources available to take care of the problem. It
doesn't matter whether the grower's conscience is guilty or free. They
can't do it. This is what we have been up against for years.
In GEO there is another drop in the bucket on farm laber housing.
As a matter of fact, when you combine the housing on the west coast
the Migrant Division there, which has done most of the housing in
OEO, with some of the better units, the self-help program, it looks like
they have done something like half or better than half as much with
their limited funds as the Farmers Home program has done in 9 years.
I repeat, it is a drop in the bucket. The Migrant Division gets less
than 1 percent of the total funds in the agency. In case everybody does
not know it, that division was created by putting a law which this sub-
committee had worked on into the OEO bill. We were very hopeful
that at least we had legislation and a nice brand new agency that was
going to take out and do things.
Sargent Shriver said, "We will start with $15 million the first year
and raise it to $300 million the third year. And we will get the
agricultural workers out of poverty."
I don't think they ever got above $33 million. That was 1 year. And
they were cut back to $'25 million. With this, they have been doing day-
care, education, economic development. Some housing, what they have
done^ is great (They have pioneered on self-help, and Congress put
that into permanent legislation, which Farmers Home is now supposed
to be administering. ) But the Migrant Division has not had the funds
to do things.
If the Congress is looking for a place to dump a few hundred million
dollars worth of conscience money for some quick subsidies for hous-
ing, it might take a look at what is left of the war on poverty. At least
the Migrant Division of OEO is the closest thing to an agency in the
Federal Government today that is concerned with the plight of the
hired farm labor.
I have never been able to find anybody in the Labor Department who
cared. Individuals, sure. But try to get the Labor Department to look
into this problem. I tried. I found that the vice president of a Chicago
f)ickle concern showed up as the executive secretary of a family farmers
abor committee during the summer. He would rest himself in Chicago
in the winter and play family farmer in the summer. But he still drew
his vice president's salary.
I asked the Labor Department under Mr. Goldberg, "Look into this,
how much of this hanky-panky goes on. What looks like some family
farmer importing Mexican workers from Texas is actually a Chicago
pickle corporation. See what the lines are."
I don't know what they were busy at, but the Labor Department has
never been veiy profarm labor. It is usually busy with something else.
Before leaving the OEO program. Senator, I would like to stress one
point.
The Congress stipulated that the migrant program was to be a na-
tional program. They weren't to hack it up and turn one piece over to
Coca-Cola and another piece over to Governor Kirk. But there is a
rumor that the new administrator of OEO is contemplating regional-
izing the migrant program.
5534
We hope that you and the Congress will oppose any such plan, be-
cause it means whatever good they are doing now will cease.
The migrant problem is not a local problem in terms of its solution
and the resources to do something about it. If it is regionalized, you
might as well cancel the program and put the money over in the Penta-
gon or somewhere where they know how to spend it.
To touch for just a minute on HUD, I don't see anything you can do
about HUD on farm labor housing until you can persuade them to get
interested in rural housing. So far, we have not been able to get them
interested in the broader problems where two-thirds of the bad housing
is.
I don't see how you can get them much interested in a narrow and
very difficult segment of that problem until their general attitude on
rural housing changes.
Under the turnkey III program, if you had some provocateurs or
somebody out there to stir the local housing authorities, offer some
leadership, hold some 'field hearings, tighten up in some way on hous-
ing inspection, turnkey III would be a great program in public hous-
ing for farmworkers, with or without self-help. But we don't see HUD
moving in that direction.
HUD is so overwhelmingly metropolitan oriented that it is difficult
to get them to even think about the problem out there in the small town
and rural areas.
Section 106 (A), in which I think you had a hand, authorized them
to sponsor self-helf projects. FHA picked up several bucks to staff
themselves up for something else. Until you called attention to it in
May, nothing had happened.
I don't think you have heard from them yet. The lawyers are still
exchanging letters over there as to what the meaning of the section is.
Senator Mondale. I had them over here the other day — a remark-
able nonprofit group working in a deteriorated section. They are doing
it all on their own — a remarkable group.
They have a very flexible program of rehabilitating rental housing
under 235. They have sat on 106 applications now for a year for some
235 housing.
I called them over. I said, "Where is that loan ?" It is something like
$17,000. I think we spent $50,000 in processing letters, and so on.
Mr. Cochran. The lawyers' letters, you mean ?
Senator Mondale. That is right. "Well," he said, "as you well know,
106 was not intended to buy 235 housing."
I said, "Hell, it is my bill, 106."
He said, "I never heard of that. That is in our regulation, Thank you
very much, but we never do it."
I said, "We passed the bill. So that suggestion is illegal that you have
here. Don't ever let me hear it again."
Mr. Cochran. I will touch very briefly on the recommendations that
we spell out in our written statement. We suggest the Congress setting
up some kind of new agency giving this as a sole responsibility.
If you give it to HUD, I am afraid the lawyers will use it up in
writing memos to each other. The agency is not bent in that direction.
If you give it to Farmers Home, they will have to go to the Agricul-
tural Subcommittee on Appropriations for money. And I tell you,
they won't get it.
5535
It should be an independent agency. It should have money for
research. It should have the authority to provide 100-peroent sub-
sidy on capital costs and require decent planning and integration in the
community, so that you are not building company towns or fenced
ghettos. It should stress permanent housing whenever possible.
And there are ways of building seasonal housing so that if there is a
diminishing need for seasonal labor within the community within 3 to
5 years, by unlocking the door or knocking down the wall, you can con-
vert it into a pleasant permanent house. What is needed is an inde-
pendent agency with funds to go out and do the job and do the research,
subsidize the rent, integrate them into the local community, see that
they are governed by camp council, see that the people who occupy them
have the right to be heard on the rules and regulations. This way we
pick up where we left off 30 years ago on at least part of the problem
through a specialized program.
The rest of it is going to have to be met through stepping up the
public concern over the general housing problem in small towns and
rural areas and, in the process of meeting that overall need, building
enough subsidies to take care of the needs of hired farmworkers.
We are very grateful for a chance to appear here, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mondale. Thank you very much for your written statement
and for your oral comments.
You have spent your life in this business. I imagine you have sat in
on some of these hearings. If you were to do one thing, you had your
wish, which you felt might bring some hope to the farmworkers of this
country, what would you do?
Mr. Cochran. I would give them coverage by NLRB.
Senator Mondale. What is the second thing ?
Mr. Cochran. Well, 5 years ago I would have given them the war on
poverty. But I will take it back now and not charge it up to them.
Senator Mondale. They might give it to you.
Mr. Cochran. I am caught here on structuring. What you want to
get done is so much involved and affected so much by the structure that
you build around it, and the bureaucracy you establish, and the number
of vetoes that you will allow the local communities to exercise against
it.
So you say, "Give us a decent migrant health program, and give us a
real farmworker housing program in an independent agency, so that
with some unionization, with some decent medical care in the mean-
time, and some kind of a house that has a clean source of water, and the
kids don't have to wallow in the worms in the yard, we can make do
while we make the broader approaches."
The result is that we create the mirgant health program. Immedi-
ately the bureaucrats want to swallow it up and put it over into some-
thing where it disappears. Even CEO has not been free on this. You
give them money for migrant workers, and too much of it gets eaten up
by nonmigrant workers.
You gave farmers home housing money — in that case, though, basic-
ally it was Congress's fault. But medical care, housing, union recogni-
tion. Of course, the others all follow. But those are the three that it
seems to me are the most essential things, not only for the children but
for their parents.
5536
Leon Kyserling said a few years ago, "Don't kid yourselves. There is
not much you can do for the children of the poor unless you are willing
to do something for their parents at the same time.
Senator Mondale; What would you think of an adequate program of
income maintenance, family -assistance program, as a strategy ?
Mr. Cochran. I think that would be great. They sa}^ the average
earnings were $900 a year ; $1,600 would seem like heaven if you did not
cut off their food stamps.
Senator Mondale. We talk about $1,600 plus food stamps. That
would amount to something like $2,200. For the average migrant,
$2,200 a year would be tripling of income.
Mr. Cochran. That would be wonderful.
Senator Mondale. You have lived with these programs for 30 or
35 years?
Mr. Cochran. Yes, but income maintenance won't build housing,
Senator. The housing is not there. The housing is not there. They will
just bid up the price of those rattraps.
Senator Mondale. If you had that, then housing solutions might be
easier. That is, if you had a good housing program
Mr. Cochran. They wouldn't be harder.
Senator Mondale. There would be some money there at least.
Mr. Cochran. Yes, of course. But we would not want to take it back
by rigging them into an $85-a-month house for the $2,400-a-year
income.
Senator Mondale. I think the President, perhaps inadvertently, has
offered us a program (FAP) that really deserves more support than
it has received, though we would want improvements. It needs to be
fixed up.
But I think there is a basic argument for giving the poor enough
money for a minimum decent life. I think they can do better for
themselves than we can do for them.
There may be lots of shortages, like housing, where you have to act.
Otherwise, the money is lost.
Mr. Cochran. I would go with you, unionization and income mainte-
nance. I was thinking more of the traditional programs. No question
about it. A little cash.
Senator Mondale. We spend something like $8,200 a year for every
Indian in this country. But the Indian's income is $1,400 a year.
Somebody is skimming.
If you just closed everything down and sent them the money, they
would be the richest sector in the American population.
Mr. Cochran. I am not sure, because I don't know how much of that
$8,200 a year goes for policing the land they have leased out to big
Anglo ranchers or paying for their own police. They pay for their own
police forces and road maintenance and schools in some areas, don't
they ? So I have never been sure that that $1,400 figure was convertible
into the $8,200.
Senator Mondale. I think it is fair to say it is an exaggerated figure,
because there are services being offered of value which are not reflected.
Mr. Cochran. But it has to be paid for by somebody.
Senator Mondale. I have been dismayed to see that our first solution
for virtually all of our human problems is to tool up by hiring a bunch
of middle-class Americans.
5537
Mr. Cochran. In Fauquier County, a few miles from here, the other
day the head of their planning commission said they were opposed to
building any house that cost less than $40,000 in the county, because any
houses that cost less than that would not pay enough taxes to defray
the cost of public services and they would have to tax the other rich
people more to take care of the people who lived in the less-than-
$40,000 houses.
I don't know what is built into their cost figures, either, but some-
body has to pay for it. I don't know. I hate to get in a position here of
defending BIA. I don't know how much of that $8,200 goes into what
we all agree are essential services such as police protection and that
sort of thing.
But it is true that it is a shocking figure. They get $8,200 per Indian,
and the Indian gets $1,400 of it. It does seem like a poor way of feeding
the birds.
Senator Mondale. I did not mean to pick on the BIA, because I
think that is rather standard strategy.
I think most of our programs and program administrators assume
that the poor have no strength and no judgment at all. I think the great
waste in American life is not to recognize that the poor and powerless
are an enormously talented and resourceful people. They would be
dead if they weren't.
Mr. Cochran. Long since.
Senator Mondale. They really want the system to work and want
to be a part of it. We have their loyalty, at least far more than we are
entitled to. The country has enjoyed their patriotism more than per-
haps we have a right to ask.
Mr. Cochran. They are almost an unfortunately patient people.
Senator Mondale. Mr. Cochran, I am most appreciative of your
efforts. Your many years of experience with the migrant labor prob-
lem qualifies you as an expert, and I appreciate your sharing that
knowledge with the subcommittee.
We will stand in recess until Friday morning. I order printed in the
record materials that are submitted to the subcommittee that are rele-
vant to today's hearing at this point.
(The material referred to follows :)
'UjS. Senate,
lck)mmittee on appkopriations,
Washington, D.C., September 2, 1970.
Hon. Walter F. Mondale,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor,
Washington, D.C.
My Dear Senator : I am sending you herewith copy of a letter I have received
from Mr. George F. >Sorn, Manager of the Labor Division of the Florida Fruit &
Vegetable Association, which I believe you will find self explanatory.
I would appreciate your making a part of your official records and/or hearing
record the six-part Report from the MIAMI HERALD written by Herald Staff
Writer John K. deGroot, copy of which I am enclosing herewith, as requested in
Mr. Som's letter.
Your advice of what action you can properly take regarding this requesit will be
appreciated.
With kindest regards, I remain
Yours faithfully,
Spessard L. Holland.
5538
Florida Fbtuit and Vegetable Association,
August 31, 1910.
Hon. 'Spessard L. Holland,
U.S. Senate, Old Senwte Office BuUding,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator Holland : This Association continues to appreciate all of your
activities in support Oif Agriculture in the 'State of Florida.
Recently, this Association — through George H. Wedgworth, Joffre C. David
and the writer — ^has had conversations and correspondence vpith you and your
staff concerning the general migrant problem in Florida. This included informa-
tion about the NBC White Paper — Migrant, and testimony before The Senate
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor.
Included in the over-all migrant problem has been much completely biased
reporting by nevi'spapers and television. Recently, there appeared a six-part re-
port in THE MilAMI HERALD written by Herald Staff Writer John K. deGroot.
The report is highly deserving of note since, in our estimation, It Is extremely
objective ireporting about the migrant problem.
We are attaching a copy of the articles for your information.
In conversation with Joffre, we wondered about the feasibility of submitting
copies of the six-part report to The Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor to
be made a part of their official flies. If you thought well of the idea, we wondered
whether you would be so kind as to submit the six-pairt report by Mr. John
deGroot to The Senate (Subcommittee on Migratory Labor so that it can be made
a part of their official records.
Sincerely yours,
George F. Sorn,
Manager, Labor Division.
Attachment.
Six-Part Report of the Miami HiaiALD Staff Writer J. K. de Groot on the
Migrant of South Florida
[From the Miami Herald, Aug. 16, 1970]
Most of the Migrants Call Florida Home
"I'm just trying to get along without shovin' nobody around."
— Tom Joad, from John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath," 1939.
For a month, reporter J. K. de Groot traveled South Florida's
farmland talking with more than 200 people, from the impoverished
to the powerful. He also dealt with more than 25 organizatons con-
cerned with the migrant and with material from nine independent
research studies of the migrant for a six-part report that begins
today.
(By J. K. de Groot, Herald staff writer)
Like a tunnel in time. State Road 80 slashes through swamp, desolation and
history as it moves westward from the gleaming coastal splendor of Palm Beach.
At one end, the richest citizens of the world's most opulent nation call for
drinks and deljentures while air conditioners and servants whisper around them.
Less than 50 miles westward, other citizens nurse wounds of the mind that
are said to be of greater cruelty than those often found festering on the
impoverished bodies of their young.
Officially, Florida numbers them among "our friends in agriculture."
In a recent greeting to such people, Gov. Claude Kirk Jr., expressed the "hope
that you will be able to spend a few additional days or weeks with us. Visit our
winter farm acreage, and enjoy our sun, beaches, fishing, state parks, and many
other attractions.
"And most important," concluded the governor, "hurry back to see us. We are
happy to see you."
Among others, the governor was addressing a said segment of our society com-
monly called "migrants."
The term is anachronistic in an age of rocketry and repose . . . just as the
governor's statement reflected a certain irony when one considers that it was
made to many who earn an estimated $1,737 to $2,800 annually as agricultural
workers.
5539
But who are these whom the state numbers among its "friends in agriculture"
and whom most term "migrants."
iFirst, they are not "migrants" . . . not in the Steinbeckian sense, not the
jalopy people of the '30s, the homeless Okies desperate and adrift in a world of
economic chaos.
Indeed, many journey by bus from farm to farm and state to sitate.
But unlike those tractored off their lands to taste the grapes of wrath in the
Depression years, these people have a home.
It's Florida — the spawning ground of 81 per cent of the entire population of
"migrant" workers who move up and down the eastern seaboard of the United
States. This was revealed in a 1969 study conducted at the request of the Florida
State Department of Education.
Hence, the vast majority of them are not homeless. They are Floridians.
Thus the term "migrant" does not connote someone with a home ; thus the
anachronism of the word and the irony of the governor's recent welcome to "our
friends In agriculture."
The governor's statement would have been more accurate had it been addressed
to our friends in the Florida agri-ghetto — this based on a diverse gathering of
studies made by various local, state and federal agencies.
But who are these people of the Florida agri-ghetto.
They are a vast portion of what the Florida Farm Labor Department refers to
as seasonal farm workers. These are people whose numbers rise and fall like some
vast human tide regulated by the harvest of crops in the vegetable and citrus
regions of the state.
Last year, during the peak of the harvest season in February, the Farm Labor
Department counted 77,9i8 persons gathering Florida produce for the nation's
stomach.
By August, with the fields dormant beneath the burning summer sun, their
number had dwindled to 24,445. For 53,539 men and women of the fields, it was
impossible to find year-round employment in the Sunshine State.
These people had two choices :
They could work elsewhere, move northward to other states and seasons. Or
they could remain to eke out a precarious life style with day-to-day jobs as
diverse as the forms of unskilled employment.
For others, by choice or chance, it was a matter of going jobless, living on
surplus commodities and the grace of agri-slumlords who let rental payments
slide until the fields are full once more and the growers require labor.
It is impossible to number the latter, the people of the precarious summer.
Mostly they are the old and wasted, the drunken and disordered, the wives and
children. For the others, the menfolk of healthy mind and body, there is work —
though they might wander 1,400 miles to find it.
"What remains significant is the schizophrenia of the Florida farm labor
demand.
At one point during the season, it finds itself begging for labor, with fruit and
vegetables rotting in fields because they cannot be gathered quickly enough.
And there are other areas of agriculture where the worker refuses to labor.
For this reason, some 8,000 are fiown in from the Caribbean each year to harvest
sugar cane. Despite newspaper ads, radio commercials and billboards, the Amer-
ican farm worker chooses not to sweat and toil in the burnt-out cane field in
harvest.
There is paradox in this because the imported "off shore" sugar cane worker is
offered base pay greater than that of any other field worker in the state.
And so during the peak of the harvest season, Florida begs for hands and
bodies to gather its goods of produce.
But depending on crop and county, the begging quickly ceases — beginning first
in the southernmost counties and moving northward.
For this reason, many workers move throughout the state — crop to crop, harvest
to harvest, week to week.
But by May, it is finished. And by August, nearly 70 per cent of February's
treasured hands and bodies have become worthless commodities in a glutted
market.
Small wonder that many travel northward from May to September in what
they call "the stream."
Who enters this stream?
The Florida Labor Department believes the number may range from 40,000 to
45,000.
5540
But this is an estimate just as Chet Huntley recently estimated the number of
Florida "migrants" at 200,000 ... in a nation-wide television special . . . bringing
cries of outrage from Gov. Kirk on down to Billy Lee, Jim Oadwick who pumps
gas in Pahokee during the summer after a harvest season behind the wheel of a
worker-laden truck.
In truth, there is an impressive collection of agencies, organizations and com
mittees quick to offer their estimate of the "migrant" population in Florida.
There are two problems crucial in producing any head count of the State's
so-called "migrants."
First, a number of them . . . roughly 20 per cent . . . actually do move from
county to county and across state lines.
Second is the matter of defining what constitutes the state of migrancy.
Nearly every organization counting migrants does so with its own definition of
what constitutes a state of "migrancy," ranging from anyone who might work on
a farm during a given year to one who crosses the state line in search of agricul-
tural employment.
The agency with the figures most widely accepted is the Farm Labor Depart-
ment, which has ofllces and staff members in the major farming centers of the
state.
The Farm Labor Department staff members obtain a semi-monthly count of
workers in fields from their employes.
Analyzing these figures, one comes up with the following — ^based on a peak
employment figure statewide of 77,984 field workers in February of 1969 :
First, 7,983 were "off shore" sugar cane workers flown in from Jamaica.
This leaves 70,001 "domestic" workers toiling in the fields of Florida. lOf these,
55,813, or nearly 80 percent, listed their home as Florida.
iFurther, 48,006 described themselves as being "local" in the area where they
worked, while only 7,803 indicated they had traveled from another point in the
state to work in the fields.
In short, only 20 per cent of those in the fields had actually "migrated" from
another state to support the Florida farm economy.
So much for the classic Florida "migrant," perched amid bedsprings, children
and chickens atop a clattering pick-up descending upon the land.
These folk, with the exception of a handful of 14,188, are Floridians.
Their trucks, cars and buses bear Florida license plates. Their children while
their attendance is woefully sporadic, receive the major portion of their education
in Florida schools before dropping out after the sixth grade.
And when those who do head north are asked where they're from, they'll say,
"I'm from Florida."
Florida is not merely a part of the "migrant stream." It is one of its major
sources, a point overlooked by the many state legislators who demand federal
solutions to the migrant problem because "migrants are federal people."
As indicated earlier, the Farm Labor Department estimates that some 40,000 to
45,000 souls leave Florida to join the northbound stream at the end of each
season.
iBut when the "stream" flowed north. Farm Labor Department flgures indicate
it bore a human load of nearly 55,000 people.
Why is the iSunshine 'State a source in this stream of human misery, rather
than one more branch in its yearly flow along the eastern coast?
The answer is that Florida has the longest harvest season of any state served
by the stream.
It begins at the end of October and closes toward the end of May, nearly eight
months long. During this period, the movements of the "stream" are minimal. The
"stream" is at home — at home in the agri-ghetto.
Times have changed since the days of Tom Joad and the "Grapes of Wrath."
No longer does the sheriff meet the "migrant" at the state line.
Now the governor welcomes him, creating the paradox of a resident being
treated as a visitor, with the genteel invitation to spend some time at the beach.
Unfortunately, when working, the "migrant spends an average of 10 hours a
day in the field, six days a week, miles from the beaches.
And he receives, at highest estimate, $2,800 a year for his services, according
to the State Department of Education's research project conducted by Uni-
versity of Miami Professor John E. Kleinert.
Kleinert's research team also reported that the wife of the average migrant-
resident-visitor works beside him in the fields or in the packing houses, bringing
in an additional $1,900 a year for 10 hours a day when the season demands it.
5541
The kids pitch in, too, a good thing, according to one Floridian interviewed on
national television. He opined that the "fresh air did them a lot of good."
The average migrant child ; according to Professor Kleinert's research team,
begins working in the fields between his 11th and 12th birthday.
The boys work longer, averaging 18.20.5 hours a week. The girls only put in
an average of 16.262 hours in the fields.
Of course, Florida law requires they cannot work during school time. But
there is no child labor la«- limiting the number of hours a child can spend in the
field after school.
But in any case, such is academic because the average migrant ciiild drops out
of school shortly after he finishes sixth grade.
With mom and dad in the field 10 hours a day and the kids hustling along
beside them after school, the average "migrant" family might earn as much as
$."(,000 a year — based on the Kleinert study of conditions in Florida.
To this. Harvard psychiatrist Dr. Robert Coles replies, "I do not believe the
human mind and body were made to sustain the stresses migrants must face."
Dr. Coles has si>ent 12 years studying the migrant family unit. He reports,
"when a migi'ant child is 10, he ceases being a child.
"These children," he continues, "eventually become dazed and listless, numb
to anything but immediate sui'vival.
"When he is 13 or 14, he is already on his way downhill with his teeth in
trouble, his skin in trouble, heart and lungs and stomach in trouble.
It is not surprising that Professor Kleinhert's research team found that 75 per
cent of the migrants wanted.other forms of work.
Three hundretl times as many migrants die of accidental deaths than the rest of
their fellow Americans according to the U.S. Department of Public Health.
Yet while their accidental death rate is 300 i>er cent above the rest of the
country, in Florida the law does not require their employer to carry workman's
compensation. Of the 113.000 farms in Florida, only 1,811 carry it on a voluntary
basis, according to the State Industrial Commission.
In addition, other studies reveal the migrant consumes less than half the needed
dietary allowances of nutrients in Florida.
Most of his children are behind from two to three years in school.
These same children are 43.6 i>er cent more anti-social than the average child.
Their chances of death during birth are nearly 2~t per cent greater than other
children.
When they grow up, their chances of death from influenza and pneumonia are
100 per cent above the rest of society.
In Florida, 30 per cent of tlieir homes lack sinks, 40.60 per cent lack toilets and
42.67 lack bathing facilities.
For this, their parents will pay an average of $r)3.43 a month in rent for three
and one-half unfurnished rooms, with an average of one and one-half bedrooms
for tlie typical migrant family of five.
The studies and statistics go on — and so does Life for those who have been num-
bered from 200.000 to 76,024, for those called "migrants," for those who dwell in
the Florida agri-ghetto.
Next : They fought the wilderness.
[From the Miami Herald, Aug. 17, 1970]
OLDTiMBai VS. Migrant — Cultures Clash on the Land
"All of them were caught up in something larger than themselves."
— From John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, 1939.
This is the second in a series of six articles on the migrant workers
in Florida.
(By J. K. de Groot, Herald staff writer)
By damn, le.ss than a good spit away in downtown Belle Glade, there's this
Jesus-haired young lawyer with granny glasses calling him "dinosaur" and
trying to get a free ride for a bunch of lazy blacks.
That's the way Lawrence Will sees it.
Not only that, these young black punks get together every weekend and t-ake
karate lessons from one of their kind who recently returned from Vietnam with
36-513 — 71 — pt. SB 11
5542
a black belt in judo and hard eyes for just about everyone outside of Colored
Town.
And have you heard about them Mexican kids over in Immokalee? They formed
this club called "Los Chicanos." Lord knows what that means, but they're strut-
ting around with brown berets, talking about "brown power" and how you
should stay in college to get smart enough to lead the revolution.
The old man sighs and his breath comes like a wind from yesterday stirring
through his room, a cell of monastical simplicity above one of his several
businesses that include cattle, crops and automotive parts.
"Sometimes I feel like I'm George Washington, woke up and listening to the
radio. Nothin' makes sense anymore," he says.
At 77, Lawrence E. Will, Belle Glade author, historian and pioneer, sits alone,
surrounded by books and papers that smell of age and yellowing photographs of
men and women long dead and buried in the muck they conquered.
It was 57 years and countless dreams and deaths ago that Lawrence Will came
to a place in Florida called The Glades, a vast area of land spreading out from
the southern shores of Lake Okeechobee.
Lawrence Will was one of Florida's first "migrants."
And like the majority of those who share this name today, he stayed to work
the land.
Beneath the Glades was the muck — earth of awesome fertility, a place where
a man could grow things. That is why the first migrants came to this land.
They'd been told tomatoes would grow the size of pumpkins and that a man
could strain himself picking peppers. 'So they came, the men first, walking south-
ward around the eastern shore of Lake Okeechobee and into what the Yankee real
estate men had said was the Promised Land of the new 20th century.
Some wept with rage and disbelief when they saw it.
"It was 1913 when I came here," Lawrence Will recalls.
"It was wilderness. I went places no white man ever went before ... no
Indian, either, I'd say. Before we came, we figured it would be paradise year
round."
He pauses, searches through years and memories. And suddenly he leaps into
an age of rocketry and social welfare.
"These people want to start off where we finished up. It's hard for us to under-
stand why the federal government wants to do all these things free — ^f ree wages,
free houses, free food."
'He spits the words out in sharp bursts tinged with emotion. He is speaking of
the people of Florida's agri-ghetto.
"There's good ones. They'll work, pull themselves up, make their lot better, just
like we did. But look at the others. Trash. Living in filth, working one day so
they can drink for two."
Dr. Robert €ole, a Harvard psychiatrist, spent 12 years living with those called
"migrant," studying the ways of the people of the agri-ghetto.
He speaks of their childhood years, the time when i)ersonalities and attitudes
are formed and patterns of life style are created.
"Migrant children . . . live incredibly uprooted lives such as no other Amer-
ican children experience.
"These children eventually become dazed, listless, numb . . . We see children
with severe depressions, a kind of self-destructiveness that knows no bounds."
Such children grow to adults. Then, according to Dr. Cole, "many of them lit-
erally start killing themselves. They take to liquor. They take to violence toward
either one another of themselves.
"They do not and cannot take good care of themselves."
Lawrence Will's father went to Harvard in the 1800's. He followed his son to
Belle Glade. He created a new type plow that would tear through the savage
sawgrass. And a stretch of U.S. 27 is named for him, the Thomas E. Will Memo-
rial Highway, a thin finger of concrete pointing southeast toward Miami from
South Bay, near Belle Glade.
There is irony in history and culture. Here is the son of a Harvard graduate, a
migrant-pioneer born in the 19th Century sitting in Belle Glade sharing mutual
subject matter with a Harvard psychiatrist of the 20th Century.
Lawrence Will views the residents of the agri-ghetto as "lazy, living in filth
spending their money on liquor."
Dr. Cole uses other terms such as "depression" and "self-destructiveness."
They disagree on cause and solution.
Lawrence Will believes a man to be responsible for his condition. "They could
do something about it if they wanted to," he says.
5543
Dr. Cole believes the wasted citizen of the agri-ghetto is the product of his
environment . . . seasonal farm work migrancy, uncertainty.
"The kind of life these people lead is destructive," Dr. Cole concludes. They
are a people incapable of placing a value on anything other than existence on a
day-to-day basis. They do not value their bodies, their lives or themselves.
And if a man does not value himsef how can he value the condition of a $12-a-
week two-room shack soon to be left like so many other faded and filthy quarters
before.
"But," says Lawrence Will, "I've lived in shacks a heck of a lot worse than the
ones those do-gooders are complaining about. Darn near all of us lived in quarters
worse than the ones you'll find in Colored Town or the camps."
And he is right.
Will spent his first year in the Glades in a tent while his days were spent in a
battle with the land, clearing it of sawgrass with grubhoe and push plow. At the
end of each day, his hands dripped blood from the wounds of the sharp-edged
grasses.
And old Andrew Duda fought the land, too. He created the massive A. Duda
and Sons Cooperative Association Inc., today a corporate family farm complex
that numbers acres in the thousands and dollars in the millions.
Andy Duda came to the Glades with three sons and one mule after having
worked for a grubstake in the steel mills of the North.
"He went busted as popcorn," Will remembers.
So Andy Duda took his sons back North where they worked and saved until
there was another grubstake and another chance to fight the land of the Glades.
And Herman Wedgeworth came, too — a new type of "migrant," different than
Will or Duda, a farm-scientist with a master's degree in plant pathology.
He started in 1932 with 320 acres of sawgrass and an idea that celery would
grow. Herman Wedgeworth's house still stands in Belle Glade. It has two rooms.
It is smaller than most of the now-condemned units of the ancient labor camps.
In 1932, adults and children slept in one room . . . separated by a cloth drape.
Horace (Red) Garner is a Negro and was one of the first to work with Herman
Wedgeworth in 1932.
Today, he is a 56-year-old stocky gathering of muscles that bunch and shift as
he moves. He is in charge of harvesting the 1,000 acres of celery that grow on
Wedgeworth Farms Inc., the end product of Herman's 320 acres and ideas.
"Back then," says Red Garner, "there was water all over the place. No big
farms. Just a lot of little people in misery.
"Mostly, you traveled by boat. Hardly any roads then. You'd push-pole your
way to town and back."
By the early '30s, the people of Will's migrant-pioneer generation had estab-
lished farming in its infancy. They were growing beans, a fast growing crop that
could be harvested four times a year. This created a demand for harvest labor and
the word spread.
"I was a young boy in Georgia and I'd heard you could make yourself some real
money picking beans in the Glades," Red Garner remembers. "That's why I
came . . . and so did a lot of others."
Pay was 121^ cents an hour to pick beans in Belle Glade when Red Garner hit
town. But he couldn't pick beans too well and he went to work for Herman
Wedgeworth.
"Back then, people were sleeping in bushes, right out in the maiden cane." Hell,
Red continues, "a lot of people were down here to harvest and there just wasn't
any buildings to live in. That's the way it was."
Red Garner chose to attack the sawgrass with Herman Wedgeworth. "You'd
pull sawgrass with a push plow. No mule. Just you and the plow going like hell.
After one run, your hands dripped blood. By the end of the day, that plow handle
would be covered with blood . . . mine and Mr. Wedgeworth's. It was all the
same."
The land was cleared and the celery grew. Then there was more land and more
celery. And Herman Wedgeworth branched out and built the first precooler plant
in Belle Grade to prepare harvest crops for shipment.
He started a fertilizer firm, a seed company and a crop marketing business for
other smaller farmers.
And pretty soon it was a corporate complex of farm-related business, family-
owned and the biggest in Belle Glade.
Red Garner saw it all, including the death of Herman Wedgeworth in 1939.
5544
"A condenser fell on him while we were building the precooler plant," Red says.
"It crushed his stomach as flat as that board over there. It took him three hours
to die and he never passed out the whole time.
"Just before he died, he said to me, 'If anything goes wrong, you see Mrs.
Wedgeworth.' Then he died."
Mrs. Wedgeworth took over the business following her husband's death and it
grew and prospered. In the early 1950s, her son George assumed management of
the family-corporate complex after graduating from Michigan State University.
Today, it represents 5,000 acres of cattle, celery and sugar cane — extending
into the fields of processing and marketings as well as fertilizer and seed, a multi-
million dollar business that a passing tourist might casually describe as "a farm."
"Look out there," says Red Garner. And there are two young men, stripped
naked to the w^aist, sweat tracing -white streams through the black muck dust on
their leaning and straining bodies as they hurl 50-pound sacks of fertilizer from
a farm wagon.
"Those are Herman Wedgeworth's grandsons. They're working the fields just i
like their father before them," he says. And there is pride in his voice. 1
There is another kind of pride in the quiet yet intense words of Jerry Rol>erts, a i
young black man .seated amid a clutter of folding chairs and hand-made tables — '
distant in philosophy and surroundings from Red Garner and the Wedgeworth '}
farm.
Jerry Roberts is president of a Belle Glade organization called Cry of Black ij
Youth (COBY) and its office is located in a faded former-store in what most folks ||
in Belle Glade call Colored Town. l|
The late Malcom X, in poster form, stares out at the people of Colored Town as jj
they pass the GOBY office.
"All power to the people," is lettered near the picture of the slain black leader, a
catch-phrase created by another black leader.
Created in April of this year, COBY publishes a weekly newspaper called
"Muck Rake." The newspaper speaks of "Belle Glade Police Brutality" and
"Migrant Pride" and the belief that "it's going to take commitment and a .strong
conviction to mankind to alleviate the agony and despair that exist in every
migrant family."
"We started COBY," Roberts explains, "because the time was long overdue.
Now. for the first time, the blacks are speaking out in Belle Glade and the whites
are getting more and more uptight."
George Wedgeworth, Herman's son, serves as one of the board of directors of
the South Florida Rural Legal Service, an agency funded by a federal grant to
provide legal aid to those unable to pay for it, including mostly migrants.
Wedgeworth expres.ses evident dismay that the COBY "Muck Rake" newspaper
is printed on a mimeograph machine in the Florida Rural Legal Senace offices.
He considers OOBY to be "revolutionary."
COBY agrees with him and a recent issue of "Muck Rake" devoted a .section to
"Revolutionary Quotations by Great Americans."
"We're trying to get the people together," explains Roberts. "We're not mili-
tants. We're just here to provide a voice to a i>eople that Belle Glade never
listened to before.
"It's time for pride. Back in April, we were sitting around talking about how
awful things were. Y'ou see, we never knew how bad it was.
"But those of us who started COBY are either Vietnam vets or college students.
We've been out and talked to brothers and sisters. We've seen other towns and
places.
"And when we came home, we found the 'old home town' was in pretty sad
shape."
These COBY people are the sons of beanpickers and field workers. They wear
Green Berets. Panther buttons and khaki Army shirts. And they are learning
karate and judo from one of their members.
"We're out to create changes through established channels," Roberts says.
But Roberts is skeptical of the "system." He says COBY is willing to try. "I
don't know why it should work now," he says. "It never worked before. Just look
at the condition of those people out there."
He was speaking of the people outside the COBY office, the i>eople whose sub-
culture .spawns an environment of "self-destruction."
And the irony of the agri-ghetto subculture is that it exists side-by-side with
the subculture of the migrant-pioneer, the subculture of Lawrence E. Will who
will tell you :
5545
"You've got to nmlerstand our people. They don't like it when someone comes
iilong and wants something for nothing.
•These people are used to working l)y themselves. They don't expect any help
from any man. They've had to work hard and come up the hard way, fighting the
land, fighting floods, fighting freezes.
T don't know anyone around here who hasn't been wiped out at least once and
had to fight to get back on his feet."
Lawrence Will continues: "When a man has had to earn his way with sweat
and long years of fighting the land, lie just hates to see somebody get a free ride."
But Dr. Cole, the psychiatrist and a scholar of the agri-ghetto mind, replies,
"these people cannot and do not take care of themselves."
Next: Trends in Farming in Florida.
[From the Miami Herald, An?. 18, 1970]
Can't Improve Lot, Migrants Believe
"Gradually, the greatest terror of them all came along. They ain't gonna be no
kind of work for three months."
— From John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath," 1039.
( Third of a Series by J. K. de Groot, Herald staff writer)
Gerard Crawford fights time and flies in a small patch of shade in his stalag-
like farm labor quarters in Delray Beach and explains, "Farmin's all I ever
kno'wed."
He is unable to read and barely can write his name. He exists on surplus com-
modities, a landlord who lets the rent slide, and the .$11.70 a day that his wife
earns when times are good. 10 hours a day, five months a year.
He is unable to woirk because he broke his leg while driving a tractor for a man
"up the way" two years ago and the leg never was properly set.
But his wife Doll is still part of the gathering of Floridians who live in financial
uncertaint.v as unskilled seasonal farm workers who do not "migrate."
It might come as small satisfaction to the Crawfords that their luimber is
dwindling. For there are three di.stinct trends in Florida agriculture :
Tliere is a decreasing demand for unskilled labor on the Florida farm.
There is an increasing demand for skilled labor to work the machines that are
eliminating the unskilled.
But the grower is finding it increasingly difficult to meet the increased compe-
tition of higher wages offered to skilled labor in the urban job market.
In short, the numbers of "migrant" and "seasonal" farm workers will continue
to diminish. But the level of unemployment will continue to grow in the agri-
ghetto.
iSpokesmen for Florida agriculture aTid many other quarters find, hope in the
fact that in South Florida alone, the luimber of "seasonal" farm workers dropped
27 per cent in a five-year period from 1063 to 1900 (from a seven county total of
33..S73 to 24,531 ) .
According to spokesmen for tlie Florida Department of Agiiculture, the greatest
loss is found in the ranks of the least skilled, such as the "day haul" worker.
As his description implies, the "day haul" worker is one wlio arrives in pre-
dawn darkness at a dusty gathering place hoping that someone will hire him for
the day, liauling him to the fields and hauling him back shortly after sunset.
According to Farm l^abor Department reports, I'alm Beach County is the cap-
ital of day-haul labor in the Sunshine State, with more than twice as many day
haul ix)ints as any other county.
During the 10-year period fr(mi lO.'.S to 1008, the number of day haul workers
in Palm Beach County was slashed in half.
In 19r>S, an average of more than 4,0(M) in the county worked on a day-to-day
basis during the liarvest season, never sure where they would work, never sure
what they would harvest.
In 1908, these i)eople of uncertainty were reduced to a daily average of slightly
more than 2,000 during the harvest season, with more than one-half of their
number swarming each moniing to a bare-earth covered city block in Belle Glade
that is called the "loading ramp" and i*esembles a slave market.
5546
The number of those called "migirant" also is diminishing. In the United States,
it dropped from 447,000 in 1958 to 236,000 in 1968, according to the U.S. Senate
Subcommittee on Migratory Affairs.
Tlie Florida Farm Labor Department reports the Sunshine State's amount was
reduced in similar fashion.
In 1960, the Farm Labor Department referred 54,524 "migrants" to jobs in and
out of the state. Last year, the number had dropped by 51 per cent to 27,193.
Similarly, 10 years ago, 1,437 crew leaders asked for job assignments for their
"migrant" work teams. Last year, only 872 sought help.
Yet while the "migrant" work force has been reduced by 50 per cent and the
"seasonal" labor pool by 27 per cent, it is significant to note that the total number
of those working in Florida agriculture has increased.
In 1957, the Florida Department of Commerce reported a total farm work force
(seasonal, year round and families of farm owners) of 135,000. In 1968, the
number was reported as 150,000, an increase of 12 per cent.
Agriculture Department spokesmen find two basic causes for the drop in "sea-
sonal" and "migrant" labor and the increase in the state's total agricultural work
force.
First, farming techniques and operations have become more sophisticated.
Today, there is a greater demand for skilled farm labor — men able to work with
machines, chemical fertilizers and the like. And there is much less demand for
the unskilled, the illiterate and the day-to-day drifter.
Second, today's modern farm demands more year round workers.
*******
All this would seem to portend a possible agri-utopia with "seasonal" and
"migrant" farm workers no longer living a precarious, day-to-day, crop-to-crop
existence, working instead on a year round basis for supersophisticated farms
of the future.
The day-to-day life style and farm labor subculture is hardly fertile ground for
the "upward mobility" philosophy inherent in skilled labor : i.e. — you learn a
skill to improve your lot.
In the agri-ghetto, one is raised with the belief that it is impossible to improve
one's lot. As Greneral Crawford says, "Farmin's all I ever knowed."
And as the personnel manager of the Sugar Cane Growers Co-op in Belle Glade
says:
"We'll start a job training program this fall. We'll train bulldozer drivers,
truck drivers and men needed to work around our refining machines. We won't
be able to fill the program."
iBut migrant leaders maintain that if the growers paid "a living wage," they'd
"get all the skilled workers they need."
Growers counter by saying they are paying all the market (that which they
can sell tJieir crops for) will allow.
But in any case, those in the seasonal work force who are skilled, or capable of
being trained for skilled work, have been leaving the agri-ghetto steadily, moving
to the cities and industry, construction and other job areas.
The balance remain to face a diminishing un.skilled labor demand as the farms
become more mechanized and sophisticated.
Paekett, of the iState Agriculture Department, reports, "I don't know of a single
crop in Florida that doesn't have an extensive research and development pro-
gram going, trying to figure out how to harvest it with machinery instead of with
men.
"Today," he continues, "it's the trend in farms, just as it is the trend in any
other field where you have people doing something that a machine could do at less
cost, or with greater efficiency."
In Florida, bean picking is almost completely mechanized. Fifteen years ago it
was done by hand. Celery is planted and harvested by machine-bearing crews.
Last year, a machine was developed to harvest tomatoes. But it is still consid-
ered in the "test" stage. The state's major sugar cane growers are spending
thousands in support of projects that will develop mechanical cane harvesters to
replace the 8,000 "off shore" workers imported each year to cut cane.
iln citrus, major research projects are considering tree-shaking machines and
chemicals that will cause the fruit to separate from the tree more easily.
WHY?
While the wages for field workers are low in comparison to other wages (the top
base figure was $1.75 an hour last year), growers maintain they are paying more
than they can afford.
5547
"I wouldn't care if I paid a field worker $50 a day if I could pass the cost on to
the guy who buys my crops," one grower says.
*******
The State Agriculture Department supports him. In a five-year study conducted
by University of Florida Agriculture Economist Donald L. Brook, the following
was revealed :
One acre of snap beans cost an average of $350.54 to produce and sold for an
average of $370.70, resulting in earnings of $20.16, or a 5 per cent return on the
investment.
The average acre of tomatoes cost $799.04 and sold for $788.22, resulting in an
average loss of $10.82.
Green pepper production cost was $1,237.39 per average acre. This same acre
sold for an average of $1,302, producing a profit of $65.43 for a $1,237.39 invest-
ment, or a 4 per cent return.
The average acre of celery required an investment of $1,451.92 and sold for an
average of $1,623.35, producing an 11 per cent return.
"Florida agriculture is in the most chaotic position it has ever been in," reports
Charles Long, general manager of the Farmers Production Credit Assn.
"The problem is created by three factors," he continues. "First, the produce
market is controlled by the major chain store buyers. There's damn little com-
petitive buying anymore. Years ago, you had hundreds bidding on a crop. Now
you have dozens.
"Second is the weather and the weather is the weather. The farmer knows that.
"The third factor is increased production costs and a big hunk of that is labor."
"In short, the farmer today has less control over his selling price and his pro-
duction cost than he did 15 years ago," concludes Long. "That's a bad situation
for any business be it hammers or cucumbers.
Long's Farmers Production Credit Association loans nearly 50 per cent of all
the money borrowed by South Florida farmers from lending institutions.
By its name, the firm (a co-op of major farmers) loans money to meet antici-
pated productions costs.
And based on Long's figures, today's South Florida farmer is borrowing nearly
three times the amount he did 10 years ago.
In 1959, 191 farmers borrowed $6,287,711 to plant their crops. Last year, 219
borrowed $16,262,021 to plant and harvest their ci-ops.
"Today's farmer," Long says, "has become almost completely dependent upon
the credit system. That's fine if you're in a business that has some control over
expenditures and earnings.
'^But when the typical farmer plants his crops, he has no idea what they'll sell
for. That's like Ford setting out to build a car without knowing its retail price."
Long's greatest area of concern is the awesome growth of his unbankable (high
risk) loans. "Ten years ago we didn't have any. This year, we have nearly a mil-
lion dollars worth.
"^And," he continues, "we closed 1959 with $300,000 in loans outstanding, while
we ended 1969 with some $3 million. These are loans that should have been paid
that year, but weren't."
(The vast majority of the loans are made on an annual basis at 9 per cent. )
■rhiLS, if a farmer borrows money at 9 per cent to plant snap beans, which have
a five-year average return of 5 per cent, "he just may be in trouble," concludes
Long.
"I can name you five big farms that went bankrupt in South Florida last year,"
he adds. "And we're probably going to be forced to foreclose on five or six major
loans this year, loans to members of our co-op.
"Times have changed," he says.
True. In 1954, there were 57,000 farms in Florida, according to the Department
of Agriculture. Today there are 35,000 — a drop of 47 per cent in 14 years.
At the same time, the average farm investment cost has jumped from $33,627
to $142,800.
Today, because the amount of acreage being farmed in Florida has remained
relatively the same since 1954, the typical farm increased in size and doubled in
investment cost.
"When you're talking about a business you're not talking about 'Old Mac-
Donald'," says Packett, State Department of Agriculture aide. "You're talking
about a business, in a damn risky business."
"Look," admits Long, of the Production Credit Association, "the only reason
we're here is because the farmers had to form a co-op to create a credit source.
5548
That's because the conventional credit sources consider farming to be the worst
loan risk imaginable."
But all this is meaningless to Gerard Crawford and his fellow citizens of the
agri-ghetto.
Next : The Housing Controversy.
[From the Miami Herald, Aug. 19, 1970]
Housing fob Many Migrant Workers May Worsen Before It Gets Better
"If a man owns a little property, that property is him."
—From John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, 1939.
( One of a series by J. K. de Groot, Herald staff writer)
Current multi-million dollar efforts to meet the critical housing needs of the
people of the Florida agri-ghetto are little more than stopgap measures designed
to replace grossly substandard public housing.
And there is every indication that the current housing crisis will get worse
before it ever gets better for more than 100,000 Florida "seasonal" and "migrant"
farm workers.
Farm workers are now sheltered in public housing, private labor camps and
the agri-slums found in Florida cities and towns.
The year-round farm worker pre-empts public housing, and a crackdown by
local health departments is closing some of the private camps. So more and
more of the seasonal and migrant workers are being forced into the agri-slums.
But to understand the causes of this growing problem, you must go back, to
another period in time:
Thirty years ago, you would find the workers sleeping in the fields and ditches,
dark bunches of weary humaniry clustered in the cane stand or snoring in bat-
tered cars and trucks.
This was the common condition of the "migrant" in those times.
The state's farm industry had demanded labor. But like most industry then
and now, it did not necessarily believe itself bound to supply this labfrt- with
housing.
For this reason, the federal govenunent moved to establish labor camps to
shelter those huddled in fields and Hoovervilles.
Eight of these camps were built in south Florida: one in Pompano ; two in
Homestead, and five in and around Belle Glade and Pahokee.
The labor camps were considered to be the finest of their kind when they were
built in the early 1940's.
They lacked indoor plumbing and cooking facilities. They were oflicially segre-
gated. They had inadequate sewage systems and water supplies. They were
crowded together, pathetically meager in living space and poorly ventilated. <
Today, onl.v one of the original eight labor camps exi.sts as it did 30 years ago, a
sad and shabby monument to another time. It is in Pahokee and is scheduled for
demolition this year.
iSurprisingly, this was the labor camp presented as "typical" on a recent nation-
wide NBC television special dealing with tlie "migrant" in Florida.
The narrator — newscaster Chet Huntley — ^failed to tell the nation that in the
past two years alone, the federal government has loaned or given local housing
authorities operating the camps a total of $17.6 million to destroy, convert or
replace the 1,984 Avoeful living units that lined the dusty streets.
Nor did the newscaster reveal to the viewers stunned by the shabby buildings
on his screen that the federal government has also provided nearly $10 million
more in grants and loans to build additional low income housing for some 19,000
farm workers in South Florida since 1968.
And so the nation sat and watched a staggering collection of Tobacco Road
shacks and hovels, the major portion of which were either scheduled for destmC-
tion OT condemned by the Palm Beach County Health Department. At the same
time, viewers heard Huntley observe this was .iust how bad things were when it
came to migrants.
NBC could have mentioned the $27 million that has been poured into low
income housing for South Florida fariQworkers.
5549
It could have omitted film footage of soon-to-be-destroyed farm labor camps
houses and condemned Tobacco Road shacks.
It might have even mentioned the fact that during the past five years, two
major Florida sugar companies have spent more than $6 million in private funds
to pi'ovide new housing for 4,296 people (2,618 "offshore" cane cutters and 398
"domestic" year round workers and families).
NBC could have told its viewers all this and still reported that the vast portion
of Florida's agri-ghetto remains unaffected by what state officials describe as "all
the good things being done here that NBC didn't show."
But there is a grim irony in all this.
First, while $17,685,000 was spent to eliminate the foul living units in the pre-
war labor camps, this money increased the number of available living units in the
camps by only 95.
The eight pre-war camps had a total of 1,984 units. When the last of the old are
gone, 2,079 will take their place.
In addition, the vast majority of iiersons that are moving from old units into
the new are not "seasonal" or "migrant" farm workers. They are employed
year-round.
At Belle Glade, where there are 647 new, or converted units. Housing Authority
Director Fred Simmons reports, "I hope to have about 75 units for 'seasonal'
farmworkers this Fall."
The balance of the housing (89 per cent) is rented year around, he adds.
At the Fahokee Housing Authority, Director James Vann admits, "over the
years, permanent residents have all but taken over our facilities.
"But," he adds, "we can't shove them into the fields. And in addition, the only
way we could get federal aid to improve what admittedly was a bad, unforgivable
situation, was to adhere to FHA permanent occupancy requirements."
In short, the rebuilt camps at Fahokee with 400 new units, have "little to offer
the migrant," Vann says.
At the rebuilt Pompano Labor Camp, only 20 per cent of the 400 new units "will
be available to migrants this Fall," Housing Authority spokesmen say.
At the two camps in Dade County's Homestead, officials say 40 per cent of the
515 new units will be available to migrants.
"But." one adds, "this kind of thing is damn expensive. Like the other Hous-
ing Authorities in South Florida, we have to pay back a good chunk of the
federal money that enabled us to build these new units. We have to do this with
i-ental income. That's rough when we have to keep 40 per cent of our units vacant
part of the year for the migrants."
In Pahokee, Housing Authority Director Vann adds, "we could never have re-
ceived the FHA funding for our rebuilding program if we had included a 25 per
cent vacancy factor in our request."
All this is not to minimize the importance of the $17-million program that
ended what one team of doctoi's recently described as "little better than slave
quarters, or cages."
In the near future, the eight pre-war camps will he little more than memory to
those who operated them or lived in them.
And the new units, with rental fees based on low income payment abilities, will
provide a life style previously unknown to the people living there.
But even with an investment of $27 million in the area of low income farm
worker housing, more than 100,000 — the seasonal laborer and the "migrant" —
will continue their current existence.
There are two other major sources of shelter.
The first is the i)rivate farm labor camp owned by farmers, or agri-slumlords.
Tht' second is tlie agri-slum within the towns and cities.
There were 408 of the.se camps at the end of 1989, according to the annual
report of the Florida State Board of Health Department's Migrant Health
Project.
These 408 camps offered housing to some 33,500 seasonal farmworkers and their
families.
. Among these are eight "villages" owned by the U.S. Sugar Co., all brand new
"agri-communities" that are tlie end product of a five-year $5 million program
that has resultetl in modern housing for 2,618 imported "off-shore" can cutters
and 1.67S "domestic" workers and their dependents.
5550
U.S. sugar "rents" these modern duplex housing units to its year round
"domestic" employes for a service fee of $1.25 a week (one bedroom duplex) to a
maximum of $5.00 a week (an entire double duplex) .
Another of the "modern" private camps is that owned by the Talisman Sugar
Co. of Belle Glade. Here, 25 new trailers are provided for" domestic" year round
employes, while a modern, three-story dormitory has been built for 1,100 "off
shore" cane workers. The firm spent $1 million to develop this facility.
Unfortunately, these are the only ones of their kind among the 408 private
camps.
Still, they stand as what could be.
There remain 406 private farm labor camps. These camps house an estimated
30,000 seasonal workers.
Forty percent of this housing is considered unacceptable by the State Health
Department under provisions of a state code requiring Health Department per-
mits for the operation of farm labor camps.
Enforcement of the farm labor camp permit code is handled by local county
health departments. Recently, many of these departments began a strict cam-
paign to crack down on camps without permits.
This has resulted in an increasing number of camps being closed by their
owners.
On Monday the owners of the South Dade Princeton Labor Camp announced
the closing of the camp — which will result in the loss of shelter to some 500 during
the peak harvest season.
The owners say they are closing the camps because they cannot afford the cost
of improvements required by the code.
And so a steadily increasing number of "seasonal" farmworkers and migrants
are being forced to find shelter in the only source available to them : the agri-
slum.
In tovFus like Belle Glade, Delray Beach and Pahokee, the agri-slum bears the
name "Colored Town." In other areas where there is a strong concentration of
Mexican farm labor, the agri-slums take on Spanish nicknames. Or they are simply
called "Mexican Town."
In either case, the majority of the buildings in the agri-slum are owned by ab-
sentee landlords. These are old buildings, usually wood-frame and dark. Often,
as in South Bay and Belle Glade, their exteriors are freshly painted, while the
walls inside are worn and stained by a legion of tenants and their children.
Typical of this sort of housing is the apartment building owned by Pahokee
City Commissioner Raymond Crosby in South Bay.
Here, you can rent two meager, unfurnished rooms for $44 a month, plus utili-
ties. In addition, you receive all the cold water you can use and the right to an
outdoor toilet.
The bedroom is barely large enough to hold a double bed.
Or you may rent two rooms in Belle Glade from this city's Police Chief,
Charles Goodlett. Chief Goodlett supplies hot and cold running water, but the
bathing and toilet facilities remain outside. You pay for the electricity in the
unfurnished rooms and supply you own cooking facilities. The chief will rent
these "apartments" for $31.52 a month, which is a bargain compared to Crosby's
rental rate.
Such housing can be considered average.
"There's a lot worse around here than what I rent," Chief Goodlett says.
And he is correct, according to a State Department of Education research
project which revealed nearly half the agri-ghetto housing lacks toilets, tub, or
shower, while one-third lack indoor running water.
Moreover, the State Health Department's Migrant Health Project report for
1969 found an awesome amount of housing lacks adequate cooking facilties.
In Palm Beach County alone, 76 per cent of the "rooming houses" offered to
migrants and seasonal farm-workers lacked cooking facilities.
The migrant health project report concluded that the well-known diet de-
ficiency of the migrant in Florida is the product of "generally poor facilities for
food preparation and food storage in available housing." (The average migrant
consumes less than half the minimum daily requirement of nutrients).
Last year, an estimated 60 per cent of the more than 100.000 seasonal and
migrant farmworkers family members were forced to find housing in the
agri-slum.
This year, an even greater percentage will turn to the agri-slum for shelter as
more and more private farm labor camps are closed due to pressures brought on
by local health departments.
Next : Attempts at health, education and welfare programs for the migrant.
5551
[From the Miami Herald, Aug. 20, 1970]
State Shifts Migrant Mess to Washington
(By J. K. deGroot)
Migrant Turner James was 56 years old and working upstream in the north
when they cut his left lung out because it was full of cancer.
That was back in 1968. Migrant Turner James is dead now.
He had gone upstream because there was no work for a man in Florida. The
land was fallow, the crops were harvested.
After his lung was gone and Turner James was taped up and moving, they
gave him three $1 bills and a bus ticket to Broward County.
The same day the people at the hospital up north called the Broward County
Health Department.
They told the Health Department to meet Turner James at the bus station be-
cause he'd just had his left lung cut out and might need some looking after.
The Health Department folks were a little puzzled by this, but the northern
hospital people said the staff at the Broward Migrant Health Center, where
migrants go for medical help, knew all about Turner James.
Trouble was, the Broward Migrant Health Center had never heard of migrant
Tuner James until he showed up at the bus station, the three dollars gone and
his chest hurting.
They found him shelter in a Halfway House and finally put him in a hospital
where there wasn't anything else they could do for him except make him com-
fortable. He died early last year.
It's hard to say what would have happened to Turner James in his last days
before the Migrant Health Project was created in 1963. It's not a nice thing to
think about.
Last year, Migrant Health Project Clinics took care of 17,870 seasonal farm
workers in seven counties of South Florida (Dade, Palm Beach, Glades, Hendry,
Lee, Broward and Collier counties).
The Migrant Health Project was supported with a Federal grant of $1,()04,15J
from the U.S. Public Health Service.
The State of Florida didn't give the folks helping people like Turner James
a nickle. Just ask them. They'll tell you.
What does the state of Florida do for people like Turner James?
Last year, some $12 million was spent in 13 major health and educational
programs in Florida geared to ease the precarious life style of the more than
100,000 called "migrant." These people are among the state's most disadvantaged
citizens and the backbone of its agriculture industry.
Included in the $12 million was the grant that enabled the Migrant Health
Project to operate.
But in virtually every one of the 13 major programs, the Sunshine State's fiscal
participation consisted of little more than a pat on the back.
When it came to any comprehensive effort to solve the health and education
problems of the migrant, Tallahassee shifted the responsibility to Washington.
But at the same time, Tallahassee is the capital of the state that serves as
home for the major portion of the migrants in the eastern United States.
Last year, Gov. Claude Kirk Jr. proudly issued a report on the "Action Plan
for Migrant and Seasonal Farm Labor in Florida."
The "Action Plan" report listed each of the 13 major efforts under way to aid
the migrant in Florida and described their function in detail.
The report indicated that the state had not appropriated any funds to support
its "Action Plan."
In fact, the entire Florida "Action Plan" was supported by the federal gov-
ernment, with the exception of the Florida Migrant Ministry. This organization,
by far the smallest of the 13 in dollar volume ($60,000), is supported by church
contributions, as well as funds from the United Church Women and the National
Council of Churches.
In short. Gov. Kirk's "Action Plan" received greater fiscal support from neigh-
borhood churches than it did from the state government.
So much for the "Action Plan" of 1969.
In 1970, the Legislature created two new agencies to deal with the plight of
tlie migrant and seasonal farm workers.
5552
And although the amount was far less than the entire 1969 operating budget
of the Florida Migrant Ministry ($60,000), it did appropriate some money for
one of the agencies.
The tirst of the two new organizations is the Florida Legislative Commission
and its Advisory Committee. The commission held its organization meeting in
Miami Wednesday.
While bemoaning its boycott by a coalition of migrant organizations, the T^egis-
lative Commission Wednesday agreed to request approval of a hoped-for annual
budget of $43,500 that would be granted by the Joint Legislative Management
Committee.
The requested budget would include a $12,000 salary for a staff director.
The commission has been boycotted by the migrant Rural Organization Coali-
tion (ROC) because the member migrants felt its Advisory Committee, to be
named in the near future, "is stacked against them."
The commission has no established budget and must olvtain its operating funds
from the Legislature. Its powers are advisory, as are the powers of its Advisory
Committee.
The second state-backed effort to ease the plight of the seasonal farm worker
is the Division of Migrant Labor in the Depa^rtment of Community Affairs.
The division has a staff of two (director and secretary) and a 1970 budget of
$4r>.000. Its powers are advisory.
Thus, while the Legislature created two more organizations to deal with the
problem of the seasonal and migrant workers, neither organization has any teeth
and one lacks a f(vrmal Itudget and the other lioasts a staff of two who are to
"coordinate" and "c(>oi>erat.e" with "all federal, state and local programs" dealing
with the woes of 100,000 people.
It should be noted that this same Legislature failed to act on four bills intro-
duced by Miami Sen. Lee AVeissenborTi to improve the lot of the seasonal farm
worker.
Tlie tirst bill would have provided for unemployment compensation to farm
workers. At jiresent, while the federal government recognizes the need for this,
the state of Florida does n(,'t. Jobless farm workers are not eligible for unemploy-
ment compensation in the Sun.shine iState.
'Weissenborn has attempted the passage of this bill at least four times. The
last three times, it was rejected by the Senate Agriculture Committee.
In addition, the Senate Agriculture Committee voted against a Weis.^enborn
bill to tighten child labor laws in the area of farm work. At present, there is no
limit on how long a child may work in the farm field after school is out . . . be it
one hour, or 10.
The Senate Agriculture Committee also rejected a Weissenborn ))ill to recjuire
state registration of migrant crew leaders — men who organize iiools of labor that
travel throughout the state and along the East Coast in gypsy caravan fashion to
work the farm fields, men, women, children and all.
At present, crew leaders (under federal law), must regi.ster in Florida — but
only if they cross the state line. Intrastate crew leaders need not register. And
the number of intra.state migrants is increasing in Florida, just as the number
of out-of-state is dropping.
The last of Weissenborn's four bills died on the calendar. This bill would have
put more teeth into the State health code governing the operation and conditions
of Florida's labor camps. In 1969, the Migrant Health Project reported 40S "i)ri-
vate" labor camps in the state. Of these, 40 percent did not meet the re(iuire-
ments of the labor camp code.
In any event, the sum of the 1970 Legislature's efforts in the area of seasonal
farmworkers was two "advisory" organizations. $4."'),000 and the rejection of four
bills proposed to improve their way of life.
But what of the 13 major projects outlined in Gov. Kirk's migrant "Actinn
Plan" * * * projects totally devoid of state funds, according to the reoortV
The most heavily funded program is the Florida Migratory Child Cnm-
pen.satory Program (MCCP). The agency's 1969-70 budget was $6,592 million, all
of which came from the IT.S. Office of Kducation.
The needs of the migrant and seasonal farm worker in the area of education
are awe!?ome. as indicated in the findings of a recent research project conducted
by a ITniversity of Miami team led by Prof. E. John Kleinert.
In his report, Kleinert found the children of the agri-ghetto attend schools only
intermittently and only when it .serves the immediate convenienfe of the family.
"Failure," he said, " is what the school offers the migratory child in most
5553
cases. These children cannot compete with the middle class child, but successful
comi)etition is the only way to avoid failure in the American school."
Kleinert found that tlie "drop-out" factor of the agri-glietto child is 42 percent
above that of the other children. At the same time, he discovered the seasonal
farm worker child is 30 percent below the "normal" child in school environment.
In addition, he learned tliat the typical parent of the agri-ghetto left school in
the sixth grade. Thus, the child was found to be following in the parents'
footsteps.
The agri-ghetto child is the product of his subculture of apathy, transition, in-
security and "self-de.structiveness."
The child, Kleinert said "adapts (to the subculture) until the day he goes to
school. At school, he finds that he is one of a disliked minority. In school, he
confronts the rest of the world for the first time."
And so the child withdraws and turns inward.
Concluded Kleinert, the school "cannot make them feel wanted. Therefore it
cannot educate them."
In short, unless the school can relate to the child of the agri-ghetto and offer
him something more meaningful than that offered to his parents, the apathy
and ignorance of a self-detructive subculture will continue.
The Federal Migratory Child Compensatory Program is just what its name
implies. It is attempting to "compensate" for the fact that our schools are
middle-class oriented.
In many cases, it is only able to work with the children a brief time — often,
only weeks.
In September of 1968, Kleinert reported an estimated school population of
7,057 "migrant' children in Florida. By February of 1969, his research indicated
the number has grown by nearly six times to 43,138.
As if transition and a self-destructive subculture were not problems enough,
the educator must also deal with a population composed of one-third of its num-
ber indicating Spanish as its primary language. These are the Mexican Ameri-
can migrants.
Kleinert reports the general ethnic break down of the "migrant" to be 33.4
per cent Mexican American, 54..j1 black American, and 10.57 Anglo-American.
Hence, the educator must address himself to the problems created by a sub-
culture primarily composed of the separate ethnic cultural qualities.
The program has focused its efforts in three basic areas :
An early childhood education program, with 140 mobile teaching units, each
staffed by one teacher and two aides. These oi)erate from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. during
the week. Their primary purpose is to bridge the huge gap between the agri-
ghetto subculture and the middle-class school . . . working with children from
4 to 5.
A reading program designed to augment standard classroom literacy teaching
techniques.
An earn and learn program, which encourages older migrant youth to learn
new job skills that will take them away from a labor pool currently facing in-
creased unemployment due to farm mechanization.
Are these programs working?
Educators believe they are.
But without special programs to meet the particular needs of the agri-
gheto child. Kleinert warns that our exi.«iting school system "cannot educate
them."
And again, the entire effort to meet the inability of the Florida schools to edu-
cate these children is being financed by the federal government and not the
state, or local governments.
The same holds true for adult education programs, and job training projects
that might take the adult out of the precarious, day-to-day world of seasonal
farm work. Last year, the federal government provided $2,409 million for six
projects of this kind in Florida.
In addition, the federal Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) provided
$804,000 in funds last year to support the entire budget of the 'South Florida
Rural Legal Services, an agency geared to meet legal needs of a people all but
totally ignorant of their rights and the law.
But while legal rights are crucial to a subculture virtually overwhelmed by
the complexities of modern living, tliey are rivaled by the needs of these people
in the areas of health and welfare.
And the needs are great :
Fifty percent more migrant children die at birth than other infants.
5554
The risk of death during birth is 25 percent greater for migrant mothers.
Death from pneumonia and influenza is 100 percent greater among migrants
than the rest of the population.
(Seasonal farmworkers suffer from malnutrition, taking in less than half their
daily minimum requirements of nutrients.
And while Florida does not require workman's compensation for farm workers
the accident rate among such people is 200 percent greater than all other types'
of work.
In short, those like Turner James are in dire need of health care.
The migrant health project is attempting to supply this with funds provided
entirely by the federal government.
But it is woefully underbudgeted and under staffed.
The Migrant Health Project in Palm Beach County reports, "patients with
emergency conditions are usually admitted to the hospital, but those needing
elective preventive care are commonly refused."
In Lee County, project spokesmen say, "Physicians are not reimbursed in
Florida for in patient hospital care of migrants and this has caused some prob-
lems. Our surgery is limited to emergency for this reason."
So the medical care offered to the seasonal farm worker in Florida is "emer-
gency" only, with a woeful lack of preventive and post-illness care.
It is difficult to say what minimal form this medical care would take if it
weren't for the efforts of the Migrant Health Project— especially when you con-
sider these people lack hospitalization insurance, the ability to obtain credit and
access to doctors and hospitals (nearly all are in rural areas, far from the medical
facilities offered by urban communities).
The last area that might offer comfort to the plight of the seasonal farm
worker is that of public welfare.
In his research, Kleinert found, "almost no migrants have even heard of any
kind of social assistance program, much less availed themselves of the advantage's
of them.
"The nomads of this state are almost totally alienated from our society."
And until recently, when the U.S. Supreme Court threw out year round resi-
dency requirements, virtually all of Florida's "seasonal" work force was in-
eligible for county welfare programs because they cross county lines to earn
their living countless times each year.
Concludes Kleinert, "one who studies (these people) is often tempted to com-
pare them for sheer misery with the occupants of America's urban ghettos— the
unemployed and partly employed black inhabitants of the rotting central citv
areas.
"When this comparison is made," Kleinert says, "the ghetto-dweller comes out
ahead, both in terms of (his) level of education and terms of economic
measurements."
Warns Kleinert, "for our governmental agencies to attack the problems of the
American migratory worker with exactly the same health and education pro-
grams that they have used in the urban ghetto would be to consign their efforts
to failure."
Because the federal government is footing the bill, this is not the case in
Florida. But spokesmen for the various projects attempting to solve the crucial
problems of the agri-ghetto say they lack the funds they need to do a more
meaningful job.
To date, Florida has chosen not to appropriate these funds. Instead, the state
continues to depend upon the federal government to solve what has become a
Florida problem.
[From the Miami Herald, Aug. 21, 1970]
A Migrant Life — Like Thet Told Him : "Your Lot's Hard and You Got to
Bear the Load"
"Only a baby can start. You and me — why we're all that's been "
From John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, 1939.
Ttf Child.— He didn't just up and quit school. It was just that one day he
didn't go. It was the same the next day. The school didn't care. They figured
lie'd just moved on down the road.
5555
The Mem. — He turned and spit in anger, saying, "Hell, I ain't going to work
today." His wife heard him, but said nothing. He didn't work that day or the
next. And soon it was just as it was when he left school.
(By J. K. de Groot)
She was a good oV truck. She was safe. She was home. You could climb inside
the truck and hide. The inside of the truck smelled like his Daddy. He liked that.
His Daddy used to say, "That ol' truck has seen some years, but so have I."
He was a migrant child and this is the story of his life.
Very early, he learned that camps and fields come and go, but there's always
the truck.
Nights in the truck were the best, the engine sweet and steady up front, his
Daddy easy behind the wheel, his mother soft beside him.
Years later, as a man, he would feel a bewildering tightness whenever he saw
a 1934 Dodge truck in his travels.
His earliest memory is that of a vast field, fiat and open. It is hot. The sun is
bright. There are many people working in the field. He can hear their hands rus-
tling among the leaves Like the sound of countless imprisoned birds.
He is with other children beside a small stream. A very old woman is watching
them. She has fallen asleep in the heat, her aged body leaning like a half-filled
sack against a tree.
He watches as one of the children walks into the stream. The child falls, eyes
open in disbelief, one arm outstretched, his mouth wide and soundless.
He sees the child vanish beneath the water.
Later that night, everyone was very sad. There was no money to bury the
dead child. They sang hymns in the camp. The other women hit the old woman
with sticks because she was stupid, allowing the child to drown. The old woman
screamed through her gums.
They put the dead child in a hole outside the camp. Then the men filled in the
hole. His Daddy helped.
"I don't want to go down in the ground," he told his mother afterwards. "Hush
up and go to sleep," she said.
He doesn't know the name of the town where he first went to school. He didn't
want to leave the truck. He didn't want to leave his people. Every since he
could remember, his mother had told him, "We stick to our own."
The teacher smelled good. She smelled like fancy fiowers. He told his mother
about that later. The teacher said he talked funny. He didn't tell his mother
about that. The teacher said his clothing wasn't right and she made him wash
his feet. Then she told him to sit still so that he could learn.
He sat still. He didn't say anything because he didn't want to talk funny, even
though the boy next to him tried to make him say something.
Later he fought the boy next to him outside the school because he called him
"trash."
"No matter what, we ain't trash," his Daddy had said. "Your granddaddy had
a farm before the 'Crash'. We were land people."
He did not understand what his father had meant. He knew a "crash" was a
bad thing. A "crash" happened to trucks on the road sometimes. He couldn't
understand how his granddaddy had "crashed" his farm.
Anyway, he wasn't "trash" and he gave the boy a bloody nose for it. The
teacher got mad and didn't give him a cookie. This made him sad. His mother
had told him school would be nice because they gave you cookies. He didn't like
school.
That night, he told his mother that the teacher said his clothes were bad and
that he had to wear shoes. He also told her how nice the teacher smelled.
His mother said, "hush."
Later he heard his mother shouting at his Daddy about money for shoes and
clothing. They had a fight. Hie daddy hit his mother. His mother cried. His
daddy left.
"Don't worry," he told his mother. "When I get big, I'll pick more hampers
of beans than any man in the camp. I'll give you money."
His mother cried herself to sleep. He lay beside her, the other children of the
family already quiet in the night.
He was still awake when his Daddy came home, drimk and running on a flat
tire.
Then his daddy sat down on the rickety wooden steps of the camp house where
they lived. And he cried. His mother got out of bed and went to him. She sat
5556
beside liim and held his daddy in her arms. He could see his father's broad
shoulders moving as he sobbed.
He couldn't understand why his daddy was crying. Then he started crying,
too. He didn't know why.
The next morning, his mother said he didn't have to go to school if he didn't
want to. Her voice was very hard.
From then on, he went to school when it suited him and the family. He went
to a lot of schools. It didn't matter. When he went, he kept quiet and didn't talk
funny. Most of the time, he tried to wear shoes. Usually they gave him a cookie.
They stopped giving him cookies when he was older. It didn't matter. The
people in school were funny. He knew they couldn't pick 18 hampers of beans a
day like his Daddy.
School wasn't one of the good times like when he was with his family and the
people, in the fields, or sitting around the camp at the end of the day.
When there was work, the people were happy. Oh, they'd talk about the Man
and how cheap he was. But there was food and his Daddy would buy things
for the truck. Once in awhile, he'd even buy a few pretties for his mother, or
sweets for the kids.
When there was work, his Daddy worked, his mother worked and he'd join in
with them, helping, just like he was grown and big. It made him very proud to
work beside them.
His Daddy didn't say much working. But sometimes, his mother would hum
something from a long time ago. He liked that. And sometimes, his Daddy'd stop
and straighten up, looking down at him to say, "Mother, we've got a fine little
man working beside us." He liked that, too.
He quit going to school in the sixth grade. It didn't matter. He knew his letters
and he could figure sums, even though he sure couldn't luaderstand all the com-
ments.
of teachers, or the number of strange children beside him * * * so many faces,
so many strange people, so many strange days.
He didn't just up and quit school. It was just that one day, he didn't go. It
was the same the next day. The school didn't care. They figured he'd just moved
on down the road.
About two weeks later, his Daddy noticed it and said, "You ain't been in school."
And he said, "I ain't going back." And his Daddy said, "I guess it's right." His
mother didn't say anything. There was work to be done.
When they were lucky and had a good Bossman Foreman, he would work in
the fields all day right with his parents. That was good because he made fair
money, getting paid by the hamper, or the row. 'Course he didn't make as much
as his folks, but it was a help. They'd let him keep the silver of his earnings. He
got paid at the end of each day, just like his mother and Daddy. He felt proud
giving his Daddy the money. Sometimes his Daddy'd punch him' in the shoulder
and they'd wrestle, his mother looking on and laughing with the younger chil-
dren. He was getting stronger and he'd test his muscles against his Daddy.
And so the years passed like signboards on the highway. One day, he heaved
his Daddy to the ground while wrestling on the dusty ground of a camp in
New York State. His Daddy lay there and laughed with pride.
By then, the good ol' truck was gone. They didn't travel as much. They were
living in South Bay in western Palm Beach County about seven or eight months
of the year. His mother stayed thei'e year-round with the younger children. He
and his Daddy went upstream around the first of June with his younger brother.
They traveled with a Crew Chief who got them work and had seats for them in
a bus. They'd come back home around the end of September. It was better than
before.
He got marriM when he was 18. He met her in Griff's Bar, which is where you
go in South Bay. She Avas fine. He loved to hear her laugh. For a long time,' he
was afraid to touch her. She was so tiny, even though she'd always worked the
fields with her Daddy and mother just like him.
They had a fine party the day of their wedding. There was whisky and wine and
cake and ribs and all kinds of fine things. His mother cried and he was surprised
at how worn she had become.
That was back in the late 50's. He and his wife got a two-room place for $6
a week. It didn't have any furniture, but their families gave them a bed and a
few things. The water was outside with the toilets. His wife cooked on an ol'
bottle gas stove an uncle had sold them for $12. The bottle gas was extra. It
worked fine.
5557
They left the two-rooms that June to go upstream for work. His wife liad
joined the crew with him and she worked tlie fields at his side, just like his
mother, just like hers.
They were in Virginia when his wife said there was a baby coming. He ran
over to where his Daddy and his younger brother were staying with some of the
others. AVe all then went to the store and bought some beer and had a fine niglit.
Her time came the next year when they were in New York. She was big and
panting next to him, working beneath the sun. Suddenly she groaned and he
understood. There were other women working in the field. They helped. She
screamed a lot and the Bossman Foreman came running to ask the Crew Chief
what the hell was going on. The Crew Chief told him and the Bossman Foreman
went away quiet.
When they returned to South Bay the following fall, they carried their son.
And he was the first of four. Two of the others were born in hospitals, but that
was a hard thing because he had no credit or cash.
Their voices were harsh in the hospital. But it was clean and he couldn't
hear the screams. That's why he didn't say anything the times they called his
wife a "charity case." He just took it, like his mother and Daddy had told him
so many times, "Your lot's hard and you got to bear the load."
He wasn't sure why, but somewhere along the line, things began to change.
Pay was better and he was getting a lot better than a dollar an hour. And with
his wife working beside him, tliere was pretty good money. His mother watched
the kids now because she was hurt she couldn't work too well. But something
was wrong. Sometimes, he'd shake his head like a horse shooing flies . . . trying
to figure it out. But he couldn't.
The stream moved on, flowing northward each spring and south each fall. He
floated with the stream, pushed along by the tide of people . . . moving from
field to field and camp to camp in the summer, rising in the pre-dawn darkness,
moving out, working the fields, returning at the end of the day.
Pretty soon the years didn't matter and his life became measured by the flow
of the stream . . . north and south, day-to-day.
His wife traveled with him to work because they needed the money. His
children remained with his mother in South Bay. He sent money home to pay the
rent. And he paid the Crew Chief for the countless rooms he and his wife slept
in when the stream was moving north. He also paid the Crew Chief a portion of
their earnings because he had found them jobs and taken them there in his bus.
That was fair. That was part of being in the stream.
And so the stream flowed. When it stopped, they worked. When there was no
work, they waited for the stream to flow . . . nervous about food, fearful of
unpaid rent, fretful over clothing. At times like this, it was hard to sleep. Maybe
that's when he took to dropping by the bar to settle himself and ease his mind.
Maybe it was earlier than that. He wasn't siire. If a man didn't work and he
didn't sleep and he didn't eat, a man usually dropped by the bar ... or so it
seemed.
The bars were a help.
By day, they sat baking beneath the sun, battered by time and humanity,
stained, sagging and empty while the people worked the fields.
At night, they became temples of magic and refuge.
These are not Main St. bars, air conditioned w^orlds of comfort, with gleaming
cars silent and waiting for their pink and polished owners.
These are places back aways and down the road.
And always inside is the odor of countless yesterdays and people . . . the
smell of a hard day's work and a long road traveled.
He could come here with a day's worth of l)ills in his pocket and the dirt
of the fields on his back. He could get himself a quart-of-45 or a bottle of Ripple-
wine, with pai)er cup and a dish of ice thrown in.
He could put some silver in the juke box and hear some fine James Brown
sounds.
And after awhile, a magic thing would happen. He could lean back and hiugli,
now the baddest dud in town, now among friends, now strong and handsome.
He'd found the music and the magic always works.
Tomorrow will vanish and yesterday will disappear.
Doesn't matter if the Bossman Foreman's truck passes outside, farm letters
stenciled neatly on its side, the sleek barrel of a 12-gauge pump glistening from
a gun rack mounted over the rear window of the cab.
36-513 — 71— pt. 8B 12
5558
Doesn't matter at all if the truck slows and stops while a figure peers from
the cab to shake its head in disgust and spit in the dust of the street.
Doesn't matter at all if the figure mutters. "Damn fools ain't got no sense at
all," before the truck moves away into the darkness beyond the pool of magic
light around the bar.
Doesn't matter at all because everything's fine-as-wine and tomorrow will
never come.
But tomorrow does come and the trucks rumble to the loading ramp, always
there to take him to the fields for another 10 hours . . . sunup to sundown,
$11.70 a day.
Through it all, the stream moves and stops and moves on. But always, the
stream returns to Florida, because this is the home of the stream.
And this is his home.
He knows this. It is part of his world. It is the end of the stream. So he moves
with the stream, but always, there are the magic nights and the bars, times of
when it doesn't matter.
Why should it matter? He stopped asking that question a long time ago. His
parents taught him. The schools taught him. His marriage taught him. The birth
of his children taught him. His endless parade of employers taught him. Everyone
taught him. He accepted. It was part of his world.
Finally, there came a morning. His Daddy was dead when it came. His mother
was spending most of her days singing songs from long ago. Her nights were
spent in moaning.
His wife had come to look at him with fearful eyes.
He awoke to taste the dregs of night in the pre-dawn darkness. He turned
and spit in anger, saying "Hell, I ain't going to work today."
His wife heard him, but said nothing.
He didn't work that day, or the next. And soon, it was just as it was when he
left school.
It just seemed to be the natural thing for a man to do. Nothing mattered any
more . . . nothing at all.
That first morning of dregs, a Bossman Foreman might have noticed his ab-
sence. He might have wondered once more, "why all these workers are such
lazy no good folk, unable to put in a decent day's work."
He would shake his head in disgust, turning back to the figures bent in the
fields.
If the Bossman Foreman had noticed, this might have happened.
But in any case, there remained one more body, defiantly choosing not to care
lying in a bed that had known a legion of similar bodies.
Born and raised to manhood, he is of the Florida agri-ghetto. And there are
more than 100,000 of his world.
This is one story of that world. But the Sioux Indians have a saying : "There Is
only one man and his name is all men. "For this reason, this story has no end.
The Ledger,
Lakeland, Fla., July 18, 1970.
Sen. Walter F. Mondale,
U.S. Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
Dear Sen. Mondale: Polk County, Florida, is the world's citrus center. Our
county produces more oranges than all of California.
The industry's headquarters is here and it is the backbone of our economy.
For most people who live here, citrus means Anita Bryant's smiling face on
television commercials talking about the '^Sunshine Tree" and explaining that "A
day without Florida orange juice is like a day without sunshine."
But there is something else here that most people are not aware of — 25.000
men, women and children who are the industry's major labor force and who live
in despair and poverty that should shock the conscience of all Americans.
The migrant workers have been with us for many years, but for the greater
majority of Polk Coxintians and most of the rest of the nation, they have been
invisible.
They live on nameless dusty roads behind the massive citrus groves — far from
the mainstream of life. Few people realize that behind those beautiful rows
of trees live "the poorest people in America," as Edward R. Murrow described
them in 1960.
5559
One year ago our newspaper began a study of the migrant workers. We con-
cluded it this spring by accompanying NBC's documentary crew on a two-week
tour of migrant camps in Polk County.
NBC aired its report, "Migrant: An NBC White Paper," last Tliursday.
We choose the week preceding the show to present our report, "Migrants :
Society's Invisible Victims." We believe NBC accomplished a courageous public
service in accurately portraying the plight of the migrant.
In our report we tried to go farther. We showed the migrant's condition, the
history of attempts to improve his life and discussed possible solutions to this
national problem.
We are enclosing a copy of our report because we believe you may be in a
position to influence the future of the migrant worker's life.
If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Otis O. Wragg, III,
Managing Editor.
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 13, 1970]
Migrants : An Invisible Army of 25,000 Languishes in Poverty in Polk
(By Ed Domaingue)
"I'm a bum, nothing but a bum.
"That's why I left school and I won't go back for nothing. It makes you feel
cheap when you can't buy lunch at school, it makes you feel like a bum.
"I ain't like other kids. I don't have the things they do. Kids make fun of me
when I had to go barefoot 'cause I didn't have any shoes. It makes you feel
different.
"There was too much fights all the time, too much trouble. We have to change
schools too much. I was older than the other kids, they was only 13 and some 14.
"I hate Florida, it's a bad state. A lot of other people hate Florida. Every
person here hates Florida. We came here to pick oranges. We were way up in
Michigan and we were living real good until we came here.
"I'm just a bum."
Jackson Bowers is 15-years-old. He lives in Eloise with his family, in a fly-
covered, dirt-encrusted, two-room duplex apartment renting for $20 a week.
Eight persons share the apartment at the end of the road on the wrong side
of the railroad tracks.
Jackson's parents are migrant fruit-pickers. They follow the crops, moving
from north to south and back with the change of seasons.
He and his parents are members of the invisible army of workers who labored
to harvest the 179,300,000 boxes of citrus fruit produced in Florida last year.
Ernest Jarvis is 39-years-old. He looks 60. He lives in one room of a three-room,
crumbling, filthy concrete block structure. He shares the building with two other
men. It has no windows and the front door is broken off the hinges.
NO ELECTRICITY
The room is five-feet by 12-feet. Roaches and spiders are everywhere. The
only light is in Jarvis' room, but there is no electricity. An extension cord from
a nearby dwelling furnishes power to the bare bulb.
Jarvis lives in the middle room. In order to get from his room to the rear room,
it is necessary to climb over the cushion-less sofa he sits on when he reads his
paperback novels.
The room is furnished sparsely, with only a bed devoid of linen and the broken-
down sofa.
He i)ays $20 a week for his room, and as an added dividend, the landlord sup-
plies one meal a day — generally beans, grits or porridge.
He worked three days last week "because that's all the work there was."
For his back-breaking, nine-hour-a-day labor, he earned $38.50— before
deductions.
He is in debt. He owes his "bossman" $55 and his landlord $100 because "times
'been pretty bad. I ain't been able to get a lot of work."
Of his situation, he says philosophically, "I ain't been able to pay my board
money for the past four weeks. I only worked one day this week and if I'm
lucky, I might be able to work tomorrow.
5560
"Maybe I'll make $30 this week, but I could wind up with only $15 — you never
know in advance what you're going: to have. If we don't work, if there isn't ftny
work, you just don't get paid.
WELFARE DISLIKED
'•I never tried welfare. I have always been able to take care of my.self. I prefer
to work, I like to earn my own living. I'm going to try and work and earn my
own way as long as I can," he said.
Ernest Jarvis is one of the 25,200 migrants who were re.sponsible for removing
44,683,000 boxes of citrus fruit from trees in Polk County last year.
He, like the Bowers family, lives at the end of the road — this time, Hobbs Road
in Auburndale.
His posse.ssions are few ; his bank account non-existant. He does not drive a
car ; own a television set ; or live in the suburbs.
There are, according to The Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services, 25.000 migrant workers living in Polk County during the height of the
citrus harvesting season.
With little variation, they live in conditions of unbelievable squalor and
deprivation well outside the mainstream of American affluence in the 1970's.
It is impossible to draw a portrait of the "average" migrant family — ^but more
often than not, they have too many children ; live in too .small an apartment or
deteriorating mobile home ; pay too much rent : have neither enough clothes nor
enough food ; and have less than $5 in their pocket.s.
They are much written and talked about, but little is ever actually done to
help them.
Exposes on the conditions forced upon migrant workers have shocked and
saddened the nation with almost monotonous regularity — but conditions today
remain virtually the same as they were 10 and 20 years ago.
VIRTUAL SLAVERY
The migrant lives in virtual slavery, or, at best, serfdom.
During the first session of the 91st Congre.ss last year, a "shocked and sad-
dened" U.S. Sen. George McGovem (D-S.D. ) rose on the Senate floor after a tour
of migrant country in South Florida and said :
"I think we have .seen once again that many of our citizens are existing without
the barest necessities of life, including the most urgent need of all — a decent
daily diet.
"Some have survived on bad diets so long that they don't even know what it is
to be free from hunger and malnutrition.
"We have seen diets and living conditions . . . that one might expect to find
in Asia not in America. Most of the cattle and hogs in America are better fed
and sheltered than the families we have visited . . .
"We saw families with six, eight, or 10 children living in one or two-room
shacks, not fit for animals — windowless — rat-infested — without water, plumbing
or electricity — shacks for which the landlord collects $12-$15 a week rent each.
"We saw empty iceboxes and iceboxes that didn't work, with fatback, beans
and lard the only thing stored in them.
"We saw children with the blank, expressionless .stare of hunger on their
faces — children not yet old enough to go to school who, when asked what they had
for breakfast said 'grits and coffee' — for lunch, 'beans and coffee' — for supper,
"beans and coffee". Many could not remember when they'd last had milk," he said.
U.S. Sen. Walter F. Mondale (D-Minn. ) accompanied McGovern on his tour.
SHOCKING POVERTY
On the floor of the Senate upon his return, he said, "Tliere are times in the
life of a public oflicial when he is brought face to face with the shocking reality
of Imnger and dire poverty. I have just had such an experience . . .
"The people I talked with travel the length and breadth of our land in search
of jobs. They do not know what it means to have a place called home, or to have
their children enrolled in no fewer than three or four different schools every
school year.
"They're the dispossessed and the disoriented — people who are chasing the
American dream, but destroying themselves and their families in the process.
". . . It is the faces of listless and undersized children that I can not get out
of my mind — faces which stared straight ahead, indicating no comprehension of
the world around them.
5561
"I could see the result of many years of malnutrition and sordid living con-
ditions in the parents of these children. It is not over-dramatic to characterize
their existance as a shadow-life — hemmed in by poverty in its most extreme form
and yet too weak, too ill and simply too worn down to press for change," he told
his colleagues.
Hunger in America. Illness in America. Poverty in America. Desperation in
America. Fear in America.
It sounds like a picture of someplace else, far away — indeed, as Sen. McGovern
said, like conditions one might expect in Asia, but not in America.
NO RELIEF IN SIGHT
But it is here — right here in Polk County. — There is desperation and destitu-
tion on a scale staggering belief.
Tlie story of the migrant worker in middle-class, rural Polk County is not p
happy one, nor is it even a sad one with a happy ending, for there appears t/<
be no relief in sight.
Polk 'County is often billed the "Phosphate Capital of the World." Many
people work for a meager living in that industry, but few are without the in-
come for the necessities of life.
Tlie situation is not the same for another segment of the economy — the or-'
which produces more citrus than any other place in the world.
Few Polk Countians pick fruit. Most of the labor is done by "outsiders "
Even those who actually live in Polk seldom are considered an integral part o"
the community.
They are ix)or : they are dirty ; they are uneducated ; they are invisible and
many people think they are lazy — they are there to be exploited.
In more than a year of research The Ledger has been unable to find one
migrant worker that lives comfortably the year 'round by picking and harvest-
ing the citrus crop.
The story of the migrant worker and the parallel story of the migrant stream,
descriptions of desperation and despair — stories that often begin and end in Polk
County.
The invisible world of the migrant worker exists in Lakeland, Winter Haven ;
Frostproof, Eloise, Wahneta, Eagle Lake and in uncounted unincorporated areas
and in migrant labor camps virtually every nook and cranny of the county.
It is hard to imagine tlie degre<;> of poverty that exists because the average
citizen seldom enters the migrant world. It is hidden from public view down
dusty roads and behind citrus groves miles fnmi major highways, cities or towns.
Few would believe the structures, without running water, toilet facilities, paved
streets, windows, screens or doors were inhabited by human beings.
Government officials have long turned a deaf ear to the problems of migrant
workers, and the citrus industry often paints a picture far rosier than is factual.
The attitude most commonly expressed is, "I worked for everything I got, so
why can't they?"
Many reasons are obvious, others are not.
Tlie average migrant worker interviewed by The Ledger was almost illiterate —
few finished high school and the majority were born into the migrant stream,
even as their children have been.
FOLLOW THE SUN
When the crops are in, it is necessary to move on, to follow the sun.
'•I ain't got no choice, my family and me just got to keep going. We ain't
got no money saved when we're done picking fruit, we can't never get ahead. We
got to keep going or we'll starve," Norton Brown .said.
Brown lives in Haines City, when he is in Polk County and when he can find
work. He is married. He and his wife have 11 children. They are migrant work-
ers, looking for some way to get ahead, hoping someday to find a little better
life for themselves and their children.
For many, the search is endless . . . and futile.
One person in 10 in Polk County during the height of the citrus season — from
November to January and from late February to mid-June — is a migrant
worker.
The statii«tical picture projected by state agencies and "assistance" groujis
is sterile — it tells nothing of the individual, of the families, or of the actual
conditions.
5562
Roughly 65 per cent of the state's agricultural labor force is migratory ; 17
per cent is seasonal ; and about 17 per cent is permanent, according to prelim-
inary figures of the Florida Migratory Child Survey Project, sponsored by the
State Department of Education.
The white migrant family has a male head of the household 80 per cent of
the time, while the Negro family has a male head only 51 per cent of the time
The average migrant worker has been following the stream 11 years and
frequently stays in Polk County six to eight months of the year.
Because children of migrants are likely to drop out of school at an early age,
illiteracy combines with poverty and dispair to overpower them.
HEALTH PROBLEMS
Health problems among migrants are severe. The Polk County Health Depart-
ment wages a continual battle against tuberculosis, syphilis, nutritional and
general health disorders— but language and cultural barriers are often unbrid-
able.
Migrants are victims of a society that is moving in a direction different from
their own ; all that supports them today are the swirls and eddies created beside
the mainstream.
Superstitions and curiosity boil around him because precious little is really
known about him, his family, or his life-style.
Being poor and \vith little education, he is easy prey for unscrupulous ped-
dlers, landlords, crew leaders and employers. He is concurrentlv the fabric of
a social structure that gives little emphasis to respect of property and contracts.
He is elusive and a poor credit risk, so he pays high prices for everything. He
is generally cut off from legal recourse, so he may never see the wages or con-
ditions promised him by recruiters in the north and south— the ones who fre-
quently most benefit from his servitude.
Employers and governmental agencies say the migrant worker is unreliable-
that he is likely to walk away from a job or a payment book without explanation
or advance warning.
The citrus industry and state oflScials claim the migrant is better off in Polk
County than anywhere else in Florida.
Citrus is the best paying crop still harvested by hand and it accounts for ap-
proximately 40 per cent of Florida's ployed migrant population.
Employers can earn up to $19.50 a day if they are men, $10.50 a dav if they
are women — three dollars above the average agricultural wage for women and
four dollars higher than the average income for male migrants.
FIGURES UNRELIABLE
But, the realibility of the figures is questionable; migrants interviewed oc-
casionally admitted it was possible to earn that much in a day, but few admitted
ever coming close.
Few said they ever earned as much as $15 a day, "and only then when things
was good."
Life among the migrant workers is hard.
"This country couldn't be no rottener," 64-year-old Carl McElvery said between
chomps on a plug of tobacco. The old man lives in Eloise.
"Hit's about to blow now. Been holding the little man down too long," he said.
Who really is the migrant worker? And what is he all about? Is he just a man
without a face who picks the fruit served on the ocean front terraces of posh
summer resort hotels or is packaged neatly in long, colorful freezer rows at the
neighborhood supermarket ?
He is Jackson Bowers; Jackson's parents; Ernest Jarvis ; Carl McElvey a
pensioner; four-year-old Terry Heflin of Dunnersville, Ala.; and two-year-old
Bridgit Hayes of Lake Hamilton, who sleeps with her seven brothers and sisters
in two rickety beds in a three room flat with no inside plumbing.
The migrant worker is a man of the earth, picker of everything, possessor of
nothing. He is a man without a home in a countryside whose rich harvest he
gathers but seldom does he share the benefits.
SORROW, FAILURE
John Steinbeck, in the "Grapes of Wrath," said :
"There is a crime that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that
weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success."
5563
This is the story of the migrant worker : why he is, what he is, where he is,
what is being done to eliminate his plight, and what needs to be done before the
weeping and anger can subside.
The Migrant Stream in Polk
The typical Polk resident has a full-time, year-round job, has lived in the same
home for several years and owns his own automobile.
He has electricity, hot and cold running water, indoor plumbing and at least
one charge account with a big department store. His children do not have
everything they want, but they have everything he thinks they need.
The family laundry is done at least weekly in the automatic washer at home.
It may be dried in an electric dryer. This home has rugs, maybe carpets, windows
and screens. If the toilet won't flush everyone expects it to be fixed within 24
hours.
Children in this house go to school all day, every day, unless they are sick.
In that case, they see a doctor and faithfully take the medicine he prescribes.
Any man who heads such a household is rightfully proud of the fact that he
works hard to provide for his family. He is secure in his belief that his children's
lives will be at least as comfortable and rewarding as his own.
He knows that the migrant worker often does not have all of these advan-
tages, but he may not realize that many migrants yearn for the stable, secure
life of the typical Polk citizen.
Permanent residents normally have little understanding of the forces which
hold workers in the migrant stream. No one who spent his entire childhood in
one community can grasp the desperation of a boy who, at 15, is already con-
vinced that life is a hopeless struggle.
Middle class people underestimate the overwhelming tendency of childern
to live the same kind of life as their parents. The insurance man's son is no more
likely to become a fruit picker than the migrant's son is likely to become an
insurance salesman.
If migrant crew chiefs recruited middle class teenagers to work the groves
and follow the season, average adults would be vitally interested in conditions
in labor camps. This is not the case, however. Average citizens know little and
care less about the 25,000 men, women and children who harvest Polk's annual
citrus crop. These workers might as well not exist as far as most of Polk is
concerned.
They do exist, however. They are the foundation on which Polk's prosperous
citrus industry rests. Without them, Anita Bryant would have little to sing
about in the lilting orange juice commercials.
The Ledger has studied the migrant situation for a year. Today we present
the first of a five-part series on that study. We are committed to the principle
that each citizen has the right and the du^ to know as much as possible about
every aspect of his community.
We hope this report will add to the average citizen's knowledge of the little-
known problems of the migrant worker in Polk. Only with such broad informa-
tion can the voter intelligently choose among the candidates and programs which
vitally affect him and his neighbors.
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 13, 19701
Fear, Mistrust Greet the Law
The call to the Polk County Sheriff's Department from the emergency room
of Polk General Hospital was typical. It began an inquiry which ended abruptly
against the roadblock of misunderstanding and fear.
"Please send a deputy to investigate a possible aggravated assault."
The victim was Juan, a 28-year-old migrant worker. He had been beaten and
stabbed several times. His wife and a friend brought him to the county hospital.
Juan had a bad cut under his left eye and a very deep gash in his back. Part
of one ear was hanging on a slender strip of flesh. The medical report was not
encouraging.
His wife, Marie, waited in silent fear for the deputy sheriff to arrive. She was
very pretty, with black hair and a soft complexion. She was soft-spoken and
illiterate.
5564
Because she was unable to .si>ell her last name, the deputy copied it from an
identification card she carried. She was terrified of the deputy, but she told
hiui haltingly of what had happened.
Juan was playing cards with her brother and another man in the "singles"
cabin (if a Lake Hamilton migrant camp, when, according to Marie, her brother
and the other man .set upon her husband.
Juan was brought to the hospital by Michael, a friend, in an old broken down
red labor bus used to carry workers to and from the groves.
Michael substantiated Maria's story. He said he was called to bring her hus-
band to the hospital.
T\\e deputy asked Maria if she would sign a warrant so he could arrest the
two men who attacked her husband. She didn't understand the question. The
friend translated.
"I don't know," she said, quietly suspicious. She said she should ask Juan
first.
"Do you want these men to go free and hurt other people . . . maybe you'll
be the next one," the deputy said.
"No, I don't know . . . Yes, I'll sign," she said haltingly, in broken English.
She made a move for the deputy's pad, thinking she only had to sign the
report he was filling out. The deputy stopped her. He explained she would have
to see a judge to swear out the warrant.
(hie of the emergency room nurses interrupted, Juan has passed out in X-ray.
His blood pressure had droppetl. The nurse said Juan might not recover.
After liearing this, the deputy decided to arrest the two accused men imme-
diately. He asked Michael if he would accompany him to the labor camp and
identify the two accused men. Michael refused.
He said he "couldn't take sides." While the crew leader was in Texas, Michael
had to keep order and do nothing to divide the crew. If he told the law what
happened, his workers would be angry. They would probably lose faith in him.
Juan regained consciousness. He was allowed to talk to his wie. She then
told the deputy she wouldn't sign the warrant. It was her husband's order.
The deputy talked with Juan. Juan said he felt fine, did not know what had
happened to him, did not know who had beaten him up.
"Who was it?"
"I don't know, leave me alone."
No complaint was signed, no warrants issued, no arrests made — Juan re-
covered. But by all odds, the attack on Juan was avenged and the guilty suffered.
This kind of violence rules the life of a migrant farm laborer ; a different sys-
tem of law and order prevails. There is distrust of the uniformed lawman.
During the fruit season, Polk County's migrant labor force accounts for a
higher i.ercentage of law violations and arrests per capita than does the rest
of the county.
In an average two month period, records kept by the Polk County Sheriff's
Department last year showed 406 bookings at the county jail at Bartow out of
1,321 arrests were of people who listed their occupation as "citrus" workers.
That's 30 percent of the bookings from less than 10 percent of the population.
The percejitage may be higher. The jail records only show what occupation
the prisoner may want to have put down, and many "laborers" may actually be
migrant or farm workers.
"I'd guess about 35 per cent of our calls on a year-round basis are from what
you'd call migrant or citrus workers," Polk County Sheriff Monroe Brannen
said.
Most migrants are arrested Friday and Saturday night.s — for drunkenness and
related offenses.
Crimes of violence are also far more frequently committed by the migrant- —
the law of the knife and the gun prevails in the close proximity of labor camps,
shal)by hotels, closely packed, run-down shacks.
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 14, 1970]
Some Days You Work and Eat — Some Days Y'^ou Don't
(By Ed Domaingue)
Zebe D. Bonner is a migrant worker. He picks oranges and grapefruit for one
of the largest fruit processors and concentrate producers in Polk Coimty — the
Minute Maid-Coca Cola Company.
5565
He labors from 10 to 12 hours a day on a ladder in a grove, picking oranges
under a boiling, brutal sun. He works four, five and seven days a week . . .
wlien there is work. Often though, there is none.
When that happens, he is simply informed not to report to work that day —
the fruit isn't ready to be picked ; too much was picked the day before and the
plant is "loaded down" ; it is raining.
He lives at the Minute Maid-Coca Cola Company labor camp in Frostproof.
He is invisible to most Polk Countians.
Bonner furnished Tlie Ledger copies of his pay slip for three successive weeks
ill March. Each pay slip identified Bonner and carried the Coca Cola Company
Food Processing Division trademark.
<_)ne week Bonner worked 32 hours, earned .$30.47 and, after deductions for
•hoard," took home $14.82 — for 32 hours work.
The following week, Bonner worked 33.35 hours — "Because that was all the
work there was" — earning 31.75. After deductions for board, he took home $6.10.
The third week he worked 25.5 hours, earned $24.47, stopped having deductions
for board taken from his pay check — "because I couldn't live" — and took home
the $24.27.
Bonner considers himself lucky — at least he doesn't have to pay rent. The liv-
ing quarters furnished him during the picking season by Minute Maid-Coca Cola
are little more than a bunkbed surrounded by three feet of space on either side.
The building is well kept, clean and attended 24 hours a day. The barracks-
style structure is not pretty, but it is adequate.
Last year, 44,000,000 boxes of citrus fruit were picked from Polk County trees.
Polk led its closest competitor in citrus production, Lake County, by almost twice
the volume.
The five top processing plants in the county are Minute Maid-Coca Cola in
Auburndale; B. C. Cook and Sons in Haines City: Adams Brothers in Auburn-
dale; Mutual (Edward's) Harvesting; and the Haines City Growers Cooperative.
There are more than a dozen others.
Minute Maid is one of the largest fruit processing ajid i-oncentrate companies in
the country and the company owns the largest lalior camp in Polk County. The
reason is obvious.
Minute Maid needs approximately 2.000 fruit pickers every single day there is
fruit on the trees to pick the 1.5 million oranges processed by the Auburndale
plant every day.
The company uses 14 million gallons of water washing and processing G0,000
boxes of fruit — fresh from the tree to your neighborhood grocer — every single
day during the height of the citrus season.
HAND PICKED
Every single one of those oranges must be picked by liaud — there is no mechani-
zation in fruit picking.
Men like Zebe Bonner earn 35 cents per box — and a box usually contains 300
oranges. They work when the company says work ; they stay home when the
company says stay home.
There is no predictability in either living or working conditions if you are
a migrant laborer — one day you might have work — and food — the next ilay you
might not.
One week you might work six days, earning $75. and the next week there
might not be any oranges to pick or only one or two days work — if you're lucky
you might earn $30.
Mrs. Leith Ann Bridges and her husband are Iwth migrant workers and they
live with their family in Coca Cola's Frostproof labor camp — in a section set
aside for families, separated from the barracks Zebe Bonner lives in.
Mrs. Bridges and her husband have worked for Minute Maid-Coca Cola for
12 years. They live in a small house, a drab green, four-room wooden-frame
structure.
NO PLACE TO GO
They share the bouse with their seven children and grandchildren — ^a married
daughter, pregnant and separated from her husband, lives with them. She has
no place else to go.
At 49, Mr.s. Bridges said she can no longer go into the fields seven days a week
like she used to. She has been forced to cut down, to four or five days a week
5566
now,^and she can only pick live or ten baskets of fruit per day at .35 cents per
Of ref SSt-n^o^'anTtrreTn^f ^ bTsf ^ ^anVo^t IZlT'^ f • "'
^don't know how much longer we-il he ahll t1 h'^ldTp ^n^u"^^^ iMTS
thJJi^s;tr=rd--^at¥re^i/»t"c"^^^^^^
JUST TOO SMALL
lnck';;7;anl\r„S"we pmtrmSch'Inl?!?"'' r™^" '"<"'• ""' "-" ■"'^"^
grease and bread to 4^^ in ft „r^™„t" ''"'' ""^ something-either some
always get what you want l™f ^^^ „J '"" "S '»"'' "»*''«'<' Potatoes. Ton can't
your helfy," The "afd ' '^ " '='"' "''''"'■ S«'"'rallr get something to fill
chMren, can lahlf In'ttI S?fo%?nute llardio'ca Cola" '"'*'""'• " '"<■"
typ' "^r'n^c Sl.t?r4e"°;?„S3„ToVaTir -^^'^^-n in il. barracks-
according tnr r n-J^^ ^ ?I quarters, men like Zebe Bonner. The barracks
^tT:TrVZoiye!Z'^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^-"' ^-^ also provided
and showers! The company also nrnvSi«f..^ f ??^^ l"" ^^ntrally located bath
city of their recruitTeSt to Slk rnnifv ^n^^vf^T'^*'^'' ^^^ '^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^o^" t^^e
A similar labor camLowne^daMo^^^^^^ f'""' '^^ ^' *,^^ «^a««"-
Aubunidale, near the co^mpany's processFnTand 'onclntra?e S '' '"'^''^ '"
Giddmgs said men like Bonner, for their $15 rifp^l ar-ff ^ ^ ^ .
morning and night, with a bae lunch nff^L* ^ • t ' ^^^ ^^^ cafeteria-style
milk in the fields ^ ""^ ^""""^ sandwiches and a sweet cake and
NO WOMEN ALLOWED
frlendTndThe^VntsTo'piikht un™™'.?"/!; ^T'^' « " '«■">" "'•'' « ^^■••-
she isn't allow'ed7o.CgTrouu™thTcamp"' """"• '"'''■"'^'''" «'«'"^'' ^^l"' ""'
Maid-Coca Cola's FrostpScaSp who «f^,nl!, 11 "*'''' residents of Minute
Mrs. Bridges' with a lot o^chlMr"? a?dVsm''aTfn?omr''' "^^ """'^ """""^^ '"^^
mlfrrw\rs'S^extS!n'?o"SS'ntr°' ''""'^ "^ " "" "^'"^^ ""^ "-'
They 1 ve m squalor; in shoddy, vermin-infected shackrunfit for anini«ls
no?;Slll^^?rillTS ?^?£ ?<;TarSr^^-l^ -educat'ed,"??4?;ntr;^fitate.
no recourse but to1ubm1t,'mo?e'oVoTfrhun"gV^^^^ ^' '' ''''''' victimized; he has
5567
HOBBS ROAD
In Auburndale, at the ends of Hobbs Road where Ernest Jarvis lives, there
are two rows of seven concrete block buildings. Each of the structures has fallen
into a state of disrepair. Many of the outside toilets do not work ; few of the
buildings have either electricity or running water.
Both families and individuals, both men and women, live in the vermin-
infested shacks. A man or a woman, living alone, pays $15 per month for one
room — five feet wide by 12 feet long. All the rooms contain is one bed. The
mattresses, like the rooms, are damp and musty.
Spiders and roaches are everyhere. The doors don't work — most are off their
hinges. There are no windows. During the day, when the temperatures rises
it is impossible to stay in the rooms. The mercury creeps past the 100 degree
mark daily.
But at least the roof doesn't leak — "It's a roof over our heads. We ain't got
no place else to go, we gotta stay here. But don't use my name please, the landlord,
he's a mean man," one male migrant fruit picker said.
He comes back to Hobbs Road year after year — it is the closest thing to a
home he has.
In Eloise only the town and the street are different — ^housing conditions and
rents are the same. Deteriorating house trailers, are renting for $20 a week to
migrant fruit pickers. Most lack inside plumbing, adequate sanitary conditions,
screens on tlie windows, and often doors.
RAILROAD ALLEY
In Haines City, the name of the street is Railroad Alley. The two-iroom cabins,
without toilets, running water or electricity, have been condemned for more than
a year, yet people are still living in them, still paying from $15 to $20 per week
to an absentee landlord who has not been in Florida for several years.
The late James P. Mitchell, a former U.S. 'Secretary of Labor, often expressed
concern over the conditions imposed on the migrant labor force.
He once said, "Migrant workers . . . (are) caught up in a cycle of life in
which poverty breeds poverty, their children are denied the educational and
other opportunities to improve their status. To this end, the migrant worker and
his family must be given the same protection of the same type of social and
lahor legislation that now applies to all his brothers."
But the cycle of exploitation and poverty goes on — and the examples in Polk
County are endless.
Last Janiiary, Clifford "Slim" Herndon made an agreement with M. R. Mizell,
owner of the Rifle Range Bar in Wahneta and of 10 dilapidated dwellings out
back. He agreed to be the handyman about the place to work off his $12.50 per
week rent and "earn a little extra money."
'ain't paid me'
Herndon said of the deal, "He agreed to pay me a dollar and a quarter an hour
but he ain't paid me a god-damned thing, not since January 5th."
He's been eating with another camp resident, Sid A. DeNike, who rents one of
the better shelters in the place for $12 a week. After seven years as a resident
of the camp, DeNike has the place he wants.
It has plumbing, a kitchen and a bedroom separated by a bath. The shoddy
structure, is of concrete block — more durable than the tarpaper and tin shacks
so frequently found in migrant camps.
DeNike, who claims he is a retired etymologist — and knows how to pronounce
it — picks fruit when he can. He speaks disdainfully of the other residents of the
camp.
"They lived like god-damned hogs. I keep this place clean," he said.
Several of the units in Mizell's camp have stinking toilets — they stink, because
the toilets have inadequate septic tanks and do not clear when fluished.
Even though this is strictly against State Board of Health rules governing
sanitary conditions for labor camps, nothing can be done. The law defines a
labor camp as having 15 or more residents, and for Mizell's camp this would be
hard to prove.
There are only 10 dwellings in the camp and most people living there stay
alone.
5568
SLIPPED DISK
Across the way from DeNike's, Lester T. Troupe of Opa Locka, Ala., languished
with a slipped disk, in a trailer body eight by sixteen feet. He fell from a grove
ladder last Spring and "messed myself up real bad."
A painter and carpenter by trade, Troupe came to Florida last year to pick
fruit. Prior to that, he "and another boy had us a place way out in the swamp"
in Alabama, where they poached deer and were scraping out a fair living, avoid-
ing the game wardens and eating venison.
He talked to a stranger while lying flat on his back, a brace resting on a ratty
chair next to his bed. Don Specks of Lanier Fruit Co. was due to take him to the
doctor again later in the day and the company would take care of the cost.
Lester T. Troupe was lucky ; a number of companies would have abandoned
him. He still was not protected by either unemployment or workmen's
compensation.
But housing and wages are not the only area in which migrant workers are
exploited.
Many people living in ghettoes and migrant camps often can't leave the area
to go to the store because they lack transportation.
They shop in neighborhood stores were prices are usually higher but where
credit is more likely to be available to the poor.
Mrs. Netti Hayes shops outside the ghetto. Merchants like Conroy's of Daven-
port and Russ Bargain House in Haines City.
She pays Conroy's $29 per month on a refrigerator which sits in her bedroom,
since the kitchen also serves as the family room and is too small to hold the
refrigerator and the television set.
At first, she said, she paid a $50 down payment. Then she was charged $12.50
for delivery when it arrived and they told her she could not get a receipt for
her down payment. After it was in her home, .she was told her balance due was
$487, she said. She paid another $50, skipped a payment, and wlien she talked
to representatives of tlie Polk County Christian Migrant Ministry, she figured
her balance was $437 — for a good refrigerator, not a great one.
Other payments include $26 i>er month for a stove and washing machine, $15
for the television, and $5 per week on her bedroom furniture, which was chipped
and had a slide panel on the headboard missing when she got it for $200 from
Russ Bargain House.
EIGHT CHILOREX
Mrs. Hayes is 31. She has no husband and eight cliildren. who share two broken
down bed.s in a crumbling three-room shack in Lake Hamilton. She pays $15 a
week for the rooms and the landlord is pressuring for an increase.
She receives welfare a.ssistance under Aid to Dependent Children — but lier
allotment is shrinking. In December li>G8, she was receiving $221. Then it dropped
to $194 per month. Now it is $179 per month.
She has attempted to help herself by picking fruit, cleaning house, whatever
she can do and whatever she can get. As she woi'ks, her benefits are decreased
and unfortunately, the work isn't .steady.
Mrs. Hayes receives food commodities for herself and her children — but she
must pay $5 for a ride to Bartow, where they are distributed, to pick them up.
Though Mrs. Hayes no longer follows the migrant stream North each year,
she mu.st care for her younger children. Her two oldest sons Ixave already began
the annual trek.
Picking fruit is something a child can do. Tliey make the trip with their
grandmother.
vICTI^[IZEn
The migrant is victimized where lie works, where he lives and where he shops.
He is often cheated the day he is born, by the fact his birth may be unrecorded.
Many migrant children born in Poly County or in some shack off the beaten
track halfway from here to the next place may never be able to go to .schohl,
because their parents failed to record their birth.
The same is true as the migrant grows old. 'When he can no longer work and
applies for the Social Security he has been paying for over the years, he often
finds he does not have enough time credited to his account.
One of the favorite ruses, employed )>y some companies and crooked crew
chiefs, is to deduct Social Security payments from a man's paycheck without
ever botliering to ask him for his .social security number.
5569
More tlian one man has been fired when he raised questions about the Social
Security deductions being taken from hi.s paycheclv wlien he doesn't even have
a social security card.
Ernest Jarvis wasn't afraid to tallv about it though. He has worked for more
tlian one company that reguhirly made deductions for Social Security.
•'I'm lucky now, as long as I stay with the man I'm working witli. I may
liave something coming from tlie government when I retire. It ain't always l»een
tliat way.
PAY DEDUCTIONS
"I worked for a lot of companies and a lot of crew chiefs tliat took tliem Social
Security deductions out of my jxiy each day or each week and never bothered
to get my number. They sure weren't sending that money where it was supposed
to go.
"My guess is that they was getting it for themselves, a little something extra.
Ain't much you can do. If you try to do anytliing, tliey kin just tell you to move
on and you gotta go," he said.
In one respect, migrant workers in Polk County are more fortunate than those
in some neighboring areas, like Hardee County.
In Polk, emergency medical service is available free with tlie only problems
being transportation and distance to the county charity hospital. Even though
the medical service at Polk General has sometimes been criticized, it is there
in time of emergencies.
The same isn't true in a number of neigliboring counties.
Wliere there is no public charity hospital, patients are often required to pay
before even emergency treatment is administered.
CONSCIENCE NEEDED
In late 1964. just prior to his deatli, former U.S. Secretary of Labor Mitchell
said, "The shameful migrant problem will finally be solved when there are enongh
Americans with wisdom, compassion and good sense to save their final censure
for those who stand by and seem unable to find within their economy a place
for conscience."
Apparently that time still has not come — the migrant worker was in the spot-
light of national attention during the 1960's, many recommendations to improve
his h>t were made and many laws were pas.sed to help him. Still little has changed.
Migrants : How To Escape Thap
, .Why doesn't the migrant "work his way iip like everybody else instead of
asking for handouts?"
This oft-aske<l que.stion de-serves an answer.
The simplest explanation is that, for migrant workers, the Great Depression
never ended. Workman's compensation, social security, unemployment com-
pensation, free (high school) education, minimum wage and FHxV loans are
virtually non-existent for fruitpickers. They did not get a New Deal like most
otiier Americans.
Through a combination of political, economic and social factors, farm labor
was exempted from almost all the public henefits listed above. Some, like public
education, are theoretically available, but the migratory life itself prevents their
taking full advantage of it.
Social security is supposed to l)e paid, but often is not. Accurate recoirds are
difiicult to keep; cheating is temptingly easy. Many migrants do not have social
security numbers.
Until last year even welfare required 12 consecutive months' residence to be
eligible for benefits.
Having no protection, the farm laborer is little better off than a beast of burden,
living in a closed economic system which has no exits. Generally ignored or
misunderstood, he receives little sympathy and even less help from the community
in which he lives.
The common image of the migrant as an "outsider" is erroneous. Most of
Polk's 2ri,0(X) fruitpickers consider themselves Polk residents. They may be here
through Winter and Spring, for six to eight months. If their children attend
school at all, they go to Polk schools.
In summer, when the citrus crop is in, they may go "up on the season," North,
for other fruit crops. Many never leave Florida, going South for the summer to
5570
harvest watermelons. Vegetables come in Autumn, and then the workers con-
verge in Polk again for the long citrus season.
The exi)ense of maintaining three or four different homes is, of course, pro-
hibitive. Only wealthy families can afford such a luxury. Few families can even
keep up mortgage payments here while paying rent in labor camps elsewhere.
They rarely achieve homeownership.
Wages are low. Very little saving is possible. Tlie unsettled migratory life is
expensive. If the income were dependable as it is for most people, more migrants
might be able to move to a better way of life.
The fruitpicker, however, is incredibly vulnerable. Bad weather means finan-
cial disaster. A flood or drought can bring real hunger, near starvation. In
addition, he can be disabled by even minor injuries or ailments. Heavy sacks,
10-foot ladders and 100 degree temperature quickly weed out workers with
high blood pressure, weak heart, sprained angle, arthritis, bad back, pulled
muscle or anemia. Dust and pesticides hamper those with respiratory troubles.
There is no "sick leave" in the groves, no pay for those who cannot work.
The disrupted, disadvantaged life does not produce many scholars. Typical
pickers were born into the migrant stream and have little education. Their in-
come is so low and so irregular that they cannot start a new life. Rarely is there
enough money to pay the debts, put down a whole month's rent in advance, stock
the pantry, buy clothes and go job-hunting.
They would like to get out of their trap, but cannot. As one picker succinctly
explained it :
"We got to keep on going, or we'll starve."
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 15, 1970]
Ten Yeabs Go Past but Lnri^B Changes
(By Ed Domaingue)
The plight of the migrant worker became a cause celebre during the early
1960's. Much was written about him during the decade ; scores of recommenda-
tions were made to improve his condition.
Little, however, was accomplished on a local, state or national level even
though many of the programs recommended then have since become law.
In 1960 CBS News created a nationwide furor with a special report on the
plight of the migrant and his family as he follows the crops from one end of the
nation to the other.
"The Harvest of Shame," was narrated by the late Edward R. Murrow. Dur-
ing the .show, Murrow said, "The migrant worker occupies the lowest level of any
group in the American economy. The soil has produced no Samuel Gompers or
John L. Lewis."
That is virtually the only thing that changed during the decade.
In the concluding moments of the documentary Murrow was standing in Belle
Glade, Florida. He said :
"The migrants are back in Belle Glade, winter quarter after months of travel
and work. One said he brought back a dollar and sixty-five cents ; another said
six dollars.
Another said, "we broke even, we were broke when we left; broke when we
got back."
Murrow asked the rhetorical question, what can you do for yourself? The
answer was not unexpected — ^nothing.
The week before the show was aired nationwide, a special Presidential Com-
mission, composed of the secretaries of labor, agriculture, interior and health,
education and welfare made certain recommendations to improve the conditions
and life-style of the migrant worker.
Murrow ended the telecast with them.
IMPROVEMENTS LISTED
Here are some of them : Extend child labor laws to cover agricultural workers.
Eliminate residency requirements so that migrants will be eligible for health,
education and welfare programs. A Federal law requiring crew leaders to register,
thus protecting migrants from exploitation — extension of Workmen's Compensa-
5571
tiou Laws to agriculture. New housing regulations — states to pay local boards
for the education of migrant children.
"There will, of course, be opposition to these recommendations ; too much
government interference, too expensive, socialism. Similar proposals have been
made before. In fact, 1.50 different attempts have been made in Congress to do
something about the plight of the migrants.
"All except one has failed." The migrants have no lobby.
"Only an enlightened, aroused, and perhaps angered, public opinion can do
anything about the migrants. The people you have seen have the strength to
harvest your fruit and vegetables. They do not have the strength to influence
legislation," he said.
That was 10 years ago. Very little has changed. Many of the conditions remain
the same. Some of the recommendations have been enacted, but even worse now
on the books have failed to relieve the misery of the nation's migrant work
force — a force as important to agriculture as the soil the harvest is grown from.
Living conditions today are still deplorable. Hunger among migrant families
is still widespread. Migrant children are still dropping out of school as soon as
they are old enough and many still cannot get in because their parents do not
have the money for a birth certificate — or can't remember where the child was
born.
MIGRANT STREAM REMAINS
' Today, 10 years after CBS rocked the nation, nine years after a series on the
plight of the migrant worker by Dale Wright of the late New York "VVorld-Tele-
gram and Sun rocked official Washington, the migrant stream is still winding
its way throiighout the country with every change in season.
Dale Wright lived and worked in the field with the migrants. He found crude
exploitation, dreadful living conditions and futility of life 30 miles south of
glittering Miami Beach and 30 miles from the neon lights of Times Square in
New York City.
Ten years ago ; nine years ago ; five years ago, today — ^What is being done for
the migrant worker on a National, State and Local level?
A number of the recommendations made by the special Presidential Commis-
sion have become law, but for a variety of reasons they have failed to have an
important, or lasting effect on the migrant problem.
Labor laws covering children have been extended, in many instances, to agri-
cultural workers and, in addition, virtually all states have laws in the books
requiring children to remain in school until their 16th birthday.
But children continue to drop out of school and the law is circumvented by
growers, harvesters and crew leaders. Both the state and federal government
have far too few investigators to catch all offenders — and in many instances
parents themselves are responsible for violations.
DROP OUT OF SCHOOL
When the family is large, the children must drop out of school, if not to work
in the fields, then to stay home and babysit for younger brothers and sisters.
Many young children do not have birth certificates — they were born in labor
camps or were delivered by midwives, who have little concern over whether the
birth is properly recorded.
Parents and children lie, simply because to lie is expedient — the more mem-
bers of the family working, the easier it is to provide the basic necessities of life.
Crew leaders are little concerned how old a child is when they are in need of
workers to harvest the crop.
The second recommendation, the elimination of residency requirements govern-
ing eligibility for health, welfare and education programs, was too controversial
for Congress to tackle.
It took a decision of the United States Supreme Court— made during the
Court's last session this year — to strike down residency requirements as uncon-
stitutional. Hence, it took 10 long years for the Presidential Commission's recom-
mendation to become effective.
It will still be many months before the full effects of the decision can be
realized, but there will definitely be farreaching benefits for the poor as a result
of the action.
No longer will a health or welfare agency, generally funded at least partially
with federal monies, be able to deny services to any poor family whether migrant
5572
or otherwise because the family is not a resident of the state or county admin-
istering the program.
The third recommendation, a federal law requiring crew leaders to register,
was enacted by the U.S. Congress in the mid-1960's, several years after the com-
mission recommended it.
EFFECT IS LIMITED
However, the effect of the law is limited — it only requires the registration of
crew leaders engaging in interstate transportation of migrant workers, but it has
been beneficial in weeding out crew leaders with lengthy criminal records.
It has also been beneficial in eliminating a small portion of the victimization
migrant work crews have been subjected to by giving the federal government a
weapon. The government can now always refuse to register or re-register a crew
leader subject to frequent complaints.
In conjunction with the Federal Crew Leader Registration Act, the State of
Florida requires registration of all crew leaders engaged in intra-state trans-
portation of migrant workers.
The law has been less than effective in many respects — a shortage of inspectors
makes strict enforcement impossible.
FOURTH RECOMMENDATION
The fourth recommendation, the extension of Workmen's Compensation Law
to cover agricultural workers, is still only optional. Participation in the program
is not required by law and as a result, many migrants injured on the job are left
on their own.
Even if the accident is clearly a case of the grove owner being at fault, the
migrant has little recourse — he has neither the money nor the inclination to go to
an attorney for help.
Housing regulations governing migrant camps and migrant living conditions
have been enacted on both the state and federal levels, but in many cases they're
not enforced.
The same living conditions described by Edward R. Murrow 10 years ago still
exists today.
The State Board of Health has stringent regulations governing conditions
tolerable in migrant camps, but then the law defines a migrant camp as having
ir» or more residents and establishes other restrictions.
Few migrants in Polk County live in labor camps. Those who do are frequently
better off than those that do not.
Migrants living "out in the community" often are protected by only a few
regulations governing health and sanitary conditions.
Again the problem is one of the enforcement and a shortage of investigators.
The final recommendation — states to pay local school boards for the education
of migrant children, is also a reality. The programs are funded with federal
money.
The Polk County iSehool System has enacted a number of programs designed
to help children of migrants. Kindergartens have been established and extra
teachers are provided for schools which receive a large number of migrant
children. Due to the high dropout rate of migrant children and the frequent
movement of their families, large numbers of these children are never reached
by these means.
FAIR WAGES MISSING
While the Presidential Commission's recommendations fared well, tiie recom-
mendations Dale Wright made after considerable study of the problem did not.
He said the fann worker must be guaranteed a fair wage for his labor — the
migrant still is not covered effectively by the federal minimum wage law.
He said the migrant and his children must be provided with adequate edu-
cational facilities "so they can prepare themselves to compete for jobs and
careers . . ."
They still do not have a fair opportunity to obtain an education.
He said the migrants many ailments must be cured so that he can perfonn
"his honest day's work and be assured of reward for that labor."
And here, perhaps, is the greatest failure, for the federally-funded and State
Board of Health-administered Migrant Health Project in Polk County was dis-
continued in November of 1968, five years after it came here with the express
purpose of providing basic health services to migrant workers and their families.
I
5573
The state chose to abdicate a portion of its responsibility to the 25,200 migrants
estimated to be in the county during the height of the citrus season, because
Dr. William Hill, director of the county's health department, refused to segregate
the services being provided for migrants from those being provided for
non-migrants.
The project had provided needed funds for birth control devices, nurses and
sanitarians. Its purpose had been threefold :
To improve preventive care and medical services to agriculture migrants and
their der>endents.
To improve and upgrade general sanitation and housing.
To coordinate and cooperate with community agencies in assisting with pro-
grams for the betterment of agricultural workers and their families.
As a result of the state abdication, the Polk County Health Department now
has two less nurses and no sanitarian.
During the county's brief tenure in the Migrant Health Project, a major area
of concentration was on sanitation services. The project objectives, aimed at
assisting the migrant worker and his family toward better community health,
were :
Instill some aspects of community pride to stabilize their environment.
Assist in the development of a housing program, obtaining compliance with
state statutes.
Provide guidance and consultation to growers and other agencies concerned
with migrant sanitation.
Inspect, consult and evaUiate findings on periodic visits to camps, food estab-
lishments, child care centers and other places of concern.
Provide consultation to industry in the development of model liousing projects.
Provide orientation and in-service training to interested groups.
Assist in the development of a generalized program of health education for
migrants.
In the report. Hill said, "Plans were made for sanitary surveys beginning in
the Negro section of Florence Villa (Winter Haven). One hundred, forty -three
(143) living units were replaced or brought up to minimum housing standards.
CLEAN-UP CAMPAIGN
"A clean-up campaign was begun by the public works department (of Winter
Haven) with additional trucks scheduled for trash pick-up at specific points. A
total of 550 tons of debris has already been removed with the program still in
action.
"Polk County labor camps began to show significant changes in operation
and management. Three large labor camps formerly operated by lai'ge citrus
co-ops (Haines City Growers Cooperative) were subleased to crew leaders as
individuals.
"These crew leaders are now in the process of obtaining permits to operate
camps. (Permits have been obtained) This action on the part of the large citrus
co-ops has presented a completely new set of problems.
"Crew leaders are not used for maintaining sanitary standards set forth in
the Florida statutes. Physical or structural violations take longer to correct
due to the inherent 'chain of command.' Food service has deteriorated since the
withdrawal of catering companies in camp kitchens.
"Many camp defects seemingly are not corrected because they recur at such
rapid rate," Hill said.
But all that is no more. All migrant services, the most critically needed, have
been cut back. Many have been eliminated, from the standpoint of reasonable
achievement.
MALNUTRITION A PROBLEM
Elimination of health problems in the groves, in the ghettoes, in the labor
camps, are essential to improving the lot of the migrant worker.
But health services are not the only critical problem migrant workers in Polk
face on a day to day basis — just as Sen. George McGovern (D-S.D. ) and his
special U.S. Senate sub-committee probing hunger and malnutrition in America
discovered the underfed and the undernourished in two South Florida counties^
so they exist here.
U.S. Sen. Walter F. Mondale (D-Minn.) accompanied McGovern. On returning
to the Senate, he said :
36-513—71 — pt. SB 13
5574 .
I
"We saw children and old people who regularly missed one or two meals a day j
and who depended on grits and fatback to survive. I could see many years of |
malnutrition and sordid living conditions ... |
". . . The effects of hunger and malnutrition are even more severe than the i
testimony of experts would have you believe. I am convinced that the malnu- j
trition and primitive living conditions have a direct casual relationship with the j
shadow-lifee existence of so many people we saw," he said.
There is hunger in Florida ; hunger in Polk County. Men, women and children I
go to bed hungry, or undernourished. !
Thus far. the state's answer here has been the commodities food program,
funded by the federal government. In April, approximately 10,500 Polk Countians
received food commodities. The suri)lus food is sufficient to keep a family alive —
often its nutritional value can be questioned.
The commodities may consist of dried beans, butter, cheese, corn meal, flour,
shortening, canned meats, dry milk, peanut butter, rice, rolled oats or wheat,
grits, prunes or raisins, split peas, instant potatoes, canned fowl, fruit juice,
egg mix, canned beef or pork, a beverage mix with a milk base and macaroni.
FOOD FOB SURVIVAL
County officials claim that even though the surplus food program was not
intended to supply a balanced diet, it does — as long as the food lasts.
Only one Polk migrant family receiving surplus food said the supply lasts the
family the month it is intended to.
Sens. Mondale and McGovern urgently recommended the federal government
immediately take the following steps to eliminate hunger in America :
Free food stamps (to enable the poor to purchase their food directly from the
supermarket, giving them a choice of staples available to the rest of us) must be
made available to those under the poverty level, as well as to those whose income
prevents them from obtaining a fully adequate and nutritious diet.
A county should be able to participate simultaneously in the food stami) pro-
gram and the direct food (commodities) distribution program.
The Federal Government should distribute all commodities, whether or not in
surplus, to supplement the food stamp program.
An applicant should be eligible for these programs after submitting an affi-
davit, with no onerous red tape.
"In addition, the school lunch program must be expanded to provide every
needy child with a free lunch ; at the present time, the school lunch program
reaches less than half the nation's school children.
BREAKFAST IN SCHOOLS
"Even more importantly, the school breakfast program, which has only been
established on a pilot basis, must be explained to reach all children from poor
families.
"And finally, we must devise a food distribution system which will enable
pregnant mothers and pre-school age children to have an adequate and nutritious
diet. Such a period to age five that hunger and malnutrition are most devastat-
ing to the mental and physical condition of a young child," Sen. Mondale said.
The State Legislature recently passed a bill that will abolish the commodities
distribution program throughout the state and make mandatory participation
in the food stamp program.
The action has met with widespread opposition — both in Polk County and
throughout the state.
Marvin Brice, director of the Polk Welfare and Rehabilitative Services De-
partment, said, "These people will not get a balanced diet. It is good for the
retail merchant. He gets full price for the stamps in the program. But, I'm
concerned with the individuals, not merchants.
"I want to look out for the people — which is my job," Brice said.
COMMODITIES PROGRAM
Polk's commodities food program presently reaches into 3,097 households-
316,114 pounds of surplus food were distributed throughout the county in April.
The Polk County Commission has opposed participation in the food stamp
program in the past, on the grounds participation would be "too expensive."
Now participation will become mandatory — but the problem will not be solved.
5575
The government's — federal, state and local — attack on the plight of the migrant
worker is three-fold : health and welfare services ; food to stop hunger and
malnutrition: and education.
The effort being made to educate the migrant child is at best a poor beginning :
it is attempting to relieve the problems created by a lifetime of misery, hunger
and despair in an eight-hour school day. It is attempting to teach the migrant
to integrate himself into a system alien to him.
Some school administrators are attempting to stabilize the migrant through
work-study programs in the high school — attempting to wrench youngsters from
the endless fields, groves and orchards, where the future holds less promise
than a more skilled job in the commercial world.
The State Department of Education's Migrant Program has also undertaken
a school record transfer project with a number of states along the eastern
migrant stream.
RECOBDS FOLLOW STUDENTS
Children beginning school in Ohio, New York or Pennsylvania can have their
records transferred from school to school as they move south, or north, with their
families. Though the disadvantages of moving from school to school still far
outweigh the advantages, it is at least a beginning.
Under the record transfer system, Polk County schools are providing the
families of migrant children with a computer card when they move on. The
card contains the child's school record.
It can work well, if the migrant family assumes a set pattern of travel with
the seasons.
But usually the migrant is oblivions to the agencies that seek to help him. He
is consumed by farm laborer and the day-to-day struggle between citrus ladder
and landlord : packinghouse, jailhouse and tavern.
He worries about the law, prices, and weather ; he falls prey to all three. He
is proud and he works long hours doing back-breaking labor for insignificant
wages.
The government's efforts to help him, without making a thorough effort to
understand him, have fallen short. But now there are leaders rising from the
soil, men of the earth born into the migrant stream.
They know "where it's at" and what must be done. They are prepared to
"rock the boat" if that becomes necessary. The nomadic migrant w^orker is their
"people" they feel for him and they understand him.
Cuban Nurse Aids Migrants
"At first I don't know how to approach them because they're very suspicious."
said Mrs. Alicia Sanchez. A county health nurse, she visits the poor in tlieir homes
and checks on problems she sees indicated on children at school.
She is vibrant and enthusiastic. As she approaches the house of a Mexican-
American fruit picker, with eyes peering unseen at her through windows and
around corners, she calls the woman of the house by her first name.
"Theresa ! Theresa ! Buenos dias," she calls. She raps loudly on the screen
door thfu opens it and has her head inside before a quieter "l)uenos dias" floats
back to her from the kitchen. At least Mrs. Alicia Sanchez speaks the language.
She's been here three years.
"In this time I have many of those Mexican and Puerto Rican families and they
don't speak English. I don't know why, Spanish only," .she says.
The Sanchez family left Cuba shortly after the Castro government seized
power. Her husband, a medical doctor, had to undergo an American internship
in Virginia and he is now a public health doctor for the county in Bartow. Tlieir
only daughter is 13 now, and she avoids speaking Spanish whenever possible.
PUBLIC HEALTH NURSES BIG AID TO MIGRANTS
Overcoming suspicion and building confidence, is one of Mrs. Sanchez' first
challenges with a new family. She finds the migrant worker of Spanish extraction
a different breed altogether from w^hite and Negro Americans. Most often the
families are close-knit, have a strong father figure who works in the fields and
a mother who cares for up to a dozen children.
She told of discovering one mother of a dozen :
5576
"When I explained to her about family planning she didn't even know about it
. . . she didn't even know about it," repeated for emphasis. That was two years
ago. Now the mother does know about family planning. She uses a intra-uterine
device for birth control which the Health Department provided, and has a free
physical examination every six months.
The woman, now 40, has had no more children.
A boy in school whose parents both speak Spanish at home may find the two
different worlds between which he alternates hard to reconcile. On the one hand
the Mexican-American mother labors under old traditions and might not part
with her youngsters to enter first grade until they are 10 or 11 years old. On
the other, children of that age may be in fourth or fifth grade.
Alfonso complained of headaches and while he was in the same grade as
children his age, his work began to fall off.
"I talked to him and find he needs a doctor examination," Mrs. Sanchez said.
"We applied through the Lions Club for an eye examination because they can't
afford it. Tliey are fruit pickers."
On the day of the appointment, Mrs. Sanchez visited Alfonso's home to make
sure he was going to be taken to be helped. At the modest concrete block house
in northwest Winter Haven there is a five-year-old car in the carport and the large
family all live in a two-bedroom facility. The living room couch makes an addi-
tional bed for small children and its cover retains the sour odor of dampness and
small children's urine. Alfonso was home from school, ready for the doctor.
To look at the house inside or out, you wouldn't think the family lived for
the season and followed crops north. They are buying, IMrs. Sanchez explained.
Summertimes they close the house when they go to pick other fruits. Several of
her clients are doing the same.
The Inggest problem is suspicion. People don't understand the germ theory
of disease. They may never have had access to information about birth control.
They may need nutritional training.
I have none with commoflities (food) so far," Mrs. Sanchez said. "This kind
of family they don't want to ask for anything. Never 'give me, give me' — They
live with what they make."
In late April Mrs. Sanchez asked Teresa, "Cuando se mudan? Mayo? o Junio?"
"No sabemos todavia . . ." the woman answered. Her husband hadn't decided
yet which would be the best place for them to go to pick summer fruit.
Time To Face Responsibility
The problem of Polk's 25,000 citrus fruit pickers cannot all be solved locally.
Some help from state and federal sources is necessary.
However, Polk must not shrug off its share of responsibility for the deplorable
conditions which exist here. Some problems can and should be solved at the local
level.
Citrus is one of the prime supports of the area's economy. Every Polk resident
benefits, directly or indirectly, from the annual harvest of 44,000 boxes of citrus
fruit. Certainly Polk citizens use and enjoy oranges and grapefruit.
Whoever profits from a situation must share the responsibility for it. Imperial
Polk extracts the maximum possible benefits from migrant labor. We must like-
wise exert maximum effort to improve workers' lives.
The hovels which are rented to farm laborers are intolerable. They can and
must be eliminated. Stinking, unsafe shacks with exorbitant rental prices are
an affront to the conscience of every Polk citizen. Their continued existence lends
a bitter after-taste to our morning juice.
Minimum health and safety standards for rental property in the county should
be enacted by the County Commission. Strict enforcement of such regulations
could quickly end the current profiteering in human misery.
County commissioners, by failure to take such steps, give approval to the
shameless exploitation of helpless migrants. Polk is not ready for a complete
minimum housing code to affect all homes in unincorporated areas. It should
be possible, however to enact an interim ordinance only to rental units.
Education is another area where local action can be effective. State and
federal help is needed, but the initiative must come from the school system which
must do the job.
Because of the relatively long citrus season, migrant children spend more
time in Polk schools than in any other. This is where the problems must be
5577
faced. A recently announced vocational program for migrant youngsters is a
step in the right direction.
Many more steps are needed. Polk schools must develop complete programs
for migrant children, programs designed to fit the average length of their stay.
A special team of attendance officers is needed to improve the attendance pat-
terns of migrant children while they are in Polk.
Health services must be expanded. County immunization programs must be
carried into migrant living quarters. Mobile units are needed to visit labor
camps. Polk citizens must recognize that festering sores on migrant children
are dangerous to the entire community.
Efforts should be made to regain state aid for migrant health services, and
requests for help should go to every appropriate federal agency.
Polk cannot solve all the problems of the migrant workers, hut it can alleviate
some of the worst ones. If we take our responsibility seriously at the county
level there will be a greater likelihood of help from state and national sources.
We have thrived on the sweat of the farm workers. Now it is time to pay the
piper.
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 16. 19701
Community Organizes : Migrants Begin Struggle
(By Ed Domaingue)
In Polk County, the migrant worker is permanent resident on the lowest rung
of the economic ladder. He is not there because he wants to be, or because he
likes it.
Many Federal, state and local government programs have failed to reach him—
partially because they have been content to offer scraps from the table of plenty
as they did with the Negro : partially because public officials can't afford to offend
the major money interests who would like to keep the migrant right where he is :
at the bottom.
With no one to turn to for assistance from outside, many migrants are now
turning to the leaders rising from among their own ranks. There are finally
appearing in Polk County and across the state, men and organizations gravely
concerned about the problems of the migrant.
Until recently, the only agency in Polk County not responsible to local or state
politico's was the Christian Migrant Ministry. Headed jointly by an ordained
minister and a former migrant worker-crew chief, a goal has been set of
power through community organization.
Several months ago, Rueben S. Mitchell, regional director for the Federal
Office of Economic lOpportunlty -funded Community Action Migrant Program, ap-
peared before the County Commis.sion in Bartow and informed commissioners his
organization would "appreciate" Iheir cooperation. He asked for a vote of moral
"support" ; it was given.
Mitchell said the organization was bringing its program into Polk County in
an effort to help the county's 2.5,000 migrant workers "better themselves" and to
enable them to leave the migrant stream if they so desire.
In South Florida, there are other migrant-oriented agencies and leaders
grappling with the problems — Rodolfo Juarez, head of the Organized Migrants
for Community Action and perhaps one of the first and most effective of the
former migrant laborers turned commimity organizers, and the federally-funded
South Florida Migrant Legal Services Program.
minister, former migrant
The Polk County Migrant Ministry is headed jointly by the Rev. Paul F.
Wilson, an ordained minnster, and Newlon Lloyd, a former migrant worker and
crew chief who came to the United States from the Bahama Islands 14 years ago.
Wilson and Lloyd have both been on the Migrant Ministry's payroll since
December 1968, shortly after the agency's work was partially funded by the
National Ministeries. Other contributions come from local churches, member-
ships, and the Westminister Presbytery.
Three years ago, the Migrant Minister moved away from service orientation,
according to Wilson, in favor of community organization — "in which the farm
workers can identify and solve their own problems through their common
strength."
5578
The multi -faceted purpose of the group is to :
Establish indigenous, democratic farm work associations which seek to define
their own goals and uncover and develop leadership from within.
Mediate between the farm worker community and the various agencies and
programs available for conusel and guidance in all areas of private and com-
munity life.
Support activities of self-help and community improvement among the farm
workers.
Recruit, train, coordinate and supervise volunteers from the churches and
community to assist in programs of social service and self-help.
Dr. Herman F. Reissig of Lakeland, a consultant in Human Relations and
strong supporter of the Migrant Mini-stry, said in the organization's application
to the National Ministries :
SHAKE DECISION-MAKING
"In terms of the farm workers, a greater measure of justice and opportunity
will prevail as they are enabled to share in the decision-making about their
destiny. Many will find new ways of achieving some of the most basic desires
they have for personal and corporate fulfillment, esiJecially as it relates to health,
education, housing, home improvement, public works facilities and job
opportunities.
"Many will find a new sense of dignity, as well as respect and admiration
for their friends and fellow workers . . ." he said.
Wilson said, "The chief problem is that they (the migrants) are forced to
reside outside the mainstream of American life — they have no control over the
programs directed at them. They lack the power, the voice and representation
to help themselves.
"That leaves the farm worker with things being done for him, instead of
doing the things himself," he said.
Wilson and Lloyd function primarily in two different areas: the minister's
responsibility is to organize the middle-class support necessary to fund and
assist the ministry's program and Lloyd works primarily in community
organization.
Lloyd, for his part in the program, was overwhelmed when he first began his
work here. The problem of organizing 25,000 migrant workers scattered across
the country was staggering.
As a result, the Migrant Ministry picked three principle target areas — Lake
Hamilton, Haines City and Winter Haven.
Two self-help groups have already been successfully organized in the Lake
Hamilton-Haines City area. They are the Florida Farm Workers Organization
with headquarters in Lake Hamilton and several hundred members and the
Black Youth Organization for Power, an attempt to draw the young people into
the organizational efforts.
"Even though both organizations are primarily the results of the Polk County
Christian Migrant Ministry's efforts," Wilson said, "they have their own separate
organizations and leaders. We can not dictate to them what they can and can
not do."
"At times we might make suggestions or point out possible alternative forms
of action, but the final decision rests with the members. They have to help
themselves get what they want," Wilson said.
SEVERAL BATTLES WON
The Florida Farm Workers Organization has already won several battles for
migrant farm workers in the Lake Hamilton area.
Wilson said last year the organization decided it was interested in arranging
work at the Lake Hamilton Packing House for the wives of several of the
members. In the past, the employees of the packing house had all been white.
Members of the farm workers organization were Black.
"They got together with officials of the packing company and sat down and
talked about the problems and what they wanted. As a result of the discussions
two Blacks were hired by the company.
"Things were pretty bad for a while and eventually the two women were fired,
but not before a precedent was established — it was a major break-through for
them," Wilson said.
On another occasion. Black farm workers and migrants got upset over medical
care for poor people at the Heart of Florida Hospital in Haines City.
5579
They wrote a letter to the hospital's administrator and set up a meeting with
him to provide him with an opportunity to present his side of the story.
"Well, he attended the meeting and made an effort to interpret the hospital's
policy and to try and work out some of the problems. These things wouldn't have
happened if the workers hadn't banded together in a single community organiza-
tion geared to improving their living and working condition," Wilson said.
The Florida Farm Workers Organization has also made initial strides forward
in blending itself with the total Lake Hamilton Community.
"One of the organization's big concerns was over the lack of recreational
facilities for their children in the city, and particularly in their area. They set
up a meeting with the mayor and city manager and everyone got together to dis-
cuss their problems.
A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH
"The very fact that the mayor came down into the Black community to meet
with them and to deal with their own organization was a major breakthrough.
"They asked him for a playground and the mayor to everyone's surprise, said
we already have one in the city. They have a very nice recreational area but in the
past Blacks had been barred from using it.
"Now they are allowed to use it two nights a week. It meant a great deal to
those families living in the Lake Haminton ghetto area," the minister said.
Wilson said the organization's efforts to bring the people together to help
themselves here are extremely important — "Polk County has the second highest
concentration of migrant workers in the state. Palm Beach county is first, with
38,000."
Both Wilson and Lloyd get angry when they talk of justice for the migrant
in Polk County and both are quick to criticize both the law enforcement agencies
responsible for enforcing the law and the court system.
"They (the migrants and farm laborers) have to band together and demand
that the laws on the books be enforced adequately.
"There are three kinds of justice in Polk County — -white to white ; white to
Black ; and Black to Black. Many incidents aren't even investigated if they
happen in a labor camp or ghetto. If Sheriff's deputies bother to come at all
when they are called, it takes them several hours to get there.
"But the general attitude of the majority of people in Polk County must change,
too. Even now, the migrant is still referred to as 'those people down there' or
'it's just those people down in the quarters acting up again.'
"Everybody is responsible and everybody is going to have to act together to
bring about the necessary changes," Wilson said.
Both Wilson and Lloyd have indicated they are prepared to be tough if that
is what's going to be necesi?ary to get results. Both would prefer a different
approach.
"Everyone is conceirned about oranges, we are concerned about people," Wilson
said.
Mitchell and the Community Action Migrant Program are new to Polk
County — but they have long been active in Lee, Hendry and Collier Counties. In
Collier County they were handed administration of the commodities food dis-
tribution program by the Office of Economic Opportunity after local governmental
officials refused to take responsibility.
". . . It must be emphasized that the people whom we serve represent that
.segment of society who fear to protest or challenge — ^for they fear retaliation.
Only as the vast majority of people become aware of the dramatic plight of the
migrant and seasonal farm laborers, and become involved fully in both seeking
and providing solutions to his problems, will truly long-range, massive and effec-
tive results be had," Mitchell told U.S. Senator George McGovern's (D-^S.D.)
Select Senate Investigating Committee in March of 1968.
Little has changed.
RURAL MANPOWER PROGRAM
The Community Action Migrant Program is primarily a rural manpower pro-
gram, working cooperatively with the private sector of the economy and industry
in job training, job placement and job development, according to Mitchell.
What impact the program will have in the coming months cannot be deter-
mined, but job training and placement will be essential in order to alleviate many
of the problems the migrant population is heir to.
One leader though more than any other is rapidly coming to the forefront of
migrant worker organizational efforts in the state. He is frequently compared
5580
to Cesar Chavez, who is a hero of epic proportions among grape-piclvers in
California.
Rudolfo Juarez, head of the Organized Migrants in Community Action in
South Florida, is a Mexican-American, a former migrant worlver and farm
laboi'er.
Mexican-Americans comprise almost half the state's population of migrant
workers. Juarez's story is typical :
"I was born in South Texas, in San Benito, and when I was about 15 I was
sold. That's right. They came and got a whole group of us and told us there
was a lot of money to make up North and over in Florida if we went along with
them, and they'd take us and feed us.
"I now know they got .so much money from the growers for each body they
brought up from Texas. Well, we w^ere living like animals where we were, and
getting practically nothing for doing crop work in south Texas, so we thought,
why not?
"I was taken up to Indiana and Oliio to work on the fairms there, and then we
tx'ied to break out, but it's hard. They tell you that you owe them for food and
transportation and the mattress on the floor you use for sleeping, and they tell
you that if you try to leave, they'll get you thrown in jail and you'll never get out
until you pay your bills.
"How else can you pay them but by going l)ack to work for them and when you
do that, you have to eat and you have to sleep somewhere and a lot of the time
there's no work, until its time to harvest and so you're their property . . .
". . . I'll tell you the truth, a lot of migrants — you know, they're Mexican-
Americans like me, or black people, and a few are white, yes, but not many —
they're not aware of their rights, and they're scared and they should be.
"Have you seen them patrolling some of those camps? The men will ride
around with guns, and the crew leaders will herd people into the trucks to go
picking. They stand them up and they look like cattle going to the market . . ."
Juarez's story is not a pretty one — but it is true and he has pulled himself out
of the fields. His efforts now, unlike many migrants who escape, are aimed at
assisting his brothers still trapped in the migrant stream.
Organized Migrants in Community Action (OMICA) has drawn in a picture
of the structure of poverty . . ." denoting the reasons ". . . . why we have been
living in the misery that we have been living in through generation after
generation."
Citing the reasons for the migrant and fann workers poverty, OMICA has
isolated these causes :
Exclusion of farm workers from the National Labor Relations Act.
No protection under Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Compensa-
tion Laws.
Importation of foreign labor.
General exclusion of the very poor from participation in housing, small busi-
ness and loan |)rograms.
Unconstitutional residency requirements for receiving welfare and health
service.s.
Discriminatory and humiliating welfare system.
A lack of individual power.
A lack of group power.
Bad working conditions and low wages, creating a slave labor system which
insures that the farm workers children will have to live the same way he did.
A lack of hope in the ability to escape the migrant stream or the farm for a
better way of life.
But it is far easier to identify the problems than to attempt to find the suitable
solutions.
STATE LEGAL SERVICES
Among things needed to approach solutions, Wilson said, is for "South Florida
Migrant Legal Services needs to become Florida Migrant Legal Services." The
OEO-funded organization employes 16 attorneys in the sugar cane and truck corp
counties. It has been the subject of repeated assignation by Congressman like
Rep. Paul Rogers, himself a land baron.
It has been attacked by U.S. Sen. Spessard Holland, a staunch supporter of
crop subsidy legislation which has seen $1.5 million in Federal money given
carte blanch to U.S. Sugar Corporation of Clewiston in the past two years (1968
and '69), with le.s.ser, but sizable lumps of Federal sweetener to other sugar
cooperatives.
5581
The Washingtonians frequently criticized the legal service organization's
$800,000 annual budget, while handing out huge farm subsidies to the very com-
panies and combines that help make the work of organization's such as Florida
Migrant Legal Services necessary.
Legal aid is of primary significauce in making a man feel he is a man — a
citizen ; protected by law instead of victimized by it. A proposal that the Florida
Bar Association take over a statewide legal aid program has been criticized
because of the belief it would be staffed with young and inexperienced attorneys
who would be using the position only as a stepping-stone.
Organizations like the Polk Coimty Christian Migrant Ministry : Community
Action Migrant Program ; South Florida Migrant Legal Services ; and Organized
Migrants in Community Action are on the right track — all attempting to or-
ganize the farm laborer into cohesive group strong enough to fight for him-
self; strong enough to demand his rights; strong enough to be heard by the
County Commission in Bartow, the Governor and State Legislature in Talla-
hassee, the Congress and the Senate of the United States in Washington.
The road will not be easy.
Migrant Report Toxight
A nationwide television spotlight will be focused on the plight of Florida's
migrant workers at 7 :30 tonight when Channels 2 and 8 broadcast "Migrant : An
NBC White Paper."
The special report, a sequel to Edward R. Murrow's documentary on the
migrant work force, "Harvest of Shame," broadcast in 1960, was filmed in part
in citrus groves and labor camps in Polk County.
Martin Carr. producer-director of the special report, spent more than six weeks
in Florida — two of them in Polk — filming the show with a six-man television
crew.
Sequences in the show, narrated by veteran newsman Chet Huntley, were
filmed in Eloise, Lake Hamilton, Frostproof and Lakeland.
Since announcement the documentary would be telecast tonight, state officials
and administrators of the national farm bureau have attacked NBC, claiming
the show they all acknowledge they haven't seen only presents "one side of the
story."
Gov. Claude Kirk refused to be interviewed by the show's producer. He claimed
the show was "biased" and had no intention of presenting the "true facts."
Carr, who also acted as the show's chief reporter, was choked with emotion
more than once during the show's filming.
In Eloise, tears came to his eyes when one 15-year-old, Jackson Bowers, told
Carr he was a "bum."
"I was shaken when I left him," the producer said.
Two weeks ago the producer told The Ledger he felt the show was "dynamite."
"It's about time the entire nation realized what it's really like to be a migrant
wtirker," Carr said.
Carr is no stranger to controversy over documentaries he has produced.
In 19G8, he stirred the nation's conscience v/ith a special report for CBS on
"Hunger in America." the show depicted malnutrition across the nation and
its affect on .small children.
One sequence captured on film showed several children dying from under-
nourishment in a Louisiana Hospital. Reaction prompted a United States Senate
investigation still underway.
The Pinch op Conscience
Every time the press explores migrant misery, growers react loudly and in
unison. Their cries of "Unfair" and "One-sided picture" stretch all the way back
to the publication of John Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath."
We can understand the dismay of the corporate farmer when his neighbors
start equating him with Simon Legree. Growers, after all, are people. They are
operating clean, honest businesses as well as they can. Few, if any. Polk
citrusmen would deliberately or maliciously mistreat workers or deny food or
education to children.
The current system does exploit farm workers, but the system is older than
most current growers. They did not create it — they inherited it.
5582
Why, then, should today's big farmers react so defensively to the negative
publicity? Obviously, if they did not feel responsible, they would not find it
necessary to defend the indefensible conditions.
Growers are not responsible for the creation of the migrant exploitation, but
they definitely must shoulder much of the blame for its continuance. This is
where the conscience pinches, and it is why they are so vulnerable to the accus-
ing fingers.
With their representatives and lobbyists, the farmers and growers of Polk,
Florida and the nation have fought tooth and nail against every legislative
effort to improve the lot of their employees. Without their opposition the mini-
mum wage, workmen's compensation and other normal benefits would have come
to the farm worker as to other laborers.
By opposing these efforts, by deliberately seeking to exempt agricultural
workers from protective labor legislation, growers have assumed full respon-
sibility for the plight of their employes.
Some grove owners would probably like to rid their conscience of its present
burden. Unfortunately, these men could not suddenly begin paying the minimum
wage and offering other standard benefits to fruit pickers. Such a unilateral
action would price the company's product out of the competitive market.
The men of good conscience can, however, immediately cease their opposition
to reform programs. Without grower and farmer objections, the weight of public
opinion would quickly carry corrective legislation through Congress. All com-
panies would have to follow the provisions, so no individual grower would be
unduly harmed.
Naturally, the consumer will have to bear the cost of reform in increased
prices. Tliis is normal in a free enterprise system. Americans will not stop
drinking orange juice because of a price increase.
Citrusmen who are sincere in their concern for the well-being of the pickers
will not react defensively to this week's local and national publicity. Instead,
they will acknowledge that problems exist and they will stop trying to block
efforts for improvements.
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 17, 1970]
TV Snow Criticism — A Repeat
(By Hubert Mizell)
National television judgment against Florida's migrant labor setup incurred
the wrath of the state's chief executive, but tlie words hardly differed after a
decade.
". . . did a great injustice."
Farris Bryant, governor of Florida, following the 1900 CBS-TV expose
"Harvest of Shame" with Edward R. Murrow.
". . . completely biased, bigoted and one-sided."
Claude Kirk, governor of Florida, following Thursday night's NBC-TV expose
"Migrant" with Chet Huntley.
While state political leaders cried of unfairness, members of Congress from
elsewhere expressed concern for the low-paid field and grove workers who harvest
Florida's rich citrus and vegetable crops.
"No group is more in need of justice," said Sen. George McGovern, D-S.D.,
regarding the migrant work force. He said his hopes are that "this will arouse
Americans so that justice will finally come to our migrant workers."
Sen. Harrison Williams, D-N..T., said significant strides have been made in ten
year.^ in this field, but that it's "still far short of being fully a part of the
American dream."
As the plight of the laborers was shown nationally, migrant worker Dora Mae
Dorn sat on her bed with her family and watched on a TV set as yet unpaid
for.
"I bought clothes for my children this week," she smiled, "but I had to u.?e my
welfare check to do it." Mrs. Dorn is jobless at present since the picking season
is over.
Sad faces dominated the hour-long show narrated by Huntley and produced
by youthful Martin Carr.
"Poor iieople like us just don't have a chance," said a black woman on the
film.
5583
Families Wage Uphill Battle to Escape Stream
Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Trammell and Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Farmer have
a lot in common. They are migrant worlcers, they want a better life for them-
selves and their children.
Mr. and Mrs. Trammell are both 24 years old. They live in Lake Hamilton.
They were born into the migrant stream and they are fighting with every
weapon they have to get out.
Mr. and Mrs. Benjamin Farmer are both 2G years old. They live in Eloise.
Benji Farmer had a brief respite from picking fruit ; he served a tour of duty
in the Navy, discovered a better life, wants some of it for himself and his family.
Mary Jean and Raymond Trammell are much better off than most young
migrant worker families, even though they are Negro and believe much of their
plight is caused by their race.
They both have high school educations — rare for migrant workers, even rarer
for the children of migrant workers. They both have a fierce determination to
escape the migrant stream and are do'ng something about it.
The Farmers, both white, are still looking for a way to escape. They, too, were
born into the nomadic life, but they weren't fortunate enough to graduate from
high school. They were forced to quit school so tliey could work in the fields
alongside their parents.
"Picking fruit is like a disease," Benji Farmer says. "You can never get enough
money saved to get out. It's like a trap you never get out of.
"I want to get out, but I don't know how. The only possible way I see is to go
back up Nortli. We are going to try our best to get out. I've done some selling
and repairing of television sets and someday I want to own my own shop."
Mary Jean Trammell's determination for a better life has .stood her well in the
past — she "aus one of the first Negro women ever to v>ork in the Lake Hamilton
Packing House.
She got the job — and the racial problems that ensued — through the efforts
of the Polk County Ciiristian Migrant Ministry and its subs'diary organization
Florida Farm Workers Organizatic^n, based in Lake Hamilton.
She is not afraid to fight for what she wants. In April, Mrs. Trammell enrolled
in an IBM Keypunch cour.se being given by an evening school in Lakeland.
The course requires that she attend classes two nights a week. It costs $350 —
steep for the Trammell's, but worth it if it becomes the key to the door that will
let them find a lietter life.
"We'v«» tried to get out before. I worked in the Lake Hamilton Packing House.
I was the first Black to ever work there. It was terrible. I hope I never have to
go through that experience again," she said.
It's tough to get out.
•It takes all our money just to pay our bills. You don't make anything and
you don't have anything to waste," Mr.s. Trammell says.
"T dream all the time of better things to come for myself and my family. I
have a hope and I have set a goal. I'm going to attain that goal one way or
another."
When you listen to Mary Jean and Raymond Trammell and to Benji Farmer
and his wife, their determination is absolute.
"I'm sick and tired of looking at oranges," Mrs. Farmer says, "You can pick
oranges, but you can't afford to buy them. They cost 69 cents a dozen in the store,
but you can sure bet you don't get no 69 cents for picking them."
Solutions To Problem Available
(By Ed Domaingue)
New bridges and roads must be constructed over which the migrant and farm
laborer can travel. There is a hopelessness in the cycle of poverty that cannot be
eliminated through legislation alone.
Vast quantities of time and money have been invested over the past decade
in programs aimed at helping the migrant worker and his family.
But still there is poverty.
The programs enacted have not been futile ; many will be essential to relieving
the plight of the migrant. The failure has been in not going far enough, of not
reaching the heart of the problem.
5584
Groundwork for the new roads has been laid, but the construction has not
been completed.
One of the problems is the migrant's lack of knowledge of aid available to him.
COMMXJNIQA.TIONS INADEQUATE
Conventional forms of communication fall short — as in cases where parents
are told by school oflOicials they must obtain a birth certificate before they can ;
enroll their children in school. \
Taking officials at their word and unable to obtain a birth certificate, the
parent assumes the child can not be enrolled. But this rule can be waived.
Education and job training programs are good. In fact, they must be greatly
expanded. Courses in food preparation, sanitation and money management arc
essential. School assistance has been helpful, but is still only a beginning.
Housing codes and sanitation requirements are on the books in some areas,
but they have not been effective in eliminating substandard housing.
Health and welfare programs, particularly in the areas of food commodities
and emergency medical service, are sufficient to sustain life and relieve some of
the hunger pains. But they, like most things being offered, only treat the symp-
toms of misery.
BASIC FRAMEWORK HERE
The federal-state-local programs already in existence provide a basic frame
work for building the structure which will change living conditions of migrant
workers. They provide the means to attack many of the problems, but are rol
solutions.
Job training and development programs such as those being undertaken by
the Community Action Migrant Program must be expanded.
Local business leaders could play a major role. With cooperation of business-
men in Polk County and throughout Florida, thousands of migrant workers can
escape the cycle of poverty.
Polk has many businesses in need of skilled and somi-skilled laborers. More
concentrated efforts could be made on the local level to train the predominately
unskilled migrants and provide them job opportunities.
The State Board of Health can do its share by stringently enforcing housing
and sanitation codes already enacted. Regulations which are weak and areas
still improtected will require new attention.
HOUSING NEEDS IMPROVEMENT
In the area of migrant housing, much work needs to be done. Regulations
governing migrant camps require reevaluation. New state legislation is probably
needed to achieve progress in this area.
A dedicated effort by government, business, concerned citizens and the migrants
themselves is essential to any long-range improvement.
The nature of the migrant is of primary importance in improving conditions.
They are nomadic, forced to wander from county to county and state to state
with the change in seasons. They must move to work at all.
In Florida, the fruit picking season generally extends from November to
mid-June. Work begins tai^ering off in mid-May and many workers are already
on the road.
Traditionally, in May, the migrant stream is winding its way through the
Carolinas, and by June through Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York—
where there is work until October. Then it's back to Florida again.
migrants' worst enemy
The migrant's worst enemy in the past has been the need for this movement.
But the nature of Florida agriculture tends to bring migrants back to the same
area year after year.
This has been good for the migrant and bad for industry and government in
several ways.
The length of the growing season in Florida, particularly in Polk, where the
citrus season is nine months long, has made this home for many migrant workers
With the growth of community organizational efforts the desire to return to
home ground has increased.
The impact of this can not be underestimated.
5585
Where federal and state programs make no effort to help the migrant, com-
munity organizations do. They provide the pride of accomplishment — and with
power to effect change.
Community organizations are just beginning to take hold throughout the state,
but already many of the young migrants-turned-organizers po.nt with a warning
finger to the accomplishments of leaders like Cesar Chavez, a man of the soil
responsible for organizing the grape pickers in Southern California and forcing
bargaining with the industry.
The signs are ominous to growers who have fought unionizing attempts in
the past. The philosophy of the organizers is simple. In order for the migrant to
be able to help himself he needs power. Power only comes through group action.
The migrant knows that in order to improve his life, basic changes are neces-
sary. His working and living conditions must be brought up to standards com-
parable with the rest of America ; he must be provided with steady year-round
employment ; and his wages must be increased.
The pressure originating from these pioneer organizational efforts has focused
on several alternatives available now to change the life-style and condition of
the migrant worker. While no one has offered a guess at which will prevail,
almost everyone close to the migrant population contends vigorously that some
change is inevitable soon.
Two of the three alternatives can be implemented by the grower; the third,
essentially a last resort, will be forced by the frustration of the migrants
themselves.
SEVERAL 0PP0BTUNITE8
The citrus growers in Polk County is in a unique position — the winds of
change are sweeping his industry, but he still has several opportunities to choose
his own future.
The alternatives are :
Mechanization of fruit and vegetable harvesting, ending the migrant stream
and forcing development of aggressive programs aimed at assimilating the
migrant and farm laborer into the mainstream of American life.
Grower-initiated programs to improve living and working conditions and to
increase salaries of migrants.
Leaving the situation as is and forcing great expanded pressure from the
labor force itself and the ultimate appearance of union organizations.
Most experts believe mechanization will eventually come to Polk's citrus
industry. Intensive efforts are already being made to develop a functional orange
and grapefruit picker which will reduce the need for migrant laborers. Effective
implementation of this alternative is still several years away.
Should mechanization occur, the citrus industry would hire some former
migrant workers to operate the harvesting machine's and there would be a greatly
diminished demand for fruit pickers.
GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY
With mechanization, the state and federal governments would be required to
assume a large responsibility in developing educational and job assistance pro-
grams to allow the migrant to be absorbed into society in productive capacities.
Government initiated action in areas of minimum wage extension and work-
men's compensation coverage could force industry to quicken efforts toward
mechanization.
The second alternative provides the most immediate solution, but it requires a
decision by the citrus industry that the price of orange juice will go up. On the
other hand, it may be the only way the industry will be able to discourage
organizational efforts by migrants.
The growers could increase wages, improve labor conditions in the groves,
improve living conditions in labor camps and put pressure on authorities respon-
sible for health, sanitation and housing code enforcement
Growers, through their own organizations, could lobby for inclusion of migrant
workers under provisions of the Unemployment Compensation Act and Work-
mens Compensation laws. They could make giant strides in arranging year
around employment for the migrant and could participate in improved and more
effective social services for migrant families.
3&-513 O— <71— pt. 8B 14
5586
UNIONS WILL APPEAB
The third alternative — doing nothing — means the pressure from the bottom
will continue to build. As the pressure grows, almost inevitable a situation
similiar to the one that made national headlines in Southern California will
occur in Florida.
Workers are discontent ; they are beginning to become aware of Chavezs' suc-
cess in California. Community action program oflBcials here and across the state
indicate strongly the mood of the migrant is changing. Labor organizers, after
a long lull, are again showing interest in Florida's farm workers.
Should the migrant become organized the pressure placed on the industry
might be overwhelming.
From the migrants point of view unionization may hold the only answer to
problems which have frustrated and beaten him for many years.
The course chosen depends on the growers and the harvestors ; on the action
or inaction by federal and state governments ; and the actions of concerned
individuals who have the power to bring about changes.
Only one thing is certain — the migrant worker and his living conditions are
headed for a confrontation and the confrontation will lead to change . . . one
way or another.
Changes Are Inevitable
Changes on the migrant scene are as inevitable as they are desirable.
After decades of neglect and exploitation, the workers themselves have begun
to realize that they, like most other American laborers, could band together for
mutual benefit. As this organization movement grows, our own citrus companies
will begin to feel pressure.
Their reaction will spell the difference between a smooth, industry-wide transi-
tion or a long, bloody series of strikes and boycotts. Either way, changes will
come which allow the farm worker to join the mainstream of American life.
In spite of the knee-jerk negative reactions of some industry leaders, the
worker organization movement will grow. The inspiration of Cesar Chavez' Cali-
fornia grape strike and boycott is incalculable. After years of seemingly hopeless
struggle, Chavez is now winning union contracts for his people — contracts which
cover working conditions and pesticide restrictions as well as wages.
This example is not lost on Polk's citrus workers. Leaders are now developing
who will be able to capitalize on the broad public sympathy which already exists
for the fruit pickers. When the workers are sufficiently strong to institute a
Chavez-style strike and boycott, the effect on the industry could be catastrophic.
Growers and public officials must understand that these are the only alterna-
tives : orderly changes or chaotic changes. Serfdom is already several hundred
years out of date ; it cannot last much longer. The end of this decade will see the
end of the migrant stream as we know it, one way or another.
Among the necessary changes will be increased mechanization. Other industries
have found better methods when their pool of cheap, docile labor vanished.
Citrus will do likewise. Fewer workers will be needed and they will receive
higher wages.
Many migrants will drop out of the stream, seeking a more permanent life.
State and federal help may be essential to help these families make the transition
successfully. Housing and employment will have to be found or created, or else
the welfare rolls will soar.
Mechanization, stability, higher wages and other benefits will come into the
life of the migrant worker. We hope the employers and public officials will help,
not hinder, efforts to attain these changes.
Polk need not be wracked by disruption and distrust. Workers, officials, em-
ployers and civic leaders, working together, can help fruit pickers without ruining
the industry. We have the opportunity to lead the state and nation toward the
solutions for age-old migrant problems.
Let us begin.
5587
[From the Ledger, Lakeland, Fla., July 18, 1970]
MiGBANT StOEM EXPOSURE "BlAS" CLAIMS DISPUTED
(By Ed Domaingue, Ledger Staff Writer)
"Florida stiould hang its head in shame" — Stan Tait, Democratic
candidate for Secretary of State.
"The growers feel they were cut down by the special, but really
NBC did them a service by not showing the worst conditions" —
Newlon Lloyd, co-director of the Polk County Christian Migrant
Ministry.
"Now I am worried about the big growers and others in power for
fear they will try to harm me or my family" — Benjamin Farmer,
26, a migrant fruit picker featured in The Ledger's series and by
NBC.
"Again the Northern liberal press has invaded our state in an
attempt to run our lives" — Harrold Carswell, a candidate for the
Republican U.S. Senatorial nomination.
The Polk County Christian Migrant Ministry and a Democratic candidate's
Secretary of State Friday disputed charges that reports on the plight of the
migrant worker on NBC last night and in The Ledger this week were "biased."
Newlon Lloyd, co-director of the Migrant Ministry said, "The growers feel
they were cut down on the special, but really NBC did them a service by not
showing the worst conditions."
Stan Tait, seeking the Democratic party's nomination for Secretary of State,
said, "Florida should hang its head in shame."
Controversy over the television news special, "Migrant : An NBC White Paper,"
telecast Thursday evening, is sweeping the state.
Critics, including Gov. Claude Kirk and Secretary of Agriculture Doyle
Conner, have charged conditions depicted did not present a true picture of the
migrant worker's living and working conditions.
Lloyd, a former migrant fruit picker and labor crew dhiet himself said, "Every
day I run across problems right here in Polk County worse than NBC showed.
It could have been stronger, but in the final analysis, I think it was a great
show."
In answer to charges both the show and The Ledger failed to present "both
sides of the story," the Rev. Paul Wilson coordinator of the Migrant Ministry
here, said:
"What is the other side of a hungry baby ? What is the other side of a 15-year-
old boy like Jackson Bowers or a middle-aged couple so beaten down they can't
do anything to help themselves?
"I don't think the s'how was biased. I do think that the fact one-third of the
show was filmed in Polk County should give us all a great deal to think about,"
Wilson said.
Lloyd and Wilson were both with Martin Carr and his NBC television crew
during filming of "Migrant." Tait said, "Bravo to NBC and The Ledger for
having enough guts to call a spade a spade on the migrant problem.
"Florida should hang its head in shame," he said.
He said he hoped the NBC documentary and The Ledger's special report
would "shock us into doing something" about the migrant's plight.
"As long as the lobbyists call the shots on migrant reform legislation, as long
as politicians go along with ithe theory that profits are more important than
people, I don't see much hope than anything will be done."
Tait used the occasion to strike out at one of his opponents, state Sen. Richard
Stone.
"If Sen. Stone was watching, I wonder how proud he is of the fact that during
the last Legislature he single-handedly killed the only bill put forth to help the
migrant vporker.
"I wonder if he is proud of the fact that he switched his vote in committee to
kill the bill to bring migrants under the "Workmen's Compensation Adt," Tait
said.
The candidate said, "I've got a suggestion to settle this dispute quickly. Let
those who say it was biased and untrue try living the life of a migrant for just
one week.
5688
"Let them work in the fields with migrants, eat what the migrants eat, sleep
where the migrants sleep, then let them tell us how good the migrant has it,"
he said.
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Harrold Carswell felt otherwise.
Carswell said, "Again the .Northern liberal press has invaded our state in an
attempt to run our lives. The NBC program on migrants, narrated by that pre-
judiced liberal, Chet Huntley, who considers our President 'shallow' is another
example of the Northern power barons constant attack on the conservative
South."
"Certainly Florida has a problem with its migrants," he said, "This vital labor
force is accompanied by the same problems from (U.S. Sen. Edmund) Muskie's
(D-Me.) Maine to (Sen. Alan) Cranston's (R-Cal.) California.
"For more than 20 years newspapers of Florida have documented the attendant
problems of housing, education and insecurity of migrants. Over the years, 27
separate federal agencies have swarmed over the problem like so many bureau-
cratic bugs — but still the problem exists," he said.
Carswell charged that the show was biased because ". . . the NBC crew refused
to film the improvements."
The TV show, as The Ledger's special report had earlier in the week, featured
several Polk County migrant fruit pickers.
Jackson Bowers, one of those featured, had lived with his family in Eloise for
several months. He quit school because he felt he wasn't like other kids, because
he thought he was a bum.
Bowers and his family, along with Ernest Jarvis, a 39-year-old Aubumdale
fruit picker who looks 15 years older, were not in Polk County when attempts to
locate them for reaction to the show were made Friday.
The Bowers family and Jarvis were reported in Michigan, picking fruit and
vegetables. Neighbors said they left several weeks ago.
Benjamin Farmer, his wife and five children, however, did not follow the
stream this year. They watched themselves on television and read about them-
selves in the newspaper from their home in Eloise.
Farmer, 26, said Friday he was "scared" for himself and his family.
He said, "After the show was over, I was glad I had told the truth, as I have
had to live it I hope that people will get the right idea that there are some of us
who can help ourselves and others who can't.
"Now I am worried about the big growers and the others in power for fear they
will try to harm me or my family," Farmer said.
John Ramsom, a retired 74-year-old fruit picker, said, "It was a heap of a
show. It was on the right track to getting something done. I just hope I live
to see it."
Ramsom picked fruit for 22 years. He lives in Aubumdale and was a neighbor
of Jarvis' on Hobbs Lane, where a five-foot by 12-foot roach-infested shack rents
for $15 to $20 per week.
A Winter Haven woman who works in the Florence Villa section of the city and
often comes in contact with migrant workers said, "It was a true picture and no
lies in that.
"But you can find worse housing than was shown on television in the Peasville
section of V^inter Haven. What I want to know is what will happen now?" she
asked.
There were many people who expressed shock over the conditions portrayed.
Some wanted to know what they could do to help the migrant.
Mrs. Jean Bryson of Lakeland called The Ledger Thursday.
She asked The Ledger to launch a campaign to collect second-hand clothes and
toys for the young migrant children described both by the paper and during the
NBC telecast.
"I live in a nice home and I've never been hungry. I just want to do something
to help. I have been making my children read the series to see how good off they
are," she said.
The owner of a beauty shop, Mrs. Bryant said Friday, "Until The Ledger's
stories and the television show, many of my customers didn't even know what it
was like here. They were shocked at some of the conditions described."
5589
She said, "I believe every bit of it. I believe those people are desperate. When I
was young in junior high school, some migrant children were in my classes. They
came to school hungry, without shoes in the winter — things haven't changed at
all."
The mother of three children, she said Jackson Bowers' appearance on tele-
vision last night upset her.
"He seemed to be about the same size as my 12-year-old son. He could have
been my little boy. It really tore me up," she said.
Mrs. Bryant, however, was not the only local resident concerned over what she
could do to help the county's 25,200 migrant workers.
A registered nurse and a medical assistant visited The Ledger oflSces Friday
afternoon and said they and a doctor they worked for were interested in giving
up their day off to operate a free clinic for migrant workers.
They said the doctor had suggested the project and they were all "extremely
enthusiastic about it." They inquired who they could contact to assist them with
making the arrangements.
Chuck Woodson, executive secretary of the Lakeland United Fund, also ex-
pressed concern over the plight of the migrant worker.
"I can't help but feel that we have a responsibility to be concerned ... I am
one of those who was vaguely aware they were here, just as there are other
people here at the poverty level, but I didn't really know anything of their living
or working conditions.
"You are concerned about it, you know about it, but you don't really address
yourself to it . . ." he said.
Bax Vows Housing Help
(By The Associated Press)
Florida's top health oflScial vowed Friday to force counties to meet housing re-
strictions for migrants as other state officials condemned as biased and one-sided
an NBC documentary on the state's roving farm workers.
"We're going to hold their (the counties') feet to the fire and make sure these
regulations are strictly enforced," said Dr. James Bax, secretary of Florida's
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services.
Bax said Gov. Claude Kirk has recommended cutting $1 million from the $1.5
million legislative appropriations for a statewide food stamp program for the
poor.
"I don't have the responsibility nor the resources to solve the problems," Bax
said.
Governor Kirk called the special narrated by newscaster Chet Huntley ". . .
completely biased, bigoted, and one-sided." He explained his absence in the film
by saying he "soon discovered that Mr. Huntley was making absolutely no effort
to give viewers a balanced story."
Sen. Edward Gurney, R-Fla., called it "just another example of one-sided re-
porting of the big television networks," and said it was "consistent with NBC's
policy of pointing out only the bad and ignoring the good."
Sen. George McGovern, who headed a Congressional committee which toured
Florida's migrant camps last year during an investigation, said the documentary
"will arouse Americans so that Justice will finally come to our migrant workers."
As controversy arose over the special, a Senate subcommittee on migratory
labor released a report from a team of doctors investigating conditions in Texas
and Florida migrant camps.
The team said it found "thousands of our fellow citizens manipulated and
managed in such a way as to reduce them to subhumans."
The doctors, part of the Field Foundation group that startled the nation three
years ago with a report of malnutrition and hunger in Mississippi, said, "This
time in Florida, we find destitution we would be ashamed to describe were we not
so horrified by their presence."
5590
Dr. Ray Wheeler said one Florida camp on the edge of a swamp "was, I am
certain, the closest equivalent to slave quarters that could exist in what we con-
sider to be a free society."
Dr. Allan C Hermann compared the living quarters in a camp near Homestead
with the prisons of the Spanish Inquisition.
After Thursday night special, Sen. Walter F. Mondale, D-Minn., said he will
investigate the conditions as chairman of the subcommittee on migratory labor.
"America has its own version of the tiger cages in Vietnam," Mondale said, "in
the migrant camps of Florida and Texas."
Florida Agriculture Secretary Doyle Conner had criticized the program even
before he saw it. After viewing the film, Conner said he was disappointed NBC
"spent the majority of the time showing what was wrong and very little time
showing the improvements that have been made."
"As I have said before," Conner said, "there is no excuse for migrants or city
ghetto dwellers to have to live in substandard housing."
Conner said he hoped NBC could "cut the red tape in Washington" that causes
delays up to 18 months in processing loans for migrant housing.
Deletions Made in TV Show
( Special to the Ledger from the New York Times) |
New York — National Broadcasting Company oflBcials, following an angry meet-
ing with representatives of the Coca Cola Company altered an N.B.C. documen-
tary on migrant farm workers before the program was broadcast over the N.B.C.
television network Thursday night.
Coca Cola was represented in the report as one of the contributors to the mar-
ginal conditions under which migrant citrus workers live and labor in Florida.
An addition and a deletion in the script of the program, entitled, "Migrant — An
NBC White Paper," were made late Thursday afternoon, according to its producer
Martin Carr.
Carr said, "The pressure from Coke was enormous."
Reuven Frank, president of N.B.C. News, said "There was no pressure. They
(Coca Cola representatives) brought us facts we did not have before. We heard
them out.
"After they left, we felt maybe we had singled them out for blame in a situation
where so many companies are involved. We removed the onus from them."
Frank said that "We made no promises" to the Coca Cola representatives. He
characterized the meeting, which was also attended by Julian Goodman, president
of N.B.C, as "angry. They expressed themselves," he said.
The alterations involved two statements made by Carr on the program's track.
At one point he is shown interviewing a woman who lives in a shack near a citrus
grove, and the woman asserts that the shack is owned by Coca Cola. Over her
voice, Carr added this phrase, "Coca Cola is at work on a major plan which it
claims will correct the failings it has found in its citrus operation."
At another point in the program, Carr asserts that Coca Cola and other "giants"
of the Florida citrus industry, "set the standards for citrus workers in Florida
together with smaller growers." This was deleted.
Senator Mondalj:. Th'ank you all very much.
I order printed in the hearing record at this point documents that
pertain to mformation considered during these hearings.
(The information referred to follows :)
5591
THE EXCEPTED PEOPLE
THE MIGRANT WORKERS IN
WASHINGTON STATE
BY
DR. TOM J. CHAMBERS, JR.
PRINTED AND DISTRIBUTED BY
WASHINGTON STATE COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
2005 FIFTH AVENUE ROOM 210
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121
HX)TN0TE5 VERIFYING DATA INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT ARE AVAILABLE
AT THE OFFICES OF THE WASHINGTON STATE COUNCIL OF CHURCHES.
5592
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I An Introduction to Washington Migrants 1
A. "Migrant" Defined 1
B. The Migrant Trail and Patterns of Employment 1
1. The Migrant Stream 1
2. The Mexican-American 1
3. .Washington State Seasonal Employment . . . , 1
k. The Composition of Washington's Migrant Force .... 2
C. The Great Depression — Public Indifference 2
Chapter II Migrant Education 3
A. The Educational Achievement of the Washington Migrant 3
B. Causes of Illiteracy and Low Education Achievement Among Migrants . . .3
1. History of Discrimination in the South West States 3
2. The Mexican-American Language Barrier ^
3. Migratory Travel - School Attendance k
k. Inadequate Pre-School Preparation ..5
5. Child Labor 5
6. Inadequate Adxilt Education 6
C. Washington State and Migrant Education , . . . .6
Chapter III - Migrant Wages and Income 7
A. Existing Wage Conditions 7
1. Below the Poverty Level .7
2. Wages 7
3. Bonus System 7
h. Wage Legislation 7
(a) Wage Collection Laws .7
(b) State Minimum Wage Legislation 8
(c) Federal Minimum Wage Legislation 8
(i) Coverage 8
(ii) Ineffectiveness 8
B. Causes of Low Migrant Income 9
1. Unavailability of Steady Employment 9
2. Mechanization . 9
3. The Labor Contractor 10
(a) Abusive Practices 10
(b) Labor Contractor Regulations 10
(i) Provisions of the Federal Farm Labor
Contractor Registration Act 10
(ii) Inadequacies of the Federal Farm Labor
Contractor Registration Act 11
(iii) The Washington State Farm Contractor Act .... 11
h. Department of^ Employment Security — A Majcimum Wage Limit . . . .12
(a) The SeVvices and Activities of the Department of
Employment Security 12
(b) The Maximiim Wage Limit 12
5. A Disadvantaged Bargaining Position .... ... .13
5593
(a) Lack of Leadership — The Labor Contractor 13
(b) lUack of Free Market -.13
(c) Inability to Organize 13
(i) Desire to Organize 13
(ii) Poverty and Lack of.j;xpectations lU
(d) Lack of Labor Relations Legislation Ik
(i) The National Labor Relations Act ll+
(ii) Washington State Labor Relations Act lU
(e) Disenfranchisement and Political Impotence l'*
(i) Inadequate Lobby , li|
(ii) Washington State's Literacy Requirement lU
(iii) Discriminatory Purpose of Literacy Requirements . . .15
Chapter IV Migrant Health l6
■A. Lack of General Health Care l6
1. Life Expectancy .16
2. Infant Mortality and Prenatal Care l6
3. Health Education — Sanitation, Sicknese, Disease l6
h. Health Costs and Other Health Problems . . .16
5- Federal Migrant Health Programs in Washington 17
' B. Farm Accidents IT
1. Frequency and Magnitude .17
2. State Industrial Insurance ..... 17
(a) Limited Coverage 17
(b) Inadequacies of Coverage 17
C. Female and Child Labor l8
1. Number of Women and Children in the Fields l8
2. The Costs of Having Women and Children in the Fields l8
, . (a) Farm Accidents l8
(b) General Health l8
(c) Education 19
3. Female and Child Labor Laws 19
(a) The Federal Fair Labor Standards 19
(b) Washington State Female and Child Labor Act 19
. D. Migrant Housing 19
1. Migrant Housing Generally 19
2. Migrant Housing in Washington State 20
(a) The Numbers and Condition of Washington
Farm Labor Camps 20
(b) Inadequate Housing and Migrant Health . .20
(c) The Farmer Bears the Burden ■. •. . ,20
3. Migrant Housing Laws ..,•..•. ..-21
(a) Federal Regulations . -. . .21
(i) Housing Programs 21
(ii) Federal Minimum Housing Regulations 21
(iii) Weaknesses of the Federal Minimum
Housing Regulations 21
(b) Washington State Labor Camp Health Regulations 21
(i) The Regulations 21
(ii) Enforcement Problems 22
5594
CHAPTER I M INTRODUCTION TO WASHINGTOrT MIGRAHTS
A. "migrant" defined i
While the migrant has been variously defined, the currently accepted and most j
appropriate definition of a migrant is "someone who has left his home coionty, some I
time during the year, to live away from home to do farm work."l It should be noted 1
that the definition includes "intrastate" workers as well as the nomadic "interstate"
farm workers. In addition, agriciiltural employment is the migrant's princip&l source
of income; he is not a "casual" farm worker. I
B. THE ^a:GRANT TRAIL AND PATTERISIS OF EMPLOYMENT '
1. THE MIGRANT STREAM
There were about 1+66,000 persons who left their home counties to work in the fieldsl
in 1967 ;2 the number of migrants in the United States has remained relatively stable, i
fluctuating around UOO.OOO since World War II.- ^ While migrants constitute only about ]
15 percent of the wage farm force nationally,^ they constitute a very large share of |
the labor force in labor-intensive crops located where there is no large metropolitan
area from which to draw the quantity of labor demanded.
The bulk of American migrants follow three major routes from along the southern
border of the country, northward. The main stream and the stream that serves the
State of Washington flows north and west from Texas , beginning in the Spring and
covering most of the North Central, Mountain and Pacific Coast States before the sea-
son ends around December. 5
2. THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN
Although the exact number is uncertain, about half of the workers in the mi(-
grant stream are Americans of Mexican descent. There are approximately 10 million Span-
ish surnamed citizens in this country and two-thirds of them reside in the southwest
states. ' The Mexican-American Community has clung to its traditional language and
culture with remarkable tenacity. "If anything, the Mexican-American sense of identity
is probably stronger now than it ever was, in spite of the general tendency of the do-
minant society to ignore or suppress it and in spite of (or because of) many years of
overt and covert discrimination."" The Mexican-American, with his \inique cultural back-
ground appears to be more permanently attached to the migrant stream than his white
or "Anglo" counter-part9 and his unique problems that deserve special attention.
3. WASHINGTON STATE SEASONAL EMPLOYMENT
Washington State characteristically has two seasonal peaks that differ in loca-
tion and activity. According to the Department of Employment Security, hiring of signi-
ficant numbers of workers begins early in the Spring and rises gradually until late June
or mid-Jiay when the first employment peak is reached at the height of the berry har-
vest in Western Washington. The second peak is reached in September or early October
when the harvests of soft fruits, potatoes, sweet corn, and tomatoes take place in East-
ern Washington. Western Washington contributes to the second peak by harvesting string
beans, sweet corn, and other vegetables.
Nationally, Washington State ranked fifth among the United States in the use of
man-months of migrant labor,-'--'- and during the month of October, Washington ranked
third in migrant employment behind California and North Carolina. While data on
when and where peak employment was reached in; Washington is inconclusive, more than
2l»,500 migrants, excluding depen4ents .were employed in Washington agriculture in the
latter half of September of I966.I'* There were approximately two non-working depen-
dents for every three migrant workers. 15 Yakima County, ysing about one third of the
-i-)v_ ust^--^
5595
state's migrant force, proved to be the largest user of migrant labor; Chelan
County, using about one-sixth of the state's supply, was the second largest mi-
grant employer in 1966 followed by Okanogan, Grant, and Benton Counties.
h. THE COMPOSITION OF WASHINGTON'S ^Q:GRMT FORCE
In 1966, less than half, U9 percent, of Washington's migrant laborers were Anglos;
Mexican-Americans represented Ul percent; about 3 percent were American Indians: Cana-
dian Indians 5 percent and Negroes represented about 2 percent . I8 Females constitute
31 percent of the Washington labor force /^ Migrants for the most part are young; a-
bout one-fourth of the nation's migrants are teen-agers between the ages of lU and IT
years and persons 55 years old and older account for only l/lO of the migrant work
force.
C. THE GREAT DEPRESSION PUBLIC INDIFFERENCE
In 1929, the United States was plunged into a great depression. To a great ex-
tent this nation was able to recover from the economic chaos of that depression by the
enactment of enlightened social welfare and labor programs. What was calledthe New
Deal" in the 1930 's is now accepted as a basic foundation of American economic and
social prosperity.
The migrant fam worker, however, has not recovered from that great depression of
1929. The plight of the migrant was described in 1968, by the United States Senate
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor:
The statistics throughout this report indicating the low wages, unemploy-
ment, lack of education, poor housing, malnutrition, disease, and lack of ade-
quate medical and dental care tell^only part of the story of the shocking degree
of impoverishment of the migrant.
The migrant farm worker, to this day, ha^ not been reached by the old "New Deal."
For the most part, migrant workers and their families have been expressly excepted from
or only minimally included in all of the conventional social welfare and workman's bene-
fits enacted by the Federal and State Governments; such legislation includes unemploy-
ment insurance, workman's compensation, social security insurance, °^^™^^^f P^°-
tection. child labor protection, collective bargaining protection, and general welfare
assistance .
The reasons that migrants 'have been excluded from --^l/^^^f ^*i°^„^" "^hr '
including lack of political organization or political identity, alienation from the
politSal system, Ld lack of bargaining power. Public indifference ^---^.^^^f ^"
the greatest obstacle to efforts to cure the social and economic -^^iff^ TxZTrei
worker. Corrective proposals, usually very modest in ^f -,f-^= '^^^^^f.^.^^.^f ^^
and supported by do-good lobbies with little success. In 1952, ^^^.^'^S,^^^^^^^^^^
migrant labor before the Senate Subcommittee on Labor ^\^f ^^^^^^^^ ' . ^^^f °^ C^^ess
phrey of Minnesota commented that fewer than 200 letters had '^^^\ll%llll^''J, fl^glll
either lauding or condemning efforts to help the migrant; it was the Senator s opinion
that the American Public was not interested in the migrant farm worker.
5596
CHAPTER II MIGRANT EDUCATION {
. I
I
A. THE EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT OF THE WASHINGTON MIGRANT I
While the average Washington State adult resident has a median of 12.1 years of j
education, the Washington migrant farm worker has a median of 8.8 years of educa-
tion.■'■ To a great extent the lower educational level of the migrant can be attri-
buted to the special problems of the Mexican-American farm worker. Mexican-American
migrants have a median of only 5.4 years of education while the median years of
education for an Anglo migrant is 10.0 years. 2 of those Washington migrants who
usually sgeak Spanish at home, about 78 percent of Washington's Mexican-American
migrants, the median years of education is 4.9. Furthermore, 41 percent of Wash-
ington's Mexican-American migrants cannot read English and 30 percent cannot speak
English.^
B. CAUSES OF ILLITERACY AND LOW EDUCATION ACHIEVEMENT AMONG MIGRANTS
1. HISTORY OF DISCRIMINATION IN THE SOUTH WEST STATES
Mexican-Americans have historically been discriminated against and educationally
deprived, particularly in the southwestern states from which most of the adult
Mexican-Americans now living in Washington came. In 1853, a great many Mexicans
became Americans when they and their land became the possession of the United
States as the result of the Gadsden Purchase. The effect of the Gadsden Purchase
was aptly described, in 1967, by the associate director of a state migrant council:
They had all the disadvantages of a vanquished nation they were now
subject to impositions of a new and powerful nation whose cultural
orientation and social and legal systems were diametrically opposed
to theirs. The new government proceeded to exploit what was benefi-
cial to it, and to ignore what was not. A new language was introduced,
but little effort was made to provide instruction in it. Then the new
economy which was superimposed was different, but no effort was made
to educate people to relate to it.
Perhaps the best illustrations of educational discrimination in the Southwest
are found in court reports. Suits attacking the physical segregation of Mexican-
American students from White students were begun in Texas as early as 1930.^
In 1946, in Mendez v. Westminster School District of Orange County, ^ the court
found that Spanish-speaking children were being retarded in learning English be-
cause the segregated system reduced their exposure to English. In Gonzalez v.
Sheely,9 the court found that the defendant school district's policy of segrega-
tion fostered antagonism in the Mexican-American children and suggested inferiori-
ty among them. Another case illustrating racial discrimination against Mexican-
Americans is Hernandez v. Texas-^^where no Mexican-Americans had been summoned to
jury duty in 25 years although Jackson County, Texas had a substantial Mexican-
American population.
Whether because of discriminatory practices, indifference, or sheer inability to
cope with the magnitude of the problem, southwestern schools have failed to meet
the educational needs of the rural Mexican-American population. One-sixth of the
Mexican-Americans in the rural Southwest have completed no years of education;
the Mexican-Americans with no years of school out-number the high school graduates.-'-^
When Mexican-American children are not segregated, the educational system often
reflects the hostile attitude of the dominant society. "'It's the way the school
feels, the attitude of the schools toward the Mexican-American,' a parent said in
-3-
5597
Los Angeles in 1967. "•'•^ To the migrant children, both Anglo and Mexican-American,
schools often seem irrelevant and the atmosphere insensitive or hostile. The long
history of educational failure among migrants and their children has made them sus-
picious of both education and educators.
Southwest school districts are often accused of failure to take advantage of Federal
Grant-In-Aid Programs. The superintendent of a district in Texas which is about
70 percent Mexican-American explained that the school had not accepted federal
funds because, "We feel like we are doing a pretty good job"; the median years com-
pleted by Mexican-Americans in that county are 2.1.-^^ Other complaints made by
Mexican-Americans include crowded and run-down facilities, large class size, poor
couiiseling, poor vocational training, inappropriate teaching materials, and testing
practices that isolate Mexican-Americans even with-in integrated schools.-'-^
2. THE MEXICAN -AMERICAN LANGUAGE BARRIER
While the language problem of Mexican-Americans can not logically be separated
from the historical suppression of the Mexican ethnic group in the Southwest, the
impact of language difficulties on the Mexican-American migrant deserves special
emphasis .
The tremendous learning disadvantage of a Spanish-speaking child placed in an edu-
cational institution where the only language of instruction is English can hardly
be over-stated. In an effort to teach Spanish-speaking children English, Mexican-
American children are often punished by spankings, by being forced to stand in a
"black square", or by being fined a penny for every Spanish word spoken. ■'•^ The
result of such policies has been frustration, lack of self-esteem, and a high rate
of school drop-outs. One educator was led to conclude, "the school districts of
the Southwest have the unique honor of graduating students functionally illiterate
in two languages."-'-^
In June and July of 1967, hearings were held before the Special Subcommittee on
Bilingual Education, a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public
Welfare. The result of those hearings was the enactment of the Bilingual Educa-
tion Act-^'' authorizing federal grants to local schools to develop and operate
bilingual educational programs, particularly for elementary years, for Spanish-
speaking students. 18
3. MIGRATORY TRAVEL - SCHOOL ATTENDANCE
By definition the migratory worker is required to travel. The dilemma of the
traveling migrant may have been best illustrated by the case of Roberto Valenzuela
who was anxious for his oldest son to learn English. He attempted to take his
son out of the special school for migrants, where instruction was exclusively in
Spanish, and tried to enroll him in regular public school where he could learn
English. Roberto, however, could not enroll his son in regular school until he
lived in the permanent section of the Colorado Labor Camp and, although there
were units available in the permanent section of the camp, he could not live in
that section until he had lived at the camp for six months — a policy that ef-
fectively encourages migrants to move on. Roberto was soon forced to leave the
camp to seek his meager livelihood elsewhere; he might never live anywhere for
six months. 20
Nationally, approximately 300,000 children accompany their migrant parents in the
annual treck for work. 21 In Washington, Mexican-American migrant children out-
number the Anglo migrant children by a ratio of almost two to one. ^ The high
-k-
5598
proportion of Mexican-American children is not surprising in view of the relatively
large family unit in which Mexican-American families migrate; the median Mexican-
American migrant family size in Washington is 6.2 persons while the median Anglo
migrant family size is 3.2 persons. ^^ The difference in school attendance patterns
of migrant children also varied by ethnic group. Mexican-American migrant children
in Washington attended an average of 17 weeks of school in various schools arid in
various states each year, as compared with an average of almost 27 weeks for Anglo
children. ^^ All migrant children averaged 21.3 weeks per year; the average school
year usually lasts for 36 weeks.
4. INADEQUATE PRE-SCHOOL PREPARATION
Indirectly related to the effects of migrant travel is the problem of both parents
working in the fields. About 54 percent of all female migrants in Washington
worked in agriculture and about three-quarters of all female migrants above the
age of 15 were engaged in agricultural labor. 26 Thus, the woman's role in the
migrant family is primarily as a money-earner rather than as a house-keeper. Chil-
dren are often cared for in the field or in the family car. It has been suggested
by one author that many migrant children are retarded as a result of the migratory
life;^^ because no one patiently answers his questions, because no one gives him
basic instructions about sounds, shapes, and colors, and because he fails to re-
ceive other stimuli which the maturation process requires, the migrant child is
likely to be deficient in the equipment of learning. ^8 Migrant Day Care Centers
offer great potential for providing migrant children with proper pre-school ex-
periences; however, most day care centers have been primarily custodial, as op-
posed to educational, in approach.
5. CHILD LABOR
Opportunities for education are significantly reduced for children who work in
the fields and for those who suffer from farm accidents. More than 12 percent of
Washington's migrant labor force in 1966 was contributed by migrants under 15
years of age.^' Almost 10 percent of all migrant children under the age of 10
worked in the crops; the percentage was about the same for both boys and girls.
However, for the age group from 10 to 15 years, over one-half the male migrant
children toiled in the fields while only about 5 percent of the female migrants
worked in agriculture. In the age group of 16 to 19, 97 percent of the male
migrants and 70 percent of the female migrants worked in the fields. 3-'- It is clear
from this data that migrant children often traveled and worked with their parents
to supplement the family income. ''Moreover, many migrants expect that their chil-
dren -will make their living in the fields. Hence they fail to see the purpose of
education. "22
Farm accidents and hard work reduce educational opportunities of migrant children.
Beginning January of 1964, 28 states were surveyed for an 18 month period; of
those accidents reported, 1,849 were to children under 18 employed in agriculture. ^^
"The California Department of Industrial Relations reports that each year 500
children of school age in California suffer lost schooltime due to farm injuries.
More than half of these children are under 16 years of age."^^ Moreover, there is
evidence that constant labor in the fields is harmful to the health of young chil-
dren; chronic fatigue and under-nourishment lowers the child's resistance to in-
fectuous diseases. The impact of agricultural labor on the health of migrant
children will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4.
-5-
5599
6. INADEQUATE ADULT EDUCATION
There are inadequate opportunities for adult migrants to receive free or low-
coot education or training. Mexican-Americans in particular are unable to find
free instruction in the English language. As one educator put it, "odd as it may
=eem the United States Government has done more to help citizens of other countries
to learn English in their own lands than it has done for non-English-speaking Ameri-
can citizens in this country. "^^ Special instruction in the English language is an
e='=ential prerequisite to any job retraining or expanded employment program. ^7 For
example, in 1967, of the very few Washington migrants (16 percent) who had received
any vocational training, 88 percent were Anglos and only 6 percent were Mexican-
American= 38 As will be discussed in Chapter 3, the future holds less-and-less
agricultural employment for Mexican-American laborers; consequently, massive train-
ing programs will be necessary to move these people into other occupations.
C. WASHINGTON STATE AND MIGRANT EDUCATION
The problems of migrant education are not peculiar to the southwestern states. Of
all migrant families in Washington during the 1967 harvest, 28 percent had wintered
in Washington. ^9 While on]v 7 percent of the Mexican-American families wintered m
Washington, 40 those families are large averaging 6.2 persons per family. 41 During
the pact ten years over 10,000 Mexican-Americans, whose lack of skills and education
make them ideal as farm laborers have been recruited by the State for the southern
part of the Yakima Valley alone. ^2 Consequently, several Mexican-American farm worker
communities have been established in the State of Washington; the population of the
Mexican-American Farm Labor Community in the southern part of the YakimaValley has
been variously estimated between 8,000 and 12,000.
As previously stated, basic education and instruction in the English language are
■b;=L pre-requisites to vocational training; Washington State's Adult Education Pro-
gram is painfully inadequate. The Washington State Migrant Education Program, sup-
ported by federal appropriation, is administered by six community colleges 44 3nd has
a maximum capacity of 600 adult students. 45 Forty-two Washington State school dis-
tricts administer federally funded special migrant education programs for school age
migrant children; it is estimated that these programs serve approximately 7,000 stu-
dents.46 At the pre-school level, plans are being formulated to provide some sort
of educational curriculum for migrant day care centers in Washington State.
Neither Washington's efforts nor its successes in migrant education have been spec-
tacular. According to a 1968 report by the Washington State Joint-Committee on
Education:
No over-all attack has yet been launched in Washington on the
education deprivations suffered by the migrant child. Some efforts
are being made by the Superintendent of Public Instruction s of- _
?ice buf what programs do exist are operated by the school districts
servicing migrant populations and are financed Primarily through
federal appropriations. It is the Subcommittee's belief that, with
few exceptions, these efforts are inadequate.
The Subcommittee expressed concern that local school authorities fail to account for
i?ke^:ti:r-s^t:^ ^sr r s: :^^:^^^ -Fr "^ n;
-LtiJitrsr^^^^
^^^ iS^ffrmig^St Slldr- ^-n-hoS-undf ^l^ ^^S^^^r
that purpose. 49
-6-
5600
CHAPTER III MIGRMT WAGES ANXl INCOME
A. EXISTING WAGE CONDITIONS
1. BELOW THE POVERTY LE'/EL
"Migrant workers do not become poor because they work in agriculture; rather
they become migrants because they have already become poor."-'- Nationally, in
196^*, 83 percent of the non-White migrant families had incomes below $3,000.
While the average Washington State family had an income of about $7,000 in 1966,
the typical Washington migrant family had a family income of only $2,300.3
Consulting Services Corporation, after a survey of I8 Washington counties which
use approximately 90 to 95 percent of the Washington migrant work force, was brought
to the following conclusion:
Perhaps the most striking conclusion of the survey was that the typical family
income was well below that level by which we normally define "poverty." There
is probably no statistic which so clearly differentiated the migrant population
from the total population as that which states that the average total annual 'in-
come for a migrant family was about one-third that of the average family resid-
ing in Washington State. When one considers fringe benefits available to most
employees in Washington State such as paid sick-leave, holiday^, vacations, anc
health insurance, the income difference is even more striking.
2. WAGES
Not only is farm work seasonal and sporadic, but the fan', vorkers' wage rate is
the lowest of all our nation's occupational groups; the national c.verage in 1967
was $1.33 per hour.^ In I967, V.'ashington ' s avei;age wage for farm workers, at $1.59
per hour, was the fourth highest in the nation." Most i:d/rrant3, however, do not
work for an hourly wage; in I966, 72 percent of V/ashington' s migrants reported that
they were being hired on a "piece rate" and not an hourly wage. ' In I966, for all
migrants in Washington, the median number of hours worked per day was 8.6 and the
median daily wage was $13.10. Migrant heads-of-household worked a median of 8.9
hours and earned an average wage of $11*. 20 per day.
Stoop labor in Washington, mostly the hoeing and picking of row crops, received
the lowest median wage in I966 at about $1.'(1 per hour.' Mexican-Americans, who
provide most of the stoop labor, on an average receive slightly less incone th^i^
Anglo migrants.
3. THE BONUS SYSTEM
The "bonus system", used by abo^t one-half of Washington growers, is an ar-
rangement whereby a worker who remains in the grower's fields until the crop harvest
is finished receives a certain amount of money or a "bonus" based on his previous
earnings. The grower views the bonus as extra remuneration above the promised rate
to assure himself of s-afficient labor to complete his harvest. The farm worker views
the bonus as the amount with-held from the wage promised by the grower to prevent
him from moving to where the crops and wages are better. '/liichever view is cor-
rect, the bonus system may be easily abused. Farn workers tell of growers who find
excuses to fire whole families or purposely provoke migrants into quitinfi; before
the end of the harvest; in either case, the migrant loses his acciomulated bonus.
h. WAGE LEGISLATION
(a) WAGE COLLECTIO-1 LAWS
■^ — 13
A Washington statute allows employees to recover wrongfully withheld
5601
wages together with double damages and costs in a civil action. The
statute, however, offers little relief to the typical migremt who
lacks the knowledge, money, and time to pursue such a remedy in court.
Another statute-*-^ authorizes the Department of Labor and Industries
to collect wages for employees who are financially unable to employ
counsel. However, the Department of Labor and Industries does not
pursue wage claims when the issue boils down to the employer's word
against that of the employee, which is almost always the case in typi-
caJ. casual contracts for farm labor.
(b] STATE MINIMUM WAGE LEGISLATION '
Seven states provide some sort of minimum wage protection for farm work-
ers. Hawaii, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, and New Mexico have
statutes covering farm employees . 1° Administrative agencies in Cali-
fornia and Wisconsin have issued minimum wage orders covering women and
minors employed in agriculture.-'-' California's order is currently in
abayance while legal issues are judicially resolved.-'-" (Note: The mini-
mum wage and overtime pay provisions of California's Industrial Welfare
Commission orders 8-68 (Commercial Packing Sheds) and 13-68 (Packing
Sheds on Farms ) and the minimxim wage requirements of Industrial Wel-
fare Commission order lh-68 (Agricultural Work in the Fields) have been
ruled valid by the California Courts and the Division of Industrial Wel-
fare is enforcing these provisions as of November 13, 1968.)
Washington State's Minimum Wage Act specifically exludes agricultural
employees .-'-9 The Washington State Female and Child Labor Act author-
izes the Industrial Welfare Committee to establish minimum wages for
women and children; however, no minimum wages have been established
for Washington farm workers .
(c) FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE LEGISLATION
(i) COVERAGE
In 1966, Congress amended the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act to
extend, for the first time, federal minimum wage coverage to farm
workers. ^•'^ The minimum wage increased over a three year period;
a minimum of $1.00 during 196T, a minimum of $1.15 per hour during
1968, and from Februaiy 1, 1969 and thereafter, the minimum wage is
$1.30 per hour.^
(ii) INEFFECTIVENESS
While the minimum wage coverage is a bold step toward extending fed-
eral labor protection to fdrm workers, the new minimum wage laws will
not have the desired beneficial impact on the economy of the Washington
migrant .
First, the minimum wage is too low to help migrants. Even if a migrant
could work a steady 50 weeks a year at Uo hours per week, an impossible
feat for any migrant, his annual income, at $1.30 per hour would be
$2,600, still below the poverty level. Moreover, the typical migrant ^3
worker in Washington earned about $1.50 per hour during the I967 harvest.
Second, extensive exceptions have been built into the minimum wage cover-
age for farm workers. The most important exception is that the regulations
do not appy to growers who did not, during any calendar quarter of the
-a-
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 15
5602
preceding year, use more than 500 man-days of agricultural labor. ^^ Thus,
only about 33,000 or 1 percent of all farms in this county are large enough
to be affected by the new wage law. Coverage will reach about 390,000
of the I.I4 million hired farm workers in the United States. 2" Even a 100
man-day test would not mean total coverage since only about 7 percent of
our nation's farm employers would be covered.^'
Certain other employees are excluded from coverage. Hand-harvest workers
who are paid on a piece-rate basis, and who commute daily from their per-
manent homes, and who were employed in agriculture for Igss than 13 tJ'eeks
during the preceding_ q^uarter are exempt from coverage. Furthermore,
the cost of lodging and services customarily furnished to the employee
may be deducted for the minimum wage. ^9
Third, there is inadequate enforcement of the minimum wage act by the
Wages and Hours Division of the United States Department of Labor. The
Division only has 8 field representatives to cover the entire nation and
complaints must be in the proper form and brought to the attention of the
proper authorities or they are never acted upon. 30 One author concluded:
Given Wages and Hours present attitude, it would be better not to
have agricultural labor covered under the Fair Labor Standards Act
o-i
than to have coverage which is meaningless.-"
B. CAUSES OF LOW MIGRANT INCOME
1. UNAVAILABILITY OF STEADY EMPLOYMENT
One of the principal problems faced by the migrant worker is his inability
to work steadily. Nationally the average migratory worker was employed for only
82 days at farm work in I965. Non-casual migratory workers — those that worked
more than 25 days a year — worked an average of 121 days in 1966.33 in 1965, a-
bout half of the nation's migrants did non-farm work during the year; those who did
non-farm work during the year averaged about I58 days of paid employment while those
who did only farm work were able to average only lOU work days. 3^
Not only do migrants find themselves unemployed because of off-seasons and travel
time, but there are indications that mechanization of certain agricultural industries
has left employment gaps and delays in the former harvest cycle . 3' Moreover, it is
the employee and not ,the employer who must bear the employment loss due to bad weather
or other unforeseen harvest problems; once the migrant has been recruite^, he has no
alternative course of employment during unfavorable harvest conditions.
36'
Consulting Services Corporation calculated that to raise the migrants to an in-
come level approximating the state average — and assuming that the migrant can only
work the same number of hours as he did during 1965 — the grower, would have to pay
an equivalent of roughly $5-1*0 per hour.3T The above calculati^p should suggest
that minimum wage legislation alone will not solve the poverty of the migrant; on
the contrary, efforts to assure more continous agricultural employment and more non-
agricultural employment are necessary.
2. MECHANIZATION
Agriculture is one of the most increasingly efficient sectors of our nation-
al economy. Farm output per man-hour climbed 61 percent between 1957 and 1967.3°
In Washington, the State Employment Security Department reports that machines are
being tested for the harvest of asparagus, tomatoes, grapes, raspberries, sind a
machine is being developed to effect substantial labor savings in the hop industry. 39
Machines are also being tested in the soft fruit industry; however, no extensive re-
duction in labor needs are seen in the immediate future for the soft fruit industry
5603
becausej^gf expected increased production of Washington apples and other soft
fruits. An actual incjjjase of 15 to 20 percent in farm labor demands by
1975 has been predicted.
It seems certain that the long range result of mechanization will be to re-
duce the demand for migratory labor. The Mexican-American migrant is experiencing
the effects of mechanization already; primarily because the greatest advances in
mechanization have been in crops requiring stoop labor, work usually done by Mexi-
can-Americans. 2 The effect of mechanization also weighs heaviest on the Mexican-
American because he possesses less education and skill. '*3 "The worker who is dis-
placed is more likely to be unskilled, while the worker who moves into industry is
quite likely to have some skills and is the type most needed to operate the machinery .*''*'*
3. THE LABOR CONTRACTOR
(a) ABUSIVE PRACTICES
The labor contractor plays an important role in the lives of many migrants.
He often arranges transportation and lodging for migrants; arranges employ-
ment terms with the employer , acts as a crew leader in the fields and per-
sonally collects and distributes wages to the migrants. Thus, the contract-
or has tremendous control over his workers and the system is inherently sub-
ject to abuses. Reports are common of farm labor contractors recruiting mi-
grants with promises of high wages, good working conditions, and other mis-
representations . ^5 There are frequent reports of contractors taking double
collections from both the farmer and the migrants for travel expenses, for
handling the employment arrangements, and for being a crew leader in the
fields. ° Contractors are also accused of renting the farmers' housing to
the workers at extraordinary mark-ups, and of keeping the workers in a con-
dition of peonage by loaning them money for transportation and food at extra-
ordinarily high rates of interest. '
Perhaps the best illustration of the contractor system was provided by an
Eissistant professor of law who hired himself to a labor contractor while he
gathered material for a seminar class. Unknown to the professor, for every
acre of beets that he hoed, the farmer paid llU.OO; the professor got $7.20
and the contractor got $6.80.
(b) LABOR CONTRACTOR REGULATIONS
(i) PROVISIONS OF THE FEDERAL FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION ACT
In I96I+, Congress decided to regulate "irresponsible contractors — who
exploit producers of agricultural products, migrant agricultural labor-
ers, and the public generally.' " The Act requires that any person who
recruits, hires, or transports 10 or more migrants in interstate com-
merce must register with the Department of Labor's State Employment
Service.-' The applicant must submit proof of motor vehicle insurance,
information concerning his contracting operations , and a set of his
finger prints. 51 The registration certificate may be revoked or sus-
pended if the registrant: (a) knowingly gives false or misleading in-
formation to migrant workers concerning the terms, conditions, or exist-
ence of employment; (b) unjustifiably fails to carry out his agreement
with either the growers or the migrants; or (c) is convicted of certain
crimes P
Furthermore, the contractor is required to disclose to each worker, to
the best of his knowledge, the area of employment, the crops and opera-
tions of employment, the transportation and housing to be provided, the
wage rate to be paid, and charges for the contractor's services.
5604
The contractor is also to keep certain payroll and employment
records .
(ii) INADEQUACIES OF THE FEDERAL FAEM LABOR CONTRACTOR REGISTRATION
ACT
The Federal Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act does not suffici-
ently regulate the conduct of labor contractors. The act should have
required that the contractor not only "disclose" information about em-
ployment terms and conditions but should also have required that the
disclosure be in writing and that a copy be served upon each recruit.
A written record is the only effective means of establishing what com-
munications were given and preventing fraudulent misrepresentations.
When non-English-speaking persons are employed, the information should
be in their mother tongue.
The contractor shoiild be required to convert piece rates and hourly
rates into weekly income, thereby requiring the contractor to esti-
mate the condition of the crops and the number of hours of employ-
ment available. Moreover, the contractor who imports workers across
state lines should be required to file proof that he has prearranged
employment with growers so that each recruited worker is assured a
minimiim number of hours of work per day and per week at a given wage
rate. Fraud could be reduced simply by requiring that each farmer
pay wages directly to each employee.
The regulations that do exist under the Farm Labor Contractor Act
are not adequately enforced. While it is estimated that 8,000 to
12,000 farm labor contractors will eventually be registered, as of
1967 only 2,lUl contractors were registered. ^'^ in I96T, only 3
applications were denied and only I8 registrations suspended. 55
The United States Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor reported
in 1967 :
The enforcement of the registration provisions of the Act
(Farm Labor Contractor Registration) continues to be a
serious problem due largely to the difficulty of finding
and identifying the crew leader after he has departed from
his State of residence, and because many crew leaders sub-
ject to the Act endeavor to evade its registration pro-
visions. This problem is further compoimded by the field
staff of the Labor Department's Farm Labor Contractor Re-
gistration Section being limited in 196T to five profesi-
sional employees. 5°
(iii) THE WASHINGTON STATE FARM CONTRACTOR ACT
Only California, Colorado, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon,
Pennsylvania and Washington have laws regulating farm labor con-
tractors . The Washington State Farm Contractor Act is primari-
ly a licensing act with a $10 annual fee. 5° The Act requires, as
a condition to receiving a license, that an applicant furnish proof
of motor vehicle insurance. 59 The Director of the Department of
Labor may require a surety bond from the applicant to assure com-
pliance with the Act.r The license may be suspended or revoked
for certain violations of the law, for making fraudulent misrepre-
sentations to workers regarding the terms and conditions of em-
ployment, or for supplying labor where he knows a strike or lock-
out to exist.
-11-
5605
The criticisms of the inadequacies of the Federal Farm Labor Con-
tractor Registration Act provisions apply with equal force to 'the
Washington State Act. Enforcement of the State Provision leaves
a great deal to be desired. Only 51 contractors had been licensed
under the Act by July of 1968,^ and reports of notorious abuses
by labor contractors continue. -^
h. DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY -- A MAXIMUM WAGE LIMIT
(a) THE SERVICES AMD ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY
A federal statute enables states to establish a network of employment offices
throughout the nation." Pursuant to the act, the State of Washington provides
for the cooperative recruitment of farm laborers. ' The Employment Security
Department staffs local farm labor offices throughout the State. Upon requests by
farmers, migrants are referred to farmers who want to hire agricultural workers. 66
In 1967, about 22 percent of Washington's migrants reported that they used the
State's Employment Service sometime during the year and approximately 23 percent
of the growers reported using the Employment Service.""
In addition to local farm placement offices, under the "Annual Worker Plaji,"
the State Department of Employment Security recruits workers from other states to
work on Washington farms. Local growers place orders for a specific number of
seasonal workers for a specified date; the orders are transmitted through fed-
eral channels to the appropriate state. The principal state of Washington's re-
cruitment is Texas; in I968, "plans were made with the Texas State Employment Com-
mission for the recruitment of nearly S.OOO workers under the orderly scheduling
procedures of the Annual Worker Plan.""° Each year the Washington State Employ-
ment Security Department sends two men to Texas to personally handle recruitment
arrangements . 'i'O
To protect the recruited worker. Employment Security requires that the em-
ployer provide a bona fide Job, wages at the prevailing rate, adequate housing
arrangements, and advance $30 for transportation costs which can later be de-
ducted from the worker's wages. "^1
To protect the local farm worker, federal regulations prohibit interstate
recruitment of agricultural workers without assurances from the state that there
is an inadequate local labor available at the prevailing wage rate.'^^ According-
ly, the State's Employment Security Department, at the beginning of each year,
makes pre-season estimates of the State's seasonal labor requirements. '3 Ar-
rangements for workers needed for asparagus cutting in April are often made as
early as January. "^^
(b) THE MAXIMUM WAGE LIMIT
Assuming that a reasonably free market exists, wages will be established at
a level sufficient to attract the amount of labor demanded; i.e., where supply
equals demand. There are two ways in which wages may be artificiaUy adjusted to
vary from the supply-demand rate: (a) by artificially placing a ceiling or a
floor on the legal wage;and (b) by artificially adjusting the supply of labor to
maintain the fixed rate.
The higher the wage level, the more people in the local wage force will be in-
duced to hire baby sitters, find transportation, leave other sectors of employment,
and otherwise overcome the current barriers to their working in agriculture. No
accurate estimate of the local labor supply can be made until a wage rate is settled
upon. The Department of Employment Security bases its estimated supply of local
labor at the "prevailing" wage rate. The "prevailing" wage is not based upon a
free market; in fact, the employees are hardly consulted. When more than^^lOO inter-
state workers are recruited for an agricultural industry, the "prevailing wage is
-12-
5606
determined by surveying farmers in that industry; when fewer than 100 inter-
state workers are recruited for a particular crop, the "prevailing" wage is
determined by what the going rate was during the previous season. "^^5 The en-
tire system of importing out-of-state workers to work at the "prevailing" rate
necessarily operates to suppress any natural rise of farm worker wages.
The farm worker has no opportunity to negotiate a supply-demand wage; by chang-
ing the supply factor, the Department of Employment Security maintains the maxi-
mum wage at the pre-determined "prevailing" wage.'"
The above analysis of Washington State's "Annual Worker Plan" is admittedly
superficial and it is possible that if the State terminated the interstate recruit-
ment of farm workers, growers would merely tiu*n to unscrupulous labor contractors
who would provide the recruitment service. However, the State should re-examine
its role of depressing farm labor wages by artificially adjusting the labor supply.
The interests of both the farmer and the farm worker may be best served by the care-
ful control and regulation of independent recruitment eind migration.
3. A DISADVANTAGED BARGAINING POSITION
So much has been written about the disadvantaged status of the agricultur-
al worker that the wretchedness of his position needs no elaboration. Some at-
tention should be given, however, to the migrant's ability to improve his own lot.
(a) LACK OF LEADERSHIP THE LABOR CONTRACTOR
Those migrants who are able to acquire the training and skills of leadership
are quickly syphoned off the ranks of the field workers. Many of those with leader-
ship potential become labor contractors. The labor contractors are in business for
themselves — not for the workers."^' There is ample evidence that the labor con-
tractor abuses his position of control. Indeed, the labor contractor may prevent
the workers from taking advantage of what little social legislation is available^
to migrants so that he might better keep his workers indebted to him with loans.
78
Clearly the labor contractor, whose economic interest is entrenched with the status
quo, will not be the leader of change.
(b) LACK OF FREE MARKET
It is sometimes said that, "no one forces a migrant^ to work in the fields,
he can work elsewhere if he chooses." The fallacy of that statement is that it
assumes that the migrant is free to change occupations. A free labor market re-
quires that the worker have knowledge of other employment opportunities, that the
worker has the skills and mobility to move to the alternate employment, and that
the worker can freely negotiate; between alternative employers. The typical mi-
grant lacks the knowledge, the skill and mobility, and the bargaining position
to take advantage of other employment opportunities. Many migrants, because of
racial discrimination and lack of education, are permanently tied to the migrant
stream. "^9
(c) INABILITY TO ORGANIZE
(i) DESIRE TO ORGANIZE
That farm workers, if given the opportunity, would choose to organize
seems beyond question. On Angu0 30, 19^6, elections set up by Gover-
nor Brown of California were held to determine bargaining representa-
tives of agricultural field workers on the Di Georgio properties near
Delano and Borrego Springs, California. Of 8t8 unchallenged votes only
12, fewer than 1-1/2 %, voted for no union; thus illustrating that when
given an opportunity to express their choice, farm workers will vote
-13-
5607
to organize and bargain collectively.
(ii) POVERTY AND LACK OF EXPECTATIONS
When the typical total annual income of a migrant fetmily is well below
$3,000 each year,ol the migrant must work at every opportunity just to stay
alive — there is little opportunity to organize. Moreover, the migrant's
expectations must rise to a level at which he feels the chances of success
Justify the risks of organization.
(d) LACK OF LABOR RELATIONS LEGISLATION
(i) THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT
The lack of farm labor organization can be traced to a significant de-
gree to the exclusion of farm labor employees from the collective bargaining
protection of the National Labor Relations Act . ° According to the United
States Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor:
The agricultural industry exclusion is specifically incorporated into
Federal and State Labor Relations laws which have covered most other
American workers for three decades, so that denial of the basic right
of association and collective bargaining constitutes a most pernicious
form of legal discrimination. Not only is the industry denied the pro-
tection of such laws, but the farm workers (and particularly the migrant
workers) freedom of association and organization is further impeded in
many instances by state and local laws and ordinances which constitute
insiirmountable barriers to organizational activities.
( ii ) WASHINGTON STATE LABOR RELATIONS LAW
83
Washington does not have a labor relation law similar to the National La-
bor Relations Act. However, the Washington State Supreme Court has held that,
not withstanding exclusion from federal coverage, a Washington employer may
not fire employees because of their union activities. If an employee is fired
for unionizing, the employee is entitled to reinstatement and recovery of back
wages. "^ One author believes that the Washington Coiort , would, if the issue •
were raised, extend this protection to agricultural labor organizers.
(e) DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND POLITICAL IMPOTENCE
(i) INADEQUATE LOBBY
The farm interest and the grower lobbies have been one of the most signi- gg
ficant political influences in America since the Grange Movement in the ISTO's.
By contrast, the migrant has only do-good lobbyists to look after his interests.
(ii) WASHINGTON STATE'S LITERACY REQUIREMENT
Migrants, particularly Mexican-American migrants, are excluded from the
political arena. Many of those who must travel from state to state to eek out g^
an existence are denied the right to vote because of local residency requirements.
Furthermore, while only 18 states in our luiion require literacy as a pre-condi-
long the Pacific Coast Migrant Stream; therefore, many Spanish-speaking migrants
lermore, while only 18 states in our luiior
iion to voting,"" three of those states, California, Oregon, and Washington, are
g the Pacific Coast Migrant Stream; thergi
are precluded from exercising the franchise.""
In Washington, there are several large communities of Mexican-American farm
workers; in the southern portion of the Yakima Valley alone, the Mexican-American
-li^-
5608
population has been estimated at between 8,000 and 12,000? Many of these
Mexican-Americans are denied the franchise solely because they cannot "read
and speak the English language so as to comprehend the meaning of ordinary
English prose," as required by Washington law. 91 While the Washington law
also requires the registration officer to satisfy himself that a voting
applicant can read and speak English by having the applicant read aloud, ^
the Washington State Attorney General has issued an opinion that the read-
ing test violates the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.^^
Migrants often find it difficult to assert their rights in a commimity
that is antagonistic and sometimes hostile toward them. The registration
procedure itself may be a humiliating experience for a Mexican -American who
lacks confidence in his English language ability. The result of the Attorney
General's opinion requires that a Mexican-American registration applicant
swear under oath that he can read and speak ordinary English prose. ^'^ The
Yakima County Auditor has refused to exercise his statutory authority?? to
appoint a Spanish-speaking deputy registrar or to allow mobile deputy regi-
strars to go from home-to-home to register voters
96
When a significant ethnic group or other class of persons with similar
economic and social interests are not allowed a voice in determining public
issues and selecting those who govern, the legitimacy of the government,
particularly local government where political decisions will have the great-
est direct effect, is weakened. To the excluded ethnic group, the law be-
comes a foreign thing imposed by foreign people. When there are no votes
to attract, politicians are less likely to develop programs responsive to
the needs of that ethnic or other socio-economic class. Predictably, the
disenfranchised group is likely to be alienated from the normal political
process .
(iii) DISCRIMIMATORY PURPOSE OF LITERACY REQtflREMENTS
While the Washington literacy requirement currently has the effect
of suppressing Mexican-Americans, there is ample evidence that W&shington
and other West Coast States initially imposed a literacy qualification to
suppress people of Chinese origin; Just as East Coast States enacted liter-
acy requirements to suppress Irish and Southern European immigrants and
Southern States Used literacy qualifications to suppress Negroes. 9T of
the l8 states that condition the right to vote on some sort of literacy,
all but one, Wyoming, are boarder states that receive immigrants.
-15-
5609
CHAPTER IV MIGRANT HEALTH
A. LACK OF GENERAL HEALTH CARE
LIFE EXPECTANCY
The amount of sickness, infectuous diseases, and injuries borne by the migrant
worker and particularly the Mexican-American migrant is absolutely staggering.
While the average American in the United States can expect to reach 70 years of
age, the Mexican-American migrant in the State of Washington has a life-expectancy
of only 38 years. Anglo migrants in Washington, with a life expectancy of 55
years, survive significantly longer than the Mexican-Americans.
2. INFANT MORTALITY AND PRENATAL CARE
To a great extent the incredibly short life-expectancy of the Mexican-American
migrant can be attributed to the fact that 36 percent of their children die at
birth. The one-third infant mortality rate is not due solely to lack of medical
attention at the time of birth. According to a recent survey, approximately 92
percent of migrant mothers went to the hospital and were attended by a physician
when giving birth; another 3 percent had their babies delivered by physicians;
3 percent were attended by midwives; and only about 2 percent had no help at all
or were helped by an unidentified source.^
The Mexican-American migrant infant mortality rate can best be explained by the
effects of travel, work, and lack of proper prenatal care during pregnancy which
are discussed elsewhere in this report.
3. HEALTH EDUCATION — SANITATION, SICKNESS, DISEASE
The principal cause of the low level of migrant health is poverty and the related
lack of health education. In 1966, 74 percent of the Washington migrants reported
that they had never been exposed to preventative innoculations and about 39 percent
of the Mexican-American migrant children had never received immunizations. ^ The
Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor has reported that migrant mortality rates
from tuberculosis, influenza, pneumonia and other infectuous diseases are more than
twice the national rate. 6
The two most prevalent illnesses reported by Washington migrants in 1966 were
gastrointestinal and respiratory problems.^ These illnesses are likely to be
caused by improper sanitation and nutrition. Because of inadequate health edu-
cation, migrants are probably not able to properly recognize the nature of their
illnesses and probably more likely to use home preparations.
4. HEALTH COSTS AND OTHER HEALTH PROBLEMS
Poverty handicaps the migrant's health welfare. While the average per capita
health-care expenditure in 1967 for the entire national population was approxi-
mately $200, the average per capita health-care expenditure for migrants was
$7.20.8 Lack of transportation and fear of local community hostilities undoubtedly
deter some migrants from seeking the medical care they need. The very communities
which demand the services of the unskilled and impoverished migrant tend to reject
the migrants with restrictive state and local welfare practices.
Many of the major causes of the general low level of migrant health are so impor-
tant that they deserve special -emphasis and will be discussed separately: Those
-16-
5610
major causes include farm accidents, the employment of women and children in the
fields, and the condition of migrant housing.
5. FEDERAL MIGRANT HEALTH PROGRAMS IN WASHINGTON
Under the Federal Migrant Health Act, initially enacted in 1962, federal grants
are awarded to state migrant health projects. The State of Washington currently
has three, principally federally funded, migrant health projects.^ Two county
health departments, in Skagit and Whatcom Counties, have migrant health projects
that are funded directly by the federal government. Four other counties, Chelan,
Yakima, Okanogan, and Douglas, operate migrant health programs under a state
administered project.
It is difficult to analyze the quality and effectiveness of Washington's migrant
health efforts; however, by comparing the number of Washington's migrant health
projects and the size of Washington's federal appropriation to that of other states,
doubts are raised as to whether Washington is doing its share. While Washington
ranks about fifth in the nation for the total use of migrant workers and ranked
about third during the month of September, 11 Washington ranked only twelfth in the
size of its Federal Migrant Health Project appropriation in 1967. -"-^
B. FARM ACCIDENTS
1. FREQUENCY AND MAGNITUDE
Agricultural work is a hazardous occupation by American standards. In 1964, when
agriculture accounted for only 7 percent of the total employment, 13.2 percent of
all disabling injuries and 22.5 percent of all fatalities from work occurred in
■ agriculture. The accident mortality rate for migrants was nearly three times
the rate for American workers as a whole. -'■* The accident death rate for agricul-
tural workers is exceeded only by those for miners and construction workers. -'-^
In Washington, migrants pick fruit while perched on ladders and harvest row crops
with sharp cutting tools and machines. More than 2 percent of the Washington
migrants interviewed in 1966 had been injured on the job during the previous 30
day period.
2. STATE INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE
(a) LIMITED COVERAGE
Twenty-three states provide some form of workman's compensation for agricultural
workers; however, until 1969, Washington did not require compulsory State
Industrial Insurance coverage for any agricultural worker. As the result of
hearings conducted by the Washington Department of Labor and Industries, man-
datory Industrial Insurance coverage has recently been provided for workers
planting, cultivating, pruning and harvesting fruit trees on farms with twenty
or more fruit trees and workers planting, cultivating, pruning and harvesting
hops.^^
(b) INADEQUACIES OF COVERAGE
The first and most obvious inadequacy of Washington's limited coverage of
agricultural workers under the State's Industrial Insurance plan is that
employees in only two of Washington's many agricultural industries are protected.
-17-
5611
Second, even in the hop and tree-fruit industries "casual employees" are not
covered;-'-^ a casual employee is defined as one who has received less than $150
cash remuneration from the employer. 20 a casual employee is no more immune
to on-the-job accidents than non-casual workers. Moreover, the exclusion means
that every migrant worker will have to work approximately 2 to 2\ weeks, assum-
ing a 40 hour week and $1.60 per hour pay rate, with each employer for whom he
works before he will become covered by the Industrial Insurance plan. More
information is needed to determine approximately what percentage of the time
the typical migrant will be covered by the Industrial Insurance plan. While
avoiding undue paperwork for the farmer may justify excluding some level of
casual workers, the $150 level seems to place an unreasonable burden upon the
farm worker.
FEMALE AND CHILD LABOR
1. NUMBER OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE FIELDS
Available data suggests that the role of the female migrant is primarily that of
a wage-earner rather than a homemaker. Female workers contributed 31 percent of
the total Washington migrant labor force in 1966.^1 Fifty-four percent of all
female migrants worked in agriculture, and about three-quarters of all female
migrants above the age of 15 were engaged in farm work. ^2
Migrant children are also engaged in agricultural employment to a significant ex-
tent. According to the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, about 800,000 or
one-fourth of the nation's paid farm labor force are children under the age of 16.23
In 1966, more than 12 percent of Washington's migrant labor force was contributed
by children under 15 years of age. About 10 percent of the children under 10
years of age worked in the fields ;25 over one-half of the male migrant children
worked in the fields while only 5 percent of the female migrant children were in
the fields. 2° About 97 percent of all male and about 70 percent of all female
migrant children between the ages of 15 to 19 years toiled in the fields. 27
2. THE COSTS OF HAVING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE FIELDS
(a) FARM ACCIDENTS
Women and children are not spared from accidents in the fields. A recent De-
partment of Labor study covering only seven states, and incomplete even in
those states, showed nearly 4,000 injuries in 2 years to farm workers 10 to
17 years old. 28 While there is no data on the number or seriousness of injur-
ies sustained by female migrants, the mere fact that they labor in the fields
would indicate that many women fall prey to farm mishaps.
(b) GENERAL HEALTH
Several leading physicians have concluded that arduous farm work is harmful
to the health and natural development of migrant children:
First, a child early in life must grow and gain weight.
Agricultural labor requires constant bending and
stooping and frequent lifting. This excessive muscular
activity expends the child's energy which should be used
in the natural process of growth. Consequently, children
who engage in much arduous labor become undernourished
and undersized. Second, chronic fatigue lowers a child's
-18-
5612
resistance to disease. Infections, which are everywhere
lying in wait for the growing child can find an easy vic-
tim in those who are overfatigued and undernourished. ^9
When working in the fields, both expectant mothers and mothers who already have
families, are limited in their opportunities to provide proper health care for
themselves and their children. Until recently, the State of Washington neither
required farmers to provide adequate and safe potable water nor adequate sani-
tary toilet facilities to the workers in the fields. 30 Farm workers, both men
and women, have often been forced to squat and deficate in the very fields in
which they are working. The State Board of Health, on October 29, 1968, pro-
mulgated regulations requiring that potable water and sanitary toilets be pro-
vided to workers in the field ;31 but the implementation and enforcement of
the regulation remain to be done.
(c) EDUCATION
The impact of travel and work on the educational opportunities of migrant chil-
dren was examined extensively in Chapter 2. It shall suffice for this section
to emphasize the relationship between child farm labor and the very low educa-
tional attainment average of the migrant worker.
FEMALE AND CHILD LABOR LAWS
(a) THE FEDERAL FAIR LABOR STANDARDS
In recognition of extensive injury rates to children in agriculture, the Secre-
tary of Labor on July 1, 1967 issued regulations declaring certain farm activi-
ties too hazardous for children under 16 years old. 32 xhe regulations, however,
do not preclude children from farm work customarily performed by children. Chil-
dren are still engaged in many dangerous activities and little has been done to
enforce the regulations. As for female migrants, the Secretary of Labor has
not yet issued protective orders related to female farm workers.
(b) WASHINGTON STATE FEMALE AND CHILD LABOR ACT
Like much of Washington's social legislation, the Female Child Labor Act speci-
fically excludes agricultural workers from its coverage. 33 However, the De-
partment of Labor and Industry has not exercised its administrative discretion
to provide protection for the women and children who do farm work. The Indus-
trial Welfare Committee has the power to establish standards "demanded for the
health and morals of the employees." Most industries in which a significant
number of women and children are employed are required to meet certain minimum
standards of wages, rest periods, and eating, washing, and other facilities;
however, women and children in agriculture are not similarly protected. 3^ In
view of the above discretion of the effects of field labor on women and children,
coverage should be extended to protect migrant women and children.
D. MIGRANT HOUSING
1. MIGRANT HOUSING GENERALLY
Lack of adequate low-cost housing for the poor is a national problem. The migrant
worker, however, faces a particularly acute housing problem. One Mexican-American
in Colorado put it this way: "On various places they just run out the chickens
and the migratory worker moves in. When he moves out the chickens move back in. "36
-19-
5613
A professor of law at the University of Colorado decided that the chickens were
not so well off either. Not all migrant housing is as bad as these comments
would indicate and there seems to be mounting evidence for the proposition
that the better the housing provided the migrant, the better the migrant per-
forms on the job.
2. MIGRANT HOUSING IN WASHINGTON STATE
(a) THE NUMBERS AND C(MriflON OF WASHINGTON FARM LABOR CAMPS
While not all of the camps are in operation at the same time, Washington
State has a capacity for nearly 25,000 migrant occupants. About 52
percent of Washington's housing units for migrant workers were built
almost 20 years ago and 34 percent were built btfore 1946.
Consulting Services Corporation concluded that most of Washington's mi-
grant housing satisfied the housing regulations that existed in 1967;
however, significant deficiencies were found in the communal facilities
in the farm labor camps. In 37 percent of the camps, toilets were not
working properly, and in 15 percent of the camps they were unclean.
In 21 percent of the camps, communal toilet facilities were not separated
for |exes and in 36 percent of the camps there was inadequate fly screen-
ing. Some of the most critical descriptions of Washington S'ate labor
camps are directed at housing administered by county government.
(b) INADEQUATE HOUSING AND MIGRANT HEALTH
Substandard housing clearly contributes to the low level of migrant health.
Toilet and washing facilities are often unclean. It has been reported
that the storage of garbage is inadequate in about half of the camps, that
row cabins frequently do not provide sufficient ventilation or fly screening
and that migrants have no place to keep foods fresh. ° All of these condi-
tions increase the potential of infectuous diseases and other health problems.
Reports of physical injuries suffered from camp conditions due to broken
glass, poisonous materials, collapsing cabin floorboards, wood stoves, fire
hazards and other conditions are frequent. In one incident, a child
was burned to death when a one room cabin with newspapers stuffed in the
open cracks caught fire.
(c) THE FARMER BEARS THE BURDEN
Everyone in agricultural communities and, indeed, everyone in Washington State
shares directly or indirectly in the prosperity that results from the use of
migrant labor. It is estimated that nearly $6 million was spent by all mi-
grants for food in Washington State during the 1966 harvest season. They
spent approximately $675,000 for rent.'*^ Of all migrant families, 60 per-
cent owned autgmobiles and 32 percent had purchased their vehicles in Wash-
ington State.
In spite of the shared benefits, the farmers alone bear the burden of pro-
viding adequate housing for migrants during peak periods of harvest. Farm
housing for migrant workers is provided by 64 percent of the Washington
State growers; this housing accounted for 86 percent of Washington's mi-
grant housing.^" Only 1 percent of the State's migrant housing is govern-
ment owned. County governments should take a leading role in solving
the migrant housing problem; county governments are better able to take
advantage of federal matching programs and to make the necessary capital
out- lays required to provide adequate migrant housing.
-20-
5614
MIGRANT HOUSING LAWS
(a) FEDERAL REGULATION
(i) HOUSING PROGRAMS
Agricultural worker housing aids are available from many federal govern-
ment sources. In 1964, Congress authorized direct financial assistance
to any state or political subdivision or any public or private non-profit
corporation to provide low-rent housing fcr farm laborers. ^2 xhe Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development, the Office of Economic Opportuni-
ty, the Economic Development Administration, the Small Business Adminis-
tration, and the USDA Rural Community Development Service all administer
programs for low-income rural housing. ^^ The Senate Subcommittee on
Migratory Labor observed that perhaps too many agencies are administering
programs :
There is an obvious overlapping of jurisdictions between the
various agencies, and in given situations each department may
apply different criteria. There are frequent delays; and the
maze of red tape is frustrating to the applicant. With authority
divided, there is always the danger that none of the departments
will adequately fund a program. ^^
Despite the administrative problems, the fact remains that there are
numerous federal programs, ranging from direct grants to low-cost loans,
to aid in and encourage the construction and maintenance of adequate
migrant housing.
(ii) FEDERAL MINIMUM HOUSING REGULATIONS
The United States Department of Labor, pursuant to the Wagner-Peyson
Act, 55 jias promulgated housing standards which must be met before orders
for interstate recruitment of farm workers will be processed by the United
States Employment Service. The regulations cover water supply, waste
disposal, structural conditions, space, ventilation, lighting, screening,
egress and heating standards, garbage disposal, insect and rodent control,
fire protection, toilets, washing and laundry facilities, as well as
other matters. 56
(iii) WEAKNESSES OF THE FEDERAL MINIMUM HOUSING REGULATIONS
First, the standards only apply to camps used by growers who are utiliz-
ing the United States Employment Service to recruit interstate migrants.
Second, for those growers who do use the Employment Service, refusal
to assist is a very weak sanction. Third, enforcement is left up to lo-
cal officials and unlimited compliance waivers are permitted. 57 it has
been reported that, in at least one Washington county, compliance waivers
were issued by state officials to every labor camp in the county for the
harvest of 1968.58
(b) WASHINGTON STATE LABOR CAMP HEALTH REGULATIONS
(i) THE REGULATIONS
In October of 1968, the Washington State Department of Health issued
new labor camp sanitation regulations and standards. 59 The regulations
5615
allow the grower to comply with the regulations on a five year, 20
percent annual implementation schedule. Running water and sinks with
plumbing are required. A sleeping room for the parents, separate from
a room for children over six years of age, is required in all family
units in accordance with the five year plan. Food preparation facili-
ties, including refrigeration, are required for dwelling units unless
a central food service facility is provided. Flush toilets, at a ratio
of one for every fifteen occupants, must be located with-in 200 feet of
the dwelling units. Minimal structural standards must be observed in
addition to ventilation, heating, lighting, refuse disposal, and rodent
and insect control requirements. The regulations do not require what
Americans normally consider "decent" housing; however, if properly en-
forced, the new sanitation regulation could result in significant in-
roads on the causes of migrant sickness and injuries.
(ii) ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS
Labor camps are not to be operated in Washington without a permit from
a local health officer; 60 presumable, the health officer will make an
inspection. The State Department of Employment Security has made a
preliminary decision not to refer farm workers to a grower until the
employer has been issued a permit by the State Department of Health. 61
The potential of the new labor camp regulations deserves cautious op-
timism. First, the regulations are subject to administrative review
and the State Department of Health is currently re-examing the regula-
tions which may result in lower standards.^ Second, local inspectors
who have lived in an area for a long period of time may be unwilling to
"crackdown" on their neighbors. Indeed, they may share the community's
unfavorable attitudes towards the migrant. An Indiana health official
recently testified before an Indiana State Advisory Committee that of
329 labor camps in the State only 4 were certifiable by state standards;
however, not one camp was closed and the Department of Labor continued
to recruit inter-state migrant workers for all growers. "^
-22-
5616
THE EXCEPTED PEOPLE - THE MIGRANT WORKERS IN WASHINGTON STATE
by Dr. Tom J. Chambers, Jr.
FOOTNOTES
CHAPTER I An Introduction to Washington Migrants
1. United States Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare - Subcommittee on
Migratory Labor, "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States," 1968 Report
to the 90th Cong.; 1st., Sess., at 3.
2. Id. , at 3
3. Id. , at 3.
4. Id. , at 3.
5. Id., at 2.
6. One report estimates more than one-half; Inter-agency Committee on Mexican-Americai
Affairs, "The Mexican-American — A New Focus on Opportunity," 1968, at 2. Another
report estimated the number to be twenty-five percent in 1960; supra, note 1, at 4.
7. Inter-agency Committee on Mexican-American Affairs, supra, note 6, at 2.
8. U.S. Commission pn Civil Rights, "The Mexican-American," A Paper Prepared for the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1968, at 1.
9. Of Washington's Mexican American migrants, 26 percent had worked in Washington for
5 years or more while only 16 percent of the Anglo migrants had worked in Washing-
ton for 5 years or more; Consulting Services Corporation, Seattle and St. Paul,
"Migrant Farm Workers in the State of Washington,"
Vol. II, "Economic and Social Characteristics," 1967 (A study based on extensive
surveys of 18 Washington counties which are estimated to utilize 90 to 95 percent
of Washington's migrant force) at 23.
10. Employment Security Department, State of Washington, "Annual Farm Labor Report, "
1968, at 11.
11. United States Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 1, at 6:
Thousands of man-months of migratory labor in 1967.
California 338.5
Michigan 136,8
Florida 129.5
Texas 71.0
Washington 69.1
New York 62.1
New Jersey 57.6
12. Id. , at 9.
13. Consulting Services Corporation reported that the peak was reached in September;
Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 9, at 1. The Department of Employment
reports that the peak was reached in July; Employment Security Department, supra,
note 10, at 11.
14. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 9, at 1.
5617
15. Id. , at 11.
16. Id. , at 1.
17. Of the 18 counties representing 95 percent of the migrant employers surveyed by
Consulting Services Corporation, these five counties accounted for 87 percent of
the migrant employment in those 18 counties, supra, note 9, at 1.
18. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 9, at 27.
19. Id. , at 9.
20. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 1, at 4.
21. Id. , at 2.
22. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Labor and Public Welfare, 82nd Cong., 2nd.
Bess. Pt. , 1952, at 431.
CHAPTER II Migrant Education
1. Consulting Services Corporation, Seatt!J.p & St. Paul, "Migrant Farm Workers in
the State of Washington", Vol, II, "Economic and Social Characteristics", 1967,
(A study based on extensive surveys of 18 Washington counties which are estimated
to utilize 90 to 95 percent of Washington's migrant force) at 32.
2.
Id. , at 32.
3.
Id. , at 30.
4.
Id. , at 30
5.
Consulting
Consulting Services Corporation, Seattle & St. Paul, "Migrant Farm Workers in the
State of Washington," Vol. Ill and "An Analysis of Migrant Agricultural Workers,"
1967, at 28.
6. A Paper Prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, "The Mexican-American,"
1968, at 1.
7. Independent School District v. Salvatierra, 33 S.W. 2d 790 (Tex. Cir. App. 1930).
8. 64 F. Supp. 544 (S.C. S.S. Cal. 1946), Aff'd. 161 F.2d 774 (9th Cir. 1947).
9. 96 F. Supp. 1004 (D.C. Ariz. 1951).
10. 347 U.S. 475 (1954).
11. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic
Report No. 101, "Rural People in the American Economy," October 1966, at 55.
12. A Paper Prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, supra, note 6, at 27.
13. Id. , at 58.
14. Id. , at 27.
15. Id. , at 29.
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 16
5618
16. Id. , at 34.
17. Bilingual Education Act. 20 U.S.C. Sec. 880 b to b-6.
18. Formerly, Washington law required that "all common schools shall be t&ught in
the English language." R.C.W. 28.05.010. However, H.B. 153, 41st Sess. (1969),
was enacted and became Chapter 71 Washington Laws, 1969; it provides in part
"that nothing in this section shall preclude the teaching of students in a
language other than English when such instruction will aid the educational ad-
vancement of the student.'"
19. Roberto Valenzuale became the friend of Jonathon B. Chase, an assistant professor
of law at the University of Colorado School of Law, who became a migrant to col-
lect material on law and poverty. See Chase, J., "The Migrant Farm Worker in
Colorado - The Life and The Law," 40 U. of Colo. L. Rev. 45, (1967), at 62.
20 Id. , at 62.
21. United States Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare — Subcommittee on
Migratory Labor, "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States," 1968 Report
to the 90th Cong., 1st., Sess., at 9.
22. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, Vol. Ill "An Analysis of Migrant
Agricultural Workers," at 16.
23. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 29.
24. Id. , at 38.
25. Id. , at 38.
26. Id. , at 9.
27. Comment, "Migrant Farm Labor in Upstate N.Y.," Columbia Journal of Law and
Social Problems, Vol. 4, 1968, p. 2, at 43.
28. Id. , at 43.
29. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 9.
30. Id. , at 9.
31. Id., at 9.
32. Joint Committee on Education, State of Washington, "Education in Washington,"
The Fifth Biennial Report Submitted to the 41st Session - Washington State Legis-
lature, 1968, at 41.
33. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 21, at 31.
34. Id., at 31.
35. Id. , at 34.
36. A Paper Prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, supra, note 6, at 35.
5619
37. Joint Committee on Education, supra, note 32, at 42.
38. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 32.
39. Id. , at 21.
40. Id. , at 21.
41. Id. , at 29.
42. Washington State Employment Security Department, "Thirtieth Report to the Gover-
nor", December 31, 1967, at 24.
43. The Yakima Valley Council for Community Action (a local anti-poverty program)
has estimated 8,000; the Washington State Mexican-American Federation has estimated
12,000.
44. A telephone interview with J. 0. Click, Supervisor of Migrant Programs, Washington
State Department of Public Instruction, May 19, 1969.
45. Id.
46. Id.
47. Joint Committee on Education, supra, note 32, at 40.
48. Id. , at 42.
49. Id. , at 45.
CHAPTER III Migrant Wages and Income
1. President's Committee on Migratory Labor, "Report to the President on Domestic
Migratory Labor," Sept. 1956, at 24.
2. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Rural People in the
American Economy," Agricultural Economic Report No. 101, October, 1966, at 47.
3. Consulting Services Corporation, Seattle & St. Paul, "Migrant Farm Workers in
the State of Washington," Vol. II, "Economic and Social Characteristics," 1967,
at 13.
4. Consulting Services Corporation, supra note 3, Vol. Ill, "An Analysis of Migrant
Agricultural Workers," at 8.
5. U.S. Senate Committee on Labor & Public Welfare — Subcommittee on Migratory
Labor, "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States, Report to the 90th
Cong., 1st. Sess., 1968, at 27:
AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS IN AGRICULTURE AND OTHER SELECTED INDUSTRIES
Contract construction $4.09
Mining 3.20
All manufacturing 2.83
Lumber and wood products 2.38
Canning, cured and frozen foods 2.21
Apparel and related products 2.93^'
Laundries and dry cleaning 1.73
Agriculture farmworker (w/o room or board) 1.33
5620
6. Id., at 27.
7. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 4, at 27.
8. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 3, at 14.
9. Id., at 15 ;
I
10. Id. , at 17. j
11. Ehlert, Charles E. , "Report of the Yakima Valley Project and Proposal for Yakima
Valley Legal Services, Inc.," 1969, at 24. |
I
12. Id. , at 24. j
13. R.C.W. 49.52.070.
14. R.C.W. 49.48.040. \
I
15. Interview with Harry Popp, Sr., District Manager, Washington State Department of I
Labor and Industries, Yakima, July, 1968.
16. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 26. ]
17. Id. , at 26.
18. See Rivera v. State Division of Industrial Welfare, 265 A.C.A. 639, 71 A.C.R. 739,
(Cal. Ct. of App. 1968); actions brought by three growers associations to prevent
implementation of the minimum wage order.
19. R.C.W. 49.46.010(5) (a).
20. R.C.W. 49.12, et. seq.
21. 29 U.S.C. 213(a) (6).
22. 29 U.S.C. 206(a) (5).
23. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 27. '
24. 29 U.S.C. 213(6)(A)
25. Kovarsky, Irving, "Increased Labor Costs and The American Farmer — A Need For
Remedial Legislation," 12 St. Louis L. Journal 564, 1968, at 571.
26. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 25.
27. Id. , at 30.
28. 29 U.S.C, 213(6)(C).
29. 29 U.S.C. 203(M).
30. Chase, J. , "The Migrant Farm Worker in Colorado — The Life and the Law,"
40 University of Colo. L. Rev. 45, 1967, at 61.
31. Id. , at 70.
5621
32. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 29.
33. Id. , at 30.
34. Id. , at 29.
35. Comment, "Migrant Farm Labor in Upstate N.Y.," Columbia Journal of Law and So-
cial Problems, Vol. 4, p. 2, 1968, at 16.
36. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 4, at 27.
37. Id. , at 8.
38. Wall Street Journal; January 14, 1968, at 14 - col. 4.
39. Washington State Department of Employment Security, "Annual Farm Labor Report, "
1968, at 12.
40. Id. , at 13.
41. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 4, at 34.
42. Id. , at 5.
43. See Chapter II.
44. Washington State Department of Employment Security, supra, note 39, at 12.
45. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, supra, note 35. at 8.
46. Symposium: "The War on Poverty — Legal Services and the Rural Poor," 15 Kansas
Law Review, 1967 at 462.
47. Id. , at 462.
48. Chase, J., supra, note 30, at 59.
49. 7 U.S.C. 2041.
50. 7 U.S.C. 2043(b).
51. 7 U.S.C. 2044.
52. 7 U.S.C. 2044.
53. 7 U.S.C. 2045.
54. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 36.
55. Id. , at 36.
56. Id. , at 36.
57. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 3, at 21.
58. R.C.W. 19.30.030.
59. Id.
5622
60. R.C.W. 19.30.040.
61. R.CW. 19.30.120.
62. Letter from Harold J. Petrie, Director, Washington State Department of Labor and
Industries, to William Mathias, Yakima Valley Project, July, 24, 1968.
63. Ehlert, Charles, E., supra, note 11, at 29.
64. 29 U.S.C, 29.
65. R.C.W. 50.12.180.
66. Washington State Department of Employment Security, supra, note 39, at 4.
67. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 3, at 24.
68. Id. , at 60.
69. Washington State Department of Employment Security, supra, note 39, at 8.
70. Telephone interview with G. W. Rowland, Chief of Placement Services, Washington
Employment Security Department ,, May 20, 1969.
71. Id.
72. 20 C.F.R. 609.9 (1968).
73. Washington State Departmant of Employment Security, supra, note 39, at 8.
74. Telephone interview with G. W. Rowland, supra, note 70.
75. Id.
76. The impact of imported farm workers on the wages and working conditions of domestic
farm workers was adequately explored during the Bracero controversy. See generally,
Kovarsky, I, "Congress and Migrant Labor," 9 St. Louis Law Journal 293, 1964.
The Bracero program allowed the importation into the United States of Mexican
nationals to work at the "prevailing" wage rate when there was an inadequate supply
of domestic farm labor. See 7 U.S.C. Sec. 1461 - 1468. Congress allowed the
Bracero program to lapse in 1966. 89th Cong., 1st Sess., 17, 1965. While the
flow of Mexican nationals into the United States has been reduced from 233,000
in 1959 to only a few who enter illegally today, guowers have not experienced the
labor crisis they predicted.
77. Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems, supra, note 35, at 3.
78. Id. , at 41-
79. Kovarsky, Irving, "Congress and Migrant Labor," 9 St. Louis Law Journal 293,
1964, at 302.
80. Morris, "Agricultural Labor and National Labor Legislation ," 54 Calif. Law
Review 1939, 1966, at 1987.
81. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 3, at 13.
i
5623
29 U.S.C. 152(3), 1935; for an excellent historical treatment of the National
Labor Relations Act see Morris, supra, note 80.
Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 5, at 40.
Krystad v. Lau, 65 Wn.2d 827, 400 P. 2d 72 (1965).
Peck, "Judicial Creativity and State Labor Law," 40 Washington Law Review 743.
1965, at 777.
Kovarsky, supra, note 79, at 322.
In 1967, the Washington State legislature lowered the residency qualification
for voter registration from one year to 60 days — for those who wish to vote for
the president and vice president in national elections only.
States that have some form of literacy requirement as a prerequisite to the right
to vote: Alaska, Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia,
Hawaii, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New York, North
Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington, and Wyoming,
Almost one-half of Washington's Mexican American migrants can not read English at
all; Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 4, at 27.
The Yakima Valley Council for Community Action (a local anti-poverty program)
has estimated 8,000; the Washington State Mexican-American Federation has estimated
12,000.
R.C.W. 29.07.070.
Id.
Washington State Attorney General's Opinion, 1967, No. 21.
Id.
R.C.W. 29.07.010; R.C.W. 29.070.100.
Ehlert, Charles, supra, note 11, at 59.
Following a tremendous influx of Irish iinmigrants into the New England States during
the mid-eighteen hundreds, Connecticut, inspired by the Know Nothing Party, ob-
tained passage of the first literacy qualification in the United States in 1855.
Other New England states quickly followed Connecticut's example and, when slaves
were emancipated as a result of the Civil War, the South was equally quick to im-
pose literacy qualifications. See Bromage, "Literacy and the Electorate," 24 Am.
Pol. Soc. Rev. 946 (1930).
On the West Coast, literacy requirements were directed against Orientals who had
been brought into the United States as cheap labor to work on the railroads and
in the minefields. In California, Nativists successfully lobbied for passage of
a literacy requirement in the Constitutional Convention of 1892. In Washington,
anti-Chinese sentiment led to violent anti-Chinese riots in 1885-86; subsequently,
bills were introduced into the Washington Territorial Legislature to prohibit the
Chinese from owning land in Washington, from operating laundries and from being
hired — all designed to harass the Chinese population and encourage them to leave.
See Comment, "Washington's Alien Land Law - Its Constitutionality," 39 Wash. Law
Review 115, 1964, at 115-116.
5624
During the Washington State Constitutional Convention, on July 11, 1889, Mr.
Weisenburger unsuccessfully proposed the following voting provision: "Provided
that no native of China, no idiot, insane person, . . . shall ever exercise the
privilege of an elector of this state." See Journal of the Washington State Con-
stitutional Convention - 1889, Rosenow, ed.. Book Publishing Co., Seattle, (1962)
at 61. Washington's present literacy provision was enacted as the Second Amendment
to the State's Constitution just seven years later in 1896. The constitutional
change was proposed in House Bill no. 57 by Representative 0. B. Nelson in 1895.
While little background is known about House Bill No. 57, it was reported by the
press that the same day that the bill passed the House, Senate Bill No. 247 was
introduced which would have fixed "a penalty of $100 to $500 for any male person
who wears a queue." See Seattle Post-Intelligencer, February 19, 1895, at 1.
98. Supra, note 88.
CHAPTER IV Migrant Health
1. Consulting Services Corporation, Seattle & St. Paul, "Migrant Farm Workers in
the State of Washington," Vol. II, "Economic and Social Characteristics," 1967,
at 45-46.
2.
Id. , at 44
3.
Id. , at 46
4.
Id., at 44
5.
Id. , at 42
6.
United Sta'
United States Senate Committee on Labor and PublicWelf are , Subcommittee on
Migratory Labor, "Migrant Health Program - Current Operations and Additional
Needs," 1967, at 15.
7. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 19.
8. United States Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare — Subcommittee on
Migratory Labor, "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States," 1968 Report
to the 90th Cong., 1st. Sess., 1968, at 14.
9. Telephone interview with William Franklin, Washington State Department of Health,
Olympia, May 26, 1969.
10. Id.
11. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Worker, supra, note 8, at 9.
12. Id. at 81.
13. Sellers, "Farm Accidents and Workman's Compensation," Farm Labor Developments,
October, 1966, at 33.
14. Senate Subcommittee report on Migrant Health, supra, note 6, at 15.
15. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 8, at 32.
16. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 43.
17. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra',, note 8, at 53.
5625
18. W.A.C. 296-17-020.
19. Id.
20. W.A.C. 296-17-030.
21. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 9.
22. Id., at 9.
23. Id. , at 9.
24. Id., at 9
25. Id. , at 9
26. Id. , at 9
27.
Id. , at 9
28. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 8, at 32.
29. Id. , at 34.
30. W.A.C. 248-62-030; adopted October 29, 1968.
31. W.A.C. 248-62-030-031; adopted October, 1968.
32. F.L.S.A.; 29 U.S.C. 213; The following categories of farm activities, with certain
exceptions, were declared to be too hazardous for persons under the age of 16:
1. Handling or applying certain pesticides and other dangerous chemicals;
2. Handling or using blasting agents; 3. Serving as flagman for aircraft; 4. Driver
of vehicles on highways; 5. Operating tractors and other power equipment; 6. Operat-
ing certain self -unloading equipment; 7. Operating forklift, rotary tiller, dump
or hoist wagon; 8. Operating combine, field baler, cornpicker, and other power
harvesting equipment; 9. Feeding materials into blower or auger conveyor; 10. Op-
erating power-driven post hole digger or driver; 11. Operating power saw; 12. Log-
ging timber with a butt diameter of more than 6 inches; 13. Working from a ladder
or scaffold at a height over 20 feet; 14. Working inside a gas-tight-type fruit,
grain, forage or other enclosure; 15. Working in a yard, pen, or stall occupied
by a dairy bull, boar, or stud horse.
33. R.C.W. 49.12, et seq.
34. R.C.W. 49.12.080.
35. A Federal District Court recently cast a shadow on the use of regulations designed
to protect women by holding that such lavis may violate the Civil Rights Act.
In Rosenfeld v. Southern Pacific Company, 293 F. Supp. 1219, (D.C. Calif. 1969),
Judge Ferguson held that denying plaintiff, a female employee, an agent-telegraph
position constituted a discrimination solely because of her sex in violation of the
Civil Rights Act of 1965, notwithstanding that the employer relied on an order of
the California Industrial Welfare Commission relating to the number of pounds
that a woman could be required to lift. The Court found that the regulation was
not a "bor.a fide occupational qualification" within the meaning in the Civil
Rights Act. 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(e).
36. A Paper Prepared for the U.S.
1968, at 51.
Commission on Civil Rights; "The Mexican-American,
5626
37. Chase, J., "The Migrant Farm Worker in Colorado - The Life and the Law,"
40 U. of Colorado Law Review 45, 1967, at 45.
38. Symposium, "The War on Poverty - Legal Services and the Rural Poor," 15 Kanss^s
Law Review, 1967, at 464.
39. State of Washington Employment Security Department, "Annual Farm Labor Report,"
1968, at 16.
40. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 47.
41. Id. , at 55.
42. Id. , at 55.
43. Ehlert, Charles, "Report of the Yakima Valley Project and Proposal for Yakima
Valley Legal Services, Inc.," 1969, the following description of Ahtanum Labor
Camp operated by the Yakima County Housing Authority at 37:
Said cabins are constructed of unpainted and unfinished wooden boards and each
contains one room with no interior partitions, approximately 15' 6"X 13' 8" in
size, with a floor of rough unfinished wooden boards, some of which were full of
splinters and were rotten, defective, full of holes and gaps and unable to support
the weight of a three year old child. Each cabin contains a single electrical
outlet, a light socket hanging from the ceiling. The electricail viring is not
substantial enough to carry sufficient current for normal household uses.
There is no running water or plumbing in either of the cabins, and the nearest
running water is obtained from an outdoor pipe, located within the garbage dis-
posal area and surrounded by garbage cans. Community toilet, laundry and shower
facilities are located in a separate building. Hot water is not available at
all times and the showers are locked at night to prevent tenants from using them.
Plumbing in the showers and toilets leak, and water and slime accumulate on the
cement floor, creating conditions dangerous to health and safety. Laundry faci-
lities are not provided in sufficient quantities and tenants are sometimes re-
quired to vjait two or three days to wash clothing.
Each of said cabins were furnishe'd with a table and two chairs, two steel bed
frames, springs, and burning "Pride" model stove for heating and cooking purposes.
Each stove is located approximately 2 to 3 feet from the only door in the cabin,
and rests directly on the wooden floor, about one foot out from the cabin wall.
There is no protective nonflammable material on the floor or wall under or around
the stove, and the flue is not properly vented, causing smoke to leak into the
cabin.
The grounds around said cabins and in the Ahtanum Farm Labor Camp contain ex-
tensive areas of weeds and grass a foot or more high, where infant children play,
with scattered broken glass and refuse; the grounds are not adequately drained
and collect standing puddles of mud and water and are infested with flies and
mosquitoes during the summer months.
44. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 55.
45. Id. , at 53.
46. Ehlert, Charles, supra, note 43, at 22.
47. Id. , at 22.
i
5627
48. Consulting Services Corporation, supra, note 1, at 17.
49. Id. , at 18.
50. Id. , at 47.
51. Id. , at 48.
52. 42 U.S.C. 1484.
53. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, supra, note 8, at 19.
54. Id., at 19.
55. 29 U.S.C. 49, et seq.
56. 20 C.F.R. 602.9.
57. Id.
58. Ehlert, Charles, supra, note 43, at 31.
59. W.A.C. 248-60 et seq. ; the issuance of the regulation met with grejit opposition
and attempts were made to overturn the regulation by statute. The regulation is
currently being re-examined by the State Department of Health which may result
in lower standards. Franklin, William, supra, note 9.
60. W.A.C, 248-60-020.
61. State of Washington Employment Security Department, supra, note 39, at 17.
62. Franklin, William, supra, note 9.
63. A Paper prepared for the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, supra, note 36, at 50.
5628
REPORT OF THE NUGRANT LABOR TASK FORCE
of the State Human Rights Advisory Council
Herbert L. Amerson, Council Chairmein
William Gadbreath, Task Force Chairman
to the
Oregon Bureau of Labor
Normein O. Nilsen, Commissioner
John R. Gustafson, Asst. Comimissioner
to the
MIGRANT LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE
Willamette University
Putnam University Center
. Sadem, Oregon
Saturday, Dec. 12, 1970
Carlos A. Rivera
Conference Co-ordihator
5629
CONFERENCE SPONSORS
Alianza
Archbishop's Socizil Action Commission
Centro Chicano Cviltural
DEMOFORUM
Eugene Human Relations Council
Governor's Advisory Committee on Chicano Affairs
Intergroup Human Relations Comnnission
Japanese Americein Citizens League of Portland
Kennedy Action Corps
National Conference of Christians and Jews
Oregon AFL-CIO
Oregon Board of Education
Oregon Bureau of Labor
Oregon Council of Churches
Portland Metropolitan Humsui Relations Commission
RIPON Society
Salem Area Human Rights Commission
State Human Rights Advisory "Council
Urban League of Portland
Valley Migrant League
Willamette University
5630
STATE HUMAN RIGHTS ADVISORY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Mr. Herbert L. Amerson, Chairman
Mr. Clennente Atkinson, Vice Chairmaua
Mr. James A. Meyer, Vice Chairman
Mr. Carlos A. Rivera, Executive Secretary-
Mr. Dwain Abbott, Milwaukie Mr
Dr. Joe Alman, Eugene Mr
*Mr. Herbert L. Amerson, Portland Mr
*Mr. Clemente Atkinson, Salem Miss
*Mr. Ted Baugh, Portland Hon.
Mr. Dick Bogle, Portland *Mr.
Mr. J. Kenneth Brody, Portland Mr.
*Mr. Kevin Collins, Portland Mr.
Mrs. Regina Flowers, Portletnd Mrs
Mr. Mike Forrester, Astoria Mr.
Mr. Walter N. Fuchigami, Portland *Mr.
*Mr. William Galbreath, Milton -Freewater Mr.
*Mrs. Betty Golding, Portland Mr.
♦Mr. Ben Graham, Daillas Mr.
Norman Lindstedt, Portland
Ernesto Lopez, Eugene
Louis Marquez, Nyssa
Donna Mashia, Portletnd
Pat McCarthy, Salem
James A. Meyer, Portlzind
Richard Nanstoll, Portland
Nathan W. Nickerson, Portland
Marie Norris, Klamath Feills
Ross Ragland, Klamath Falls
Carlos A. Rivera, Portland
Don Robinson, Eugene
Trigve Vik, Eugene
Harry Ward, Portland
MIGRANT LABOR TASK FORCE
Herbert L. Amerson
Clemente Atkinson
Kevin Collins
Walter N. Fuchigami
William Galbreath
Donna Mashia
Carlos A. Rivera
Harry Ward
* Executive Committee
5631
PROGRAM
8:00 a.m. -9:00 a.m. Registration
9:00 a.m. -9:30 a.m. Introductory Remarks :
The Honorable Don Wilner, Moderator
Welcome by Norman O. Nilsen, Commissioner
Oregon Bureau of Labor
Introduction of the guest speaker by Carlos A.
Rivera, Conference Co -ordinator
9:30 a.m. -10:00 a.m. Remarks by Cong. Edward R. RoybJtl
"The National Scene"
10:00 a.m. -10:20 a.m. Morning break
10:30 a.m. -11:00 a.m. Remarks by Philip Montez, U. S. Connmia-
sioner on Civil Rights, Los Angeles
"Observations on the Regionail Scene"
11:00 a.m. -11:20 a.m. History of Migrant Legislation in Oregon
by Don Wilner
11:30 a.m. -12:00 p.m. History of the Mexican American Migrcuit
*" by Frank Martinez
12:00 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Lunch break
1:30 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Education Workshop, Gilbert Anzaldua,
Chairman. Hecilth & Housing Workshop,
David Aguilar, Chairman. Farm Labor &
Civil Rights Workshop, Pablo Ciddi
Chairman.
3:00 p.m. -3:20 p.m. Afternoon break
3:30 p.m. -4:00 p.m. Finzil workshop reports & recommendations
I
5632
STATE HUMAN RIGHTS
ADVISORY COUNCIL
403 STATE OFFICE BLDG. • PORTLAND, OREGON • 97201 • Ph. 226-2161, Ext. 555
NORMAN O. NILSEN
Commiuloncr of Labor
RUSSELL ROGERS
Admtniltratof,
Civil Sight! DIvlilon
HERBERT L. AMERSON
Council Chairman
CLEMENTE ATKINSON
NORMAN LINOSTEDT
VIca-Chalrman
December 9, 1970
The Honorable Norman O. Nilsen
Oregon Bureau of Labor
State Office Building
Portland, Oregon 972 01
Dear Commissioner Nilsen:
It is my privilege to transmit to you the Report of the Migrant
Labor Task Force.
Since the Task Force's first nneeting on July 10, 1970, the nnembers
have been actively engaged in fulfilling their responsibilities under
the law and in attempting to meet the charge which you set before
them. They have been reviewing the social and economic conditions
faced by the agricultural labor force, and they have now offered
recomnnendations which they deem to be appropriate.
The Council Task Force Members appreciate the cooperation from
the Bureau of Labor Staff which made every effort to provide the
Members with information on labor legislation and conditions in
Oregon so that the members would have a firm foundation for their
r econnmendations .
I sincerely hope that the governmentcil and private agencies with whom
they have cooperated, as well as the agricultural community, have
benefited from their efforts.
Sincerely,
Herbert L. Amerson
Chairman
5633
STATE HUMAN RIGHTS
ADVISORY COUNCIL
403 STATE OFFICE BLDG. • PORTLAND, OREGON • 97201 • Ph. 226-2161 , Ext. 555
NORMAN O NILSEN
Commiiiioner of libct
RUSSEIL SOGERS
Admini.li.lor.
Civil RIghli Division
HERBERT L AMERSON
Council Chairman
December 9, 1970
Mr. Herbert L. Amerson, Chairman
State Human Rights Advisory Council
c/o Pacific Northwest Bell
1900 S. W. 4th
Portland, Oregon 97201
Dear Mr. Amerson:
CARLOS A. RIVERA The Migrant Labor Task Force of the State Human Rights Advisory Council
Executive secrei.ry j^j^g asked me to transmit this Report to you for your consideration.
The Task Force meetings and Hearings have proved a forum for Advisory Council members
and others to exchange ideas on the problems of migrant farm labor in the state of Oregon.
The multifaceted nature of these problems and the seemingly conflicting views held by
different citizen groups underscores the need for such forums to assist in arriving at
acceptable solutions.
A number of recommendations have been considered by the Task Force; they are detailed
in this report. While they are all important, I would like to draw special attention to four
of the recomnnendations of the Task Force:
(1) Extension of the right of collective bargaining to agriculturcil labor;
(2) Extension of the mininnum wage to all agricultural workers;
(3) Extension of unemployment compensation coverage to agricultural labor;
(4) Establishment of Government financed centred farm camp housing.
The assistance of the Oregon Bureau of Labor Stsiff in providing a climate in which the Task
Force can be most effective is greatly appreciated. No request has gone unheeded. Parti-
cularly important to the functioning of the Task Force has been the assistance from the Wage
and Hour Division of the Bureau.
I am very grateful to the individusil Task Force Members not only for their time and energies,
but also for the spirit of cooperation and mutual respect which has pervaded our deliberations.
Sincerely,
0<***-^ ><?^i!^2«**fc^
Carlos A. Rivera
Executive Secretary
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 17
RALTH TAfWOKOUOH, TCX.. CHAIRMAN
HAROLD K. HUOHU. U
5634
QlCwiicb Alette* r£>enaie
IS, sr*rw Diiixcn>R
. acNUUu. couNsD. WASHINGTON. D.C. ZOStO
December 1, 1970
Mr. Carlos Rivera, Executive Director
Oregon State Human Relations Advisory Council
403 State Office Building
Portland, Oregon
Dear Mr. Rivera:
Thank you very much for your kind invitation to attend your
Migrant Conference. I deeply regret that the press of Senate
business and schedule conflicts and complications make it
impossible for me to come out to Oregon at this time.
Hearings before the Migratory Labor Subcommittee have well
documented the economic and political powerlessness that is the
plight of the migrant and seasonal farmworker, and the myriad of
problems has been documented throughout the country a thousand
times over. Now is the time for constructive action at the federal,
state and local level. In this regard, the State of Oregon is to be
commended for its efforts to involve all interested parties as par-
ticipants in the development of a positive program to solve the
problems of wages, housing, bi-lingual education, health, and coverage
under various social and worker benefit programs.
I wish you success in your endeavors, for the guarantee of
Justice and human dignity for the farmworker will reflect favorably
on the entire agriculture industry in Oregon and the Nation.
With warm regards*
Sincerely,
Walter F. Handale
Chairman
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor
5635
NOTE:
The testimony on the following pages has been submitted
to the Conference by the Honorable Joe J. Bernal, of
the 26th Senatorial District of Texas, including the city
of San Antonio, Texas. He regrets the fact that he
could not be with us today but asked that his statement
be included as part of the record of the proceedings.
Senator Bernal is one of the outstanding leaders of the
Chicano Movement in the United States today.
5636
Speech by: State Senator Joe J. Bernal
District 26, San Antonio, Texas
TO: Migrant-Labor Conference
Portland, Oregon
Saludes a todos Ustedes conferencistas que estan asistiendo a
esta junta de migrantes. Los felicito por su inter^ indicado por su
presencia aqui .
Tambien des6o expresar grefcias al Oregon Bureau of Labor tanto como
a Carlos Rivera por el inter^ que este departamento, as i" como el Sr.
Rivera han desenpenado en promo ver esta conferencia. Pero, porque hay
entre Ustedes algunos desafortunados que no hablan o entienden la lengua
de los ahgeles y de los santos - le sigo pues^en ingles: 1
A conference is as good as the results it brings. Nothing, of
course, will be accomplished if you have come here just to have a good J
time. Along with good times, don't forget we have a "causa" that
should mobilize all of us to speak against the many bad things wrong with
the treatment agricultural workers are getting. I would like to enumerate
some recent adverse occurences, as well as mention those bad situations that
have been around for a long time. I'll mention the following, which
I don't like now, yesterday, or ever, and which we need to correct if we
are to have a good life for ourselves and our children to follow:
1. I don't like Cesar Chavez being put in jail. He is protecting
the best interests of our people - in attempting to do what is recognized
as very American - to bargain collectively. We need to support him...
thereby supporting ourselves.
5637
2. I don't like what the Nixon Administration has done to our
Chicanes. The resignations of Hilary Sandoval, Henry Quevedo, and Martfn
Castillo are indicative of the Chicano's position (which seems to be
opposed by the Administration) that equal opportunity and social justice
cannot and should not be negotiated. We should not be satisfied with
just a handful of Chicanos being named to positions of trust. Our
satisfaction should come with government-supported programs which
would meet the needs of our people.
3. Our food programs are in a mess. A survey by University of
Texas Medical School at Galveston found that in Texas - su'casa, y
mrcasa, they found a return of "endemic goiter," a disease that was
virtually eradicated thirty years ago. They also found an "alarming
prevalence" of diseases commonly associated with undernourishment. We
need a nationally supported Food Stamp Program, so that our children
won't suffer from brain injury caused by mal nourishment.
4. I don't like to see 147,000 farm migrants leave Texas each
year because "Chicanos like to wander." We should correct the situation
by making sure, through national law, that aliens crossing the border
into the United States do not affect the wages and working conditions
of Chicanos similarly employed. Good neighborliness with Mexico should
begin with dissolving the competition growers and government cause
among the very low wage earner from Mexico with Chicano migrants from
the United States. (Forty-two percent of Mexican commuters are in
farm labor.)
But we are not going to do or accomplish much if we take the
attitude taken by Glen E. Garrett, Executive Director of the so-called
5638
Texas Good Neighbor Commission, which has the charge: "to survey
conditions and study problems related to migrant labor in Texas." In his
annual report of 1969, he states the following concerning the complex
commuter problem: "This is a difficult question to answer since we do
not really know who or what to blame and since we are so poorly informed
on the socio-economic implication of the situation." The growers and
mamby-pamby politicians, who are afraid of the Texas Farm Bureau, as well
as the United States Farm Bureau, are the reason. They have wanted,
demanded, and maintained a cheap labor pool which is beneficial to them
and their special interests.
5. Dr. Jose" Cardenas , Superintendent of the Edgewood Independent
School District in San Antonio, two years ago in his report to the
United States Commission on Civil Rights, estimated the school drop-out
rate of Texas migrants close to ninety percent. He also stated that
"school administrators in the ninety school districts in Texas with the
largest migrant enrollment estimate that one-fifth of migrant children
NEVER enroll in any school..." I don't think the situation has changed
measurably since that report in 1968. And it won't change, if legislation
presently in Congress, does not go beyond its hearing stages.
6. We all recognize that the migrant farm worker is the lowest paid
worker in the United States. The partial reason for this is that migrant
work is seasonal or part-time. The other reason is more real and more
complex. I think migrants have been looked at as non-people, like the
old plantation "nigger" who wasn't quite people. This is one of the
reasons why the farm worker nationally makes $1.59 per hour compared to
the factory worker at $3.28 per hour.
5639
There are so many areas of concern when one thinks of migrants that
it i£ difficult to provide an easy out.
To each of you as migrants, I would say, voice your concerns
politically. Register to vote in Edingburg, in San Antonio, in Crystal
City, in Cotulla, etc. And when you are home, vote for your friends
and against your enemies. The enemy includes los mal inches. Sometime
they are the worst because they are wolves in MEXICANO clothing. They
are raza with a little "r." They don't speak about our problems. And
they don't go to our political rallies. They will tell you they are
Americans and not Chicanes because the word Chicano offends them. Their
last names are like yours and mine. Vote against them like you would
vote against a Mexican-hating gringo - and you know him well.
The power of your vote means that you can have a real voice city,
county, state, and federal government. The people in these offices can
provide meaningful governmental programs which will give you a just
minimum wage, unemployment compensation, workmen's compensation, and a
real equal opportunity for employment and for your children, equality of
opportunity in the schools. Or they can sit on their brains and do
nothing because you aren't going to vote them out of office.
The other suggestion I have is for you to unite whenever and
wherever you can. The thought of being a united people is beautiful.
And the first step to bring our people into a united effort, is to join
together, and bargain collectively. Join up with the United Farm Workers
Organizing Committee. United we stand and divided we fall - is not
only a good saying for the United Fifty States, but for our RAZA.
One of the reasons why we are in the situation we have been in, is^
that we have been divided. The UFWOC would provide you that essential
unity.
5640
While you vote and try to change adult life that way - the other
half would be concern for our children. For them, I would suggest we
try to keep them in school as long as possible. We should sacrifice
all we need to sacrifice to better their lives and their opportunities.
I don't think there are too many of us who can't look at our parents
who, as mine, went only to the fourth grade, - nuestros padrecitos y
madrecitas que por el sacrificio del sudor, lagrimas, y muchos
coscorones nos dieron ma's qu^'lo^que ellos habian tenido.
A la misma vez no hay que olvidar - tenemos una historia, una
idioma, una musica, en total, una cultura que debemos preservar. Aunque
todos somos Amiercanos - y aunque tenemos orgullo por serlo - sabemos que"
somos de descendencia Mexicana. Que somos Chicanes - dedicados a lo
mejor de dos mundos, y que nadie no los va a qui tar.
HojalaTy tengan gran exito en ^sta conferencia.
5641
INTRODUCTION
Severcil times in past years commissions, task forces and interagency committees
have been formed dealing with specific problems in the nnigrant farm labor area
and studies have been conducted to solve these problems. The problems have not
been solved; the time for studies is over; the time for action is now.
Oregon has no proud record of leadership in the area of agricultural farm labor.
Since 1959 when a package of five Bills were passed, a totaJ. of 18 Bills have been
introduced in the legislature having to do with migrant labor problems. Of these
18 only 7 have been passed; 4 of these 7 worked against the best interests of nnig-
rants, dealing with unemiployment compensation, collective bargaining, anti-picket-
ing and labor relations. The three Bills that did pass do not adequately provide any
remedy or any marked improvement of migrant worker conditions in the state of
Oregon.
The Migrant Labor Task Force recognizes that agriculture is vital to the well-
being of the whole state of Oregon. We are also aware that the protection and
encouragement of the agricultureil industry, where necessary, is an obligation of
the state. It is that form of protection that is in question. The discriminatory
exclusion of the agricultural worker from coverage of legislation that would give
him the power to improve his economic and social condition is in effect assisting
the farmer in keeping his costs down. In actuality the Oregon legislature has
been subsidizing the individual farmer at the cost of the farnnworker.
Legislation must focus on much more basic humanitarian interests in insuring
the farmworker a decent life as measured by the currently accepted minimum
standards of our society. The well-being of all Oregoniajis, including farmworkers.
5642
(
should be the primary goal of our Legislature. Unfortunately, this has not been |
the case. Those employed in agricultural labor are entitled to the same rights
and privileges as other workers and the laws of the state of Oregon should not
discriminate against such individuals.
At this time ajid place in history, Mexican Americans constitute the largest
minority group in the state of Oregon numbering well over 35, 000. The majority
of these Oregonians were at one time if not now employed in seasonal agricultural
work. During the peak of harvest time, an approximate 40 to 50, 000 migrant
farmworkers come into our state. The majority of these farmworkers are also
Mexican Americaji. They bring with them a great culture, a great heritage cind
a great language. It is to our shame that to date, we continue to reject their
valuable contribution not only towards building a better Oregon, but a greater
country as well.
Oregon is at a crossroads. The people of Oregon must make a decision; and that
decision is whether or not to support the forces of chajige for a better Oregon or
to support the status quo. The people of Oregon as reflected by their Legislators
must make that decision. In the final analysis, they must decide whether or not
every Oregonian regardless of his national origin or native language is entitled
as is any other citizen to the American promise of a full and equcil opportunity to
share in the good life that can be offered by a dynamic, prosperous ► democratic
society.
5643
Composition, Role and Responsibilities
The Migrant Labor Task Force was created by the State Human Rights
Advisory Council on July 10, 1970, by the Chairman. It consists of
eight members. The Chairman provided that the Task Force sheill:
a. cooperate with all governmental agencies and committees
concerned with agricultural labor.
b. cooperate with private voluntary or community groups having
as their prime concern problems involving agricultural labor.
c. seek effective methods for the improvement of living, working
and related problems of agricultursil workers.
d. recommend policies to be adopted to achieve these purposes.
The Task Force held a series of formal meetings since the date of
their inception of which the majority were in the mid -Willamette valley
and one in Eastern Oregon. Several of the meetings were scheduled
to personally view farm labor housing and educational facilities design-
ed specifically to benefit migrant workers.
Ontario - A tour of Malheur County Farnn Labor Camps and a
Public Hearing was held at which time testimony was
presented by the following organizations:
Oregon State Employment Service
Malheur County Farm Bureau
Onion Growers Association
Wheat Growers Association
Amalgamated Sugar Company
National Farmers Organization
Oregon Potato Commission
Sugar Beet Growers Association
Treasure Valley Migrant Program
American G.I. Forum
5644
Woodburn - A public meeting was held with the stsiff of the Valley
Migrant League to educate the Task Force members on .
the workings of this OEO funded migrant project. This
included a tour of migrant labor camps in Marion and
Yamhill Counties.
Salem - A public Hearing was held at which time testimony was
taken from representatives from the following groups:
Oregon Farm Bureau Federation
Valley Migrant League
Yamhill County Human Relations Council
Medford Pear Growers Association
Hood River Growers
Diamond Canners
Portlaind - A meeting was held with various state agencies charged
with the responsibility of enforcing farm labor caunp statutes.
Among those agencies in attendaince were:
The Oregon Bureau of Labor
The Oregon Board of Health
The Oregon Employment Service
In addition to this, several meetings were held with the
Wage and Hour Division of the Oregon Bureau of Labor as well as a represen-
tative of the U. S. Department of Labor to report on enforcement of state
cind federcil statutes pertaining to migrant workers in the state of Oregon.
The following members of the Oregon Bureau of Labor staff have
participated in the proceedings of the Migrant Labor Task Force at various
times:
John R. Gustaison, Assistant Commissioner of Labor
Edward J. Hawes, Administrator, Wage and Hour Division
5645
A. W. (Bud) Gardner, Asst. Administrator, Wage & Hour
Division.
H. J. Belton Hamilton, Assistant Attorney General and
Russ Rogers, Administrator, Civil Rights Division
In order to expand their own base of information and to promote better
understanding of the conditions faced by agricultural workers, the Task Force
encouraged the active involvement of public officieils ctnd representatives of
various private agencies in the affairs of the Task Force. During this time,
the following individuals were consulted by the Task Force on the nneauis of
program improvement:
Gilbert Anzaldua
Oregon Board of Education
Boren Chertkov
U. S. Senate Migratory
Labor Subcommittee
Pablo Ciddio
Governor's Advisory Committee
on Chicano Affairs
Epifanio CoUazo
Alianza
Rev. Ted Crouch
Council of Churches
Jose de la Isla.
American Association of
Junior Colleges
Kin-i Frankel
Alianza
Carolyn Jackson
Demoforum
Vera Katz
Kennedy Action Corps
Jeff Kilnner
Alianza
John Little
Valley Migrant League
Frank Martinez
Valley Migrant League
Molly Miller
Alianza
John Perry
Alianza
Margot Perry
Kennedy Action Corps
Jose Rios
Centro Chicano Cultural
Hon. Don Wilner
State Senator
Recommendations
During the course of its proceedings, the Task Force has adopted
recommendations with regard to various programs, activities and
5646
proposals having an impact upon the migrajit worker ajid the agri-
cultural community. Included are recommendations pertaining to the
coordination of government services; labor standards and civil rights;
migrajit housing; health, education and welfare services and equity of
services.
Coordination of Government Services
1. We recommend that the Labor Commissioner urge the Governor and
the Legislature to re-establish an Inter -Agency Committee on Migra-
tory Labor consisting of representatives of all agencies deeding with
migrant or ex-migrant workers.
2. We recommend to the Labor Commissioner that he urge the Governor
to assign a member of his principal executive staff the specific
responsibility for staffing and coordinating an Inter -Agency Committee.
3. We recommend that the Labor Commissioner urge the Governor to
direct the Head of each appropriate department or agency dealing
with migrant workers to formally designate one individual who would
be particularly responsible for departmental activity concerning mig-
rants and ex-migrants. Such an individual should himself be Spanish-
speaking and should be qualified as a result of national origin or
personal experience to deal directly with migrant workers.
Labor Standards ajnd Civil Rights
4. We recommend the extension of the state minimum wage statute to
cover all agricultural workers paid on a piece rate basis. Repeal
of this exclusionary section of the statute will only mean that farmers
will have to pay their agricultural labor, 18 years of age or over.
J
5647
at least the applicable minimum wage whether they work on a piece
rate or hourly rate.
5. We recommend that the activities of the Wage and Hour Division of
the Oregon Bureau of Labor be endorsed and that additional budgetary
support be given this Division for enforcement purposes.
6. We recommend the repeal of the anti -picketing provision of ORS
662.815 which prohibits anyone not a "regular employe" from
picketing "any farm, ranch or orchard where perishable crops are
being harvested. " The Attorney General of the state of Oregon stated
on November 17, 1970, in a 23 page Opinion (No. 6780) that the
constitutionality of this statute is "uncertain. "
7. We recommend the extension of the right of collective bargaining
to agricultural labor.
8. We recommend the extension of unemployment compensation coverage
to agricultural labor.
9. We recommend the adoption of more stringent child labor laws for
those employed in agriculture.
10. We recommend that the agriculturad industry provide handwashing and
drinking water facilities for farmworkers in the fields.
11. We reconnmend that a surety bond be required of each Farm Labor
Contractor licensed by the state of Oregon.
12. We recommend the licensing of crew leaders by the state of Oregon.
Migrant Housing
13. We recommend that the sum of at least $150, 000 be requested in the
Executive Budget for migrant housing for the planning and implementa-
5648
tion of a statewide program for utilizing available federal facilities.
The state should assume control of these facilities, upgrade their
qucility and convert them for use as agricultural labor housing and
rest camps. An example of such a facility would be Camp Adair in
Benton County.
14. We reconnmend the establishment of federal/state financed centred,
farm labor camp housing.
15. We recommend the adoption of the Federal minimum standards as
set by the U. S. Department of Labor by the Oregon Board of Health
for Oregon farm labor cannps.
16. We recommend the enforcement of existing farm labor camp housing
and sanitation codes be transferred from the county sanitarian to the
Migrajit Health Project sponsored by the Oregon Board of Health.
17. We recommend that the staff of the Wage and Hour Division of the
Oregon Bureau of Labor be augmented in the next biennium by the
addition of at least six additional seasoned camp inspectors. They
should all be Spanish -speaking.
Health, Education zmd Welfare Services
18. We recommend that the continued operation of the Federed Migrant
Health Act Program in Oregon be endorsed.
19. We reconnmend that special programs of bilingual instruction be
undertaken by school systems wherever migrants settle and that ORS
336. 078 which limits classroom instruction to English be revised to
allow bilingucd education. This will make certain that migreint school
children are given equal opportunity to secure a quality education.
^
i
5649
20. We recommend support for the special migrant education program
under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
administered by the Oregon Board of Education.
2 1. We recommend changes in the U. S. Department of Agriculture 's
Food Stamp Program such as: (a) income computation on an annual
basis; (b) combination food-stamp - commodity programs; (c)
simplified certification procedures.
Equity of Services
22. We recommend that all materials designed for or concerning
migrants be printed in both English eind Spanish.
2 3. We reconnmend that the Civil Rights Division of the Oregon Bureau of
Labor expand its compliance programs to make certain that Mexican
Americans are given equal opportunity in all areas of endeavor; and
that the State Human Rights Advisory Council implement and expajid
its affirmative action programs to assure the spirit as well as the
letter of the law.
24. We recommend that the Labor Commissioner urge the Department of
Employment which is also charged by the legislature with aji area of
responsibility for migrant workers to utilize their Rural Manpower
Service Division to develop and implement a program of information
to growers on the rights as well as the responsibilities of seasonal
workers; through such a program, migrant workers could be more
fully informed of their rights and the services available to them under
the law. Furthermore, we recommend that the Labor Commissioner
transmit a copy of this Report to the Department of Employment for
its consideration of the recommendation.
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 18
5650
R. P. (Bob) Sanchez
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW
aaa so. i7n iouirra) btrsst
MCALUEN. TSXAS 78301
July 22, 1970
Senator Walter Mondale
United States Senate
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Senator Mondale:
As you know, the chairman of the Senate Labor and Public Welfare
Committee, our distinguished Senator Yarborough, was defeated in
the recent Texas elections by Lloyd M. Bejitsen, Jr. I note in the
Texas press t6da.y that Mr. Bentsen has offered his support and endorse-
ment to your subcommittee hearings.
As a Mexican- American, a Valley resident and a Democrat, 1 am
deeply grateful for the energy and courage which you and your
Subcommittee have shown in focusing national attention on the plight of
the Mexican- American migrant. And as you further know, the greatest
single concentration of migrant farm workers in the nation is in South
Texas.
But before you burden yourself with Mr. Bentsen, let me point out a few
things about this man who now professes such sympathy for our cause:
1. Mr. Bentsen 's business interests include banks, hotels and tremendous
land holdings in South Texas. Some of his holdings have been exploitative
and discriminatory, profiting from the near-enslavement of Mexican-
American workers in the Valley.
2. While in Congress during the fifties, Mr. Bentsen opposed legislation
which would have stepped up law enforcement efforts, to curtail illegal
"wetback" immigration. Mr. Bentsen supported extension of the infamous
bracero labor program, and bracero workers were employed on the
Bentsen properties.
i
i
5651
3. Mr. Bentsen, as a Congressman, fought efforts to establish wage
minimums for farm workers.
4. He opposed legislation which would have given the U. S. Border Patrol
the right to pursue and arrest illegal immigrants who were hiding and
working on Valley ranches (and who were thus competing with and
lowering the employment opportunities for our own migrants).
5. He opposed legislation to end discrimination in federal hiring, which
would have meapt a great deal to Mexican- Americans.
In summary, may I respectfully suggest that Mr. Bentsen 's record speaks
eloquently of his concern for migrants and Mexican-Americans in general.
He has consistently preyed on our political and economic weakness and
exploited our people cynically and apparently without regret.
The Bentsen stance is not unique; it is characteristic of a monolithic
power structure which exists in this State. Governor Preston Smith's
callous disregard of state police brutality against Mexican- Americans,
the frequent use of Texas Rangers to intimidate our people and the blatant
discrimination a'gainst Mexican-Americans by the state government are
everyday products of a political machine which has victimized the poor in
this State for decades. Until that structure is altered, I have little hope
for meaningful improvement in the lives of farm workers or other Mexican-
Americans.
Really, 1 would be grateful if this letter could be incorporated with your
other testimony and made a part of your Subcommittee hearings.
Sincerely,
R. P. (Bob) Sanchez
RPS/an
SPliCiAI. iiM,l\'iJ<Y
Pieces
and
Farm Labor Housing in the United States
5653
Pieces
tfi and
Scraps
Farm Labor Housing in the United States
by LEE P. RENO
September 1970
RURAL HOUSING ALLIANCE
Suite 500 Dupont Circle Building
1346 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington. D.C. 20036
202/659-1680
5654
THE
TION
ucat
and
prov
to p
and
to r
memb
buti
Off i
comm
RHA
of E
Stat
RURAL
AL SE
i ona I
adv i s
i de h
rov i d
data
u ra I
ersh i
ons ,
ce of
endat
and d
conom
es Go
HOUSIN
LF-HELP
organ i
ory ser
omes fo
e a cen
can be
I ow- i nc
p organ
g rants
Econom
ions in
o not n
ic Oppo
vernmen
G ALL
HOUS
zati o
V i ces
r I ow
tral
CO I I e
ome h
i zati
f rom
i c Op
this
ecess
rtun I
t.
lANCE, forme
ING ASSOCIAT
n, organized
to i nd i V i du
- i ncome f ami
i nf ormat i on
cted and eva
ous i ng group
on, supDorte
f oundat i ons
portun i ty .
report are
ari I y ref I ec
ty or any ot
d i n
1966 a
ION,
i s a n
to
provi de
ais
and gro
i ies
in run
poi n
t where
luat
ed and
s an
d spons
d by
i nd i V i
and
grants
The
cone 1 us
those of th
t th
e V i ews
her
agency
s the INTERNA-
on-p rof i t ,ed-
tech n i ca I
ups seeking to
a I areas ; and
exper i ence
made available
ors . RHA i s a
dual contr i -
from the
ions and re-
e author and
of the Office
of the Un i ted
Copyright 1970 by
Rural Housing Alliance
1346 Connecticut Avenue, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20036
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 79-141814
5655
There ie a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There
ia a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize . There ie a
failure here that topples all our success.
John Steinbeck
The Grapes of Wrath
5656
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my gratitude to the entire staff
of the Rural Housing Alliance, without whose support this
study could not have been completed. I am especially
grateful to George Rucker and Phil Brown for their gen-
eral knowledge and assistance in research. I am obli-
gated to Clay L. Cochran for his invaluable criticism and
interest and help in the formation of the details and
thrust of the study. I am also extremely grateful to
Robert Hiatt and Lucy Norman for their editorial assis-
tance.
Beyond the staff of RHA, my obligations are too numerous
to list. However, special thanks must go to Elinor Blake,
who at the time was doing volunteer work for the Stani-
slaus County Community Action Commission and to John
Kelly, directing attorney at the Modesto office of Cali-
fornia Rural Legal Assistance for their help In locating
people and documents which contributed to my understand-
ing of the farm labor housing situation In that part of
the country. In the State of Washington, I am Indebted
to Robert Wiley and Ray Seaman, County Supervisors, Farm-
ers Home Administration, for their cooperation.
Lee P. Reno
September 1970
Photo Credits
George Ba II i s - Cover, 10, 34
Farmers Home Administration - 88, 93
Rural Housing Alliance - All Others
5657
CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
INTRODUCTION
Part
1 .
THE NEED
The Home Base
States
Florida
Texas
Ca 1 i f orn i a
The Stream States
11. AN EFFECTIVE PROGRAM, NOW HISTORY
The Farm Security Administration
III. MINOR PROGRAMS AFFECTING FARM LABOR
HOUSING
Migrant Housing Codes and Code
Enforcement
The Office of Economic Opportunity
Se I f -He I p Hou s i ng
Hous i ng Services
Temporary Housing -■ California
IV. THE FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION FARM
LABOR HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS
The Agency
The Leg i s I at i on
The Loan Program
Expanding the Program
The Regu I at i on s
Eligibility for Loans and Grants
Loan and Grant Purposes
Amount of Loans and Grants
Some Limitations on Loans and
Gra nts
Financing Rates and Terms
25
35
35
49
49
54
67
67
69
77
5658
Technical and Other Services
Construction and Development
Po I i c i es
Application and Process for Loans
and Grants
Results of the Program
Funds
Where the Funds Have Gone - by
State
Who in the States Get the Funds
Effect of Grants on the Program
Restrictions on the Grant Program
New Restrictions on Eligibility
for Grants
Some Examples of Projects
Background and Need - Stanislaus
Cou nty , Ca I i f orn i a
Farm Labor Housing Project •-
Stanislaus County, California
Background and Need - Othello and
Royal City, Washington
Farm Labor Housing Project -
Othello, Wash i ngton
Farm Labor Housing Project -
Royal City, Washington
The Cost of Projects Built With
Grant Funds
The Cost of Operating and Maintain-
ing the Pro j ects
The Effect of an Inadequate Subsidy
Other Problem Areas
07
126
SOME CONCLUSIONS,
RECOMMENDATIONS
SUGGESTIONS AND
What Ultimately Must be Done
The Need for Direct Federal Action
The Need for a New Agency
The Need for Immediate Action
FmHA Farm Labor Housing Amendments
Creating a Strict National Standard
for Migrant Labor Camps
Broaden and Balance the Office of
Economic Opportunity Migrant
Division's Approach in the Field
of Housing for Migrant and
Seasonal Farm Workers
I 3!
I 32
137
1
1
5659
A Final Note
14
APPENDIX A - Federal Regulations for
Housing for Agricultural Workers
APPENDIX B - California Temporary
Hou s i ng Stat i st i cs
5660
LIST OF TABLES
Table
I Housing Conditions in Rural Areas -
Florida Economic Sub Region 39.
II Housing Conditions in Rural Areas -
Texas Economic Sub Region 99.
III Housing Conditions in Rural Areas -
Texas Economic Sub Region 98.
IV Type of Permanent Housing by Stability.
V Number of Rooms by Size of Family Unit.
VI States With More Than 10,000 Migrants
and Dependants in 1967-1968
(Excluding Calif., Tex., and Fla.).
VII Defects in Labor Camps in Michigan and
Fou r Other States .
VIM Number and Location of Farm Security
Administration Camps in 1942.
IX Obligation of Funds for Farm Security
Administration's Migratory Labor
Camps.
X Number and Amount of Self-Help Housing
Loans Obligated by State Cumulative
From Inception Through June 30, 1970,
XI Appropriations Made by Congress for
Farm Labor Housing Insured Loans,
Funds Actually Obligated by FmHA,
by Fiscal Year 1962-1969.
XII Appropriations Approved by Congress for
Farm Labor Housing Grants and Funds
Actually Obligated by FmHA by Fiscal
Year 1966-1970.
Page
16
17
22
24
30-3
42
56
89
90
5661
Table
XI I I
XIV
XV
XVI
XVI I
XVI I I
XIX
Number of Loan and Grant Applications
Received, Rejected and On Hand,
From Inception of the FmHA Labor
Housing Programs to March 31, 1970.
Labor Housing Loans and Grants Approved
Cumulative as of March 31, 1970.
Dollars Loaned and Granted Through FmHA
Labor Housing Program Per Migrant
and Seasonal Farm Worker by State
From Inception to March 31, 1970.
Number and Amount of Grants Obligated
by Year, Under FmHA Farm Labor
Hou s i ng Prog ram .
Distribution of Costs of FmHA Labor
Housing Projects in Royal City,
Washington, and Granada, Colorado.
Comparison of Average Income and Expen-
ditures of Selected FmHA Farm Labor
Housing Projects (Dollars Per Unit
Per Month ) .
Total Per Unit Cost, Size of Grant, and
Amount of Rent Per Unit Per Month
Used to Retire Debt In Selected FmHA-
Farm Labor Housing Projects.
Page
92
94
96
00
I 20
122-123
25
5662
INTRODUCTION
Two-thl
rds o
and sma
1 1 tO'
farm workers
the mos
t poo
averag i
ng $ 1
work in
1969
only of
1 ow
of the
work.
other g
roups
insurance, w^
laws; are on
Act and
M i n i 1
c 1 uded
from 1
we 1 fare
, and
emp loye
d in
United
State
f the
wns an
I i ve
r I y pa
,435 p
. ' Lo
hour I y
They
, i.e.
orkmen
I y par
mum wa
catego
manpo
the th
s.
Natio
d mos
i n pa
i d wo
er wo
w ann
wage
are
, mos
' S CO
tial I
ge la
r i ca I
wer t
i rd m
n's
t of
rt o
rk i n
rker
ua I
s, b
af fo
t ar
mpen
y CO
ws;
ass
ra i n
ost
bad h
the
f it.
g gro
for
ea rn i
ut a!
rded
e not
sat i o
vered
and m
I stan
ing p
hazar
ou s i ng
Nation
Farm
ups in
both f
ngs ar
so of
fewer
cover
nor I
by th
any a r
ce pro
rogram
dous o
I s
's 2
wor
the
a rm
e a
the
bene
ed b
a bor
e So
e ef
gram
s .
ccup
I n r
. 6 m
kers
cou
and
resu
seas
fits
y un
re I
c i a I
feet
s, g
They
at io
una I a rea s
i I I i on
are among
ntry ,
non-fa rm
It not
ona I nature'
than most
emp I oyment
at i ons
Secur i ty
i ve I y ex-
enera I
are
n in the
I . U
Serv i
Stati
Apr i I
days
and h
from
of fa
and h
$575
to 24
worke
which
Worke
of wh
. S.
ce, "
st i ca
, 197
of fa
ad an
f a rm
rm wo
ad an
came
9 day
rs an
$2,3
rs" (
ich $
Depa
The
I Re
0, T
rm w
ave
wage
rk)
ave
from
s of
d ha
78 c
more
3,48
rtme
Hi re
port
able
ork)
rage
won
acco
rage
far
far
d an
ame
tha
5 ca
nt of Agr i
d Farm Wor
, " Agr i cu I
7. "Casua
accou nted
i ncome i n
k. "Seaso
unted for
i ncome i n
m wage wor
m Work) ac
average i
from farm
n 250 days
me from fa
cult
ki ng
tura
ure.
For
I Ec
Eco
ce o
onom
nomic Research
f 1969, A
ic Report No. 180,
I Workers" (less than 25
for 43 percent of the workers
1969 of $880 of which $8 1 was
na I Workers" (25 to 149 days
28 percent of the workers
1969 of $1 ,238.28, of which
k. "Regular Workers" ( I 50
counted for 10 percent of the
ncome in 1969 of $2,827 of
wage work. "Year-round
of farm work) averaged $3,594,
rm wage work.
• ;/
5663
About ten percent of the farm workers are classified as
"migratory." These workers travel outside the county
where they usually live, not returning home each
evening. Many travel great distances seeking employment,
often existing under the worse circumstances immaginable.
Their reward is small. In 1969 their income averaged
$1,732, of which $891 came from farm wage work.
Dr. Robert Coles of Harvard University, vividly describes
the i r cond i t ion : -^
No group of .people I have worked with--in the South,
in Appalachia, and in our northern ghettoes--tr i es
harder to work, indeed travels all over the country
working, working from sunrise to sunset, seven
days a week when the crops are there to be harvested,
There Is something ironic and special about that,
too: in exchange for the desire to work, for th.e
terribly hard work of bending and stooping to
harvest our food, these workers are kept apart I ike
no others, denied rights and privileges no others
are denied, denied even halfway decent wages, asked
to live homeless and vagabond lives, lives of virtual
peonage, . . .
I do not be I ieve the human body and the human mind
were made to sustain the stresses migrants must
face--worse stresses, I must say, than any I have
seen anywhere in the world, and utterly unrecognized
by most of us. Nor do I believe that a rich and
powerful nation like ours, in the second half of the
20th century, ought tolerate what was an outrage
even centuries ago: child labor; forms of peonage;
large-scale migrancy that resembles the social and
political statelessness that European and Asian
I bid
3. Testimony of Dr. Robert Coles, in Hearings before
the Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. 91st
Congress, 1st Session, "The Migrant Subculture,"
Ju ly 28, I 969, Part 2, p. 335.
5664
refugees have known; and, finally, be it emphasized,
for people who seek work and do the hardest possible
work, a kind of primitive living that has to be
seen, I fear, to be understood for what it does
to men, women and most especially, children.
The study that follows looks at the condition of housing
in which farm workers live, with special emphasis on
migrant housing. The brief descriptions document that a
tremendous need for improved facilities exists. The study
presents in some detail past and present programs designed
to meet that tremendous need. It is a study of the pieces
and scraps used by farm workers for shelter. It is a
study of the pieces and scraps, called programs designed
by the government to improve that shelter.
Above all, the study should be read in context--the resources
devoted by the government to assist and protect a terribly
impoverished group of workers is an Indicting reflection
of our system and institutions: a system that has pumped
billions of dollars for direct subsidies and research into
the agricultural industry which has gone far in eliminating
family farms; a system which has caused commercial farms
to flourish, blessed with the existence of a cheap, in-
dentured and powerless labor supply.
5665
PARTI
The Need
In discussfng the need for more and better housing for our
farmworker population in this paper no precise statistical
showing is attempted, A showing of that sort would re-
quire time and resources far beyond those available. Al-
though that type of study is needed, i.e., one which would
indicate precisely how many units are needed, where they
should be located, their size and cost, it is recommended
that it not be undertaken until there is a reasonable
commitment to actually solve the problem. In short, there
has been study enough. The need is undeniable. Therefore,
this section will summarize studies done in the past and
present views of individuals and groups who have seen and
experienced farmworker housing conditions first hand.
THE HOME BASE STATES
A home base state is a state which the migrant farm worker
claims as his domicile. He may live there only a few
months out of the year, but when he is working elsewhere
his ties are there. He may own a house, although this
is rare. More likely he is a renter. Those possessions
he has gathered which are too cumbersome to take on the
trek away to the fields are left at the home base. If
he has children, most of their schooling is received there,
although they will probably be enrolled in schools in other
states if school is in session when they are there. The
home base is where his family ties are. He probably grew
up there. When he dies fie will expect to be buried there;
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 19
5666
that Is, if he dies there or, if not, someone will pay
the freight to get the body back. in short, the home base
state is what the migrant calls home.
Three home base states, Florida, Texas and California, are
the biggest suppliers of migrant labor. Other southern
and southwestern states also contribute. Migrants from
Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee and Kentucky travel to the
midwest and eastern seaboard in search of employment each
year. Arizona and New Mexico are suppliers of farm labor
for the western and mountain states.
I ncr
Stat
supp
larg
some
gran
lod
"set
stre
ma i n
Some
ba se
Wash
sea s
ingt
ea s i
e re
I ler
est
po i
ts a
by u
tl in
am s
as
eve
. F
ingt
on i
on a
ngiy,
I at i on
s of m
users,
nt du r
nd Ca I
sing I
g out"
tates .
agr i cu
n m i gr
or exa
on may
n sear
t the
the ho
ship i
i gra nt
Flor
i ng 19
i f orn i
33,386
i n st
Ma ny
Itural
ate se
mp I e,
trave
ch of
end of
me base
s becom
farm I
i da rep
67-1 968
a I ed a
m i gra n
ates fo
of the
or agr
a sona I I
farm wo
I to Ca
higher
the wo
-stream
i ng mudd
a borers
orted us
. ' Texa
I I state
ts.3 Al
rmer I y c
se "sett
i cu I tu ra
y from t
rkers I i
I i f orn i a
wages .
rk seaso
state o
led. T
are a I s
ing 77,
s repor
s du r i n
so, man
ons i der
led out
My re I
heir ne
V i ng in
during
Yet the
n .
r supp
he thr
o amon
159 mi
ted 96
g the
y migr
ed to
" n i g r
ated I
w I y aq
the s
the h
y retu
I i er-u ser
ee largest
g the
grants at
,3042 mi-
same per-
ants are
be strictly
ants re-
a borers .
u i red home
tate of
arvest
rn to Wash-
The housing problem for farmworkers in the traditional home
I. U. S. Senate, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. "The
Migratory Labor Problem in the United States: 1969 report."
91st Congress, 1st session; report No. 91-83. February 19,
1969. Appendix A, p. 117. Migrants are defined as workers
"...and family dependants who establish a temporary resi-
dence while performing seasonal agricultural work at I or
more locations away from the place he ca I I s home or home
base. It does not include 'day haul' agricultural workers
whose travels are limited to work areas within I day of his
work I ocat ion."
2 . I b i d-.
128.
Ibid.
I 6
5667
base states is, in its simplest forrr, two-fold. First
there is the problem that any rural area has with a large
low-income population. Under our present system poor
people can not afford housing on the open market. Most
government housing programs don't reach them because of
their extreme poverty. Programs designed to reach the
poor through local institutions have most often failed
because local governments are not responsive to the poors'
needs. The second problem facing home base states is
similar to that in stream states, i.e., one of providing
adequate housing for an itinerant population that is
needed for relatively short periods each year. The prob-
lem, stated so simply, is actually enormous in economic
terms .
Florida
Of the 92,000^ migrant farm laborers who call Florida
their home, 99 percent live below a line forming the
northern borders of Citrus, Marion, Volusia, and Flagler
Counties. The I960 Census gives some indication of the
condition of housing in that area. Of all rural non-
farm housing units, 27 percent were substandard^ (see
Table I). One can get a better idea of housing lived in
by farm workers by looking at housing occupied by persons
with earnings of less than $2,000.^ Twenty-eight per-
4. Ibid., p. I 17. Figure for number of home based migrants
"inculdes migrants and family dependents who may, or may
not, migrate with the worker in a given year."
5. Substandard units include all units lacking some plumb-
ing facilities, have no piped water, or are considered
deteriorating or dilapidated. It does not include over-
crowded living conditions which contribute significantly
to the misery of many migrant families.
6. Persons performing more than 25 days of farm work av-
eraged a total of $1,793 from both farm and non-farm labor
in 1968. In the South, this average was $ I , 4 I 5--$ I , 094
for non-whites. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic
5668
■P
■a c
0) Q)
--I
ir>
o in
vo
o
ro ^
ro
•H o
•
•
• •
•
•
• •
•
d u
o
'J'
00
o in
00
vo
O CM
1~-
w
o
3 (U
o
<*
CN
r-{
rs)
r-\ rH
CM
>
o
o
O ft
■H
H
o
•w
o
rH
(N
u
'd'
"*
(N
<y\ fo
VD
in
00 ro
•^
0
<A-
U <D
•^
IT)
<n
in o
o
00
00 ro
00
>
0) n
'*
(N
«X)
vo en
r-
<Ti
vo o
"S*
c
-M 6
».
*.
V
•.
•»
•. w
V
•*
(d
c 3
VO
r-
■^
<-i
•>*
rH CM
'T
Cn
^
(U z
iH
C
(n
«
•r(
w
tfl
" 3
*
U)
0
a\
0)
-M
X
en
H^l
c
iH
rH
in in
vo
•>4'
CO 00
ro
m
s
OJ
-c u
O
00
r-
00 (N
■<*
in
in ro
r~
0
o
B
(U M
o
1^
VD
•-i
H
0
•H 0)
iH
to
o
c
aeu
3
s
3 —
01
H
CJ
c
00
U )-i
VO
o
in
VO CTl
o
r-
r- vo
yo
CD
in
n
O 0)
«*
iH
r-~
ro cTi
CM
ro
o r~
r-i
U
CM
p
t^
<yi
CJ>
O 00
CM
CTl
(Ti ro
VD
•
CO
^ "r
•.
••
•^
•-
•"
^^
•» •»
•^
o
G.
(U 3
LD
t^
ro
ro
in
r^
rH rH
(N
VD
u
C Z
ro
CM
CM
CTl
ro
H
rH
1
s
o
CTi
• ro
o
z
tn
o
3 0)
u
tn r-i
w
(D 05
<
tj Eh
a
M
-p
MH 13
K
c
0 C
O
W
0)
VO
n
f~ r^
in
vo
O 00
<y\
(Cj
y^
-P
u
•
•
• •
•
•
• «
•
3
fe
•H
M
o
o
n
in rH
CM
in
■>* CM
vo
(0 vo
c
0)
o
00
r^
r-i
<U in
I
D
cu
iH
U CM
3
CO
tJi
CQ ■
<:
C
V ^
g
•H
cn
V£)
r-<
in
O CN
•^
yo
00 O
in
<U -
<
3
u
00
o
en
r- •«*'
in
in
O CTi
CM
O rH
0
Q)
VO
\o
in
ro VD
rH
rH
00 rH
<yi
^ 1
J
ffi
«.
^
^
«> IW
*.
•-
•. -w
•-
0) cn
2
'p
r~-
in
a\
CM ro
r^
CM
00 l£)
•>*
g ro
Ph
g
3
r-^
t^
in
rH
CM
rH
rH
P
o
m
z
CN
<-{
r-\
0 Q)
a
U rH
X3
2
I
1
I
<4H n3
H
c
o
■H
rH
0 Eh
CO
z
•H
•rl
-P
Z
O
Cr>
u
Di
C •
o
.H
(0
C
(C
C
Q) tji
H
nj
IW
•r(
<4H
•H
g c
Eh
>-i
Q
Xi
4-> -H
H
3
Cji
"p
C3^
>H tn
Q
a
c
3
c
p
10 3
Z
•H
rH
•H
r-t
cu 0
o
-CJ
o
a M
^
CL U
0) ffi
CJ
0)
1
1
0) tn -p
Q
r-i
o
a
rH
g 0) (0
en
rH
g 0) (0
• (0
z
3
a.
O-H s
C
CL
0-H S
CO u
H
u
to +J
■H
m -p
Xi
• 3
CO
u
rH
•H Tl
HJ
<-{
■H Tl
(U
D «
D
o
rH
OlrH 0)
(0
rH
tJlrH <U
-p
o
(0 tn
C-H Ch
V4
(0 M
C -H Cb
lO
K
rH
0)
•rl CJ -H
0
0)
•rl CJ -H
T!
r-i
Si ■•-{ M <a cu
•H
XI -H ^ (0 &,
■H
0)
<
iH
-a
-P 4->
CJ m
M
+J +J
U *tH
a
o
(0
c
•H
la 0
Q)
•H
(0 0
(0
M
-p
3
S
h^ z
-P
5
h^ z
rH
3
o
0
(U
-rl
0
EH
CO
Q
Q
CO
5669
cent of the housing occupied by owners earning less than
$2,000 was substandard and over 65 percent of the housing
occupied by renters earning less than $2,000 was substand-
a rd .
Journalist Peter Kramer , wrote a series of articles that
appeared in the St. Petersburg Times in 1965 and 1966,
based upon his
hou sing, he
own experiences as
wrote : ^
a m i grant worker
On
The pickers live in housing rented by the week,
since they rarely can be sure where they'll be
from month to month. "And you should see some
of the places they call home," said the foreman,
"Why them congressmen from Washington wouldn't
even keep their dogs in them."
I sought a room in several privately run camps
inhabited by pickers to see the situation for
myself.
At Allen's Court, near the Cypress Citrus Plant
in Eloise, I was offered a very small room with
no bathroom or hot water and an ice box instead
of a refrigerator for $12.50 per week. "We
ain't got no rooms for single men costs more
than $15 a week," the owner said proudly.
Things were equally uninviting and expensive at
Lewis' Court and Haven Trailer Court in Winter
Haven, and B;A. Yon's camp in Eloise.
I finally decided to live in luxury, taking a
$ I 2 . 50-a-week room on the top floor of the Lake
Region Hotel in Winter Haven. It was fully e-
quipped with a sink, hot water and a bathroom
Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic Report
No. 164. "The Hired Farm Working Force of 1968, A Sta-
Table
t i st i ca I Report
9, p. I
7. Peter Kramer, "Migrant" Reprinted from The St. Peters-
burg Times by Community Action Fund, Inc., 1966, p. 3.
5670
just down the hall.
If those particular esta b M shments Fiave ceased to exist,
or the rents have changed, others have undoubtedly taken
their place.
Farm Labor Houa-
ingj Immokalee,
Florida.
Attorneys employed by the OEO funded South Florida Migrant
Legal Services Program, Inc., which operates In the six
southernmost counties in Florida, have made some especially
poignant observations on non-labor camp housing for farm
workers in their area.^
8. "Seasons in the Sun--A Preliminary Study of the Sea-
10
5671
I n m
you
res i
end .
are
i s n
ly d
w i nt
as a
does
na nt
cars
an a
stag
I a nd
f iel
ost i ns
are in
de beca
I n th
constan
ever st
art i ng
er (the
re the
not en
poo I s
with b
bundanc
nant po
and g i
d.
tanc
a ne
u se
e su
tly
i I I
a bou
d ry
yard
d at
surr
roke
e of
ol s
ve t
es I
i g hb
that
mmer
fill
beca
ton
per
s .
the
ound
n w i
tra
of w
he a
t i s s
orhood
is wh
the d
ed wit
u se of
the s
lod) t
In the
ditch
I ng ea
ndows ,
sh and
ater a
ppea ra
tr i ki ng
where
ere the
i tches
h water
the mo
urf ace .
he d i tc
ra i ny
es but
ch of t
tin ca
garbag
nd some
nee of
I y c
farm
pav
next
and
squ i
Du
hes
seas
sta n
he h
ns ,
e st
t i me
a va
I ea r wh
I a bore
ed road
to the
the wa
tos con
ring th
are dus
on the
d s ins
ome s .
rags, a
and in
son dr
cated b
en
rs
s
road
ter
stant-
e
ty
water
tag-
Old
nd
the
y
attle-
There is the constant presence of many children
darting in and out of the broken glass and bot-
tles and playing in the stagnant puddles and
using the broken down cars for trapezes, jungle
Jims, swings, and any other imaginary object
that their limited experience would allow them
to con j ure up .
An overwhelming impression after visiting any
of the houses is that they are in constant need
of repair. Front doors are hung improperly or
broken. Porches are on the ground or non-exist-
ent. Windows are half out of their encasements.
The roofs are a sea of patchwork and old shingles
or in some cases are made of tin.
During the heavy rainy periods water leaks into
the house through breaches in the walls or through
improperly constructed windows. Everything smells
of mildew. It is impossible to keep a house clean
because the children track In mud from the out-
side and it mixes with the water on the inside
resulting in filth. No matter how diligently
the residents attempt to maintain cleanliness it
sonal Farmworker in the South Florida Setting." South
Florida Migrant Legal Services Program, Inc., 1969. p.
24-26.
11
5672
is impossible to fight the elements which can-
not be kept out of shoddy houses in disrepair.
Upon entering each of the homes the same sme I I
greets you. It is a mixture of odors from
backed up toilets and tubs. A slight, faint
odor of urine and an overwhelming pallor of
gloom and deprivation prevail. When indoor toi-
lets are present, they frequently are in disre-
pair or will not flush properly during rainy
periods. During those periods when the toilet
is stopped up, the bath tub is also unusable,
making it impossible to observe the basic rudi-
ments of health and we I I being.
When septic tanks overflow the waste bubbles up
and fills the yard with a rancid smell. Land-
lords are called but they do not react. The
stock answer is that when the dry weather comes
the septic tank will work perfectly. In many
cases the septic tanks were imperfectly construc-
ted and placed in such a manner so that they are
higher than the toilets themselves. There are
also cases where the pipes from the toilets to
the septic tanks were too sma I I to carry the
waste products. The natural result of these
problems is no drainage and toilets that do not
function.
If water is taken from the wells, the water
smells bad, tastes bad, and often is not potable.
When local health departments are called they
usually find no problem with the water. Yet,
when surveys are taken by the residents and sent
to the health department with samples, frequently
the water comes back labled "non-usable for human
consumption." As a result, on many tables, there
are water buckets or water jars from water that
has been hauled from inside nearby cities.
The lighting fixtures, when they are present,
consist of a bare light bulb hanging from the
ceiling by an electric wire. The wire is exposed
as it runs from the bulb to the ceiling and across
the ceiling to the next room and finally to the
outside electrical connection. Many residents
complain that when they touch the outlet or attempt
to change the bulb they are rudely startled by
12
5673
a shock from the exposed wiring. This is espe-
cially prevalent on rainy days.
In the heat of a summer's day, all the windows
in every home are open and usually there are no
screens to prohibit flies, mosqultos and other
pests from having free access to the houses.
But there is a choice of suffocating from the
ever present heat or being bothered by the smal-
ler but no less annoying insects. All chose to
fight the insects and not the heat.
The greatest haven for pests and bugs is under
the kitchen sinks. When the doors of the cabi-
nets have been opened to expose the rusted and
leaky pipes, hundreds and thousands of small
bugs and rodents scurry away from the I ight of
day and from the eyes of the onlooker. It is
not a pretty sight. The residents complain fre-
quently of the rats -- rats which are a natural
result of garbage in the yards, bad plumbing
and poor construction.
The residents complain to the various local
officials about the lack of mosquito control.
The officials always promise to spray the next
day. More often than not, the mosquito control
unit is never seen .
Ma ny persons
rent
I ng f rom 1 a nd
dollar a week
for
ga rba
ge coll
In rura 1 area s a s
a ru 1
e , coun
vide garbage
serv
i ce .
It Is t
who consc i ent
i ous
1 y CO 1
lects t
week 1 y ba s i s .
As
a result, ga
in cans, and
dogs
and c
hi 1 d ren
from one end
of the ya r
d to th
are filled w i
th d
ebr i s
and dec
other remnant
s of
huma n
wa ste .
a nswer to t he
pro
b 1 em I
s that
inherently d I
rty.
But
he does
cans and he d
oesn
' t prov I de ga
which the tenants
a re p
ay i ng .
lords pay an extra
ect i on services,
ties do not pro-
he ra re I a nd I ord
he garbage on a
r bage overf lows
strew the garbage
e other . Ditches
ay i ng food and
The landlord's
the beop I e a re
n't provide garbage
r bage service for
Rents for the housing described above run from $6.00 to
$12.00 per week. An interesting footnote Is a comparison
between the rents paid per square foot of living space
by migrants and those paid by the Attorneys writing the
13
5674
report. A typical family paid $1.26 per square foot for
a two bedroom house of 450 square feet, while two miles
away an MLS attorney rented a two bedroom, a i r-cond I t loned
house consisting of 1200 square feet, on a quarter acre
lot for an equivalent of $1.10 per square foot.
10
Obviously, most seasonal farmworkers don't live in labor
camps in Florida. Surprisingly, neither do most migrants.
Approximately 96 percent of the migrants in Florida,
including both those groups who call it home and the group
migrating in each season, are located in the seventeen
counties which are served by Migrant Health Projects.
Of the more than 162 thousand migrants' who reside In
those counties at one time or another during the year
less than 41 thousand,'^ or about 25 percent live in labor
camps. If none of the home base migrants lived in camps
(which is probably not true), still less than 50 percent
of the migrants coming Into the counties would live in the
camp s . ' -^
During the 1967-68 season, only 276 of 425 camps in the
seventeen county area had operating permits,'^ i.e. 35 per-
cent of the camps were operating contrary to law.'^ Most
Ibid
footnote I
26
10. These counties are Broward, Collier, Dade, Glade,
Hendry, Highlands, Lee, Manatee, Martin, Orange, Palm Beach,
Polk, Putnam, Flagler, St. Lucie, Sarasota, and Seminole.
11. Number taken from annual county project reports in
Florida Migrant Health Project Fifth Annual Progress Re-
port, 1967-1968, Florida
cooperation with the U.S
State Board of Public Health in
Public Health Service, 1968.
12
bid
13. Percent Is derived by using In-mlgration figures for
these seventeen counties found In "The Migratory Labor
Problems in the United States: 1969 Report." p. 117.
I 4 . Florida Migrant Health Proj ect--F I f t h Annual Progress
Report, 1967-1968.
15. FSA 381,031 (i) (g), 381,432; Rules of the State Board
14
5675
of the Migrant Health Projects in the seventeen counties
employed sanitarians who inspected the camps for viola-
tions of the state health code. 15,225 violations were
found during 1967-1968, of which 6,236 or 41 percent were
corrected.'^ The 59 percent which went uncorrected sug-
gests the condition of many of the camps.
Texas
"There has been little evidence of any trend or incentive
for improved housing for farm labor in Texas. "'^ Very
little has been written about labor housing in the state
that supplies the nnost migrant farm labor and is among
the greatest users.' However, those who have seen the
living conditions in the ba r r i os and co I on i a s in the Rio
Grande Va I ley are left with a lasting impression of
squalor and poverty.
An estimated 52,500 migrants reside in the two most
southern counties, Hidalgo and Cameron.'" This accounts
for nearly 37 percent of all home based migrants in Texas
The I960 Census gives some idea of the condition of hous-
of Health, The Sanitary Code of Florida, I706--32.05.
"170 c-32.04 Permit for Operat i on--bef ore any person shall
either directly or indirectly operate a camp he sha I I make
an application for and receive from the board CFIorida
State Board of HealthH a valid permit for operation of the
camp . "
1 6 . Florida Migrant Health ProJect--F i f th Annual Progress
Report, 1967-1968.
17. "No Evident Texas Trend in Housing", The Packer, March
18. 1967, reprinted in the Congressional Record, March 23,
1967, p. s 4326.
IB. "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States:
i 969 Report", p. 126-128.
19. Ibid.
15
5676
0)
c
(U
o
4 U
t-t
ro
ro in
CM
in
00 CO
r>
•H
0
o
ro
a>
<yi ^
"*
CM
in in
CM
-
3
0)
o
n
rH
CO
CM
CO
>
o
04
rH
H
o u
o O
•
o
M
iH
^ u
(1)
•^
o
o
0^ r-{
vo
o
CM 'S"
00
0
CM Q)
t-i
ro
<r»
00 in
vo
00
00 O
r-t
>
v> +J
"g
rH
O
(N
CN «*
o
>-i CO
O
c
H
^
^
^
^
^
c <u
2
M
f-\
rH
rH
cn
n] p;
C
x;
•H
EH
CO
3
(0
4J
0
m
c
K
0)
0)
o\
yo
r-t a
CM
00
vo CO
CT>
iJ 13
o
•
• •
•
•
• •
•
m
(U
M
o
o
V£>
o^ in
00
CM
in c.
O
0
0) -H
0)
o
If)
rH
CN
CM
rH
CM
£ 0
J e^
r^
CO
3 •
(0 CO
0 P
O CJ
c c
C ro
H C
u
(0 vo
0)
-^
vo
r-i
vo a\
CO
CO
vo o^
O
U
^
00
r»
r-i
n CN
CO
o
O CM
t^
•
Ui
a
"S
vo
00
VO
ro <Ti
o
rH
CM r^
r^
O Oi
g
c
a
z
CO
f-{
rH
vo
<T\ -
rH CO
1
,
»<n
1
CD <n
3
i
(0 (U
0^
J f»
C rH
U (0
><
i
H
O
Eh
VH
0 T)
c
s
3 m
g
§
(0
c
0)
o
n
o vo
O
r~-
rJ H
H
(0
0) rH
M CO
55
m
+J
o
o
00
•«»•
o^ '*
in
'I'
in in
r-
3 vo
H
•H
c
0)
o
IT)
m
r-i
f^J
t-i
H
(Q
CO
D
&<
^ 04
z
u
<U
O
H
t7>
c
U -
H rH
tl
o
-iH
Q) 1
M
2
(0
g o>
Q
o
3
;^
r~-
'T
rH
CM rH
CM
ON
r- vo
rH
6 CT^
2
u
o
0)
ro
(T>
in
r- r~
CO
VO
CM ro
rH
O
o
u
K
iH
rH
oo
fS o
in
vo
i^ t-i
^
U 0)
E
^
^
^
^ ^
^
^
^
rH
g
z
r-i
00
'*
rH CM
ro
CM
CM
*»H A
0 CO
2
(0
I
Eh
hH
b
•H
H
■P
W
1
U
cn
o
CT
C •
D
c
(ti
c
(0
c
Q) cn
O
q
0)
•H
c
•H
•rl
r-i
CU U
0)
a> CO -p
t4H
c.
•H
•rl
rH
1)
0) CO -P
e c
-P •rl
^1 cn
(0 3
a 0
(1) S
Q
o
rH
g 0) nJ
t7>
rH
g (1) (0
• (0
o
Ch
O-H &
C
(X
O^H S
Cfl M
o
CO -P
•rl
CO -P
-O
• 3
rH m
-rl -O
■P
r-{ cn
•H -d
0)
D «
iH
.H 0)
CTIrH Q)
(0
.H 4)
tr>rH a)
■p
iH
(0 -rl
C -H Cb
u
ro -H
c-H a.
(0
<
■P
■H O -H
O
+J
•H U •rl
•d
• •
j2 -H j^ to a.
•H
jC •rl AJ (0 a
•rl
0)
f-i
'd
■p f-i
U <4H
U
■P rH
O >W
0-
o
Id
c
•H
m O
9)
•H
(0 0
(0
M
+J
3
S
iJ 2
•P
s
(J z
rH
3
0
o
Q)
•rl
0
Eh
w
a
P
tfl
16
5677
n)
+J
<S\
n '^ CM
r^
VO
ro 00
^
^
rH
-o c
•
• . .
.
to
Q) Q)
o
o
^ O VO
o
VO
ro o
00
>
+J >
•H O
o
■^
CNl rH
ro
•-i .H
M
H
-H < to
a n
rH
S J«J ISl
o
3 (U
•
e fo
o
O (1<
rH
•H O 73
o
o
0
>
Q C
0) (0
o
fM
u
in
r»
r- o o
in
VO
o <yi
CO
* >
<«■
U 0)
o
u>
VO o o
r~
r-»
-* H
VO
^
-P -H *
0) ^
00
<yi
H ID n
■"r
ro
VO in
ro
cr>
-P iJ (0
c
-•-' 6
^
^
^
«
^
c
•H +J
(0
c 3
'S"
rH
H
H
•-t
•H
S * nJ
X!
0) 2
m
(u a
EH
cc;
0
0) rH (0
Q rH N
o
to
33
to
(0
^ CO "
(U
-p
ro
r- nH in
O
i^
CM CM
r~
MH
to C
«>a
c
•
• . .
•
• •
O
Ai 10 0
(U
o
o
VO (N tH
O
■^
o in
<Tl
0 hP CO
0)
-a u
o
lO
fS rH rH
n
rH rH
rH
^
0 rH
g
0) u
rH
U --H
0
•f^ (U
0) •
CQ cnS
u
OiOi
G r-
M
c
3
8) (N
- a) >
H
o
U «»
u
(0 Q) X3
O J-i
o •
>! rH <U
(U
nH
.H
VO 0> VO
a\
in
CO r^
.H
VO a.
0) 1^ 13
^ ^
(Tl
r--
VO CM r~
•>*
en
VO <J\
r~
a\
CQ
0) ^
'I'
CM
(N o as
in
tn
00 CM
VO
r-i -
c 3
•.
•■
-
>.
CO
' >i M
a^
00
'»•
(N r-i
CN
rH
rH
1
0) -a M
■.'-•■XO
(U 0) (0
CO 0^
Q) (XI
3
CO <u
>«
C --i
to
0) ^
U to
CO •■ O
0 CO -H
Eh
u <u o
-p
<X)
rO rH fN
.H
in
00 r~
t»1
MH
CO G -H
c
• . .
•
•
• •
•
o -a
10 Vj n
Q)
o
00
in 00 in
O
VO
VO VO
^
c
-P iO -P
<: D (0
O
o
vo
lO
CM
•-]
3 (d
Vj
r-\
itJ
Pn
0)
<U in
0^
U CM
3 VO
CO CO C
to H (0
tn
m
CD rH CO
C 0)
•H
~ a
(OS*
C
(U
M O
D
o -
< E-n
U
r~-
iH
<N CM r-
fO
ro
CTl rH
ro
iH <-*
-H tri
CJi
0)
(N
o
"* in o
r~
rH
VO o\
in
(U 1
.. H) 3
c
•|
CM
VO
(N CN »H
o
so
P~ VO
in
E 00
CO tp
-H
*.
*.
^ < V
-
^
.« ^
».
e «h
0) < (U
M
^
o
r-
(N n CM
00
(N
CM CM
"sr
•H Dice;
3
2
>*
CN
CM
U Q)
+J en
0
rH
CO*
3 K CO
K
1
'1
'S'S
•iH
■H
O (U
g
iH
iH
EH
u E u
f^
•H
-H
+J
•H (1)
(0
O tP
U
CT
C '
tJih) 3
fa
1
MH
C
•H
C 2
•H *
c
ft
Q
s -a *
0
CP 1
cn
*£
u to
o to c
2
c 3
•H rH
C
•H
rH
to 3
O. 0
rH -H <u
r-i r-^ .-i
TJ
^ 04 >-l
Q
a v^
Q) a:
0 0 rH
•0)
§ 0)
"g
0)
Q
iM O 3
•H
3 0) CO -P
3
<U CO +J
rH
2J
a
rH e 0) (0
tj*
.H
e 0) (d
• (0
d) * 0
3
Q- O -rH S
C
cu
O -H s
Ui U
x: o a
O
W -P
-H
tn +J
T>
• 3
■p--)
o
rH -rH 73
-P
rH
-H 'O
Q)
D Oi
m *
o
rH CP iH 0)
td
rH
!j>rH (1)
-p
CO fa ^
(0 03 C -H a
SH
(0 U)
C -H tt
to
••
Q) u
r^
Q) -H U -H
o
Q)
•H O -H
-d
CO
-a *-H
nH
s:-M M 10 Ch
■H
X; -H ^ flj Q4
-H
0)
3 rH M
<
nH
T)
-P +J U MH
M
+J -p
0<4H
a
u
rH (0 <U
(0
C
■H (0 O
<U
■H
(0 0
to
M
o > >
+J
3
2^2
■P
s
1-^ 2
r-{
3
C 3 iC
o
0
0)
•H
0
MPS
Eh
CO
Q
Q
CO
«
17
5678
i ng available to home based migrants in that area. Of all
rural, non-farm housing in Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy
County nearly 61 percent were substandard (see Table II).
In ownef-occu p i ed units occupied by persons with income of
less than $2,000, 80 percent were substandard and for
renter-occupied dwellings in the same i ncpme category, 88
percent were su bsta nda r o . ^^
In the area just north of Hildalgo and Willacy Counties
which is sub-divided into 27 counties, the housing in which
Texas based migrants are most likely to live is not much
better than that found in the "Valley". (See Table III)
Over 60,0002l migrants, about 42 percent of those calling
Texas their home, live in this area.
Although the above statistics may be open to question be-
caus:e of their age and subjectivity, they do indicate that
most housing in which most migrant farm workers live In
their- home bas. e area is far below standard, be it some
objective standard of the building trade or simply a stan-
dard o-f decency. Perhi-ps tne often heard statement by
growers that "The housing we furnish to migrants is as
good as th?y've got back home," is frue. But when it is
used as a justification for providing bad housing, it does
not meet the issues, it com poinds it.
California
The refusal of the Congress to renew the bracero law in
1965, 23 years after the importation of foreign labor began,
generated what was termed a housing crisis for migrant farm
workers in California. For over two decades much of the
labor had been male Mexican nationals who were housed in
relatively inexpensive barracks. Growers realized that
migrant families would have to be recruited to replace
the male crews, thus requiring a different kind and unavail-
able housing unit.
20. See note 5, above.
21. See note 18, above
18
5679
California's agricultural industry Is huge, em-
ploying some 500,000 workers, supplying some 40
percent of the nation's table food, and taking
in annual receipts of over $3,600,000,000. The
average annual Income of seasonal farm families,
an aggregate of all who are old enough to go out
1 n the f iel ds, 1 s $2,500.
Rural housing In general is of dismal quality:
Governor Brown's Advisory Commission on Housing
Problems has estimated that there are 200,000
substandard units in the rural agricultural areas
of California. Highway 99, running the length
of the state and lined with farm workers' shan-
ties, has been termed "the longest slum in the
world." But for the 5 to 10 percent of Califor-
nia's farm workers who go on the road, traveling
up and down the state, following the harvest for
a living, housing is worse than substandard.
...(F)amily housing, when available, can cost
as much as $15 a week, and be considerably above
the allowable occupancies set for courts and
camps. The large f am i I i es--f ou r, five, and six
children are not uncommon--present their own
problems of overcrowding.
With no shelter available, many families are
forced to camp in ditchbanks and under bridges,
where the most elementary sanitation and comfort
is lacking. But despite the varied types of
shelter, the common denominator for migrants
Is a vast sense of social Isolation. Migrant
workers do not belong to any community, are not
wanted by any community. They are herded off
after the harvest, and while in residence are
beyond the reach of such basic services as schools,
day-care centers, clinics. ^2
In the four years since the above was written some changes
22. "Short Term Housing for a Long Term Problem," Progres-
sive Architecture, May 1966, p. 167.
5680
have occurred, but essentially it is the same. At best,
some of the migrants can now find units with "elementary
sanitation and comfort." Migrant children in several
areas have access to schools, day-care centers and clinics
Yet some migrant fami I ies are sti I I forced to camp out on
riverbanks and many crowd into the motels, hotels, and
rooming houses available to transients.
Sughsorij California - Cabins rented by Migrants during
harvest season.
It is a wonder that the condition and availability of
housing for migrants is not worse due to an overall housing
shortage reaching the crisis stage in much of rural Cali-
fornia. For example, in Stanislaus County:^^
(t)he vacancy rate is estimated at about \%.
(During December, The San Francisco Chronicle
23. Elinore Blake, Unpublished background paper on housing
activities in Stanislaus County, California, Stanislaus
County Community Action Commission, Inc., Modesto, Califor-
20
5681
featured a story on that city's housing problems
and reported that officials were in extreme dis-
tress because the vacancy rate had fa I len to
2 1/2^.) A vacancy rate of \% means that there
are essentially no dwellings available to be
rented. The housing shortage has resulted in a
seller's market and a rapid rise in rents; fig-
ures provided by the Welfare Department show that
lower-priced units have doubled in cost over the
I a st two yea rs .
Interior of a Labor Contractor ' s Camp in California
A survey of the California farm labor force done in 1965
found :24
There is no single farm labor housing problem.
n I a , p . I .
24, Assembly Committee on Agriculture by its Advisory Com-
mittee on Farm Labor Research, The Ca I i f orn i a Farm Labor
21
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 20
5682
TABLE IV
TYPE OF PERMANENT HOUSING BY STABILITY
(Percentage Distribution of a Weighted
one Percent Sample of Workers with $100
or More California Farm Earnings in 1965) .
Type of Permanent
Housing
Total
STABILITY
Non-Migrant Migrant
Total Number
4,867
(100%)
3,417
(70.2%)
1,451
(29. %)
Total , Permanent
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
House
Trailer
Apartment
Hotel or Motel
Rooming House
Other
Unknown
86.0
89.7
77.4
2.0
2.1
2.0
5.7
4.6
8.2
1.1
0.7
2.1
1.2
0.8
2.2
3.3
2.0
6.5
0.6
0.2
1.6
Source: The California Farm Leibor Force: A Profile, "Assembly Com-
mittee on Agriculture; Advisory Committee on Farm Labor Re-
search, April, 1969. Table E, p. 115.
In one sense, farm labor housing must be con-
sidered as a part of the broader problem of pro-
Force: A Prof I I e, April, 1969, p. 112
22
1
5683
viding adequate housing for low income rural
people. In the narrower sense, it is an aspect
of the problem of labor supply for California's
agriculture. To attract and hold both perma-
nent local workers and migrant workers, Califor-
nia growers must be concerned that housing needs,
of such workers, are being met by the combined
efforts of the public and private sectors in-
cluding the growers themselves.
A part of the survey attempted to identify the type of
permanent housing lived in by farm workers. As would be
expected, a greater percentage of local workers were more
likely to live in houses while migrants were more likely
to live in other types of units. (See Table IV).
Overcrowding, always a problem among the poor, is wide-
spread among California farm workers (see Table V), and
is undoubtedly critical among migrants (most state labor
housing codes, and the Federal code require only 60 square
feet of living space per person in housing where cooking,
eating and sleeping is permitted).
25
Perhaps the most disheartening thing about the housing
situation in California is that more has been done to meet
the problem in that state than in any other--and it is
still critical. To date, the OEO had spent an estimated
$5,750,000 to build some 2,000 temporary family shelters
More self-help housing has been built by farmworkers there
than in any other state. From 1965 to June 1969 the
Farmers Home Administration loaned $2,779,540 to Public
Housing Authorities under its s5l4. Farm Labor Housing
Program, and gave $3,776,900 to the Public Housing Author-
ities through Its s5l6 Grant program. 25 These funds were
used to upgrade or construct 843 family units.
25. Interview by telephone, V. Ralph Gunderson, Chief,
Migrant Programs, State Office of Economic Opportunity,
Sacramento, California, May 7, 1970. This amount means
that just over $43 has been spent per migrant and seasonal
farmworker on housing. (Based on 1967-1958 migrant and
seasonal farmworker population.)
26
See Table XI, this report.
23
5684
c
5
1 o
c c
D Ai
c
0) tn
(U
M c
>
o o
QJ
e 0)
iH
u
W
M Q)
0 CL,
U
0
0)
0
c
w
•H
c u
2
EH fc
M
0
tn
c
-P 0
0) £! tn
>
en U
(U
■A (1)
w
w C^
-
Sh
0
tn
in
0
o VO
0)
(0
Eh
-O O CTv
>
X u
H
0) H iH
■H
•H QJ
§
-P V>
x; c
fa
W fl<
>H
■H -P
cn
J
Q) -H W
c
H
S S tJi
0
M tn
S
ifl en -H
3 M
fo
>^ c
Eh
0 0)
M-l 0) !h
H
fa Oi
fc
0 M (0
*z
o
C 0
S
tn
>
w
0 S g
■H S
>H
C
N
1-J
0) o
a
H
4-1 4-1 to
H
(U tn
i-q
W
3 0 fe
^
^ iH
PQ
X!
"^
j:^ (U
<;
>l
■H 0) fl
fa
Eh cm
H
CQ
M iH -rH
4-1 a, c
fe
W
tn e M
o
tn
2
■H (0 0
c
o ■
D W 4-1
u
0
O
•H
ISl
tn
K
(1) -P rH
H
O ^1
tji C (0
cn
i tu
P^
(0 0) u
Eh cm
O
•P o
C M Q)
K
0) 0) M
C
a
U fr, 0
0
CQ
u S
tn
s
0) 0
(U iH
D
(1^ c u
C (U
S
— O 0
O CM
ItJ
4->
0
EH
tn
e
o
o
o
CM
o
c»
•<*
CN
•^
a\
o
o
O
rH
l~~
t~-
r-l
CO
in
o
00
o
t~-
r-
<N
^
CJ^
(N
<Ti
o
o
o
o
'S'
rj
ro
vo
CM
o
rH
t^
O
vo
in
(N
in
<-{
f-{
a^
rH
o
o
i-H
o
(N
<y\
CJ^
CN
00
rH
in
o
<N
o
r-
VD
O
r^
in
CM
o
O
CM
o
CTi
»*
CO
o
^
o
<-t
rH
CM
rH
CM
o
<N
o
a^
«*
CM
ty.
r-t
CM
o
o
rH
fN
1X>
VO
CN
vo
CM
00
rH
rH
o
r-i
o
vo
00
O
CN
CO
VO
o
CS
n
o
vo
cn
in
o
CM
o
rH
CN)
CM
rH
•-{
o
in
ro
•<«•
n
a^
in
CM
CTl
o
o
I-H
iH
in
vo
CM
o
CM
vo
CM
00
o
^
•«r
(N
rH
ro
00
rH
00
o
CO
in
n
VD
(N
>*
•««•
in
o
rH
rH
rH
rH
r-t
rH
o
t~~
CXD
in
•^
vo
vo
r~-
r-
O
m
•5*
o
rH
"V
vo
CM
in
O
i-H
rH
CM
CM
r-t
•-\
-P
cn
tn
C
e
0)
tn
g
(U
tn
o
g
g
tn
o
(U
u
g
e
0
0
0
g
0
Vh
u
Q
0
(u
0
O
0
«
o
C
Q)
0
0
tf
K
0
g
5
Ch
«
a
(U
«
c
o
(1)
u
Q)
tu
u
c
rH
G)
0
^1
0
>
X
>
0
^
ItJ
C
a
^
0
-H
•H
Q)
c
4J
C
EH
fa
fa
cn
Cfl
D
O
H
5685
More must be done in California, if farm workers, be they
migrant, seasonal, or year round workers, are to be housed
adequately. Much, much more must be done in other home
base states to even bring the conditions of farm labor
housing up to what it is in California.
THE STREAM STATES
There is probably no working group in the United States
today that lives in worse housing than migrants in stream
states. Traditionally, the growers who hire the migrants
furnish the housing.^' This has been a point of irrita-
tion for both growers and migrants over the years. Growers
complain that they are the only employers in the country
who are required to furnish housing for their labor force.
This contention is often used to justify why stricter
farm labor housing codes should not be enacted or actively
enforced. Migrants complain that housing provided by
growers is used as an unreasonable tool by their employer
to gain an unfair bargaining position and control over
their private lives. It is well documented that a large
number of labor camps run by growers, groups of growers,
or labor contractors often become virtual prisons for the
employees and families who occupy them.
27. For example, 75-85 percent of the housing units in
Oregon and Washington were located on farms where migrants
worked, "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States:
1969 Report.", p. 34. In a sample of 194 growers in
Michigan, 91 percent of them provided camp housing for
their workers. (Michigan Civil Rights Commission, "Report
and Recommendations on the Status of Migratory Farm Labor
in Michigan," 1968, Appendix, p. 123.)
28. See: "Opinion on Right of Access to Labor Camps,"
Patrick J. Foley, United States Attorney, District of
Minnesota, July 26, 1968; Kent Springs, "Access of Visi-
25
5686
Housing available to farmworkers -
Beverly J Washington.
Agriculture is a unique industry in several ways. It is
one of the few basic industries where classic competition
"works", i.e. where price control is still essentially
beyond the control of any single producer. It is also
unique in that it requires a highly fluctuating seasonal
labor supply. This labor may come as far as 2000 miles
and be employed by one grower for as short a time as a
few days. Except for housing furnished by growers, there
few places, if any, in rural areas of the country which
have sufficient accommodations to house the large influx
of migrants each summer.
tors to Labor Camps on Privately Owned Property," Florida
Law Review. Vol. 21, No. 3, Winter, 1969, p. 295; Eliza-
beth J. du Fresne, "Compare this Prison--Lack of Free Ac-
cess to Labor Camps," unpublished article, 1968. Agri-
culture is the last stronghold of the "company town" which
was always an implement of servitude.
26
5687
Although many growers complain about having to house mi-
grants, they are generally loath to participate in any
form of central housing over which they do not exercise
control. The fear of having to bargain in a relatively
free labor market often offsets their threat of "getting
out of the housing business". Growers generally put for-
ward four basic arguments for not wanting to invest sub-
stantial funds in housing for their workers;29
1. Mechanical harvesters will replace workers
in the near future ;
2. Housing facilities are used for only a few
weeks out of the year;
3. Alghough the housing leaves something to be
desired, it is at least equivalent to what
workers have in their home base areas;
4. Al I too often there has been wi I Iful destruc-
tion of very fine facilities that were pro-
vided.
There were 15 states (excluding California, Texas, and
Florida) that had more than 10,000 migrants and family
dependents establishing temporary residence during 1967-
1 968 (see Table VI ) .
Studies have been conducted, surveys have been made,
articles have been written, or hearings have been held
on farm labor housing in most of these 15 states. Most
of them point to the undeniable conclusion that much of
the housing provided for migrants is deplorable.
During the summer of 1969, the Migrant Research Project^O
surveyed 148 camps in Michigan, or about six percent of
all the licensed camps in the state. In addition, they
surveyed 54 camps in four other states (Wisconsin, Iowa,
Minnesota and Washington). The survey showed the percent
29,
Michigan Civil Rights Commission, note 27 above, p. 10,
30. The Manpower Evaluation and Development Institute, Mi-
grant Research Project is an Office of Economic Opportuni-
ty funded program located in Washington, D.C.
27
5688
TABLE VI
STATES WITH MORE THAN 10,000 MIGRANTS AND DEPENDENTS
IN 1967-1968
(Except California, Texas and Florida)
State Number of Migrants
and Dependents
Michigan 83,696
Oregon 43,233
Ohio 32,583
Washington 31,257
New York 29,280
Wisconsin 19,687
Illinois 19,518
Arizona 19 , 29 2
Idaho 18,86 8
North Carolina 17,307
Colorado 15,532
New Jersey 15,19 4
Indiana 14 ,375
Connecticut 11,672
Virginia 10,171
Source: U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. "The Migratory
Farm Labor Problem in the United States: 1969 Report" 91st
Congress, 1st Session. Report No. 91-83. Appendix A.
of camps which had defects based upon the minimal require-
ments of the (viichigan Labor Camp Code^l and the Federal
Housing Code For Agricultural Workers. ^^ The results of
that survey are found in Table VII.
On Long Island, in Suffolk County, New York, 1170 migrants
lived in 77 camps in 1969.-^-^ Another 550 seasonal em-
31. Michigan Public Act 289 of 1965 and regulations.
32. 20 CFR 620.
33. "Tabulation of the Numbers of Seasonal Agricultura
Workers on Farms and Potato Grading Stations in Suffolk
5689
ployed agricultural workers lived in housing of less than
five persons per camp.-^^ The county agricultural agent, H.
D. Wells, ranked the condition and availability of the mi-
grant housing as "excellent". ^ Testimony of the Reverend
Arthur Bryant, pastor of St. Peter's Lutheran Church in
Greenport, New York and vice chairman of the Suffolk County
Human Relations Commission before the U.S. Senate Subcom-
mittee on Migratory Labor, suggested that he would rank at
least some of the camps d i f f erent I y : ^^
Occasionally we get glimpses of migrant life.
The bullpen (male migrant living barracks) is
a study in itself. No prison was ever better
designed to destroy the identity of a human
being. It is the place where the bully rules,
where the alcoholic throws up on the floor,
where the TB victim coughs in everybody's face.
It Is the dimly lit room without furniture ex-
cept bed s .
There Is no place to read a book, no closet to
lock up one's personal belongings, no family,
no love, no hope. The State of New York is
advanced in that it now prescribes 50 square
feet of floor space per man although there is
no provision In the State sanitary code for a
County, N.Y., 1967, 1968, and 1969." Estimated on'January
7, 1970 by Robert Dietrich, Farm Placement Representative,
NY State Employment Service, Riverhead, N.Y.; Sidney Beck-
wlth, Suffolk County Department of Health, Riverhead, N
and H.D. Weils, Cooperative Extension Agent, Riverhead,
based on U.S. Census Information, Health Department In-
spection of Camp and labor referrals made by N.Y. State
Department of Labor. Unpublished.
Y
34
I bid
35. Answer in questionnaire for Survey of Farm Labor Hous-
ing conducted by the Rural Housing Alliance, April, 1970.
36. Statement by Rev. Arthur Bryant, Hearings Before the
Subcommittee on Migratory Labor of the Committee on Labor
and Public Welfare, United States Senate, 91st Cong. 1st
Session on "Who Are the Migrants," June 9 and 10, 1969.
Part I, p. 30
29
5690
TABLE VII
DEFECTS IN LABOR CAMPS IN MICHIGAN AND FOUR OTHER STATES
Percent of camps defective
Defect
Michigan*
Other States**
Camp Area
Camp Drainage
Junk and trash in camp area
Poisonous weeds and plants
in camp area
Inadequate number of garbage
cans
Uncovered garbage cans
No recreation area
Water Supply,
Insufficient water
Water supply believed to be
unsafe
Housing Construction
Leaking roof
Leaking walls
Unsafe floors
Rough floors
Wet floors
Uncleanable walls
Uncloseable windows
Broken windows
Inadequate doors
Inadequate screens
Fire Protection
45%
54%
11%
35%
73%
39%
18%
17%
43%
28%
32%
42%
40%
49%
23%
39%
36%
40%
Insufficient fire escapes 43%
Inadequate fire extinguishing
equipment 47%
Furnishings
No food storage shelves or work
area 22%
No place to hang clothing 46%
No working refrigerator 19%
Insufficient tables and chairs 43%
Electricity,
Electricity not furnished to
all units
Not at least one wall plug in
each room
48%
45%
4%
11%
84%
54%
6%
14%
11%
16%
15%
46%
24%
45%
16%
29%
43%
78%
60%
43%
24%
40%
12%
60%
1% 10%
21% 12%
Continued on next page
30
5691
TABLE VII Cont.
Percent of camps defective
Defect
Michigan*
Other States**
Inadequate yard lighting
Bare electrical wires
Wires exposed to combustible
materials
Overcrowding
69%
14%
Overcrowded units
People sleeping on floors or
in cars
Children sleeping with parents
Heating
70%
26%
39%
Unsafe heating system
Bathing Facilities
69%
No bathing facilities
Laundry Facilities
32%
No laundry facilities
Toilets
56%
Inadequate number of toilets 35%
Separate toilets not furnished
for men and women 38%
Toilets not well lighted 83%
Toilets not well ventilated 71%
Toilet paper and holder not
provided 76%
Privy pits not fly tight 73%
Privies too close to living
units 44%
Toilets too far from living
units 19%
Unsanitary toilets and privies 62%
52%
18%
13%
75%
25%
74%
32%
39%
37%
76%
49%
75%
49%
29%
10%
46%
Source: Unpublished draft of preliminary findings of conditions in
Labor Camps in Michigan and Four Other States. Manpower Eval-
uation and Development Institute, Migrant Research Project. 1968.
Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota, and Washington.
Based on a six percent sample.
5692
reading or a recreational room. Most States
now accept the totally unacceptable standard
of 40 square feet prescribed by the U.S. Employ-
ment Serv i ce .
The city of New York requires 80 square feet of
space for any chi Id above the age of 2. When
growers protest the destruct i veness of the mi-
grant worker in the bullpen, it never seems to
occur to them that the crowded, undisciplined
minimal standards for bullpen housing are in
themselves destructive, violent attacks upon
humanity which deserves some form of reciproca-
tion.
Congressman Allard Lowenstei-n, of New York, also found the
Labor camps in Suffolk County considerably less than ex-
cel I e n t : 5 '
Rep. Allard Lowenstein, accompanied by repre-
sentatives of the Suffolk Human Relation Com-
mission and Seasonal Employees in Agriculture
(SEA), visited the Agway Inc. and Mort Zahler
camps on Edgar Avenue, Riverhead.
Lowenstein, Long Beach Democrat, said later;
"There exists a large group of Americans living
under conditions that would not be proper even
in the most primitive times."
The House agricultural committee member asked
the migrants about conditions. Most asked for
help but their tired faces showed little hope.
At the Zahler camp, a forgotten string of Christ-
mas lights hung from the shingleless, leaking
roof to a spot above a screen door rotted and
peel i ng .
The heat inside the two-room shack was oppres-
37.
Apri r
bid
28,
, p. 86,
I 969.
reprinted from Long Island (N.Y.) Press,
32
5693
sive, even with the windows open and a cool
breeze blowing. A man Inside spoke briefly with
Lowenstein but without grasping what the meeting
wa s all a bout .
Lowenstein next toured the "bullpen", a building
housing 21 cots and little else. The blankets
on the beds were thin and worn. Mattresses
showed the effects of years without change.
Stuffing billowed from some; others were so grimy
and faded, their original color had long since
d I sappea red .
Two of the migrants, Frank Funn, 40, and Samuel
Carter, 58, said they were in the camp because
this Is the only thing they know.
One of the workers said the food was "pretty
good" In response to a question from Lowenstein.
"We get plenty of rice and beans," he said. He
made no mention of meat.
But several other workers said they occasionally
were fed chicken, pigs knuckles and feet.
Bathroom facilities consisted of two commodes,
a sink and a shower.- Water trickled from a pipe
onto the muddy floor and the room reeked of
urine.
At the Agway camp the "bul Ipen" had been newly
painted. Some of the beds had mattress covers.
But on the whole it was far below the housing
standards one has become accustomed to--even In
the worst areas of Long Island or any place else.
These descriptions could go on indefinitely as similar con-
ditions exist in all of the states with any migrant popu-
lation. In Maryland, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Michigan,
Minnesota, Illinois, Iowa, Colorado, Utah, and Washington,
the record^^ clearly points to a great need for a mass
38. John M. McClIntock, "Migrant Camps Blur Identities,"
The Ba I t i more Sun , September 22, 1969; Interviews with
33
5694
program to improve the living conditions of migrant and
seasonal farm workers. The remainder of this study wil
look at some of the programs designed to do just that.
Wretched Housing in the shadow of scenic Mt. Baker,
vo
Pe
Ta
Su
no
Ci
Ci
In
19
do
We
to
I n
I n
m i
91
Pa
I unteer
nnsy I va
ble VII
rvey Fo
is; Ann
ty , I ow
vi I Act
terv i ew
70; and
n, Kerr
bster ,
n. Seat
the Ya
gs befo
wor
n i a ,
, th
rms
ua I
a; V
i on
, Ch
Kar
y J.
Depa
tie,
b i na
re t
kers
Febr
i s st
of se
Repor
a I enz
in Union
uary 2 1,
udy ; M i g
vera I ca
t , M i qra
ue I a v .
Cou
197
ra nt
mps
nt A
Hous
No. C
ar I es
en M .
Pata
rtmen
Wash
Val I
he Su
-1580, I
Brenner
James,
k i , Lynn
t ofAnth
i ngton ,
ey--l 967
bcomm i tt
969,
, Ut
J ean
D.
ropo
"The
ee o
nty,
0; M
Res
i n V
ct i o
i ng
Penn
i gra n
earch
erm I I
n Pro
Autho
D.C
ah M
M.
Patt
logy
End
Exce
n M i
. , De
i gran
Langd
erson
, Uni
less
rpts
grato
sy ! va
t Res
Proj
lion
ararn .
r i ty
n I a ,
ea re h
ect ,
Count
I 969
of We
Lew i sbu rg ,
Project,
Hou s i ng
y, I I! i-
. Mason
Id Co. .
nver ,
t Cou
on , T
, and
vers i
Cyc I e
pu'b I i
r^ La
Colo
nc i I ,
homas
Stev
ty of
, Mig
shed
bor o
rado;
Apri I 13,
A. Lang-
en S .
Wa sh i ng-
ra nt Life
i n Hear-
f the Com-
ttee on Labor and Pu b I i c We I fa re , Uni
grant Subcult
st Cong
rt I I, ,
t Ses
83-54
s i on "Mi
4.
ted S
ure"
tates
July
Senate ,
28, 1969,
34
5695
PART II
An Effective Program,
Now History
THE FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
The problems of migrant farm labor were almost entirely
ignored by the New Deal legislation designed to pull the
country out of a depression and extend social benefits
to working people. However, the housing situation for
the rural poor migrating to the West Coast was so criti-
cal that something had to be done. The Farm Security
Administration (at that time The Resettlement Adminis-
tration), engaged in a rehabilitation program for people
on their own land, was assigned the task of reaching the
migrants in 1935:'
The FSA
Camp program played a
s i gn i f i cant ro 1 e
in the
history of farm labor I
n the United
States.
The camps were the fi
rst concrete
evidence of recognition on the
part of the Gov
ernment
of its responsibility
toward m i gra nt
agricultural workers--toward those thousands
of men.
women and children who
were uprooted
from th
eir farms and forced ou
t onto the h i g h-
ways in
search of a living during the stormy
per i od
of agricultural adjustments which took'
p 1 ace a
fter the first World War. Although
who 1 1 y
inadequate to meet the
desperate needs
of more
than a fraction of the
total number of
mi grant
workers and their fami
lies, the camp
1 . Hi story of the
Farm Security Administration Camp Pro-
gram for Migratory
Agricultural Workers--w i th particular
emp ha s i s on the ro 1
le of the camp program in relation to
agricultural labor needs. Labor Division, Farm Security
Administration, Department of Agriculture, p. 3. (herein
after cited as History of the Farm Security Administra-
tion. ) p. 28.
3S
5696
program pointed the way toward the rational, hu-
mane handling of a broad ijocial problem.
Thirty-five years later the "broad social problem" sti
exists and still needs "rational, humane handling."
Farm Security Administration, Weslaoo, Texas, 1940
From 1935 to 1938 the program attempted "to provide tem-
porary relief for migrant agricultural workers"^ by
providing shelter where concentrations of migrants were
found. In 1935, by assuming management of two emergency
housing camps set up by the California State Relief Ad-
ministration, the Farm Security Administration found it-
self in the labor housing business;-^
From this beginning, actually limited to the
bid
3. Clay L. Cochran, Hired Farm Labor and the Federal Gov-
ernment. Doctoral Dissertation, University of North Caro-
lina , I 95 I , p . I I 8 .
5697
assumption of administration of two groups of
wooden tent platforms around some sanitary
facilities, the program developed into a nation-
wide program with 95 camps serving 121 cities
in 16 states .
These camps
t i me . ^
had a total capacity of 19,464 families at one
Farm Security Administration^ WestaoOy Texae, .-._'_.
The first camps built were called "standard" camps. At
the start, only rows of platforms on which migrants could
pitch tents were provided along with central sanitary
facilities. These platforms soon gave way to more sub-
stantial one room structures made of wood or meta I . ^
4. House of Representatives, Hearings before the Select
Committee on Agriculture, to Investigate the Activities
of the Farm Security Administration. 78th Congress, 1st
"Session, 1945, Part 3, p. 1165.
5. The metal shelters were an early triumph for industri-
37
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B
5698
TABLE VIII
NUMBER AND LOCATION OF FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION CAMPS
IN 1942
Number of
standard
camps
Number of
mobile
camps
Total
United States
41=
SI*-
92
Atlantic Coast
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Florida
Idaho
Missouri
Oregon
Texas
Washington
3
1
13
2
7
2
1
1
9
2
20^
3
20
6
1
19
2
7
9
1
10
9
8
Source: Clay L. Cochran, "Hired Farm Labor and the Federal Government."
Doctoral Disertation, University of North Carolina, 19 51,
Appendix A, p. 19 4.
a
Does not include 3 standard camps commandeered by the Army at Yakima,
Washington, McAllen, Texas, and S. Dade, Florida.
Includes two mobile camps utilized by Army.
Includes 18 mobile and two CCC Ccimps.
a I i zed housing but an unmitigated tragedy for the human
beings forced to live in them.
5699
Community centers were established, providing space for
camp meetings, day nurseries, recreation, education
classes and clinics. 6 Eventually, about 50 cottages or
"labor homes" were built for each camp of 350 shelters.^
These were used by migrants wishing to stay In the area
after the major harvest period.
Mobile camps were designed for use In areas where the
agricultural labor demand was strictly seasonal. These
camps used tents on platforms for housing; water and
power were supplied from auxiliary trucks. Some of these
camps had a capacity of 1000 people.^
The camps were a great improvement over what was other-
wise available, even those with tents. In fact, they were
better than many that are in use today. However, even in
1943 the camps were considered as "... offer(Ing) the
barest minimums of sanitary living f ac i I 1 1 i es . "9 Perhaps
more important than their relatively good condition was
the manner in which they were managed.''^
...(T)o prevent the possibility of a "concen-
tration camp" atmosphere and at the same time
to promote an understanding of democracy among
the migrants, as many of the management and
disciplinary functions of the camp as possible
were turned over to the camp residents them-
selves. They handled these problems through
the medium of a community council.
The camp councils proved highly successful in
promoting the efficient management of the labor
6. History of the Farm Security Administration, p. 26
7. Ibid. , p. 27.
8. Ibid., p. 67. Also see Cochran, Appendix D.
9. Hearings to Investigate the Activities of the Farm
Security Administration, p~! 1165.
10. History of the Farm Security Administration, p. 30-
34.
39
5700
camps, particularly in those areas where the
season was long with a resulting fairly stable
camp population. In very short-season areas,
using mobile type camp units, some difficulties
were experienced in establishing an active camp
council because of the rapid turnover among the
camp residents which destroyed the continuity
of the camp personnel and even prevented the
residents from becoming well acquainted with
one another.
Despite th
ese d i
f f icu
1 t i es the
sel f
-govern i ng
principle
upon w
hich
a 1 1
FSA camps
were estab-
1 i shed was
one o
f the
most importan
t factors
in assur i n
g the
success
of the
prog
ram. By
the simple
exped
i ent
of
giving
the
peop 1 e a
chance to
have a
say
in
their own a
f f a i rs the
workers 1 ea rned
a rea
1 1
esson
in democracy and
the task o
f admi
n i ster i n
g order 1 y ,
d i sc i p 1 i ned
and c 1 ean
camps
was reduced to
a m i
n imum . By
prov i d i ng
hou s i n
g and
sa
ni tary
f ac i
1 i t i es the
FSA camps
p 1 ayed
a si
gn i
f i cant
ro 1 e
in relieving
the distress of
home 1
ess
wanders as
we 1 1 as be-
coming an
examp 1
e of
the
mini mum r i
ghts to
which this
. class
of work
.ers shou 1 d
be ent i 1 1 ed .
The response of the migrants to this type of
camp organization was excellent. Enthusiasm
was particularly noticeable among those migrant
groups who suffer most from social ostracism-
in our society today, i.e., the Mexican and
Negro workers. The camp government was often
their initial experience with the processes of
democracy. For the first time they felt that
they had a stake in and a responsibility for
something important in their lives.
Up until the 1942 season
to live in the camps free.'
families were allowed
II. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Security Admin-
istration, Migrant Farm Labor--The problem and some ef-
forts to meet it, 1940, cited in H i story of the Farm
Security Administration, at p. 32.
40
5701
Each family is asked, however, to contribute
about 10 cents a day to a camp welfare fund,
which is handled jointly by the campers' com-
mittee and the FSA manager. Money from this
fund is used for minor improvements around
the camp, and sometimes to help out fam'Mes
who are particularly hard up or to provide
school lunches and clothes for needy children.
In a few cases, campers have ustd some of the
money to finance inexpensive camp newspapers,
consisting of three or four mimeographed pages.
In addition to its daily contribution, each
fami ly is expected to put in two hours work
every week around the camp, cleaning up the
ground and sanitary buildings, planting grass,
repairing shelter, and so on. If a family is
unable to pay its 10 cents a day, it was asked
to do an extra two hours work a week.
In 1942, as farm labor wages began to rise somewhat, rents
were charged ranging from 50 cents to $3.25 per week, de-
pending upon the type of shelter provided. '2
From the beginning of the farm labor camp program until
1938, funds for it came from emergency relief appropria-
tions acts earmarked for "rural reha b i I i tat i on . " ' ^ From
1938 through 1942 the funds for migrant camps totaled
$21,557,631.14 (See Table IX, for yearly breakdown.)
By the end of 1942, the FSA's farm labor program, of
which the camp program was a part, came under increasingly
savage attack by conservative farm lobbies and Congress-
men.'-' The progressive tide had turned in the Department
I 2 . Hearings to Investigate the Activities of the Farm
Security Administration. p . 1165.
13. Baldwin, Poverty and Po I i t i C5--T he Rise and Decline
of the Farm Security Administration, (Chapel Hill, Univer-
sity of North Carolina Press, 1968), p. 222.
I 4 . Hearings to Investigate the Activities of the Farm
Security Administration, p . 1178.
15. Baldwin, p. 378-382.
41
5702
TABLE IX
OBLIGATION OF FUNDS FOR FARM SECURITY ADMINISTRATION'S
MIGRATORY LABOR CAMPS
YEAR
AMOUNT
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
$1,095,308
5,048,195
5,010,733
4,561,841
4,432,441
Source: Hearings before the Select Coiranittee of the House Committee
on Agriculture, To Investigate the Activities of the Farm
Security Administration. House of Representatives, 78th
Congress, 1st Session 1943, Table: "Obligation of Funds by
Purposes and Fiscal Years." p. 1178.
of Agriculture and in April of 1943 President Roosevelt
signed the House Joint Resolution 96 into law. 16 |n
this law the FSA's migrant labor camp program was trans-
ferred to the War Food Administration. In 1946 the li-
quidation of the labor camps was ordered. 1^ In 1947
Congress passed new legislation which authorized the Se-
cretary of Agriculture to
...dispose of any labor supply center, labor
home, labor camp or facility tby sale]. ..to any
public or semipublic agency or any nonprofit
association of farmers in the community who will
agree to operate and maintain such facilities
for the principle purpose of housing persons
engaged in agricultural work and to relieve the
16. 57 Stat. 70, cited in Baldwin, at p. 382.
17. 60 Stat. 1 046 ( I 946) .
42
5703
Government of
therew i th . ' ^
responsibilities in connection
The Secretary was to have until June 30, 1949, to dispose
of the camps; and after January 30, 1948, none of the re-
maining camps were to be operated
except under contractual arrangements with re-
sponsible public, or semi-public organizations
or nonprofit associations of farmers who will
agree to operate such facilities for the princi-
pal purpose of housing persons engaged in agri-
cultural work and to relieve the Federal Govern-
ment of all financial responsibility in connec-
tion with the operation of such f ac i I i t i es . ' 9
In May of 1949, however, 39 of the camps remained unsold,
so Congress extended the Secretary's authority to sell
the camps until June 30, 1950.^0 /\-f the end of this period
the camps were to be sold to the highest bidder. Prior
to the deadline, however. Congress again passed legislation
affecting the camps. This time it authorized the transfer
of camps to the United States Housing Authority
,..for the principal purpose of housing persons
engaged in agricultural work, and preference
for occupancy in such projects shall be given
to agricultural workers and their families; the
rents In such projects shal I not be higher than
the rents which such tenants can afford. 21
The act also authorized the Authority
...to enter Into contracts for disposal of said
projects by any of the methods provided in this
Act, Including disposal of any such project to
a public housing agency for a consideration con-
sisting of the payment by the public housing
18. 61 Stat. 694 (1947)
19. Ibid., sec. 2.
20. 63 Stat. 144 ( I 949)
21 . 42 U.S.C. 1412 (f ) .
43
5704
agen
I ess
afte
( I )
oper
proj
exce
esta
prop
rent
i nte
nect
agen
cy t
tha
r de
rea s
at i o
ect;
ss o
bl i s
er r
I y m
rest
i on
cy w
o the
n twe
duct i
onab I
n , ma
( i i )
f I 0
hment
eserv
atur i
on a
with
ith t
Auth
nty y
on of
e a nd
i nten
paym
per c
and
es; a
ng i n
ny i n
such
he ap
or i ty du
ears of
the amo
proper
a nee , an
ents in
entum of
ma i ntena
nd ( i V )
sta ! I men
debted ne
project
prova 1 o
r I ng
all i
unts
costs
d i mp
I i eu
shel
nee o
the p
ts,.pf
s s in
by th
f the
a term
ncome t
necessa
of man
rovemen
of taxe
ter rein
f reaso
ayment
pr i nc i
curred
e pu b I i
Author
of not
heref rom
ry for
agement ,
t of such
s not i n
ts; ( i i i )
na b I e and
of cur-
pal and
i n con-
c hou s i ng
ity.22
Finally, in 1956 the Federal Government washed its hands
of "the first concrete evidence of recognition on the part
of the government of its responsibility toward migrant
agricultural workers" by amending the PHA responsibilities
of operating the camps and of receiving payment from lo-
cal Authorities. This amendment authorized the Authority
to transfer its title to the camps
. .■'. vy>' "^
...to any, public housing agency whose area of
operation includes the project, upon a finding
and certification by the public housing agency
...that the project is needed to house persons
and families of low income and that preference
for occupancy in the project wi I I be given
first to low income agricultural workers and
their families, and second to other low income
persons and their f am i I i es . . . . 23
This transfer of title was to be "without monetary con-
sideration".
Thus, a strong government program designed not only to
suJDsidize the growers by providing housing for their
laborers, but also to help the laborers by furnishing them
with sanitary housing in a democratic atmosphere in which
they could feel that they had a "piece of the action",
be it ever so small, came to an end. It took the govern-
22. I bid.
23. Ibid., as amended by 70 Stat, 1091, (1956).
i
5705
ment less than six years to build all of the camps. It
took it 14 years to get rid of them. Of course, one can
only conjecture what would have happened if the Farm Se-
curity Administration could have continued in the pattern
set between 1936 and 1943, a pattern which seemed to mean
the stabilization of migrant farm workers by providing
housing. It seems clear, however, i i,at the condition of
migrant housing today is much worse because of the loss
of the program.
Many of the camps built by the Farm Security/ Administra-
tion are still being used by migrants and other agri-
cultural workers under local housing authorities. Their
condition varies greatly. One of the camps built In
Florida was described in the summer of 1969.24
The government built some housing In this area
for emergency use back in 1942, and these same
houses hold possibly more than one third of
the town's population, even though they have
been condemned for about eight years. The
housing authority took over this from the gov-
ernment a long time ago, about 194"', and since
that time they have not even put a coat of
paint on the houses. They haven't done any-
thing to them. People are living there because
there is no other place in the town to stay.
They have to live in condemned shacks.
The camp built in Fort Lu^tcn, Colorado, and subsequently
turned over to the Weld County Housing Authority has been
the subject of recent litigation brought by migrant farm
workers. In one suit the migrants sought Injunctive re-
lief to prevent what was alleged to be a retaliatory
eviction for complaints made to the state camp licensing
division, 25 The second case^S more or less grew out of
24. Sta + cTient by Elija Boone, Hearings Before the Subcom-
ni'+tee on Migratory Labor of the Committee on Labor and
'/ 'lie ".elfare, "Who are the Migrants," Part I, p. 30.
2 5 . Valenzuela v. The Housing Authority of Weld County ,
C'vil Action No. C-1508, 1969," U.S.D.C. Denver, Colorado.
26
Perez et . a I
The Housing Authority of Weld Coun-
45
5706
the first one. The camp was closed in November, 1969,
because of numerous violations of the labor camp housing
code, and the Housing Authority subsequently decided to
sell the units used by migrants to individual growers for
$10 each. The suit is attempting to stop this sale on
the theory that Federal Statutes require (see above) that
the camp be used by agricultural workers as long as there
I s a need .
These are but two examples of what has happened to the
camps since they were transferred to local authorities.
There are others, e.g., those in Stanislaus County, Cal-
ifornia, which have been maintained in relatively good
condition. At the camp in Linnel, California, the metal
one room shelters were torn down in 1967 and replaced
in 1969 by units financed with a Farmers Home Administra-
tion Farm Labor Housing Loan and Grant.
It is extremely significant that one observer noted27
...though conditions had always been bad, no
one paid much attention to the problem because
it affected mainly foreigners. It was not un-
til increased mechanization on the Nation's
farms, the depression and the drought had driven
thousands of native white American families from
their homes that the distressing conditions of
the migratory worl<er became a problem of nation-
a I concern .
With the demand for industrial labor caused by World War
II, most of those "native white American families" were
able to secure better employment than in the fields,
leaving that worl< again to "foreigners". Blacks, and Chi-
canos. When that occurred, it is probably not coinciden-
tal that the "distressing conditions of the migratory
-ty, Civil Action No. C-
Colorado, Dec. 9, 1969.
1919, f i led in
See a I so , the
U.S.O.C. Denver,
Memora ndum Filed
in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgement, Gary S.
Goodpaster, Jonathan B. Chase, William D. Prakken, At-
torneys for Plaintiffs, Colorado Rural Legal Services,
Inc., Boulder, Colorado.
27 . History of the Farm Security Administration Camp Pro-
5707
worker" were no longer a "national problem" and a program
designed for their benefit was discontinued. The next
federal program to provide housing for farm workers did
not come into existence until 1962, and that. Is totally
I nadequate .
gram, p
20,
47
5708
PART III
Minor Programs Affecting
Farm Labor Housing
MIGRANT HOUSING CODES AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
There seems always to have been an awareness on the part
of at least some public officials of some of the deplor-
able conditions in migrant camps. Their approaches to
combat them have varied considerably. The most universal
approach has been to set minimum standards and attempt to
enforce them through the issuance of licenses or operating
perm i ts .
At the Federal level the first attempt to improve camps
not within its jurisdiction was made by the Farm Security
Administration. Part of its migrant labor program in-
volved transporting labor to areas where they were needed. I
With
FSA
on t
Ma np
act i
ha rv
of t
with
of t
port
tees
the
diti
hou s
sat i
pa i d
resp
and t
he ba
ower
ng i n
est r
he FS
pote
he ag
at i on
. No
FSA u
ons ,
ing,
sf i ed
, wit
act t
he U.
sis o
Comm i
resp
ecord
A neg
nt i a I
ency
f u nc
farm
n I ess
wage
and f
Lo
ham
o do
S. E
f di
ss i o
onse
-bre
ot i a
emp
u sed
t i on
wor
sta
rate
reed
ca I
i n i m
mest
mp I o
rect
n i n
to
akin
ted
I oye
the
to
kers
ndar
s, t
om f
p rev
urn o
I c m
ymen
i ves
J un
dema
g cr
a se
rs,
I ev
extr
wou
d s r
he p
rom
a i I i
f th
I g ra
t Se
i ss
e, I
nd s
ops,
r i es
i n w
erag
act
Id b
espe
rov i
d i sc
ng w
I rty
tory
rv i c
ued
942.
for
rep
of
h i ch
e of
spec
e tr
ct i n
s i on
r i m i
ages
cen
wor ke
e proc
by the
In t
worker
resent
agreem
the I
their
i f ic g
a nspor
g work
of ad
nation
were
ts an
rs, the-
eeded
War
he fa I I ,
s tp
at i ves
ents
eaders
tra ns-
ua ra n-
ted by
i ng con-
equate
were
to be
hour .
I. Sidney Baldwin, Poverty and Po I i t i cs--The Rise and De-
cline of The Farm Secur i ty Adm i n i stra t i on , Chapel Hill,
University of North Carolina Press, 1968, p. 224.
49
5709
Between September, 1942, and May, 1943, the FSA
transported more than 8,000 domestic farm work-
ers under these arrangements. Also, during the
same period, more than 5,000 year-round farm
workers from cbrdrglnai farming areas, espe-
cially the Appalacians ad the Southeast, were
transported to areas where labor shortages exis-
ted.
In May ,
Labor wa
laws sho
comm i ss I
It even
th i s typ
gratory
of recom
for m i gr
In Augu s
gratory
M I grator
a code,
agencies
for m i gr
1946
s f o
u Id
oner
went
e.2
Labo
mend
ator
t, I
La bo
y La
i ssu
, fa
ant
, the
rmed .
be en
s for
so f
In I
r was
at i on
y far
954,
r, la
bor w
ed i n
rmers
agr i c
Fed
On
acte
I ic
ar a
950,
est
s w i
m I a
the
ten
as a
195
, a n
u I tu
eral Interagency Committee on Migrant
e of its recommendations was that
d giving authority to State labor
ensing and regulating labor camps,
s to "suggest" language for law 3 of
the President's Commission on Mi-
ablished and it too "made a number
th respect to improving conditions
bor, including migrant housing". ^
Interdepartmental Cnrrmittee on Mi-
called the President's Committee on
ppointed.4 This committee drafted
6, to serve as "a guide to State
d civic groups in improving housing
ra I wor kers" . -
This code was used by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bu-
reau of Employment Security State Agencies as the basis
for approval of the housing element of Interstate Job
orders for agricultural workers.^ These regulation'^
2. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Standards,
-' c u sing for Migrant Agricultural Workers-- La bor Camp
a , a 0 d a r d s ,
3. Ibid.
Bulletin 235 (Revised) November, 1962, p. 3
4. I b ' c
5. }J^i±- ' P- 4.
6. U.S. Department of Labor, Manpower Administration,
"Housing regulaticns of the U.S. Department of Labor for
out-of-state Agr i cu 1 , u ra I , woods, and related Industry
workers recruited "through State Employment Service," 1968,
p. 1.
50
5710
were
word
deny
who
mitt
had
with
to m
La bo
Ma jo
wate
camp
(60
s I ee
Whet
prov
the
that
serv
when
not
s, af
the
cou I d
ee' s
a pro
the
eet t
r ame
r cha
rand
s. I
sq. f
ping
her t
I ng c
recru
emp I
i ces
the
made man
ter 1967
use of t
not fur
code. I
vision f
result t
he code,
nded the
nges I nc
I aundry
t also p
t. per p
are alio
he new c
amp cond
Itment s
oyer use
were a t
rev i sed
dator
, the
heir
n I sh
t sho
or "w
hat m
On
code
I uded
f ac i
rov I d
erson
wed ) .
ode h
i t Ion
ea son
of t
hird.
code
y, ho
Stat
recru
hous I
uld b
a I ver
uch o
Octob
Sand
show
I Itle
ed f o
I n u
(See
as ha
s I s
In I
he Em
of wh
was n
wever ,
e Emp I
I tment
ng mee
e note
s" whi
f the
er 30,
subst
ers w i
s were
r mini
nits w
Append
d any
debata
969 a
p I oyme
at the
ot i n
unt
oyme
sen
ting
d, h
ch w
hou s
1968
anti
th h
to
mum
here
Ix A
I mme
ble.
ma jo
nt A
y we
ef fe
I I
nt
V I c
th
owe
as
I ng
, t
al I
ot
be
spa
bo
dia
A
r u
gen
re
ct.
I 967. '
Agenc I es
es to em
e Pres I d
ver, tha
used ext
used st
he Depar
y streng
and CO I d
prov i ded
ce requ I
th cookl
th I s rep
te effec
t one po
ser stat
cy ' s rec
the year
I n other
were to
p I oyers
ent's Com-
t the code
ens I ve I y
III fal led
tment of
thened It.
running
i n a I I
rements
ng and
ort.)
t of Im-
I nt during
e reported
ru i tment
before
The maj
bl I ity
recru 1 1
of the
ment ag
tect i on
c I es of
or I nsp
of camp
for won
only re
necessa
or p
of e
ment
camp
ency
of
ten
ect I
s .
kers
suit
rl ly
rob I
nf or
ser
. T
his
the
mu st
ons
Once
» a
I n
pre
em w
ceme
V I ce
hus ,
wor
Fede
re I
by o
cer
subs
a ca
vent
ith
nt.
s; I
If
kers
ral
y on
then
tif I
eque
nee I
the
this
The
t ca
a gr
are
Gove
se I
sta
cat I
nt f
latl
wor
typ
Sta
nnot
ower
not
rnme
f -ce
te a
on I
I nd I
on o
kers
e of
te Ag
deny
does
affo
nt.
rti f I
gene i
s mad
ng of
f the
f rom
code
ency
the
not
rded
State
cat I o
es as
e and
none
orde
com I
Is t
can
grow
u se
the
Emp
n by
to
an
omp I
r; i
ng a
he Imposs'I-
only deny Its
er the use
the Emp I oy-
m I n I mum pro-
loyment Agen-
the grower .,
the condltlpn
order is sent
I a nee -eani
t does n o t. . •■
nyway .
There is evidence that the regulations are putting so,m e
squeeze on growers with bad housing. Congressman Ediw^rd
Hutchinson of Michigan's Fourth Congressional District
took to the floor of the House of Representatives to tell
the plight of his grower constituents:"
7. 20 C.F.R. 602 I , (d)
8. 20 C.F.R. 620 (1969). Appendix of this report,
9. Congressional Record, March 17, 1970, p. HI862.
SI
5711
. . .(
by t
enf o
area
and
from
i n a
a I d
The!
hous
of t
bear
M) ig
he D
reed
s of
I mpr
the
n or
in t
r po
i ng
he g
a p
rant I
epartm
i n th
south
act I ca
growe
gan i za
he con
s 1 1 1 on
for mi
rower
art of
a bor
ent
e fr
west
I ap
rs'
t i on
stru
i s
gran
to p
the
hou s
of La
uit a
ern M
p I I ca
point
i nte
ct i on
that
ts be
rov i d
bu rd
i ng sta
bor are
nd vege
i c h i gan
t i on of
of vie
nt on o
of m i g
i f the
yond th
e , the
en .
ndar
bei
tabi
. T
the
w , h
btai
ra nt
Gove
e fi
Gove
d s p
ng r
e-pr
he u
sta
as r
n i ng
hou
rnme
nanc
rnme
romu I ga
igidly
oduc i ng
nrea I i s
ndards ,
esu I ted
Federa
si ng.
nt requ
i a I ab i
nt shou
ted
tic
i --es
I ity
Id
There is a growing opinion that the government
seeks to discourage the use of migrant labor in
the area, though such-labor is presently essen-
tial to the harvesting of crops.
A principal complaint of the growers is that_
they need to obtain individually and annually
the housing permit required before they can
utilize the services of the U.S. Employment Ser-
vice in obtaining essential farm labor.
A year ago I was asked to come to their assis-
tance and I arranged to have a Labor Depart-
ment official, armed with authority, go into
the areas and there act upon individual appli-
cations.
Today these growers are faced with the same
problems they experienced last spring.
To keep things in perspective it is estimated that only
a very small percentage of migrants are recruited through
the U.S. Employment Service.
One positive aspect which can be attributed, at least in
part, to Federal involvement in establishing migrant hous-
ing standards is the establishment on the state level of
similar codes. As of 1962, 28 states had laws or mandatory
regulations applicable to migrant camps. '0 Since that time
additional states have established codes, while some of
Housing for Migrant Agricultural Workers, p. 5,
52
5712
the 28 have strengthened theirs. The Federal code states
that the standards outlined are "minimum standards used
to determine whether conditions are so inadequate as to
require the Bureau to withhold services generally made
available upon request".'' Many of the new codes passed
in the states depart little from the Federal regulations
--generally they have been copied verbatim or are less
stringent. '2 These new regulations, minimal as they are,
fill a vacuum which was before occupied only by ill-
housed migrant workers.
If th
not ,
i n mo
f ortu
autho
a re e
most
by th
amp I e
I at i o
viola
be op
i n th
even
more
mum s
viola
close
numbe
no ot
I a bor
ese
rath
St i
nate
r i ty
nf or
i nd i
e ag
, th
ns f
t i on
erat
e ag
if a
than
ta nd
t i on
a c
rs o
her
i s
codes p
er than
nstance
ly the
and pe
ced on I
ct i ng s
ency re
e f i gu r
ou nd in
s went
ed . Pa
ency as
gene i es
grad ua
ards we
s are m
amp at
f m i gra
hou s i ng
needed .
rov I
mer
s th
code
rson
y i n
tati
spon
es c
the
unco
rt o
sign
wer
I i m
re s
i n i m
the
nts
i s
ded
e sa
ey w
s ar
ne I
the
st i c
si bl
i ted
cam
rrec
f th
ed t
e f u
prov
tr i c
a I a
pea k
shel
I I ke
for de
n i tary
ou I d s
e only
behind
most
s ava i
e for
ear I i
ps in
ted an
e p rob
o cond
My St
ement
1 1 y CO
nd it
Of th
ter I es
ly to
cent
she
ti I I
a s
the
extr
labl
the
er i
F lor
d th
I em
uct
af fe
un I e
nstr
i s a
e se
s a n
ex i s
hou
Iter
be
good
m .
eme
ear
enf o
n th
i da
e ca
i s o
the
d th
ss t
ued .
d i f
a son
d pr
t i n
sing, w
s and c
i nef f ec
as the
I nvar i a
c i rcums
e often
rcement
e repor
showed
mps wer
ne of u
I nspect
ere wou
hese CO
Pena I
f icu I t
, rende
oba b I y
a rea s
h I ch
amp
t i ve
enf
biy
tanc
pub
F
t of
that
e a I
nder
i ons
Id b
des
ties
thin
ring
job I
wher
they do
sites,
. Un-
orcement
the codes
es . The
I i shed
or ex-
t he V i o-
6,236
lowed to
staff i ng
. But
e little
of- m i n i -
for
g to
large
ess , si nee
e farm
I I
20 C.F.R. 620 I (d) (I 969)
12. See Housing for Migrant Agricultural Workers , Appen-
dix A, summaries of mandatory codes p. 30-100, and Migrant
Research Project, Unpublished comparison of State Housing
Codes, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota,
and Ohio.
I
53
5713
THE OFHCE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
In 1964, Congress established the Office of Economic Op-
portunity and under Title III B of the act authorizes
projects
(1) to meet the immediate needs of migrant and
seasonal f arm-worl<ers and their familie.-,
such as day care for children, education,
health services, improved housing and sani-
tation (including the provision and mainte-
nance of emergency and temporary housing
and sanitation faciiities), I ega I adv i ce
and representat ion, and consumer training
and cou nse I i ng ;
(2) to promote increased community acceptance
of migrant and seasonal farmworl<ers and
the I r f ami lies; and
(3) to equip unskilled migrant and seasonal
farmworl<ers and members of their families
as appropriate through education and train-
ing to meet the changing demands in agri-
cultural employment brought about by tech-
nological advancement and to tal<e advantage
of opportunities available to Improve their
well-being and self-sufficiency by gaining
regular or permanent employment or by par-
ticipating In available Government training
programs. (emphasis supplied).
The Migrant Division (III B) of OEO has attempted to meet
the mandate to provide "improved housing and sanitation"
by allocating an estimated 10 percent of Its budget for
housing purposes. Their housing role by and large Is bro-
l<en down Into three categories: Self-Help Housing tech-
nical assistance. Housing services and Temporary housing.
54
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 22
5714
Seli-Help Housing
OEO grantees have served as the catalyst for most of the
self-help housing built in the country since 1966, and
the majority of this was done by III B grantees. The
III B grantees' role is to organize families who qualify
for self-help housing loans, assist them in making appli-
cations for credit and provide supervision (Technical
assistance) in the actual construction of the houses.
At least 15% of the money invested in housing by the Mi-
grant Division goes for the establishment and operation
of these projects.'^ Ironically, little of this housing
is built by or for actual migrants. Mainly it reaches
seasonal or full time farmworkers who don't migrate, or
those few migrants who have "settled out" of the migrant
stream and have found steady employment. Most of the
money used to finance the building and purchase of the
homes comes from Farmers Home Administration Self-Help
Housing Loans. '4 From 1966, until March 31, 1970, (the
Insured Loan Program came into effect in 1967, supple-
menting the Direct Loan Program, and completely replaced
initial Direct Loans in 1969) 1,966 initial loans have
been made (see Table X). (Prior to F.Y. 1966, 109 loans
were made.) These loans, plus 198 "subsequent loans"
(generally made to make up differences for cost estimates
of construction and actual cost), totaled $15,804,210.
The Farmers Home Administration Self-Help Housing loans
have been made in 33 states and Puerto Rico. To get a
better idea of their distribution, it is important to
point out that of 1,966 initial loans, 876 (45^) went to
California, 201 (10^) went to Florida, and 154 (8^) went
13. The Rural Housing Alliance, "Farm Worker Housing: A
brief review and analysis of current housing activities
by the Migrant Division of OEO and a discussion of the
Need to Develop a comprehensive plan relating to Farm
Worker Housing", 1970, (unpublished).
14. Section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949, (as amended)
S5
5715
OAHLE X
NUMBER AND AMDUNT OF SELF-HELP HOUSING LOANS OBLIGATED
BY FmHA BY STATE CUMULATIVE FRDM INCEPTION THHDUGH JUNE 30, 1970
Number Amount
$1,388,730
670,980
128,570
9,227,870
62,000
1,559,230
40,500
297,680
9,900
84,750
192,070
638,780
180,170
231,910
76,900
225,310
69,220
317,150
528,110
374,120
284,590
52,200
290,190
218,890
214,210
268,460
81,660
102,550
9,200
267,670
110,350
50,000
113,020
Alabama
187
Arizona
87
Arkansas
22
California
1087
Colorado
8
Florida
203
Georgia
6
Idaho
27
Indiana
1
Iowa
7
Kentucky
29
Louisiana
95
Maine
22
Vermont
21
Michigan
8
Mississippi
37
Maryland
5
New Jersey
40
New Mexico
81
New York
34
N. Carolina
42
Ohio
5
Oklahoma
35
Oregon
25
Pennsylvania
23
S. Carolina
36
Tennessee
9
Texas
32
Virginia
1
Washington
32
Wisconsin
8
Wyoming
5
Puerto Rico
29
Totals
2289
$18,336,940
Source: Rural Housing Alliance, Hie Self -Help Reporter, June
1970, updated with U.S.D.A. FmHA Report of Loan and
Grant Obligations, 1970 Fiscal Year through June 30,
Table 23.
5716
to Alabama. Thus, nearly 63 percent of the Self-Help Hous-
ing loans made went to residents of three states. '^ Since
housing needs of migrants are as great in other states,
it is obvious that no overall successful strategy exists
within the Migrant Division for encouraging extensive
self-help housing activity by its grantees.
It must be emphasized that none of the Migrant Division's
funds went for the actual construction of these homes.
Migrant Division money has been used for organization and
technical assistance. Even with this assistance, some-
thing less than 2,000 homes have been built for agricul-
tural workers. Use of other Federal Programs available
from Farmers Home Administration, such as "home rehabili-
tation" and especially "Farm Labor Housing" have been
virtually ignored by the Migrant Division.
Housing Service
One function that the Migrant Division's grantees serve
is to find or attempt to find suitable housing for-migrants
who decide to drop out of the stream and take part in a
grantee's education and training programs, to seek perma--
nent employment in the area, or for some other reason.
For example, in Michigan, last year, approximately 420 mi-
grant families managed to escape the migrant life. About
two thirds of this number received assistance in trying
to find housing from the Migrant Division's grantee,
United Migrants for Opportunity, Inc. UMOI was funded
for four full time employees just to provide this ser-
vice. Their experience in finding housing has been, if
not futile, at the very least, extremely frustrating.
Available housing is nearly as bad as that in which the
migrants were living before they decided to settle out.
15. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Adminis-
tration, "Report of loan and grant obligations. Fiscal
year through June 30, "1966, 1967, 1968, I 969 '.l' "Report of
loan and grant obligations 1970 fiscal year through March
31 ."
57
5717
For example, a two bedroom apartment In the very worst
section of Saginaw rented for $125 per month. The prob-
lem with a "housing services" approach Is that, In most
cases, a decent and adequate housing supply at a price
ex-migrants can afford simply does not exist. '^
Temporary Housing — California
It Is essential to recognize that from the outset the Mi-
grant Division has sought to deplete the migrant labor
force by providing means for escape--for settling out--
through education. Job Placement, and other means. Com-
mendable though this may have seemed to the social minded
administrators, too much stress on this aspect of the
program has been at least a partial perversion of the
law. A balanced program would have placed stress on serv-
ing those condemned to migrancy as well as opening doors
for some of them to escape. As a result of the Migrant
Division's approach, only In California is housing for
migrants being constructed with OEO money, and there
because of Congressional pressure. It is most unfortu-
nate that in this single experiment to provide shelter
for migrant farm workers, the Migrant Division did not
attempt to establish a model of decent housing which
could be followed in other States. Instead it has pro-
vided housing which, under the best circumstances, is
shelter which is sanitary, yet which falls far short of
what could be considered decent living. A fairly close
look at the California experience therefore seems worth-
wh I I e .
In 1965 the California legislature adopted the Califor-
nia Migrant Master Plan which gave the California Office
of Economic Opportunity the task of providing labor camps
and assistance programs for migrants. To date 1,818
family units have been built at 21 Farm Labor Centers
16. Interview b/ tel^ohone with James Shrift, j'lrec'ro;
United Migrants for Opportunity, Inc., Mt. Pleasant,
Michigan, May 8, 1 970.
58
5718
and 27 1 more units are projected by the end of this pro-
gram year. '7 it is estimated that to meet the current
demand for temporary housing some 5,500 units are needed
(See Appendix B, Table I.) Present expansion rate, how-
ever, is only 320 units per year.
Migrant housing provided with OEO funds^
Patterson, California.
The centers are generally sited outside or on
the outskirts of rural communities. They vary
from four to 17.9 acres in size and may be
characterized as fenced compounds. About half
are hooked up to municipal utilities while the
remainder are self-sufficient with on-site wa-
ter and sewage systems. Typically they have
up to 100 shelters with sanitary facilities in
each or with community bathhous.es, a day care
building and outside play area, as well as
17. Interview by telephone with V. Ralph Gunderson, Chief,
Migrant Programs, State Office of Economic Opportunity,
Sacramento, California, May 7, 1970.
S9
5719
laundry facilities.
The program began with a crash phase, on-the-
spot planning and execution of sitework and con-
struction. It is conceived of as a five-year
experiment. Hence, sites have been made avail-
able by the local communities on short-term,
renewable bases. The centers are by law open
only for 180 day periods and, as temporary fa-
cilities, qualify for waiver of code require-
ments normally governing construction.
An objective of the Program is to undertake in-
novation in the use of materials and methods of
construction. To this end, and given the relax-
ation of code constraints, a certain amount of
experimentation has gone on in conjunction with
just plain cutting corners.
In this context all plumbing and electrical sys-
tems have relied altogether or in part upon plas-
tic piping and conduit. Most dramatic has been
The "Kitchen" - Interior of shelter provided for
migrants in Patterson^ California.
60
5720
the search for a low-cost shelter which resulted
in the brief use of a polygonal unit, the Para-
dom, and for the balance of the crash phase of
the program the Plydom, an oblong shelter made
of Vinylized paper encaseing a polyurethane core,
Subsequently, with the conclusion of the emergen-
cy aspect of the program a more orderly evolu-
tion has been possible. Professional planning
of sites and development of intermediate-term
shelters have been pursued. Several centers lo-
cated on the grounds of Public Housing Projects
have their utility loops laid out in accord with
master plans for future permanent housing. '^
The Plydom, Empire, California - Built with OEO funds
through the California Department of Human Resources
Development . They are scheduled to be replaced this
year. They lasted 2-5 years.
18. California Office of Economic Opportunity, H.C,
Collaborative, Farm Labor Centers, 1968, p. I.
<1
5721
The first 18 centers built before 1968 contained 1534
units and cost a total of $3 , 809, 675 . ' ^ The prorated
cost per shelter for these units was $2,480. To date an
estimated $5,750,000 of Migrant Division Funds have been
spent for construct i on . 20 The Plydom, known as the "pa-
per house", was the backbone of the Initial stage of de-
velopment. These units enclosed 314, square feet of living
space and contained a sink and stove. Designed to last
five years, most did not last that long, and all but a
very few will be replaced by this year.
The
unit
corp
emp I
erec
she I
and
ten I
late
ture
The
The
$100
prog
bath
coun
grou
comp
the
bath
sign
of s
hous
she I te
s are
orat i o
oy i ng
t eigh
ters e
a kl tc
or and
d. No
s i nc I
pr I ce
I a bor
for s
ram wa
rooms
ties.
ps22 i
rom i se
new u n
rooms .
ated t
u bstan
i ng.
be I ng
2 I
24 me
t of
nc I OS
hen- I
I nte
ne of
uded ,
for t
costs
et-up
s the
i n th
Upon
n Sta
was
Its p
It
o com
dard
rrent I
bul 1 1
Over
n. A
these
e 480
i V i ng
r I or w
the u
t houg
his ba
seem
per u
dec I s
e rep I
d I SCO
n I s I au
reache
ut up
I s i.n'c
bat po
hou s i n
y be
und
400
cons
unit
squa
area
alls
nits
h w i
s I c
mini
nit.
i on
acem
very
s Co
d on
this
ompr
vert
g de
I ng
er c
unit
true
s a
re f
and
. A
are
I I b
shel
ma I -
On
by C
ent
of
unty
the
yea
ehen
y wo
sign
cons
ontr
s w i
t i on
day
eet,
u se
I I e
w I r
e ad
I, s
-$65
e d i
a I if
unit
this
com
i ss
r w I
sibi
uld
ed t
true
act
I I b
ere
on c
con
ply
xter
ed n
ded
et u
for
stur
orn i
s lo
, se
p I a i
ue :
I I n
e th
advo
o re
ted as
to GEO
e bull
w of s
oncret
tain t
wood o
I or wa
or a re
prior
pons
const
b I ng a
a GEO
cated
vera I
ned b i
s i xty
ow hav
at an
cate t
p I ace
rep I a
by a
t in a
i X men
e slab
wo bed
n both
Ms ar
kitch
to occ
I te, I
ruct i o
spect
not to
i n sev
concer
tter I y
pence
e I nd I
agency
he bu I
su bsta
ceme
pr I V
f ac
can
s .
room
the
e I n
en f
upan
s $1
n an
of t
put
era I
ned
and
nt o
V I du
de-
Idin
ndar
nt
ate
tory
The
s
ex-
su-
i X-
cy.
518.
d
h I s
19. Ibid. , p. 60, 61 .
20. Interview, V, Ralph Gunderson
21
MLW Corp., Rlverbank, California.
22. Letter to Mr. Noel Klores, Director of Special Field
Programs, GEO, Washington, D.C. and Mr. V. Ralph Gunderson^
Chief, Migrant Services Division of Farm Labor Services
Department of Human Resources, Sacramento, California from
John P. Kelly, Edward L. Mattison, Armando A, Zavala, Cal-
ifornia Rural Legal Services, Modesto, California, Febru-
62
5722
The
to r
pora
ifor
448
and
der
wh i I
an e
for
stag
wh i c
squa
constru
ep I acem
t Ion of
nla OEO
square
a k i tch
the dir
e the s
st imate
labor i
e i s a
h wi I I
re foot
ct i o
ent)
Fre
fro
feet
en- I
act 1
econ
d ma
s an
unit
have
23
n of
i s
sno,
m th
of
i V i n
on o
d 10
ter i
est
con
an
un I
be i n
Cal
e Ro
f loo
g ar
f OE
0 (p
al s
imat
ta i n
est i
ts us
g don
i f orn
hr Co
r spa
ea .
0 had
resen
cost
ed $4
i ng 9
mated
ed f o
e by
i a , r
rpora
ce an
The f
a ma
tly u
of $1
00.
50 sq
tota
r expa
Produc
ecent I
tlon.
d cont
irst I
ter i a I
nder c
250.
A I so i
uare f
I cost
ns I o
t i on
y ac
The
a i n
00 c
S CO
onst
The
n th
eet
of
n ( a s o
Tra i n I
qu I red
se unit
two bed
onstruc
st of $
ruct ion
ass i gne
e devel
of f I oo
$5.50 p
pposed
ng Cor-
by Ca I -
s have
rooms
ted un-
1450
) have
d cost
opment
r space
er
The camps themselves have a population ranging between 250
and 500 inhabitants. The major complaints against the
camps are not much different' from complainfs heard about
migrant camps in other parts of the country e.'en though
these are much cleaner and seem to have some s^nse of
planning.
In sum, these flaws have been found to be major
impositions between the intent and achievement
of the centers: Isolation and undesircble land;
excessive population density, insufficient open
space and intolerably small shelters; inadequate
day care and educational facilities. Tnere are
Innumerable less Important def I c i enc I es . ^^ ^
Of particular consequence is the overcrowded condition of
the camps. In 1968, the camps aver'aged eight acres per
camp and had a population density of 50 persons per- acre.
('•The average American suburb is planned for 14 Inhabi-
tants per acre. An urban density of 100 persons per acre
usually Indicates three story construction on small par-''
cels.")25
ary 16, 1970.
23. Interview, V. Ralph Gunderson
24 . Farm Labor Centers, p . 13.
25. Ibid., p. 10,
C3
5723
The Plydom units contained only 320 square feet of floor
space and at present the largest unit used in the centers
has only 480 square feet. Yet this Is obviously Inade-
quate when statistics for 1969 Indicate that the average
size of families occupying the centers was 5.3 persons.
(See Appendix B) Occupancy In the Plydoms was limited to
6 people. Over 27 percent of the families in the camps
consisted of more than six people. For those families,
two units are generally provided. From November, 1968,
through December, 1969, the camps served 2,618 families,
but had to turn away 4,337 families (Appendix B).
Rents for the units range from 50 cents to $1.00 per day
depending upon the type of unit and the furnishings in-
cluded. For example, the Plydom rents for 50 cents per
day; plywood units rent for 75 cents if they do not have
toilets and $1.00 per day if the units have toilets.
Operation and maintenance costs at one point ran as high
as $450 per unit per year. 26 This year these costs are
budgeted at $1.80 per day for the 180-day operating per-
iod or a total of $324 per unit.27 This figure should
continue to drop as the Plydom units are replaced because
they required a great deal of maintenance.
OEO's view that this type of housing only perpetuates the
migrant stream and gives migrants no "economic opportu-
nity", except to save them from paying exorbitant rents
for worse facilities provided by the private sector, is
superficially all too true. The fact that California law
provides that the camps can only remain open for 180 days
out of the year (this provision Is sometimes waived when
a determination Is made that labor Is needed for a longer
period) clearly indicates that the camps operate as a
subsidy to California's first industry, agri-business.
Considering the experience of the Farm Security Adminis-
tration's Labor Camp Program, and the example It set so
many years before. It Is tragic that GEO should have lent
itself to a program of bad housing for migrants. By doing
so GEO avoided its obligation to give an "economic oppor-
26. Ibid., p. 46.
27. Interview, V. Ralph Gunderson
5724
tun i
gati
pol I
have
InsI
read
pand
trib
prov
an a
the
of I
"pre
Pens
p I ac
prov
the
ty"
on t
t ica
pro
sted
ily
ed,
utlo
i d i n
ttem
grow
a bor
f err
ons
e to
I des
bas i
to m
0 do
1 pr
vide
tha
conv
The
n to
g de
pt t
ers
. T
ed"
i nte
I iv
sma
c am
I gra n
what
essur
d m i g
t at
ert i h
M i gr
the
cent
0 sta
are h
he re
treat
reste
e can
1 I pa
en i t i
ts. Be
is rig
e f rom
rant ho
least a
! e i nto
ant Civ
"oconom
hou sing
bi 1 ize
appy :
s i dent
ment an
d i n se
not be
per or
es a ssu
yond
ht.
Cal i
u s i n
goo
dec
i slo
i c o
wh i
migr
they
farm
d ca
ei ng
sat i
p I yw
med
that,
Adm i t
f orn i a
g, how
d pa rt
ent ho
n cou I
p portu
ch was
ant la
ca n g
worke
n just
that
sf ied
ood sh
essent
it
ted I
, OE
ever
of
uses
d ha
n i ty
hig
bor .
et t
rs 3
i f i a
al I
with
el te
iai
avoided
y under
0 could,
it a I so
that hou
as the
ve made
" of mig
h I y SUDS
As i t
heir sea
ee m i gra
b I y ask,
peop I e h
an agen
rs, some
for many
its o
power
and
cou I
si ng
supp I
a ma j
ra nts
i d i ze
sta nd
sona I
nts g
"Why
ave a
cy wh
with
year
bl i-
ful
shou I d ,
d have
be
y ex-
or con-
by
d, in
s, only
supply
ett i ng
?"
decent
ich
out
s .
From the discussion above concerning the Migrant Division's
housing program it is readily apparent that little, if
any, overall planning has gone into viable solutions for
onv? of the prime concerns of its constituency. This is
especially true when one looks at the overall migrant pro-
gram, where the projects are locate-' and what emphasis
each project places on housing.
Yet,
the
were
neve
gran
I ay-
"sol
thi s
mu s ^
hoi s
grai:
prec
to w
and
as w
Migr
but
thro
betw
shou
alio
fact t
sched
r rose
t a nd
-a mis
ut i ons
sorry
Dear
i ng pr
t Di vi
oncept
it: T
adm i n i
el I
,-nt
,. a s
ugh
een
Id
a s
Di
r Q
ot
no
sur
f thes
hat th
u led t
a bove
season
enable
", ha I
s i tua
the ba
ogram-
s i on s
ions o
hat th
ster p
free
vision
iidemne
her or
progr
prise
e re
e M i
o r i
$33
al f
pit
f me
t i o n
s i c
- i nd
uf fe
n wh
e Fe
rogr
ente
sta
d tc
gani
am o
no o
marks mu
grant D i
se quick
million
arm work
ta nee .
asuret ,
, two Pr
b I ame .
eed, the
rs from
ich OEO
dera I Go
ams to c
r;^ r i se o
ff rids n
the ta s
zat i ons .
r a poor
ne .
st be
vision
I y fro
, or a
ei- in
That a
and in
es i den
It is
ent i r
the ef
wa s or
vernme
a rry o
r I oca
ot on I
;; of c
r req
spons
ta ke
, wh
m $1
bout
the
I one
adeq
ts a
a I so
e pr
feet
gani
nt c
ut t
I i m
y be
ha nn
uonT
or w
n I n
ose
5 to
$33
year
gua
uate
nd f
obv
ogra
s of
zed
ou I d
he "
itat
en a
e I i n
ly i
ith
conte
annua I
$300
for e
of hi
ra ntee
p I ann
ou r Co
i ou s t
m--of
the i
and ad
not o
war on
ions.
I way s
g its
t had
result
xt w
bud
mi I I
ach
g hes
d ch
i ng .
ngre
hat
the
n i t i
mini
rgan
pov
So
too
fund
to c
s wh
ith
gets
i on ,
m i -
t out-
eap
For
sses
the
Mi-
a I
stered ,
i ze
erty"
the
sma I I
s
hoose
i c h
65
5725
PART IV
The Farmers Home Administration
Farm Labor Housing
Loans and Grants
THE AGENCY
For 18 years, from 1943 until 1961, no Federal funds, and
from 1947 until 1961, no federal program, existed to pro-
vide financial aid for the construction of migrant farm
worker housing. Put in historical perspective, the labor
housing program under the Farm Security Administration in
the late I930's and early I940's was a resounding success
In 1961, when a growing concern for the still existent
housing problem for farm worl<ers resulted in a new pro-
gram. Congress again turned to the Department of Agricul-
ture and assigned the job of administering the new pro-
gram to the Farmers Home Administration.
The Farmers Home A
amalgamation of th
hopes, the Resett!
home ownership pro
the Fa rm Secu r i ty
which it has been
cause there is no
is willing to assu
programs in rural
Department of Agri
of that Department
business. Present
to a Department of
the cocoon of Agri
of loan and grant
a t i ng Loa n s to imp
Estate Loa ns : Fa r
Land Conservation
Programs: Watersh
Loans, Cooperative
Grants, and Resour
and 4 . Rural Hou s
tion. Purchase and
i ng and Labor Hous
dm i n i stra t i on (FmHA
e reman-ents of old
ement Adm i n i strat i o
gram , the Rural Reh
Administration, p I u
a ss i gned , partly by
other agency in gov
me responsibility f
America. It is a b
culture and is virt
which is not the h
I y FmHA is the c I os
Rural Affairs, cram
-business. It admi
programs, including
rove farm revenues;
m Ownership, Recrea
and Deve I opment ; 3
ed Protection Loans
Loans, Water and S
ce Conservation and
i ng Programs: Loan
Repa i r , Renta I Hou
ing and Self-Help H
) is an hi stor i ca I
soc i a I d reams and
n, the Tenant Farmers
abilitation program,
s a series of programs
design, largely be-
ernment which was or
or soc i a I service
u rea u of the U.S.
ua I I y the only part
umble servant of Agri-
est thing in existence
ped as it is within
nisters an aggregation
1. Individual Oper-
2 . Individual Rea I
tion. Soil and Water ,
Community Services
, F I ood Prevent i on
ewer System Loans and
Development Loans;
s for Home Construc-
sing and Labor Hous-
ousing Technical as-
67
5726
s i stance Grants .
The agency is more decentralized and reaches further Into
the "grass roots" than any other Federal Agency. Most of
the authority for making loans lies with 1700 County Su-
pervisors in rural counties throughout the country. Large
loans, however, must be approved by the State Director or
in some cases, as with Farm Labor Housing Grants, at the
national level. Policy is set at the national level and
state offices administer the program through the county
offices.
The County Supervisor plays a vital role in the Labor
Housing Grant and Loan process even though final decisions
are made at a higher level.
Desp
grou
appi
the
the
qu i r
Supe
t i on
ty S
perh
I eve
ted
wh i c
vers
for
i s n
u sua
Ite
p ho
i cat
proj
deta
es s
rv i s
i f
uper
aps,
I s i
to t
h go
e I y ,
succ
ot c
I ly
the b
using
i on ,
ects
i led
ubsta
or i n
succe
V i sor
by t
n the
he su
es fa
if h
ess,
ontr i
very
urden
app I i
the te
contem
requ i r
ntlal
the d
ss i s
ma kes
echn i c
agenc
ccess
r i n i
e i s n
part i c
buted
good . '
p I ac'ed
cants
chn i ca
p I ated
ements
assist
eve I op
to be
this
a I ass
y, he
of the
nsur i n
ot i nv
u I ar I y
f rom a
on
to j
I na
a nd
of
ance
ment
I i ke
i nve
i sta
is I
app
g it
o I ve
if
noth
orga
ust i
ture
the
the
f ro
of
ly.
stme
nee
i kel
I i ca
s su
d, t
s i m i
er s
n I za
fy t
of
nee
agen
m th
the
One
nt,
from
y to
t i on
cces
he p
lar
ou re
t i on
heir
many
d to
cy,
e Co
appI
e th
acc'o
hig
be
i n
s .
rosp
expe
e, a
a I and
own
of
meet -
re-
unty
i ea-
e Coun-
mpan i ed ,
her
comm i t-
a way
Con-
ects
rt i se
re not
Also, involved in the decision making process is the Coun-
ty Committee, made up of three individuals, two of whom
must be farmers at the time of their appointment. They
review applications for loans and grants and must give
them favorable recommendation prior to their approval or
submission to the State Office.
I. Stanley Zimmerman, Legal Control of Government Benefit
Programs, A Study of the Farmers Home Administration;
N.Y.U. Law Library, New York University, 1968, p. 11-40.
6S
5727
The relationship between the County Supervisor
and the Committee varies from county to county.
Each committee member serves a three year term
with a new appointment made each year by FmHA.
The County Supervisor normally determines who
is selected to the Committee (although the for-
mal appointment is made at the state level after
the State Director receives the recommendations
made by the Supervisor). The Supervisor's long
affiliation with FmHA and his knowledge of each
Individual applicant places him an a position
of greater influence than any single member of
the Committee. It appears that some County
Supervisors view the Committee essentially as
an advisory body assisting them in making the
decision with some limited power to override his
opinion in close cases. At the ether extreme,
some County Supervisors find their activities
restricted to a great degree by recalcitrant
County Committees.^
This then Is the agency selected to adminls.ter two very
small programs^ hypot het I ca I I y designed to .solve the prob-
lems of farm labor housing in this country.
THE LEGISLATION
The Loan Program
fn 1961, with the addition of Section 514 to Title V of
the Housing Act of 1949, the Farmers Hume Administration
(FmHA) was authorized to make insured leans at 5 percent
interest '"to the owner of any farm, any association of
2. Ibid. , p. 11-16.
3. Farm Labor Housing Loans and Grants made up just over
five-tenths of one percent o1 the funds expended by the
Farmers Home Administration in 1969.
69
5728
farmers, any State or political subdivision thereof, or
any public or private nonprofit organization for the pur-
pose of providing housing and related facilities for do-
mestic farm labor...." From the very beginning of the
loan program some controversy existed as to whom the re-
cipient of the loans should be. Secretary of Agrfculture,
Orvilie Freeman wrote:'*
We suggest limiting these loans to associations,
public bodies, or private nonprofit organiza-
tions as provision exists in the law to make
farm labor housing loans to farmowners for the
benefit of their tenants and laborers. Limiting
these loans to nonprofit associations and public
bodies would further insure that the benefits
of this legislation would inure to the laborers
for whose benefit the legislation is obviously
designed.
The provisions existing in the law at that time for farmers
(502 and 504) were not producing many units for farmwork-
er use. An estimated 1000 new dwellings were constructed
or existing dwellings were repaired for occupancy of
tenants, farm laborers or others who were not owners of
farms. An additional estimated 25 housing facilities for
migrant laborers were financed with these loans. 5
Within two years of enactment of section 514, It became
very apparent that the loan program was not a sufficient
incentive for farmers or organizations to jump into the
farm labor housing field. In 1962, the first year of the
program, only two loans were made; one to a farmer in the
amount of $2,500 and one to an organization for $50,000.
In 1963, eight loans were made; five to farmers totaling
$31,010 and three to organizations, totaling $190,000.
These were less than impressive results for the new legis-
lation.
4. U.S. Senate, in Hearings Before a Subcommittee of the
Committee on Banking and Currency on S. I 127 and S. 1249.
U.S. Senate, 87th Congress, 1st Session, May 31 and June I,
1961, Letter to Honorable A. Willis Robertson, Chairman,
Committee on Banking and Currency, p. 26.
I bid
Mr
Floyd HIgbee, Deputy Administrator, Farmers
Home Administration, Supplemental statement, p. 35.
70
5729
Expanding the Program
On March I, 1963, Senate Bill 981 was introduced and re-
ferred to the Committee on Banking and Currency. This
bill among other things, provided: (I) grants up to
$1,000, or a combination of a grant and loan under Sec-
tion 504, to a domestic farm laborer to make repairs or
improvements to a dwelling occupied by him whether or
not he owned it; (2) defined domestic ■'arm laborer as
a citizen of the United States receiving a substantial
portion of his income as a laborer on farms situated in
the United States; (3) insured loans to domestic farm
labor to provide housing and related facilities; (4)
provided for direct 4 percent loans to the owner of any
farm, any association of farmers, any State or political
subdivision thereof, or any public or private nonprofit
organization, or to domestic farm labor to provide hous-
ing and related facilities; (5) stipulated that domes-
tic farm labor be given an opportunity to purchase hous-
ing built by owners of any farm, any association of far-
mers, any State or political subdivision thereof, or any
public or private nonprofit organization; and (6) Per-
mitted grants of up to two-thirds of the cost of housing
for domestic farm labor to any State or political sub-
division thereof, public or private nonprofit organiza-
tion, or association of farmers. The direct loans were
to come from a revolving fund not exceeding $25 million
and appropriations not to exceed $75 million would be
authorized until the end of fiscal year 1968 for the
grant program.
Hearings were held on the bill on October 15, 1963, and
several Federal Agencies recommended various changes both
by report and in testimony which affected the final out-
come of the bill. Most of the major recommendations made
by the Department of Agriculture eventually became law.
6. See U.S. Senate, i-lear i ng Before a Subcommittee of the
Committee on Banking and Currency, on S. 9810, 88th Con-
71
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 23
5730
Section 504 Loans and Grants for Home Rehabilitation
First the Department of Agriculture recommended that Sec-
tion 504 loans and grants be restricted to "rural areas"
commensurate with other FmHA loans and grants. In ad-
dition, they had misgivings about the soundness of making
...a loan or grant to a domestic farm laborer
to repair or improve a dwelling occupied by him
or his family for only a brief period during
the year unless the building were used princi-
pally to house other domestic farm laborers
during the rest of the year.^
To assure the latter they recommended^
(t)hat assistance to domestic farm laborers un-
der this subsection may be provided only to re-
pair Or improve a dwelling in a rural area oc-
cupied by the applicant or his fan)Ily for a
substantial portion of the year and only upon
such conditions js the Secretary shall prescribe
to assure that the major benefits of such assis-
tance will accrue to the applicant and his fa-
mily, or to the applicant and his family and
other domesti': farm laborers.
The Secretary of Labor favored the extension of the loan
and grants to the non-rural areas, pointing out that many
farm laborers reside in urban areas -for at least part of
the year.^ His Under Secret iry, John F. Hennirig, doubted
...the advisability of extending financ'i.g pro-
gress, 1st session, Oct. 15, 1963.
7. Ibid., p. K, (Letter to Hon. A. Willis Robertson,
Chairman, From Orville L. Freeman, Secretary of Agricul-
ture) .
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid., p. 20. (Letter to Hon. A. Willis Robertson,
Chairman, From W. Wiliard Wirtz, Secretary of Labor).
72
5731
V i s i ons , . . . to persons who have no ownership con-
trol over the property to be improved. If ten-
ants themselves can take on the responsibility
for improving property, the owner of the pro-
perty who will benefit in the long run from any
improvements will have no incentive to do so.
The tenant, on the other hand, would be incur-
ring a long-term debt for the temporary use of
improved housing and facilities. Accordingly,
we strongly recommend that loans and grants to
farm laborers be made only where the worker is
the owner of the property.''^
In the end, the Department of Labor's recommendation was
followed as to ownership for Section 504 loans and the
Department of Agriculture's view of limiting loans and
grants to rural areas was adopted. As far as grants for
improvements were concerned, it became a moot argument,
for no appropriations have been made since 1964, even
though the statutory authority exists.
Section 514 Loans for Farm Labor Housing
The Department of Agriculture (FmHA) opposed the amend-
ment that would allow farm workers to receive insured
loans under Section 514 for two reasons: first, a farm
worker who owns land in rural areas may qualify for a
loan under the existing Section 502 program; and second,
the President and the Department of Agriculture had re-
commended and submitted to Congress a proposal to make
insured loans for all rural housing. "Enactment of a
broad insured loan program would be preferable to a
piecemeal approach of authorizing such loans only to in-
dividuals who are domestic farm laborer."'' Consequently,
far IT, workers were not allowed to be the recipients of
these loans under a program specifically designed to
provide housing for their benefit.
10.
bid
p. 42. (Statement of John F. Henning, Under-
secretary, Department of Labor)
II. Ibid., p. 17, (Letter from Secretary Freeman).
73
5732
With
part
beca
comp
wou I
Sect
gram
rect
I i ke
f avo
our
very
curr
I i ve
no f
ass i
term
if,
rate
tary
y i e I
Stat
I oan
took
I oan
res
ment
use
ared
d re
i on
wou
com
I y w
rabi
free
bas
enti
w i t
i na n
stan
s' r
rath
sho
of
d s o
es w
s."l
al I
pro
pect
of
of t
to
p I ac
514.
Id "
pet i
ou I d
e te
ent
e of
y fa
h th
clal
ce i
athe
er t
u Id
Trea
n ou
ith
3 T
of
gram
to the
Agr i cu I
heir I o
5% for
e the i
It al
place t
t i on w i
not be
rms,"'2
erpr i se
the to
c i ng .
e d i rec
assist
s not o
r than
han a 4
be set
sury ta
tsta nd i
matu r i t
he bill
this ad
for fa
pro
ture
wer
i nsu
nsur
so r
he F
th o
ava
an
sy s
tal
The
t lo
ance
ther
on t
per
ti
ki ng
ng m
i es
wh i
V i ce
rm I
posed
oppos
i ntere
red , )
ed I oa
easone
armers
ther I
i I a b I e
appare
tem, a
hou s i n
Treasu
an pro
sha I I
wi se a
erms '
cent i
at a r
i nto
arketa
compar
ch was
and d
abor h
d i rec
ed it
st ra
the d
n pro
d tha
Home
ender
to t
ntly
pos i
g sho
ry De
gram
be e
va i I a
equa I
ntere
ate d
cons i
b I e o
able
f i na
e I ete
ou s i n
t I oan
on th
tes (4
i rect
gram a
t the
Adm i n
s beca
he app
untena
t i on w
rtage
partme
if it
xtende
b I e on
I y as
st rat
eterm i
dera t i
b I i gat
to the
My pa
d the
g alto
pro
e gr
% fo
I oan
utho
d i re
i str
u se
I i ca
ble
h i c h
the
nt f
prov
d un
're
f avo
e, t
ned
on c
ions
ter
ssed
prop
geth
gram,
ou nd
r d i r
prog
r i zed
ct lo
at i on
other
nt at
pos i t
lies
cou nt
elt i
i ded
less
asona
ra b I e
he i n
by th
urren
of t
m of
appa
osed
er .
the
that
ect
ram
u nd
an p
i n
ere
sue
i on
at
ry i
t CO
f i na
ble
tere
e Se
t ma
he U
the
rent
d i re
De-
er
ro-
di-
dit
h
i n
the
s
uld
that
nc i a I
and
st
cre-
rket
n i ted
ly
ct
Section 516 Grants for Farm Labor Housing
The Department of Agriculture attempted to change Section
517(a) of S. 98 1 (this section became Section 516 of the
Housing Act of 1949 as amended) which provided for grants
of up to two-thirds of the cost to "any State or politi-
cal subdivision thereof, public or private nonprofit or-
ganization or association of farmers" by narrowing it to
"public agencies and nonprofit associations of domestic
farm laborers".''* They reasoned that
12
Ibid.
13. Ibid., p. 21 (Letter from Be I i n ) .
14. Ibid., p. 17 (Letter from Secretary Freeman)
74
5733
( i )n
with
gram
t i on
over
requ
term
thou
of u
memb
t i on
i ng I
t i on
exce
bene
tic
our J
the n
to au
, even
, u n I e
i red a
costs
g h non
1 1 i mat
ers of
and d
y, it
shou I
pt non
f i c i ar
farm I
udgem
ature
t hor i
an a
ss pe
nd en
, gra
p rof i
e fin
the
i str i
i s ou
d be
prof i
i es o
a bore
ent it
of the
ze gran
ssoc i at
rpetua I
forced ,
nts to
t , wou I
anc i a I
orga n i z
but i on
r view
made el
t assoc
f the p
rs
15
wou I
pro
ts t
i on
ded
w i t
any
d i n
bene
at i o
of t
that
ig i b
i at i
rogr
d be i
posed .
0 a pr
of far
i cat i o
h its
pr i vat
vo I ve
f it to
n upon
he ass
no pr
1 e for
on s of
am; na
ncomp
. .gra
of it
mers .
n i s
atten
e org
the p
the
its
ets.
i vate
such
the
me I y ,
at i b I e
nt pro-
organ i za-
More-
to be
da nt I ong-
a n i zat i on ,
OSS i b i I i ty
owners or
d i sso I u-
Accord-
organ i za-
gra nts
i ntended
the domes-
The compromise reached would seem to satisfy no one. Both
associations of farmers and associations of farmworkers
were excluded from eligibility. The legislation provides
that a state or its political sub-division or public or
private nonprofit organizations are eligible. It is most
unfortunate that FmHA's recommendation that associations
of farmworkers be eligible was not followed for had it
been, the program would undoubtedly have provided much
more decent housing. Five years after the enactment of
the legislation FmHA still believed that private organiza-
tions should not be the recipients of grants, and by
administrative fiat and completely ignoring the statute
determined that grants would go only to public bodies
16
The last significant change that took place between the
proposed bill and what actually became law was the defi-
nition of domestic farm labor. The proposed definition
was "a citizen of the United States who receives a sub-
stantial portion (as determined by the Secretary) of his
income as a laborer on a farm or farms situated in the
United States." Prior to this the definition for domestic
I 5. Ibid.
16. Letter to staff for Subcommittee on Migratory Labor,
U.S. Senate, from James V. Smith, Administrator, Farmers
Home Administration, December 16, 1969. Also FHA Instruc-
tion 444.6 (5-5-70) PN 204.
75
5734
farm labor in use for purposes of the Section 514 insured
loan program was essentially the same. However, the De-
partment of Labor sought a change: '7
We recommend that resident aliens be included
In the definition of "domestic farm labor" for
the purposes of agricultural housing programs.
A large percentage of alien workers are, for
all practical purposes, permanently attached
to our farm labor force and should not be ex-
cluded from housing on the basis of non-citi-
zenship.
They recommended that'^
the term "domestic farm labor" means a citizen
of the United States or a worker who has legal-
ly entered the United States and has resided
in this country for at least one year and who
receives a substantial portion (as determined
by the Secretary) of his income as a laborer
on a farm or farms situated in the United States,
Congress went even further than Labor's recommendation by
deleting the one year residency requirement. This pro-
vision would have allowed the housing built by these funds
to be used by braceros had^the braceno program not been
defeated, however belated
19
I 7 . Hearings Before a Subcommittee on Banking and Currency
on S. 981 , p. 20 (Letter from Secretary Wirtz).
1 bid
19. Many Mexican
nat i o
United States
as
"green
dent alien v i
sas .
Thes
emp 1 oyed and
1 i ve
in th
Although many
of
the Me
1 at i ons, many
do
not by
cross the bor
der .
It a
and Nat i ona 1 i
zatlon Ser
residence as
"emp
1 oymen
compete with
U.S.
farm
n I te 1 y have an ad
verse
na I s are still
ca rders" , i . e
e V i sa s requ i r
e United State
X i can national
commut i ng da I
ppears as thou
vices condones
t". These "gr
I a bor for ava i
effect on our
farm workers In the
. those ho I d i ng res i •
e that the alien be
s for six months .
s abide by the regu-
ly or less often a-
gh the Immigration
this by defining
een card commuters"
lable jobs and defl-
domestic laborers'
7(
5735
The legislation tiiat was passed by Congress was essentially
what the Farmers Home Administration wanted with the excep-
tion of the definition of farm labor and associations of
farm laborers being eligible for Section 516 grants.
The bill would, in FmHA's Administrators' words, "provide
a tremendously effective farm labor housing program. 21
THE REGULATIONS*
This subsection outlines, in some detail, eligibility re-
quirements and the process through which applicants must
go in order to receive a farm labor housing loan or grant
or both. While the information it contains is extremely
important (especially to the potential applicant), it is
presented in as great a detail as it is to show that the
application process is lengthy and complex. One can only
surmise the number of potential applicants who have been
discouraged by the process and consequently failed to
apply.
economic condition. Under the provision defining "domes-
tic farm labor" which was passed by Congress, loan and
grant funds can be used to provide housing for these com-
muters when they remain in the United States for short
periods of time.
20. Housing Act of 1964, P.L. 88-560, September 2, 1964,
78 Stat. 769.
2 1 . Hearings Before a Subcommittee on Banking and Currency
on S . 98 1 , (Testimony of FmHA, Administrator, Howard
Bertsch) , p . 3 1.
* Information for this section is taken verbatim or para-
phrased from FHA Instruction 444.4 and 7CFR I 822 . 6 I - I 822 . 77
for the loan program and FHA Instruction 444.6 and 7CFRI822
201-1822.222 for the Grant Program.
77
5736
IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE DISCUSSION OF THE REGULATIONS
AND APPLICATION PROCESS HERE INCLUDES BROAD-BASED PRIVATE
NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS AS BEING ELIGIBLE FOR GRANTS IN
SPITE OF THE FACT THAT FmHA HAS EXCLUDED THEM BY ISSUING
NEW REGULATIONS ON MAY 5, 1970 WHICH DOES NOT MENTION
THEM AS BEING ELIGIBLE AND DROPS ALL MENTION OF ANY ITEM
IN THE REGULATIONS WHICH PERTAINS TO THEM. Broad-based
private nonprofit organizations are included in the dis-
cussions here for several reasons. First, they were an
important part of the program up until this year. Second-
ly, it is believed that the action by FmHA was arbitrary
and capricious and therefore illegal.
Eligibility for Loans and Grants
To be eligible for a loan the applicant must be either a
farmowner or an organization which will own the housing
and related facilities, including the site, and operate
them on a nonprofit basis.
In the case of an Individual farmowner, he must show that
he cannot provide the housing nor secure credit from other
sources to supply it. He must show that he will be able
to undertake the loan and has sufficient farming experience
to reasonably assure the success of the operation. He
must be a citizen of the United States and have the legal
capacity to incur the obligation. If the labor to be
housed Is not to be used on the land of the applicant
(either individual or organization) then an individual must
be an established resident of the community and personally
operate or supervise the operation.
An organization must have a mojority of its members and
directors reside in the community. They must have had
extensive and successf u I experience in providing farm labor
in the area, unless it is an organization with a broadly
based membership which will provide the labor housing as
a community service. It must also have the approval of
appropriate state officials of the applicant's operations,
and be likely to continue to have such approval. Also it
must be financially responsible and likely to succeed in
the business of providing farm labor for others.
An organization must also show that it is unable to pro-
vide housing from its own resources, including the power
to. tax, assess or charge its members, and unable to obtain
the necessary credit. It must have initial operating capi-
78
5737
ta I and sufficient income to meet operating expenses,
capital replacements, payments on the loan and other debts,
expenses, and the accumulation of reasonable reserves.
Eligible recipients of grants under Section 516 are states
and their political subdivisions, and any public or pri-
vate nonprofit organization with an assured life over a
period of years sufficient to carry out the purposes of
the grant (generally not less than 50 years). The appli-
cant must be the owner, as opposed to a lessee, of the
housing and the land at the time of the closing of the
grant. Applicants must also have initial operating capi-
tal as described for organizations in the paragraph Im-
med i ate I y above .
If the applicant is a private nonprofit organization, the
members who own the controlling interest must live in the
area where both the housing and the farms where the labor-
ers work are located. It must have a large local member-
ship which reflects varied interests in the community and
be governed by a board of directors of not less than five
members drawn from the community leaders. It must legally
bind itself not to distribute any dividends or net earnings
to its members or any private individual during the cor-
porate lifetime. It must transfer its net assets to a non-
profit organization of a similar type or to a public body
in event of dissolution. The transferee must continue to
operate the housing for the use of domestic farm labor or
for some other public purpose.
Loan and Grant Purposes
The loans and grants are to be used to construct or repair
housing which may be single family units, apartments,
dormitory type units, or multi-use facilities. Loans and
grants may be used to improve the land on which the hous-
ing is located by landscaping, foundation plantings, seed-
ing and sodding lawns, constructing walks, yard fences,
paTKing area;. ?nd driveways. Loans may not be used to
purchase the s,;-. Grants may be used to acquire the ne-
cessary land but not at a cost exceeding its unimproved
market value. In addition to the actual housing, the loans
and grants may be used to construct recreation areas and
centers, central cooking and dining facilities, laundry
facilities, essential equipment, which upon installation
becomes a part of the real estate, small infirmaries for
79
5738
emergency care only, and fallout shelters. (From the lat-
ter two, one might assume that FmHA shows more concern
about nuclear attack than from pesticide poisoning 017 in-
dustrial accidents.) The loans and grants may also be
used to pay legal and architectural fees and other related
costs of construction. Loans may be used to pay interest
on the loan from date of closing until the estimated con-
struction completion date.
Amount of Loans and Grants
Loans to individual growers may not exceed the value of
the farm as improved by the loan less the unpaid principal
balance and any past-due interest of any prior or junior
liens that exist against the property after the loan is
closed. Loans to organizations may not exceed the lesser
of either the estimated depreciated replacement value of
the housing and facilities financed with the loan or the
actual cost to the applicant of the housing and facilities.
In addition the market value of the completed housing and
facilities must exceed the amount of the loan and the un^^
paid principal plus past-due interest of other liens that
exist against the security.
Grants cannot exceed two-thirds of the total cost of the
project, although the remaining one-third may come from
a Sect ion 514 I can .
ome of th
and opera
ion In or
sou nd . I
ss due to
enses, or
will be d
s which
nee a sou
ector det
be obta i n
oan , ta ki
able for
ts, payme
ves. An
urn amount
e ava i I ab
e size of
e
ting
der
f
un-
for
i s-
nd
er-
ed
ng
I oan
nts
le
the
80
5739
grant. The State Director establishes the amount of the
grant to be made and instructs the County Supervisor to
complete the development of the grant docket. The State
Director's determination must be fully documented and
becomes a part of the docket.
Some Limitations on Loans and Grants
Dockets for loans or grants which would exceed $500,000
cannot be developed without prior consent from the National
Office. To obtain this consent, the following information
must be furnished by the applicant: I. Name and address;
2. assets; 3. a listing and status of all debts; 4.
information on any interlocking memberships or boards of
directors; 5. experience in operating farm labor housing;
6. proposed amount of applicant's financial contribution
to the project, including any loan the applicant may be
about to obtain; 7. a realistic estimate of future need
for the housing; 8. a general discription of the housing
planned; 9. evidence of need and the County Supervisor's
evaluation; and 10. any other factors having a bearing
on the need and financial soundness of the proposed hous-
i ng .
Loans and grants may not be used for: construction of
housing or related facilities which are elaborate or ex-
travagant in design or material; refinancing debts; mov-
able-type furnishings or equipment; the payment of any
fees, charges, or commissions for the referral of a pro-
spective applicant or solicitation of the loan; or the
payment of fees, charges or commissions, etc., to the ap-
plicant or any officer, director, trustee, stockholder,
member, or agent. Loans may not be used to purchase land.
Organizations (unless composed of individual farmowners)
cannot require as a condition of occupancy of the housing
that an occupant work on any particular farm, or for any
particular owner or interest. When loans and grants are
used to finance more than two units, the recipient may not
discriminate in the use of the housing on the basis of
race, color, creed, or national origin. (The requirement
for more than two units was dropped as to units financed
with grants in new regulations.)
Organizations receiving loans and grants must adopt a re-
solution which contains, among many other things, the
81
5740
policy and procedure of operation. The resolution author-
izes FmHA to prescribe requirements regarding the housing
and the operation of the project. These include: I. That
rentals charged will not exceed those set by FmHA after
considering the income of the occupants and the necessary
costs of operating and adequately maintaining the housing;
2. That the housing will be maintained at all times in a
safe and sanitary condition in accordance with standards
prescribed by State and local law, or as required by FmHA;
3. That absolute priority for occupancy will be given to
farm labor at all times. Unless the FmHA gives prior con-
sent, the organization may not use the housing for any
purpose other than for low rent housing for farm workers.
It may not contract to improve or extend the project which
secures the loan and grant. The corporation cannot be
voluntarily dissolved or consolidated or merged with anoth-
er organization, nor can it transfer title to the property
In any manner. In addition it cannot enter into any other
type of new business.
Financing Rates and Terms
The interest rate for loans is five percent per year on
the unpaid balance (for applications from public bodies
filed prior to October 16, 1969 and obligated prior to
July I, 1970, the interest rate Is four percent per year).
Loans are scheduled for payment in installments within a
period not exceeding 33 years. The period is determined
by considering the probable depreciation of the security.
The borrower is. required to refinance the loan if the FmHA
determines that he is able to obtain a loan from respon-
sible cooperative or private credit sources at reasonable
rates and terms.
If the borrower's Income or other resources are deficient,
smaller than regular payments of principal or no payments
of principal may be provided for the first and second in-
stallment dates. Interest accruing to February 1st of
the next year after the calendar year in which the loan
Is closed must be paid at the first installment date, and
the full year's accrued interest must be paid at the second
I nsta I I ment date .
As a condition of receiving a grant, the recipient must
obligate itself to abide by the conditions established by
the grant agreement for 50 years unless otherwise agreed
5741
upon. If any condition of the grant is breached, FmHA
may, at its option, require repayment of the full amount
of the grant plus interest at the rate of five percent per
year after the default. The obligation to repay the grant
in case of a breach must be secured by a mortgage on the
housing or other security as provided for in the loan
program .
All loans made through the loan program must be secured.
In the case of a loan to an individual farmer, a real
estate mortgage must be given for the entire farm. For
loans to organizations which can do so, a mortgage must
be given on the real estate, including the housing, related
facilities and the site. If a first mortgage cannot be
obtained, a junior mortgage is acceptable if such security
does not jeopardize FmHA's position or the borrower's a-
billty to pay the loan. Other security agreements, such
as a mortgage on other property, liens on personal pro-
perty, pledges, assignments and others, are acceptable in
certain cases. It is a general policy that personal lia-
bility will be required of the members of an organization
which does not have a numerous, broadly based membership.
Technical and Other Services
In cases requiring extensive legal services for which loan
funds will be used, and in all cases involving grants, the
applicant must have a written contract for such services.
The contract, which should include the services to be per-
formed, the amount of the fee and the payment schedule,
is reviewable by FmHA prior to execution.
Architectural services are required for construction costs
in excess of $50,000 unless prior consent is given by the
National Office. Architectural services are required when-
ever a grant is involved. In the case of grants and when
loan funds are to be used to pay architectural fees, a
written contract is required. This contract must be ap-
proved by FmHA prior to execution. The contract must in-
clude the amount of the fee and the services to be given
such as preliminary and final planning; furnishing of
sketches; drawings, specifications, and cost estimates;
assisting in preparing and soliciting construction bids;
analyzing, bids; preparing and awarding construction con-
tracts; preparing change orders; exercising supervision
during construction; and certification of all payments for
83
5742
work performed.
The State Director determines the minimum amount of insur-
ance that the applicant must carry. The project must have
fire and extended coverage on all buildings essential to
the successful operation of the project. Workmen's Com-
pensation Insurance must be carried for all employees.
In addition, the applicant will be advised, and in some
cases required, to carry liability insurance.
Surety bonds are required when loans result in construc-
tion in excess of $20,000. Organizations must provide
fidelity bonds for persons entrusted with the receipt
and disbursement of funds and the custody of any property.
Construction and Development Policies
Construction financed with Section 514 loans must be done
by qualified builders whenever possible. The applicant,
the applicant's officers or directors, or a member of an
applicant which is a closely held corporation, cannot bid
on the job. In the event that borrower construction is
necessary or desirable, the borrower or its members, di-
rectors, or officers, may not receive any profits from
the loan funds except in the case of members who are not
officers or directors in a broadly based organization.
When construction is financed by a grant it is subject to
the Davis-Bacon Act requiring that prevailing wages be
paid to labor.
The planning, constructing, zoning, and operation of the
housing must conform with applicable laws, ordinances,
codes, and regulations governing such matters as construc-
tion, heating, plumbing, electrical installation, fire
prevention, and health sanitation.
Application and Process for Loans and Grants
For loans to individual farmers, an application involves
a complete financial statement and inventory of owned and
leased property. It also includes the type and amount of
crops grown. A "Farm and Home Plan" must also accompany
the application which details cash flow for farming and
5743
personal operations, crop yields per
of improvements, among other things.
acre and a schedule
An application for
form of a letter to
pose of the loan, t
manner in which it
previous experience
addition, the folio
dated financial sta
obtain credit eisew
showing anticipated
year of operat ion;
specifications for
(these must include
number and type of
ev i dence of comp I i a
I at i ons ) ; a pre I i m i
the need and probab
tion on neighborhoo
tance to shopping a
available transport
formation on topogr
supply, and a refer
these items; a stat
t hod of p rov i d i ng c
and initial opera ti
to the spec i f i c pro
applicant is organi
or proposed charter
and other ba s i c org
dresses of the appi
d i rectors and of f i c
i zat i on , its name ,
a loan from an organization is in the
the County Supervisor stating the pur-
he estimated amount of the loan, the
will be secured and repaid, and any
in operating farm labor housing. In
wing exhibits must be furnished: a
tement; evidence of the inability to
here; a proposed operating buuoet
income and expenses for a typical
a plot plan and preliminary plans and
the housing and related facilities
building layout, type of construction,
rental units, estimate of cost, and
nee with State and local health regu-
nary survey of the area to determine
le demand for labor housing; informa-
d and existing facilities, such as d i s-
rea, schools, neighborhood chruches,
ation and other essential services; i n-
aphy, drainage, sanitation, and water
ence to any known problems related t^
ement on the amount, purpose, and m^-^-
apital to cover preliminary expenses
on expenses; and an accurate citation
visions of State law under which the
zed; a copy of the applicant's existing
or articles of incorporation, by-laws,
anization documents; the names and ad-
icant's principal members and of its
ers; and, if a member is another organ-
address, and principal business.
In addition to the Information immediately
cants for grants must furnish a statement e
housing cannot be provided without a grant,
tenure arrangements and rental charges to I
contribution by growers, and the method of
management practices. The letter of applic
grant must include the purpose for the gran
the applicant Is able to furnish, the estim
the grant needed, the manner of securing de
cant has or will incur, previous experience
farm labor housing, and the authorized repr
the app I i ca nt .
a bove , app^ i - "
xp I a i n i ng why
the customary
a borer s and
operat ion and
ation for the
t, the amount
ated amount of
bt s the app I i -
in operating
esentat i ve of
85
5744
All of this information makes up the preliminary docket
which is reviewed by the County Supervisor. If it appears
that the applicant is eligible and a sound loan or grant
can be made, the docket along with the Supervisor's com-
ments and recommendations and any other materials is sent
to the State Director. The County Supervisor must include
his own views on the financial position, income, occupa-
tion, and background of the members, directors, and offi-
cers. In the case of a loan to a closely held corporation,
a current financial statement must be furnished by each
director and from each member who holds a substantial in-
terest in the corporation.
The S
I oan
with
of Ge
its o
I oan
FmHA
study
He at
def i c
for t
plans
term i
are t
Super
tate
to a
any
nera
p i n i
or g
Regu
of
tach
i enc
he a
a nd
ni ng
o be
V i so
D i rec
n orga
commen
I Coun
on as
ra nt c
I at i on
the do
es his
i es in
pp I i ca
spec i
that
cha rg
r with
tor
n i za
ts o
se I .
to w
an m
s .
cket
com
the
nt's
f i ca
the
ed t
fur
rev I ew
t i on o
r ques
The
hether
eet th
The St
, prel
ments
plans
cons i
t i ons
app I i c
he doc
then i
s th
r f o
t i on
Of f i
the
e re
ate
i m i n
to t
a nd
dera
and
ant
ket
nstr
e docke
r a gra
s he ma
ce of G
app I i c
qu i reme
D i recto
ary p i a
he dock
sugges
t i on wh
cost es
is e I i g
i s retu
uct i ons
tan
nt,
y ha
ener
a nt
nts
r th
ns a
et,
t i on
en o
t i ma
i ble
rned
d if
it i
ve t
a I C
and
of S
en m
nd s
po i n
s f o
btai
tes .
and
to
It
s su
o th
ouns
the
tate
a kes
pec i
ti ng
r i m
n I ng
Af
wha
the
i s for a
bm i tted
e Of f i ce
el renders
proposed
law and
a thorough
f i cat i ons .
out any
provements
deta i I ed
ter de-
t rents
Cou nty
At this
very det
plans, s
cost bre
r i g hts-o
connect i
g i neer i n
not cove
equ i pmen
State an
the need
farm or
the name
ers used
ers who
in the a
cu rrent I
d i t i ona I
and i na b
po I n
a i I e
pec i
a kdo
f -wa
ons,
g, a
red
t;
d lo
for
in t
s of
per
wi I I
rea
y be
ev i
i I it
t, t
d i n
f i ca
wn o
y, b
on-
nd I
in t
3.
ca I
dom
he a
far
mon
I i k
for
i ng
dene
y to
he o
form
t i on
f th
u i I d
s i te
ega I
he I
Appr
of f i
est i
rea .
mens
th b
e I y
comp
char
e wh
obt
rgan I
at i on
s, an
e pro
i ng c
i mpr
serv
oan o
ova I
c i a I s
c far
Thi
us i n
y eac
u se t
a ra b I
ged f
i c h m
a i n c
zat i o
. Th
d cos
ject
onstr
oveme
ices.
r gra
of th
; 4.
m lab
s i nf
g far
h: th
he ho
e hou
arm I
ay be
red i t
n-ap
i s i
t es
for
uct i
nts.
It
nt s
e ho
A
or h
orma
m I a
e es
u s i n
si ng
a bor
req
f ro
p li c
nc I u
t i ma
such
on ,
and
sho
uch
u s i n
deta
ou s i
t i on
bor ;
t i ma
g; a
, if
ers
u i re
m ot
ant
des :
tes;
ite
equ i
a re
u Id
as f
g by
i led
ng o
sho
the
ted
nd t
ava
for
d of
her
mu st p
I .
2.
ms a s
pment ,
h i tect
show o
urn i sh
the a
surve
n the
u I d in
numbe
number
he ren
i I ab I e
hou s i n
ef for
sou rce
rov I
Deta
A de
land
uti
una I
then
i ngs
ppl i
y sh
i nd i
d i ca
r of
of
tal
, an
g;
ts m
s;
de
i led
ta i led
and
I ity
, en-
i tems
and
cable
ow i ng
V i dua I
te
I a bor-
I a bor-
I eve I s
d rents
5. Ad-
ade
6. A
86
5745
descr
7. A
ci I It
docto
ba rbe
8. A
and a
9. P
f i rst
narra
propo
occup
ment
12.
merits
prior
i pt i o
Stat
i es t
rs , d
r sho
sche
ny se
ropos
yea r
t i ve
sed h
ancy ,
and a
If th
with
mort
n and
ement
hat w i
enti st
ps , be
du I e o
parate
ed det
and f
form o
ous i ng
i nc I u
ny ru I
e I oan
prior
gages
JUS
g i V
I I
s ,
aut
f r
ch
ai I
or
uti
d i n
es
i s
I i
mu s
tif i
i ng
be a
hosp
y s h
enta
arge
ed o
a ty
i n i n
I I .
g a
and
sec
enho
t be
cation
the lo
va i lab
i ta I s,
ops , a
I rate
s for
perat i
p i ca I
g the
A sta
copy o
regu I a
ured b
I ders
f u rn i
As this
V i sor i
rev i ew
ness .
app I i ca
fairs,
managem
exp lain
t i nued
spec i f i
operat i
less la
I a borer
i nf o
s sup
the i
He sh
nt pl
and i
ent .
i ng a
ef f ec
ca I I y
ons ,
bor,
s .
rmat
pose
nf or
ou \ d
a n s
nc I u
I n
nd s
t i ve
on
the
and
I on I
d to
mat! o
a I so
to CO
de hi
addi t
uppor
dema
the r
I ikel
other
s be
work
n f u
eva
nduc
S CO
ion ,
t i ng
nd f
ate
i hoo
f ac
I ng
c I o
mis
luat
t it
mmen
he
the
or I
of m
d of
tors
of
cat i
le i
chu
nd r
s pr
the
ng b
year
plan
teme
f th
t i on
y a
and
shed
deve
se I y
hed
e th
s bu
ts o
mu st
ba s
a bor
echa
Shi
ten
any
on o
n th
re he
ecre
opos
u se
udge
; I
for
nt o
e pr
s go
jun i
I nf o
re 1 a
f ot
e CO
s, s
at i o
ed f
of r
ts,
0.
man
f po
opos
vern
or m
rmat
ted fac
her ess
mmun i ty
hopp i ng
na I fac
or the
e I ated
both fo
A state
agement
I I cy re
ed leas
i ng occ
ortgage
Ion con
i I i t i es ;
ent i a I f a-
, such as
center ,
i I i t i es;
hous i ng
fac! I i 1 1 es;
r the
ment in
of the
gard i ng
e agree-
upancy ;
, agree-
cern i ng
loped, the County Super-
with the applicant and
for accuracy and complete-
e manner in which the
siness and financial af-
n the adequacy of the
prepare a statement
is for expecting a con-
housing, commenting
nization of the farming
fts to crops requiring
ding to displace farm
The County Committee considers all the pertinent Informa-
tion concerning the applicant and the proposed housing,
and has the opportunity to talk to the applicant if the
Committee so desires. In order for the loan to be approved,
the Committee must certify that It favors the loan or
grant .
The final docket is prepared at this point. Some of the
Information is reduced to standard forms although much of
it consists of the evidence produced by the applicant as
discussed above. It can be easily Imagined that the final
docket Is no small stack of papers. It Is then submitted
to the State Office along with additional comments of the
County Supervisor and the County Committee. The State
Director prepares a memorandum to the County Supervisor
either requiring additional information or setting forth
the conditions of loci or grant approval. The State Direc-
87
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 24
5746
tor cannot approve the loan or grant if it is to an organ-
ization, or if the amount of the loan plus unpaid princi-
pal and past-due interest of any other liens on real es-
tate of the applicant would exceed $60,000 or if the pro-
posed loan together with unpaid principal of any other
FmHA loans of the applicant would exceed $60,000, unless
he has prior consent from the National Office.
Farm labor housing financed with FmHA loan and grant at
Dimmitj Texas
RESULTS OF THE PROGRAM
Funds
That any loans and grants have been made under the pro-
cedures outlined above probably is indicative of the dire
need for farm labor housing and the stamina and ingenuity
of the applicants and an often overworked FmHA county staff
But loans and grants have been made--l73 all together--
88
5747
TABLE XI
\PPHDPRIATIONS MADE BY CONGRESS FOR FARM LABOR IK»USING INSURED LOANS,
FUNDS ACTUALLY OBLIGATED BY FmHA, BY FISCAL YEAR 1962-1969
Fiscal
/ear
Obligational
Authority
Approved by
Congress
Approved Obligational Number
Authority Actually of Loans
Used By FmHA Insured
Amount
Percent
1962
1963
1964
1965
196'i
1967
1968
1969
TOTALS
$ 1,000,000
1,000,000
3,000,000
6,000,000
9,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
15,000,000
$60,000,000
$ 52,500
221,450
884,300
47,480
3,465,840
3,818,360
4,494,620
3,530,910
$15,575,460
5
2
22
8
30
8
0.8
11
33
22
33
26
33
31
24
28
25.8
131
Source: Jim Hightower, "Farmers Home Administration Farm Labor
Housing: Missing The Mark, "National Rural Housing Conference,
June 9-12, 1969, Background Paper No. 10, Appendix B. (Up-
dated with U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Ad-
ministration, "Repor.t of Loan and Grant Obligations, 1969,
g_ Fiscal Year Through June 30," Table 10).
totalling $28,254,050. (See Table XIV for distribution
by state.) This money was used to build or repair, over
4,146 units for families and 3,307 units for individuals,
Unfortunately, this accounts for only a very small per-
centage of what is needed.
5748
TABLE XI I
APPRDPRIATTONS APPROVED BY ODNGRESS HDR FARM LABOR HOUSING GRANTS
AND FUNDS ACTUALLY OBLIGATED BY FmHA BY FISCAL YEAR, 1966-1970*
Fiscal year
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970*
Totals
(Carry over
Appropriations Approved
By Congress (Does not
Include Carry over)
$ 3,000,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,250,000
2,500,000
$16,250,000
4,177,480)
Appropriations Actuall
Spent by FmHA
Amount
$ 2,156,320
1,789,140
2,700,290
5,003,500
423,270
$12,072,520
Percent
72
60
77
117
17
74
Source: Annual U.S. Budgets and FmHA, "Report of Loan and Grant
Obligations for Fiscal Year through June 30," 1966, 1967,
1968, 1969, and "1970 Fiscal year through March 31, 1970."
^F.Y. 1970 — 3/4 year, through March 31, 1970
Up through F,Y.I969, funds appropriated for the loan pro-
gram far exceeded the actual expenditures. Of the
$60,000,000 that Congress had authorized FmHA to obli-
gate for loans, only $15,515,460 (26 percent) was so ex-
pended. (See Table XI.) The grant program did better--
of $16,250,000 authorized to be given for grants,
$12,072,520 (74 percent) was obligated (See Table XII).
With such a great need for improved farm labor housing
in the country, it seems inconceivable that all of the
money appropriated cannot be spent.
Officials at FmHA explain that their agency
responds to the demand that comes into their
offices--if the demand is small, FmHA's response
is small. They point out that demand does not
come from the farmworkers, but from growers,
associations of growers, governmental bodies,
and nonprofit organizations. "Under the law,
the laborer himself is not a customer of ours,"
says an FmHA official. "Our customers are
90
5749
those who are willing to take responsibility
for housing farm workers." (emphasis added), ^2
Herein lies one of the major flaws of the present program--
if eligible applicants are not motivated to apply for
loans and grants, the money lies idle and FmHA believes
it can do nothing more than to reduce the next years ap-
propriation request. The legislation placed the decision
making power as to whether to build farm labor housing in
the hands of local individuals (farmers) and organizations
(Farmers associations, nonprofit bodies, and local com-
munities) and excluded farm workers, as a group, from the
process. Thus, if there is no local initiative, the farm
workers must suffer. The Farm Security Administration
Labor Camp Program assumed the responsibility for meeting
the needs of hired farm labor within the funds available.
It undertook to ascertain the need, administer, and sub-
sidize the housing it constructed. It did not depend
upon the initiative of local institutions. For that sin-
gle reason, it was better able to serve the needs of the
farm workers.
Even though FmHA claims that it is meeting the demand
from its "consumers" for farm labor housing, the number
of applications for assistance it has received compared
to the number of loans and grants made clearly indicate
that a large number of applicants who desired to take
advantage of the program did not for one reason or another,
From the inception of the program, of 498 applications
received, 292 (60 percent) were either rejected by FmHA
or withdrawn by the applicant. (For a breakdown by state
of applications received and loans and grants made, see
Table XIII.)
Where the Funds Have Gone — by State
Improved farm labor housing is needed in all states where
migrants or farm workers are employed. Loans have been
22. Jim Hightower, "Farmers Home A^lm i n i strat i on and Farm-
Labor Housing: Missing the Mark," Background Paper Num-
91
5750
TABLE XIII
NUMBER OF LOAN AND GRANT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED, REJECTED AND ON HAND,
FROM INCEPTION OF THE FniHA LABOR HOUSING PROGRAMS TO MARCH 31, 1970
State
Applications
Received
Loans and
Grants
Made
Applications
Withdrawn or
Rejected
Application
on Hand
Alabama
11
8
3
0
Arkansas
16
5
10
1
California
43
16
21
6
Colorado
10
3
7
0
Florida
55
25
26
4
Georgia
3
2
1
0
Idaho
33
12
16
5
Illinois
5
5
0
0
Indiana
4
2
2
0
Kansas
7
1
6
0
Louisiana
15
6
8
1
Maine
11
6
3
2
Maryland
6
1
5
0
Michigan
14
1
11
2
Minnesota
3
2
1
0
Mississippi
26
12
14
0
Missouri
3
2
1
0
New Jersey
23
8
14
1
New York
19
3
12
4
North Carolina
22
7
15
0
North Dakota
9
6
2
1
Ohio
11
3
7
1
Oklahoma
3
1
2
0
Oregon
9
3
6
0
South Carolina
8
1
7
0
South Dakota
8
1
6
1
Tennessee
1
1
0
0
Texas
27
11
15
1
Vermont
2
1
0
1
Virginia
12
4
8
0
Washington
17
6
11
0
West Virginia
1:
1
0
0
Wisconsin
15
6
8
1
Utah
7
0
6
1
Puerto Rico
1
0
0
1
Nebraska
3
0
2
1
Massachusetts
4
0
4
0
Connecticut
2
0
2
0
Delaware
1
0
1
0
Pennsylvania
12
0
12
0
Arizona
9
0
9
0
Montana
4
0
4
0
New Mexico
2
0
2
0
Wyoming
1
0
1
0
Totals
498
172
292
34
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration,
"Monthly Report of the Farmers Home Administration," June,
1962, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, and March, 1970,
5751
made
In 33 states and gran
ts h
ave been
(See
TabI
e XIV.)
The geog
raph
i c d i str i
s i ze
of 1
oans an
id grants.
the
numbers o
repa
i red ,
and th
te farm wor
ker
popu 1 at i o
ma 1
re 1 at
ion to
the overa 1
1 need. Of t
gran
ts ma
de si nee the beg i
nn i n
g of the
has
rece i
ved 51
percent of
the
money , C
cent
, and
Texas
9 percent.
Th
ese three
rece
i ved
88 percent of a 1 i
the
grant f u
of a
1 1 th
e 1 oan
funds. Of
the
4, 146 fa
1,996 (49
percen
t ) are in
Flor
ida, 843
Cal i
forn ia, 4 12
( 1 0 percen
t) i
n 1 da ho ,
in T
exas .
Units
used to h
ou se
1 ,643 i n
ers
have
been bu
iit in Florida
, making
the
tota 1
bu i 1 t
in the Un i
ted
States .
made in eight states,
bution in terms of
f units built or
n bear only m i n i -
he 173 loans and
program, Florida
alifornia, 23 per-
states then, have
nds and 79 percent
mily units built,
(20 percent) in
and 363 (9 percent)
dividual farm work-
up 50 percent of
Farm tabor housing financed with FmHA loan.
Lake Worth, Florida.
ber 10, Nat'l Rural Housing Conference, Airlie House, War-
renton, Virginia, June 9-12, 1969, p. 7.
93
5752
TABLE XIV
LABOR HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS APPROVED
CUMULATIVE AS OF MARCH 31, 1970
Loans
Number Amount
Grants Housing for
Number Amount Families Individuals
Alabama
8
$ 123,150
6
122
Arkansas
5
20,590
5
California
8
2,779,540
8
$3,776,900
843
Colorado
2
264,400
1
244,960
66
32
Florida
18
8,640,220
7
5,799,750
1996
1,643
Georgia
2
22,000
3
Idaho
10
1,009,070
2
489,570
412
104
Illinois
3
158,550
2
210,000
46
Indiana
2
42,000
19
Kansas
1
77,500
20
Louisiana
6
153,840
20
Maine
6
55,500
7
Maryland
1
10,110
24
Michigan
1
10,300
4
Minnesota
2
20,590
2
Mississippi
12
362,250
47
Missouri
2
16,530
2
New Jersey
8
35,300
4
89
New York
3
91,000
6
855
N. Carolina
7
44,550
5
98
N . Dakota
6
61,380
5
2
Ohio
3
59,210
34
36
Oklahoma
1
•2,500
1
Oregon
1
156,850
2
260,300
85
90
S. Carolina
1
7,420
30
S . Dakota
1
10,500
1
Tennessee
1
19,900
Texas
8
1,327,200
3
1,102,040
363
21
Vermont
1
15,500
1
Virginia
4
28,670
3
16
Washington
5
475,960
1
198,000
111
140
W. Virginia
1
14,500
28
Wisconsin
7
64,950
$16,181,530
26
6
4146
Total
147
$12,072,520
3307
U.S. Department of Agriculture; Farmers Home Administration
"Labor Housing Loans and Grants Approved Cumulative as of
December 31, 1969." Updated with FmHA: "Report of Loan
and Grant Obligations 1970 Fiscal Year through March 31."
5753
That Texas, California and Florida have the largest mi-
grant and seasonal farm worker populations offers some
explanation of he large share of funds going to those
states. However, the three states ranking immediately
behind them--M i ch i ga n , Arizona and Oregon--have received
a substantially smaller portion of funds. Since the in-
ception of the program, Michigan has received one loan
for $10,110 which built 4 family units, Arizona has re-
ceived no funds and Oregon has received one loan for
$156,850 and two grants totalling $260,300 which built
85 family units and additional units for 90 individuals.
Clearly, the amounts of money expended thus far are in-
sufficient. Even in Florida and California, where most
of the program funds have been spent, the surface has
only been scratched. 23
23. Of passing interest is the dialogue that took place
between Howard Bertsch, then the Administrator of FmHA,
and Senator Holland of Florida, during the 1969 appropri-
ations hear i ng s ,
Mr. Bertsch: The budget contains a request for $5 mil-
lion for grants for farm labor housing, which is in
addition to $.7 million more than the amount available
in 1968.
Senator Holland: Are we more interested in proper hous-
ing for those who labor than we are in proper housing
for those who own the farms, and are eking out a bare
existence on them?
Mr. Bertsch: We are concerned, of course, with proper
housing for all Americans, and for both these groups.
Probably the worst housing provided any group, any-
place, in the United States can be found in the hous-
ing utilized by farm laborers.
Senator Holland: That is certainly true somewhere. It
is not true in many parts of my own State. They are
housed, and I am glad they are housed, better than the
poorer farmers in the nonprosperou s areas of my State,
where they are producing crops that they probably
ought not to be producing at this time, but they have
been doing it for centuries, and they just can't seem
to get anything else. And it is certainly not true
that the migrant laborers in my State are more poorly
housed than many, many, of the small farmers in my
State. Of course, they don't operate in the same areas
95
5754
TABLE XV
DOLLARS LOANED AND GRANTED THROUGH FltlHA LABOR HOUSING PROGRAM
PER MIGRANT AND SEASONAL FARMWORKERS BY STATE
FROM INCEPTION TO MARCH 31, 1970
(Population based on Counties with 10 0 or more Migrant or Sea-
sonal Farmworkers, reported in U.S. Senate, "The Migratory
Farm Labor Problem in the United States; 1969 Report, "Sub-
committee on Migratory Labor, 91st Congress, 1st Session,
Appendix A.)
$ Per Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworker
State
$ Per Migrant and
Seasonal Farmworker
1.
Florida
85
35
2.
Idaho
74
46
3.
Mississippi
58
35
4.
California
37
02
5.
Maine
27
07
6.
Colorado
26
29
7.
Louisiana
23
76
8.
Alabama
22
88
9.
Washington
21
00
10
.Illinois
18
88
11
.Georgia
16
62
12
.Kansas
15
69*
13
.West Virginia
10
37
14
.Texas
10
13
15
.North Dakota
10
00
16
.Oregon
9
46
17.
Tennessee
7
.42
18.
South Dakota
5
.34
19.
New York
3
.10
20.
Indiana
2
.92
21.
Virginia
2
.81
22.
Wisconsin
2
81
23.
Minnesota
2
49
24.
Arkansas
2
47
25.
New Jersey
2
32
26.
Maryland
2
18
27.
Ohio
1
81
28.
Missouri
1
79
29.
North Carolina
1
69
30.
South Carolina
.67
31.
Oklahoma
14
32.
Michigan
.10
* Recipient of Loan reports that it was not received (Vermont not in-
cluded since there is no Migrant or Seasonal Farmworker population
reported for that state.)
of the State, now. Let's understand that.
Mr. Bertsch: A substantial amount, Mr. Chairman, of the
funds that we have invested in our farm labor housing
program has been Invested in the State of Florida,
simply because it is one of the heavy users of migra-
tory farm labor. (Hearings Before the Senate Commit-
tee on Appropriations, "Department of Agriculture and Re-
lated Agencies Appropriations," H.R. 16913, 90th Congress,
2nd Session. F.Y. 1969, p. 1027.
5755
enormity of the problem.
Who in the States Get the Funds
Loans to Farmers
The number of loans made to individual farmers for farm
labor housing is about the same as the number of loans and
grants made to organizations. However, the latter has far
outweighed the former in the amount of money received.
By the end of Fiscal Year 1969, approximately $27 million
was obligated through the loan and grant program. Of this
amount, $1,162,280 was loaned to individual farmers to
build or repair 316 units for families and additional units
to house 480 individual farm workers. 24 jhe cost of these
family units averaged $3,226 per unit, ranging from a low
$42! per unit for 24 units in Maryland to $15,500 for one
It should be noted, however, for accuracy's sake, that
Florida does not have 51 percent of the migrants and sea-
sonal farmworkers, even though it received that amount of
loan and grant funds.
24. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Admin-
istration, "Labor Housing Loan and Grants Approved Cum-
mulative June 30, 1969," (unpublished).
97
5756
unit
vidua
i nd i V
d i V i d
North
for s
ex i st
f am i I
a bout
The i r
nat i o
I oan
posed
74 pe
cost
nat i o
d i V i d
i n New
I s (gen
i d ua I h
ua I s in
Da kota
uch lit
ence as
y units
117(3
averag
na I ave
funds.
to f am
rcent o
per i nd
na I ave
uals.28
J ers
era I
ouse
Was
.26
tie
to
bu i
7 pe
e CO
rage
Hou
ily
f th
i V i d
rage
ey . ^
ly d
d, r
hi ng
Loa
hou s
be a
It b
rcen
st w
of
si ng
hou s
at t
ua I
of
5 The
orm i tor
ang i ng
ton to
ns to i
i ng in
Imost i
y farme
t) were
as abou
f am i I y
for in
i ng ) in
ype bu i
housed
$383 fo
cost
y ty
f rom
$5,9
nd i V
the
neon
rs u
bu i
t $2
unit
d i V i
str
It b
wa s
r fa
of
pe)
a I
60 f
i dua
n i ne
sequ
si ng
It i
00 I
s bu
dual
eam
y fa
$225
rmer
hous
aver
ow o
or t
I fa
yea
ent i
Sec
n st
ess
i It
far
Stat
rmer
as
bu i
I ng
aged
f $3
wo i
rmer
rs o
al .
t i on
ream
per
by f
m wo
es a
s .
comp
It-h
u sed
$38
6 fo
nd i V
s ha
f th
Of
514
sta
unit
arme
rker
ccou
Its
ared
ous i
for i nd i -
3 for each
r 120 in-
i dua I s in
ve accounted
e program' s
the 316
loan money
tes.27
than the
rs with
s (as op-
nted for
average
to the
ng for i n-
Loans and Grants to Organizations
$26,021,640 was loaned and granted to organizations, as-
sociations, or public bodies to repair or construct over
3,800 family units and other units to house over 1,100
i nd i v i dua I s . 29 The cost of the family units in these
projects ranged from a low of $379 per unit for 45 units
in Owyhee County, Idaho, to a high of $11,228 per unit for
100 units in Kern County, California, and averaged $6,480
per unit throughout the country. ^0 The cost of housing
25
Ibid., Averages include housing built or repaired
from only those loans which provide family housing only or
housing for individuals only.
26.
1 bid
27.
1 bid
28.
1 bid
29.
1 bid
30.
1 bid
9S
5757
for individual workers (dormitories, etc.) averaged $121
per Individual, ranging from a low of $91 per Individual
In a project in Cayuga County, New York, which housed 744
Individuals, to a high of $957 per individual in a pro-
ject in Geneva County, Alabama, housing 92 individuals."^'
Per unit cost for family housing In stream states averaged
about $4,500 as compared to $6,400 nationwide. The aver-
age cost for individual workers' housing Is somewhat
higher in the stream states than nationwide. Nearly all
of the units for individual farm workers provided by or-
ganizations were built In states In the Eastern Stream
(North Carolina and New York). 32
Of the 16 organizations receiving grants, ten have been
public bodies (Public Housing Authorities) and six have
been "broadly based" private nonprofit organizations. All
together 26 grants have been ma'de. Ten of them were sub-
sequent grants to organizations which had previously re-
ceived grant funds. (See Table XVI for yearly breakdown.)
In most cases. If not all, the supplemental grant was
used not to finance additional houses, but to supplement
the previous grant.
Effects of Grants on the Program
There can be little doubt that the grant program has stim-
ulated the use of loans. Of the total amount of funds
loaned from the Inception of the program, $11,684,230 (72
percent) has gone to the 16 organizations which have re-
ceived grants. These 16 organizations have received over
83 percent of the total funds under the Labor Housing
program. Ostensibly, grants are to be used to lower rents,
because the size of the required loan, which is repaid
from rental income. Is reduced. What has happened In most
cases is that the money borrowed per unit has remained
about the same and grant funds were used to provide higher •
31 . I bid
32. I bid
99
5758
TABLE XVI
NUMBER AND A^DUNT OF GRANTS OBLIGATED BY YEAR, UNDER FmHA
FARM LABOR HOUSING PROGRAM
GRANTS OBLIGATED TO PUBLIC BODIES
Fiscal Year
Total
Number
Initial Grants
Number Amount
Subsequent Grants
Number Amount
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970*
Totals
4
4
5
10
3
26
4
1
2
3
_0
10
$2,156,320
1,000,000
2,266,940
1,689,880
0
$7,113,140
0
0
0
0
1
179
850
4
2
,878
840
3
423
270
8
$3
,481
960
GRANTS OBLIGATED TO PRIVATE NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
Initial Grants Subsequent Grants
Fiscal Year Number Amount Number . Amount
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970*
$789,140
150,000
374,780
0
$1,313,920
0
0
0
0
1
103,500
1
60,000
0
0
2
$163,500
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration,
"Report of Loans and Grants Obligated for Fiscal Year
Through June 30, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969" and "1970 Fiscal
Year through March 31, 1970."
* F.Y. 1970 — 3/4 Year, through March 31, 1970.
cost hous i ng
33
33. The average per unit costs in projects built by organ-
izations which constructed or repaired only family housing
are as follows: Per unit cost when organization received
only a I oan--$3 , 505 ; Per unit cost when organization re-
ceived both a loan and grant-- $7 , 552 of which $3,847 was
borrowed .
100
5759
Restrictions on the Grant Program
When the legislation was passed authorizing FrtiHA to make
grants of up to two-thirds of the cost of a rental pro-
ject to public bodies and nonprofit organizations, there
was some hope among those concerned about the welfare of
farm workers that much of their housing needs might fi-
nally be met. With the aid of hindsight it is relatively
easy to see why those hopes did not materialize.
First of all, FmHA does not often make a grant to an or-
ganization for the full amount authorized by the statute.
From the very beginning of the grant program it looked
like another "government give-away program" to conserva-
tive congressmen. What occurred in the appropriations
committee is a clear example of how a few congressmen can
subvert the intention of legislation passed by the entire
Congress. The House of Representative's Appropriations
Committee in authorizing the programs' first appropria-
tions reported : 34
The committee has agreed to an appropriation
of $2,000,000 [$5,000,000 was asked for by
FmHAD for the coming year to enable the De-
partment to undertake this new program on an
experimental basis. It recognizes the serious
shortage of farm labor to do 'tedious' and
'stoop' work on the Nation's farms. It feels,
however, that no funds should be provided to
any applicant in excess of 50 percent of the
development costs and that grants shou I d be
limited strictly to nonprofit associations or
public bodies of a similar nature. Grants to
individuals or private organizations must not
be permitted. The Committee recognizes that,
unless this program Is kept under very close
supervision. It could result in the use of
Federal funds for the benefit of private land
owners. (Emphasis supplied.)
34. U.S. House of Representatives, "H.R. Report No. 364",
98th Congress, 1st Session, May 29, 1965, p. 40.
101
5760
The Senate Appropriations Committee used a softer approach:^^
The
5 m i
I a bo
Pub!
Hou s
prog
I a bo
ca I
prof
V i d i
by d
that
Comm
I I io
r .
ic L
i ng
ram ,
rers
su bd
it o
ng h
omes
app
ittee recommends an appropriation of
n for rural housing for domestic farm
This is a new program authorized by
aw 88-560, under Section 516 of the
Act of 1949, as amended. Under this
low-rent housing for domestic farm
will be extended to State or politi-
ivisions or to public or private non-
rganizations to assist them in pro-
ousing and related facilities to be used
tic farm laborers. It is anticipa ted
licants will be able to furnish about
50 percent of the development costs of such
hou s i ug~, ( Emp ha s i s supp I led).
The Conference Report did not raise the subject
36
Amendment No. 44 - Rural Housing for Domestic
Farm Labor: Appropriates $3,000,000 instead
of $2,000,000 as proposed by the House and
$5,000,000 proposed by the Senate.
Grants
percent
three p
of CQSt
of a s i
tee ' s i
that fi
percent
Of the
four of
for the
made to
to 66
roj ects
, and o
ngle gr
nf I uenc
ve of t
, and s
five pr
them r
i r high
the
2/3 p
rece
n I y o
ant .
e has
he 16
i X ha
oj ect
ece i V
perc
16 o
erce
i ved
ne o
Tha
had
org
d gr
s w i
ed s
enta
rgan i zat i ons
nt of the pro
grants for t
f them receiv
t the House A
effect i s ev
a n i zat i ons re
ants of less
th grants exc
ubsequent gra
ge.
have ranged from 40
ject costs. On I y
he full two-th i rd s
ed that in the form
ppropriation Commit-
idenced by the fact
ceived grants of 50
than 50 percent,
eed i ng 50 percent,
nts which accounted
It appears to be FmHA's policy to limit grants below the
50 percent level and to give subsequent grants if the
project requires it. It does not seem reasonable that
35. U.S. Senate, "S. Report No. 423", 89th Congress, 1st
Session, July 6, 1965, p. 35.
36, U.S. House of Representatives, "H.R. Report No. 1186",
P.M.
102
5761
many organizations, eigher public or private, would under-
take a project knowing that it might be economically un-
feasible unless a subsequent grant could be obtained at
some future and unknown date. By giving a full two-thirds
grant instead of a one-half grant, the monthly rental in
a typical camp could be reduced from $5.00 to $10.00 per
unit. In many cases that sma I I amount might make the
difference in the decision of whether or not to build.
One County Supervisor from California, in response to a
questionnaire sent by the Rural Housing Alliance, 'offered
the following information:
The . . . Hou s i ng Authority ha^ been in contact
with me and they may file an apDlication. They
have taken the project under conslderarion.
The 50i^-50/£ loan and grant our Washington of-
fice Is requesting may stop all of our Labor
Housing loans and grants here In California due
to cost of construction. I assume availability
of funds is the -factor for the 50-50. Present-
ly, two applications (one approved and the other
hopefully approved any day) are on two-thirds
grant and one-third loan. (Emphasis supplied.)
More than any other single problem with the program, the
shallowness of the subsidy accounts for its lack of suc-
cess. A grant (subsidy) is limited by statute to two-
thirds of the total cost of a project and FmHA has de-
creased it further by attempting to follow the House Ap-
propriations Committee's language of limiting grants at
the 50 percent level. Rents which farm workers are able
to afford do not provide projects with sufficient income
for operating and maintenance expenses plus the repayment
of a iocn for part of the capital costs. This is espe-
cially true for pr^.iects which serve migrants who only
occupy the housir,:^ on a seasonal basis. This will be
demonstrated later In this study with some examples.
A lesson can be
g rams where
learned rrom current public housing pro-
( h) I stor i ca I I y , the fixed annual contribution
has been limited to amounts required to cover
debt service on the capital cost of the project,
with the local authority covering other project
expenses out of renta' Income. In recent years,
however. It has become dpparen+ that a subsidy
limited to debt service requirements is not suf-
103
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 25
5762
ficient to assure the low-rent character of pro-
jects located in some of our larger metropolitan
a reas . -^^
In other words, some housing authorities are in financial
difficulty even with a 100 percent subsidy of capital
costs, and these projects are occupied on a year-round
basis. That labor housing projects with high vacancy
rates and only a 50 percent subsidy of capital costs have
financial problems is no wonder.
New Restrictions on Eligibility for Grants
On May 5, 1970, FmHA issued new instructions regulating
labor housing grants. The new instructions define eligible
applicant organizations as "a State agency, or political
subdivision, or an agency of State or local government
such as a public housing author i ty . "^8 This means, of
course, that private nonprofit organizations are no longer
considered as eligible applicants by FmHA despite statu-
tory language to the contrary.
It is apparent that the policy of excluding private non-
profit organizations may have been in effect some time
before the new instructions were issued since no nonprofit
organizations received grant funds in F.Y. 1970. In a
letter dated December 16, 1969, FmHA Administrator, James
V. Smith, stated his reasons:^^
We have made several labor housing loans and
37. U.S. Senate, "Report of the Committee on Banking and
Currency to Accompany S. 2864," 91st Congress, ! st Ses-
sion, 1969.
38. FHA Instruction 444.6, MID, 5-5-70, PN 204.
39. Letter to Staff of U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Mi-
gratory Labor, from James V. Smith, Administrator, Farmers
Home Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, De-
cember I 6, I 969.
104
5763
gran
to p
V i ce
been
beca
I zat
the
bi I i
ject
fit
area
gra n
the
that
on a
of t
hou s
farm
the
pert
ts to broa
rov i de ren
Our exp
sat i sf act
use the gr
ion and em
hous i ng ha
ty for the
or paymen
from ha V i n
This ma
t i s i nvo I
hous i ng as
occupants
ny farm in
he orga n i z
i ng to lab
s . ■• Anothe
members do
y when the
Based on our e
a few million
funds are a va i
we have I i m i te
d I y ba
tal ho
er i enc
ory .
owers
p I oyer
ve not
succe
t of d
g the
y be d
ved , t
a pub
of th
the n
at i on
orers
r i s t
not a
y repa
xper i e
do I I ar
lable
d thes
sed nonp
using as
e in tho
The reas
who are
s of the
assumed
ssf u I op
ebts eve
hou s i ng
ue to th
he organ
I i c serv
e hou s i n
e i g hborh
cannot r
who will
hat when
cqu i re o
y the I o
nee and
s of lab
for the
e grants
rof i t o
a comm
se case
ons are
members
I abore
adequa
erat i on
n thoug
ava i I a b
e fact
i zat i on
ice, wh
g a re f
ood . G
estr i ct
work o
a gran
wnersh i
an .
rgan
unit
s ha
pr i
of
rs I
te r
of
h th
le i
that
mus
i ch
ree
rowe
use
n I y
t i s
p of
i zat i ons
y ser-
s not
mar i I y
the organ-
i V i ng in
espons i -
the pro-
ey bene-
n their
when a
t prov i de
means
to work
r-members
of the
on their
i nvo I ved ,
the pro-
the fact that only
or hou sing grant
current fiscal year,
to public bod i es .
At t
as t
be e
mitt
gran
or p
dua I
I n N
of A
of g
ter ,
i nf o
the
he o
0 ex
1 igi
ee d
ts s
ubi i
s or
ovem
gric
rant
quo
rmat
op i n
utse
acti
ble
i d n
hou I
c bo
pri
ber
u I tu
rec
ted
ion"
i on
t of
y wh
for
ot c
d be
dies
vate
I 965
re r
i p i e
a bov
) .
stat
the
at t
the
I a r i
I i m
of
org
, th
ende
nts
e f r
Afte
ed w
grant
ype of
grant,
fy the
ited st
a s i m i I
an i zat i
e Gener
red an
(this o
om Admi
r trac i
ho wa s
program t
nonprof i t
The Hous
matter wh
r i ct I y to
a r nature
ons mu st
a I Counse
opinion a
pinion wa
n i strator
ng the I e
eligible:
question was raised
rgan i zat i on wou I d
Appropriations Corn-
it stated ". . .that
onprofit associations
Grants to i nd i v i -
t be perm i tted . "^0
at the Department
to the eligibility
attached to the I et-
mith, as "background
s I at i ve hi story ,
40,
See note 34, above
41. John C. Bagwell, General Counsel, U.S.
Agriculture, "Opinion of General Counsel No
ber 30, 1965.
Department of
136," Novem-
105
5764
lar
int
a b
I ea
tri
its
d i s
dom
V i c
and
men
dit
(A)
ge I
eres
oard
ders
buti
cor
so I u
est i
e i n
(e)
ton
i on
nonp
oca 1
ts i
of
hip,
ng t
pora
t i on
c fa
the
i s
any
of o
rof it
memb
n the
d i rec
(c)
he d i
te I i
, (d)
rm I a
i nte
proh i
part
ccupa
corp
ersh i
comm
tors
is I e
V i den
f et I m
i s p
bor h
rest
bi ted
i cu I a
ncy o
orat i o
p ref I
unity,
d pawn
ga I I y
d s to
e and
I edged
ou s i ng
of the
f rom
r f a rm
f the
n wh i
ect i n
(b)
f rom
prec I
its m
i n th
to a
a s a
who I
requ i
or f
hou s i
ch (
g a
is g
the
uded
embe
e ev
dm i n
com
e CO
ri ng
arms
ng.
a ) has a
va r i ety of
overned by
commu n i ty
f rom d i s-
rs during
ent of its
i ster the
mu n i ty ser-
mmun i ty ,
emp I oy-
as a con-
Such a
a p r i V
that i
person
Yet in
ma y co
fit or
cru i ng
emp I oy
more d
owned
or to
troi le
cor
ate
t i s
5 ac
eve
rrec
gani
to
ers
i rec
and
a no
d by
pora
nonp
org
ti ng
ry o
tiy
zat i
pers
of f
t th
open
npro
a S
t i on
rof i
a n i z
i n
then
be d
on .
ons
a rm
an t
ated
f it
tate
may
t or
ed a
thei
asp
escr
Any
who
I a bo
hey
by
orga
or
for
gani
nd o
r pr
ect ,
i bed
I nc
a re
r wo
wou I
a I o
n i za
I oca
certa
zat i on
perate
i vate
such
as a
i denta
member
y 1 d be
d der i
ca I go
t i on o
I gove
I n p
i n
d by
capa
a CO
pub!
I be
s a n
no
ve f
vern
wned
rnme
urpo
the
pr i
c 1 1 i
rpor
i c n
nef i
d a r
grea
rom
ment
and
nt a
ses be
sense
vate
es .
at i on
onpro-
ts ac-
e a I so
ten or
hou s i ng
agency
con-
gency .
In light of this opinion and the reasons given by Adminis-
trator Smith for the change, it appears that consideration
for program integrity came in a distant second to a bud-
get conscious adm i n i stra t i on . 42 Rather than insist that
42.
FmHA's reasoning takes
the
ea s
y way
out of
a bad s i t-
uat
I on .
That
grower members
of
a "
broad
-based"
nonp rof i t
org
an i za
tion
have "not assumed
adeq
uate
respons i
b i 1 i ty for
the
successf u
1 operation of
the
pro
ject"
s hou 1 d
be i ncon-
seq
uent i
a 1 if
the organ i zat i on
were
set
up as ou
1 1 i ned i n
Dep
artment of
Agr i cu 1 ture ' s
Genera 1
Counse 1 ' s op
i n ion ,
i . e
• > a
tru 1 y
broad-based or
gan
i zat
i on--
one that
i nc 1 uded
not
only
growers and communi
ty
lead
ersh i
p , but a
1 so a
bal
a nee
of farm worker tenan
ts
and
farm
worker 1
eaders .
It
wou 1 d
seem
that any unsat
isf
actory ex
per i ence
that FmHA
ha s
had
in th
e past stemmed
from an
imba
1 ance i n
the make-
up
of th
e org
an i zat ion plus
the
fac
t tha
t the grant itself
Itfr
5765
nonprofit organizations be truly booad-based, thus dimin-
ishing the control of unresponsible growers, FmHA ruled
out "nonprofits" altogether and in the process saved money
by further restricting the use of the program.
SOME EXAMPLES OF PROJECTS
By examining the experienc.es of several projects the prob-
lems discussed above can be more clearly demonstrated.
The projects selected for discussion are illustrative and
not necessarily representative of all farm labor housing
projects. Undoubtedly some of the problems faced by them
are faced by others and likewise the extent to which they
may be successful is probably not unique. They were cho-
sen mainly because the personnel involved indicated a
willingness to cooperate with the study (which may make
them unique, though by no means were' a! I projects contacted
persona I I y ) .
wa s so sma 1 1
as to make successful
management a virtual
i mposs i b i 1 i t
y . But certa inly not
because it was a non-
profit organ
ization per se. Although the amount of funds
app rop r i ated
by Congress for the g
rant program was con-
siderably smaller than that reques
ted ($5.7 million re-
quested and
$2.5 million appropr i a
ted ) FmHA had about
$3.7 million
available (including
carry over from F.Y.
1 969) for F.
Y. 1970. Only in 1969
did FmHA obligate more
than this amount. Latest statistics (U.S. Department of
Agr i cu 1 ture ,
Farmers Home Administ
ration, "Report of Loan
and Grant Obligations, 1970 Fiscal
Year Through June 30,
1970, Table
10.) show that even th
e $2.5 million which was
appropr i ated
was not obi igated, no
t to mention the carry
over . Only
eight grants were made
, all but two of which
were subsequent grants. The eight
tota led $2, 133,770.
107
5766
Background and Need — Stanislaus County, California
Stan i si
aus County, Ca
1 i f orn I a , 1
ocated i n t
part of
the San Joaqu
in Valley,
1 i ke its ne
ties to
the North and
South', is
bas i ca 1 1 y a
a rea .
Its 1 argest c i
ty, Modesto
, with a po
ceed i ng
100,000 peopi
e, ref I ects
an agr i -bu
tat i on ,
with its huge
packing an
d processin
t i 1 i zer
outlets and warehouses.
The Depart
cu 1 ture
estimates tha
t approxima
tely 3,000
workers
and members o
f their families move
each year to harvest
grapes, nut
s, and tree
nother
1 ,000 workers
and their f
am i 1 I es ca 1
their h
ome . ^^ Many p
eop 1 e ta 1 ke
d to in the
these o
fficial figures represent
a serious
he northern
i g hbor i ng cou n-
n agricultural
pu I ati on ex-
si ness or i en-
g s hed s , fer-
ment of Agr i -
migrant farm
I nto the county
fruits. A-
I the county
county thought
u nderest i mate .
"-^ •■>
^^
■Bl
^ III
Bridge leading into Modesto ^ California. A migrant
family was found camping on this site the previous
night. They were without food and money.
43
U.S. Senate, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor, "The
IM
5767
There appears to be a growing awareness in parts of the
county that the housing problem is fast approaching the
crisis stage. The vacancy rate for housing in the county
is estimated at one percent and over 20 percent of the
housing was considered either dilapidated or deteriorated
i n the I 960 census. ^4
The Stanislaus County Tenant's Rights Association is ac-
tively engaged in an organization campaign to improve the
condition and availability of housing for low-income peo-
ple in the county. They have taken many photographs of
the poor housing in the county. The quotation that follows
is a description of some of these photographs, made by
Joe Johnson, President of the Association.
Grayson, California
This
house, aga in, i
s i n very bad sha
pe. There
are
10 in this f am i 1
y. This family comes from
Texas . We ta 1 ked to
one of the 1 i tt 1
e girls.
She
says this hou se
i s owned by M . C .
and that
they
pay (she thinks
) $50 per month.
plus ut i 1 i -
ties
There are no
screens on these
w i ndows .
The
screens that are
here aren't screens anymore.
they
're fish nets .
There are wi ndows
m i ssi ng ,
rep 1
aced by p 1 ast i c
sheets or pieces
of boards.
The
inside of this h
ouse is dep 1 orab 1
e . The
sme 1
1 of gas 1 ea ki ng
out of the water
heater
gree
ts you as you come in. The walls
on the i n-
side
are about to co
1 lapse. There are holes and
crac
ks . On the ce i 1
i ng some sheet rock is coming
unna
i 1 ed . In the ma
keshift shower th
e fa ucets
a 1 so
leak, leaving the floor (cement)
a poo 1 of
water all the t ime .
The hou se a 1 so 1
ea ks in
places. The yard of
this hou se is f u
II of cans
and
broken bottles.
There is a 1 so an
old car
Migratory Labor Problem in the United States: 1969 Report
91st Congress, 1st Session, February 19, 1969, p. 116.
44. Elinor Blake, Unpublished background paper on hous-
ing activities in Stanislaus County, California, Stanis-
laus County Community Action Commission, I nc
Ca I i torn ia , p . I and 7 .
Modesto ,
109
5768
in the back yard making it unsafe for the child-
ren. This car has broken glass all over the
place.
Mr. G
. C. 1
i ves in this sma
1 1 two room
house
where
he pa
ys $35 plus uti 1
ities. Mr.
C. 1 i ves
on $8
8 per
month . Mr . C . s
tates that
better
hous i
ng i s
needed, but that
if the Ian
d 1 ords
repa i
r them
they, the renters, will be
forced
to pa
y more
for the hou ses .
And some
peop 1 e
1 i ke
him are not able to pa
y what the
1 and 1 ord
wou 1 d
requ i
re after repa i rs
have been
made .
1 n th
e i ns i
de of the house,
the f 1 oors
are
bare .
There is also no closet. The b
ack door
Is in
need
of fixing. There is no glass on it
and i
t's covered by cardboards. There
is glass
miss!
ng on
some w I ndows , a 1
so. The th
ree bur-
ner s
tove i
s connected by a
rubber hose from
the outs i de
in a ma kesh if t
room. The
back of
this
i s covered by a p i ece
of ca nvas .
The tol-
let i
s held
by two screws and is broken and
glued
w i th
black tar .
Ceres
, Call
torn i a
Houses that are included in the contract for
ranch hands are usually run down, but for fear
of losing their job the ranch hand must accept
what is given him, which is never very much.
But a man's fear can force him to put up with
some of the most adverse conditions imaginable.
Bu t I er ' s Camp
This family can find no housing in or around
Modesto, so they live In their car. The family
has three children, the oldest being about 10,
the youngest about two years.
in many parts of the country the problem of providing hous-
ing for farm labor will ease as the farm labor force is
reduced by mechanization (it then becomes a problem of sol-
ving the housing problem of rural unemployed). Yet in
California, especially, a significant reduction is a long
way off. At least two grower's associations In Stanis-
laus County predict a need for more labor in the next few
110
5769
years. ^-^ As mechanization replaces the need for hand labor
in some crops, other crops may very well be cultivated to
utilize labor surplus and create new demands. Therefore
the need for housing for farm workers will remain great.
Farm Labor Housing Project — Stanislaus County, California
The Stanislaus County Housing Authority has attempted to
meet some of the need for low income housing by operating
a tota I of 895 units.
Of these, 240 are migrant housing occupied only
from May to October, 237 are farm labor housing.
198 are leased housing, and 320 conventional low-
rent housing. An additional 150 units of leased
housing were authorized by H.U.D. in November
1969, and should be completed eight months from
that time; authorization for 50 more is expected
in July I 970.
The vacancy rate for leased and low-rent housing
during the first eleven months of 1969 averaged
just under ten units per month. However, there
are currently 350 applications on file at the
Housing Authority office...; about 1,000 appli-
cations are received each year. It is necessary
to contact the Authority every two months in
order to keep an application current. (The Di-
rector) believes that the number of current ap-
plications represents only a portion of those
families who are eligible, as many families are
unaware of the program and others are discouraged
from applying by the length of the waiting list.'*"
45. Interviews, David Zollinger, Freestone Peach Grower's
Association, Modesto, California, March 20, 1970, and
Ray Codoni, President, Growers Harvesting Committee, Keyes,
California, March 24, 1970.
46. Blake, p. 3.
Ill
5770
The Authority's farm labor housing is located at four dif-
ferent sites in the County. Empire, Just east of Modesto,
is the site for temporary migrant housing. It had 85 P I y-
dom type units, now replaced with new plywood shelters
(see page 61). The camp also has a day care center.
Farmers Home Administration Funded Housing (Farm
Labor Housing Loan and Grant) in Ceres, California.
Rent-- $55/mo . plus utilities .
The 125 units built with an FmHA labor housing loan and
grant are located at Ceres, Patterson and Westley. The
Ceres and Westley sites were originally Farm Security
Administration labor camps and the apartments and cottages
built 30 years ago are still in use. Patterson and West-
ley also have temporary housing for migrant labor.
The FmHA units were completed in 1968 and took about two
years to develop. They cost $1.4 million, half of which
came from a Section 516 grant and the other half from a
Section 514 loan. AM of the units have 3 bedrooms and
are constructed of cement blocks. These rent for $55 a
month plus ut i I i t i es--mea n i ng about $80 a month outlay
for housing by each tenant. A $25 deposit is also re-
quired to move in. Rents for the older housing range from
112
5771
$41 to $47 a month/''
The camp at Ceres is in the community, across the street
from a school. It Is shaded and has a pleasant appear-
ance. At Westley the camp accounts for most of the pop-
ulation of the community. As a whole, the town is little
more than a crossroads which dissects the large, flat,
cultivated fields. The camp at Patterson is quite seg-
regated from the rest of the town. It is located about
a mile from the center of the community, across the rail-
road tracks, making it rather i naccessa b I e . Even within
the camp, there are three distinct areas: one for the
older housing, one for the 60 units built with FmHA funds,
and one for the temporary housing for migrant workers.
The Director of the Housing Authority, Walter Thompson,
stated that the Authority encouraged the formation of
tenant's councils at the various sites but there did not
seem to be much interest. Tenants at the Westley site
do have their voices heard on some matters though. They
petitioned the Authority to install street lights in the
project and this was done. Also the tenants at Westley
and Patterson are seeking to have the projects named
"Hiiiview" and "Walnut Acres", respectively. Lawyers
with the California Rural Legal Assistance office in
Modesto, however, feel that the Authority's efforts in
forming Tenant's Councils is less than sincere. They
believe that the eviction of one tenant who tried to or-
ganize his fellow tenants has had a chilling effect on
subsequent efforts of organization. (At the same time
the tenant was attempting to organize he was evicted on
the grounds that he had become a gardener and was no
longer employed as a farm laborer.)
Background and Need — Othello and Royal City, Washington
in Central Washington, the shortage of decent housing for
a growing farm worker population is similar, if not even
47. Interview, Walter Thompson, Director, Stanislaus
County Housing Authority, March 20, 1970.
113
5772
more critical, than in Stanislaus County, California. On
the "Royal Slope" in Southern Grant and Adams Counties,
the Columbia Basin Reclamation Project over the past 15
years has brought into production thousands of acres of
land that was previously desert. Labor was desperately
needed to produce the new crops of sugar beets and to
harvest the hay, potatoes, and alfalfa. Some of the grow-
ers, in the early I960's, seem to have understood that in-
efficiency on the job was related to the discomforts and
Illnesses resulting from poor housing or camping out, in-
cluding the lack of adequate sanitary facilities.^"
West of Othello 30 miles, the town of Royal City has a
hard time living up to its name. The town's population
is approximately 1,000 and growing. In recent years, a
bank, drug store, restaurant and other stores have been
added along its main street, and a new school has been
constructed on the outskirts of town. It lacks the pro-
cessing plants and larger retail outlets that neighboring
Othello has. Many of the town's residents live in house
trailers. The people in the town expressed a pride in
its growth and had the spirit of the frontier, for indeed.
Royal City is on the frontier. Hired farm labor is a
relatively new thing In the area as irrigation has only
recently made farming economically feasible. Consequent-
ly, structures which could be used to house farm laborers
were nonexistent until the housing project was built.
Farm Labor Housing Project — Othello, Washington
About 60 growers were initially interested in forming a
labor center in Othello. In 1964, seven or eight of them
incorporated and applied to FmHA for a farm labor housing
loan. A loan of $190,000 was received and construction
started in June of 1965. The camp began operation in
April, 1966, with units for 50 families and 20 bachelors.
In 1966 a subsequent loan was received for 20 additional
family units. Fifty of the units contain 660 square feet
48. Interview, O.S. Kenfield, Manager, Othello Farm Labor
Camp, Othello, Washington, March 26, 1970.
114
5773
of space and are used to house up to eight people. They
rent for $70 a month, plus utilities. The 20 bachelor
units rent for $45 a month plus utilities and are actual
efficiency apartments. They are misnamed in that they
often house couples, often with a small child. The ef-
ficiency apartments are the most popular, not because of
their size, but because of their lower rent.
Efficiency Apartments at labor camp in Othello , Wash-
ington. Financed by FmHA farm labor housing loan.
Unit contains kitchenette ^ bath and living room-bed-
room combination. The unit these men are entering
is occupied by a man^ his wife and infant child.
Originally, each unit was individually metered for gas and
electricity, but because of delays in billing and a high
turnover of tenants many bills were going unpaid by the
users. This problem was solved by Installing a master
meter for the entire camp and bl I I ing the tenants by the
size of their units. Prior to this, bills averaged about
$26 a month. Because of the cheaper rates for bulk use,
monthly charges have been reduced significantly. Now
during the winter months occupants are charged $14, $12,
and $10 respectively for gas. In the summer the charge
is one-thirdthat amount. Electirc bills average about
115
5774
$2 a month. ^^ Therefore, the total cost for shelter and
utilities ranges from $57 to $86 in winter months to $50
to $77 in summer months.
1^
'Tl
Interior of kitahen at labor camp in Othello , Wash-
ington. Financed completely with Farmers Home Ad-
ministration farm labor housing loan.
When the camp began operation, the population changed a-
bout four times each year. Now it turns over twice a year,
with each group staying about six months. In the summer
and autumn months the workers harvest crops. In the other
months, another group works in local processing plants or
is on welfare. The vacancy rate is extremely low. For
1967-69, it was 8 percent, 14 percent, and II percent
respectively. Collection losses are also low. In 1968,
2.4 percent, and in 1969, 2.2 percent of the rent was lost
because of non-payment. When a tenant leaves without pay-
ing, his account is turned over to a credit bureau which
has been able to recover about 19 percent of total losses.
49,
116
bid
J
5775
The credit bureau retains one-half of all that it recovers. ^0
The camp itself is rather unattractive, although much bet-
ter than that provided by growers in other parts of the
country or what the workers would be able to find else-
where. The buildings are aligned in rows and look like
very cheap motels. The roadways and walkways are gravel,
resulting in a great deal of dust. A few small trees have
been planted. The camp is located outside the city limits,
about two miles from town along with what is obviously
Othello's slum. An estimated 2,000 people live in this
area, known as the "other side of the ditch" (referring
to an irrigation canal) in wretched houses. The city does
not provide water or sewage services to the area.
A small laundromat is located In the building which also
houses the manager's office. The laundry facilities were
not financed with loan funds. The project also has some
furniture available, which is provided to families who
need i t .
Farm Labor Housing Project — Royal City, Washington
The development of the farm labor housing project took
several years. ^' The original outreach came from the state
office of FmHA. Several growers in the area were interes-
ted in the grant program but FmHA required a broader based
organization before it would give a grant. Consequently
the idea of a farm labor housing project in Royal City al-
most died aborning. But with the persistence of a few in
the original group, the organization met FmHA's requirement
of a nine man board, five of whom had to be businessmen
50. Ibid.
51. Information on the development of the Royal Slope
Farm Labor Housing Project was gathered at a meeting at-
tended by the writer; Sam Porch, Manager of the project
and ex-mayor of Royal City; Hugo Van Bendenhuesen , Presi-
dent of the corporation and a farmer; Abe Haugen, Direc-
tor, and local merchant; Mrs. Frank Cobb, Treasurer; and
117
5776
from the commun
Hou s i ng Corpora
the farmers to
at i on , but the
was started . I
around hous i ng
force. There w
cern i ng the bu i
slum. What was
i ng of 13 struc
of a hill. The
spring of 1970.
loan of $200,00
family units an
among the best
the use of farm
rents that must
any farm labor
i ty , and became th
t i on . It wa s some
have "city peop I e"
requirement was ac
t was dec i ded by t
was needed to reta
as some d i scord w i
I d i ng of what wa s
built is a p I ea sa
tures over I ook i ng
project was opene
Farmers Home Adm
0 and a grant of $
d an office. The
in the country of
I a borers . Part i a
be charged are a I
p reject under this
e Roya I S I o
what d i scon
i n contro I
cepted and
he orga n i za
in a depend
thin the co
be I i eved m i
nt su bd i V i v
the town fr
d for occup
i n i strat i on
I 98,000 whi
units are u
those provi
1 I y because
so among th
program .
pe Fa rm
cert i ng
of the
the pro
t i on th
able la
mmu n i ty
ght bee
ion, CO
om the
a ncy in
prov i d
c h bull
ndou bte
ded so I
of thi
e h i ghe
La bor
to
corpor-
ject
at year-
bor
con-
ome a
ns i st-
s i de
the
ed a
t 37
dly
e I y for
s, the
st of
Migrants move in at Royal City Labor Camp, Royal City,
Washington.
Douglas Gilson, Seattle, Washington, and from an interview
118
5777
Eight one- bedroom units have 524 square feet and rent for
$65 a month. The 17 two-bedroom units have 658 square
feet and rent for $75 a month. The 12 three-bedroom units
contain 882 square feet and rent for $85 a month. Uti I i-
ties are not included in the rent. The management be-
lieves, however, that electricity is so cheap in this lo-
cale that, even with electric heat (which these units have)
the cost will not be much of an "extra" burden on the ten-
ants.
Labor camp--Royat City, Washington . Financed with
FmHA labor housing loan and grant.
With such high rents there was some fear among the incor-
porators that the project would not be fully occupied. To
counteract the consequences that might develop should farm-
ers start providing housing for their workers at lower
rents, "user agreements" were signed by 39 farmers. Eight-
een of them were members of the corporation and agreed to
with Robert Wiley, County Supervisor, Farmers Home Admin-
istration, Royal City, Washington, March 25, 1970.
119
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 26
5778
TABLE XVII
DISTRIBUTION OF COSTS OF FmHA FARM LABOR HOUSING PROJECTS IN
ROYAL CITY, WASHINGTON, AND GRANADA, COLORADO
Royal City, Granada,
Washington Colorado
Building Construction
Land Acquisition
Administration and Contingency
Architectural and Legal Fees
Utilities
Site Development
Taxes
Other (Insurance and Bonds)
71%
1%
2%
5%
6%
11%
3%
0
72%
0
1%
7%
19%
.2%
0
1%
Source: Robert Wiley, Country Supervisor, Farmers Home Administration,
Royal City, Washington, and Prowers County Farm Labor Housing,
Grananda, Colorado.
employ nine tenants of the project full time. Twenty-one
nonmembers agreed to employ 16 tenants full time. Other
members and nonmembers agreed to employ 12 tenants for
eight months and 15 tenants for six months. To counteract
problems that would arise from a long period of vacancy
in the beginning, FmHA has agreed to allow non-ag r i cu I tu ra
workers to rent on the condition that they vacate if the
housing is needed by agricultural workers. In addition,
FmHA has allowed a two year deferment on payment of any
principal owed on the loan.
The Cost of Projects Built With Grant Funds
The 16 projects built utilizing Section 516 grant funds
have ranged in cost from $360,000 for 44 units in Illinois
to $4,385,500 for 632 units in Palm Beach County, Florida.
By far, construction costs account for most of the out-
lay. Other items, such as land acquisition, utilities in-
stallation, and site development can vary greatly. Table
XVII gives a breakdown of the costs of the projects in
Royal City, Washington, ($398,000 total cost) and Granada,
Colorado ($502,000 total cost).
120
5779
Construction costs may be higher when grant funds are uti
I i zed since Section 516 requires that contractor's pay
prevailing wage rates in accordance with the Davis-Bacon
Act, 52 It is believed by officials at FmHA that this re-
quirement raises the cost of projects from 12 to 15 per-
cent above what it would be if prevailing wages were not
paid. 53
The Cost of Operating and Maintaining Projects
When total operating expenses are added to the amount re-
quired to repay the loan, the income that must be gener-
ated often makes a project economically not feasible.
They are made feasible by charging exhorbitant rent. The
projects discussed' above are examples of this. Total
average operation and maintenance expenses per unit per
month in those projects are as follows: Othello, $28.09;
Royal City $25.10; and Stanislaus County, $40.90. (See
Table XVII.) The largest single expense of the three pro-
jects is wages. Other expenses vary considerably. Utili-
ties account for a large amount when paid for by the pro-
ject (as opposed to payment directly by the tenant).
Taxes, insurance and bonding is also generally a major ex-
pense. Expenses for repairs generally are not, at least
initially, great unless the project has older buildings
such as In Othello and Stanislaus County.
With the exception of the Othello project which has a
longer operating record, variation in debt repayment fig-
ures in Table XVIII somewhat distort the true picture.
In the case of the Stanislaus County project, no payment
on the loan was made In 1959. Thus, the average of 13
percent Is lower than It would be in a typical year. (The
budget figures for 1970 Indicate that total operation and
maintenance expenditures will be 68 percent of the total
52. Housing Act of 1964, I 503 (a), P.L. 88-560, 78 Stat.
769, 797, 798.
53. Interview, Louis Malotky, Director, Rural Housing Loan
Division, Farmers Home Administration, February 25, 1970.
121
5780
TABLE XVIII
COMPARISON OF AVERAGE INCOME AND EXPENSES OF SELECTED FmHA
FARM LABOR HOUSING PROJECTS
(Dollars Per Unit Per Month)
Item
Income
Othello, Washington
Av. $ per unit per
mnnth 1
Rent schedule
Interest
Other
Less Vacancy
Less Collection
Loss
Total Income
OPERATION & MAINTENANCE
Wages
Office Expenses
Taxes, Insurance,
Bonds
Fees (Accounting,
Legal)
Director Travel &
Expense
Repair to Facilities
and Equipment
Power Machinery &
Equipment Hire
Misc. Equipment &
Supplies
Oil & Gas
FICA
Other (Utilities)
Total Operation &
Maintenance
Capital Improvements
Debt Repayment
Reserves
TOTAL
Balance
$62
22
08
10
13
07
$49.33
$13.19
1.73
6.03
.67
.03
3.31
1.77
.99
,39
$28
09
2
68
15
55
1
76
% of
total av.
income
Prowers Co. ,
Colorado Av.
$ per unit
per month^
$60.00
1
05
40
56
21
$20.28
$48.08
1.25
27%
3%
5.02
.48
12%
4.69
1%
.56
-0-
.15
7%
1.09
-0-
.06
4%
2%
1%
.26
.38
6.40
57%
$19.09
5%
32%
3%
-0-
.83
-0-
97%
3%
.27
Based upon 1968 and 1969 actual income and expenses and 1970 Budget.
J
'Based upon 1967, 1968, 1969 actual income and expenses and 1970 Budget.
122
5781
TABLE XVIII Cont.
% of total
av. income
Stanislaus Co. ,
Calif ■ Av. $ per
unit per month
$50.87
7,
.02
5.
.74
.29
.29
100%
$51.86
% of total Royal City, % of total
av. income Wash . Av.$ av. income
per unit per
month ^
$76.08
1.42
19.0 2
$58.88
100%
25%
2%
23%
3%
1%
5%
-0-
1%
-0-
2%
32%
94%"
4%
98%
2%
17.84
1.40
4.76
.24
6.99
.72
1.09
2.41
5.45
$40.^90"
-0-
6.69
4.16
$5i .75
.11
34%
3%
9%
1%
13%
1%
2%
,5%
10%
78%'
13%
8%
99%
1%
9.97
17%
1.12
2%
1.58
2%
.34
1%
-0-
.30
1%
1.58
2%
8.52
14%
;25.10
42%
-0-
29.28
4.50
;58.88
50%
8%
100%
Based upon 1969 actual income and expenses and 1970 Budget.
}
Based upon 1970 Budget
Source: Budgets and actual amounts
'^' furnished by projects.
5782
income. The accuracy of the budget is questionable since
the difference between the 1969 budget and actual expen-
ditures was substantial.)
The same is true with the project in Granada, Colorado
(Prowers County). This project demonstrates clearly what
happens when a project is occupied for only part of the
year (In this case, the vacancy rate is about 66 percent).
Since the opening of the project In 1967, no payments have
been made on the loan. By the end of 1969 it was del i n-
quent in excess of $35,000. The present budget al located
$2,424 for debt retirement; far from the $15,000 that
will accrue this year. Had the maximum grant of two-
thirds of the total cost of the project been given the
project would still not be operating in the black. To
date al I revenues from the project have gone for opera-
tion and maintenance.
The project at Royal City may also experience financial
difficulty in the near future. With a repayment schedule
of nearly $13,000 a year for interest on the loan, this
leaves only $20,000 (or $45 per unit per month) for oper-
ation, maintenance and reserves. If the project were
operated at full capacity. At 75 percent capacity, for
which it is budgeted, only $13,000 (ur $29 per unit per
month) remains for operation and maintenance. So'on after
it began operation, it became doubtful that the project
would reach the 75 percent level of occupancy for the
first year of operation. In June 1970, 30 of the 37 units
were occupied, but many of these occupants were migrants
who may be moving out later In the year. One problem is
that the units are not furnished. 54 Loan and grant funds
cannot be used to provide items which do not become a
part of the rea 1 ty .
The Effect of an Inadequate Subsidy
The size of the gra nt rece i ved by each project has a very
great effect on the rentals that must be charged, i.e..
54. Interview by telephone, Robert Wylie, County Super-
visor, Farmers Home Administration, Royal City, Washington,
124
5783
TABLE XIX
TOTAL PER UNIT CDST, SIZE OF GRANT, AND AMOUNT OF RENT PER UNIT PER M3NTH
USED TO RETIRE DEBT IN SELECT FmHA FARM LABOR HOUSING PROJECTS
Project
Total Cost
Per Unit
Grant Size Debt Retire-
% of Total Cost ment Per
Occupied Unit
Per Month *
Riverside, Calif. $7,191
Soledad, Calif. 9,787_
Stanislaus, Calif. 5,618'
Granada, Colorado 7,575
Union Co. , 111. 8,181
Castro Co., Texas 4,960
Royal City, Washington 10,757
Othello, Washington 2,991
40%
66%
50%
49%
58%
40%
50%
0%
$24
18
16
22b
19
17
30
17
Actual per unit cost in Stanislaus County project is $11,191, based upon
125 new units build. However, rentals from 249 units are used to amor-
tize the debt.
""Actual vacancy rate in Prowers County project has been about 66%. Based
upon that rate the debt retirement per occupied unit per month is $59.
'Based on 10% vacancy rate.
the portion of capital costs not received in the form of a
grant, in all cases, was borrowed and must be repaid.
Table XIX shows the amount of each month's rent which goes
for debt retirement in certain selected projects. These
are the amounts that each unit must earn, if occupied 90
percent of the time if the debt is to be repaid. In ad-
dition, the unit must earn additional amounts in order to
pay for operation and maintenance expenses.
Only in those projects where "total per unit" costs were
kept low, a maximum grant was given, or there are addi-
june 10, I 970.
5784
tional units available to help defray the per unit debt,
does the per unit debt retirement become low enough to
make the project feasible for low income persons. In
almost all cases, the grant should have been greater in
order to reduce the amount of rent that must be collected
Grants of 100^ of the capital costs would reduce rents
by the amount shown as "Debt Retirement" in Table XIX.
Projects need to have rents reduced by this amount to
bring them within payment capabilities of farm workers.
OTHER PROBLEM AREAS
Even if the major flaw of the farm labor housing program
could be overcome, i.e., a deep enough subsidy were pro-
vided to make it an attractive program to house farm
workers, other "minor" problems exist which prevent the
program from reaching its goals.
Foremost of these is the FmHA requirement that the member-
ship of broad I y- based organizations live in the community
where the housing is to be built and the occupants are
to work. (This has been mooted by the fact that FmHA no
longer considers nonprofit organizations eligible to re-
ceive grants, but it is a partial explanation of why the
program has not been effective in the past.) In many
areas where there is a need for farm labor housing, the
people in the community who would necessarily make up the
membership in such an organization do not want to see
permanent housing made available to farm workers who
historical ly have moved out of the area at the end of the
harvest season. These communities view permanent, year-
round housing for farm workers much the same as they see
housing for other low income groups, i.e., that it lowers
real estate values wherever it is located. In addition,
this type of housing for farm workers, especially in
stream states, is thought to attract new poor people, thus
adding to the tax burden. These communities fear that
welfare, service, and school costs will increase without
a corresponding contribution from the new residents. And
126
I
5785
running throughout these "fears" is the racism which fol-
lows most farm workers throughout their lives, since they
are, by and large, minority group members.
In these communities, then, it is virtually impossible to
create local broadly-based organizations which are vitally
interested in the rights and needs of farm workers. An
effective delivery system of farm labor housing must pro-
vide that either the farm workers themselves be made
eligible to receive the funds, or that broadly based organ-
izations be allowed to draw their membership from through-
out the state and build the housing wherever it is needed,
or both .
Anot
prog
thi s
duct
Cou n
m i gr
fort
of t
ther
at i n
wi I I
than
it.
the
comp
has
the
staf
a re
t i on
her ba s i c
ram ex i st
case, wh
ed by the
ty Superv
ant farm
was made
he ex i ste
e i s a g r
g i nteres
ever be
i nf orm t
As we ha
app I i cat i
I ex . Ass
necessa r i
State Of
f ed , it s
not I i ke 1
s that re
problem
s, or if
y i t doe
Rural H
i sors I o
workers ,
to info
nee of t
eat d i f f
t i n a p
put toge
he pop u I
ve seen
on proce
i stance
I y come
f i ces .
eems rea
y to enc
quire su
1 s
they
sn't
ou s i
cate
nea
rm V
he I
eren
rog r
ther
at i o
i n t
ss f
i n p
f rom
When
sona
ou ra
c h a
that
do ,
wor
ng A
d i n
riy
a r i o
oan
ce b
am .
i f
n th
he s
or I
utti
the
the
ble
ge t
n ex
so
how
k) .
Ilia
cou
a i I
us g
and
etwe
Ver
FmHA
at m
ect i
arge
ng t
Cou
who
to a
he d
tens
few peo
i t rea
I n a r
nee of
nt i es w
i nd i cat
roups a
gra nt p
en info
y f ew I
staff
i g ht ta
on on t
p ro j ec
he app I
nty Sup
I e agen
ssume t
eve I opm
i ve amo
p I e know
I I y work
ecent su
over I 60
i th over
ed that
nd i nd i V
rogram .
rm i ng an
arge pro
does not
ke advan
he regu I
ts is I e
i cat i on
erv i sor
cy is sh
hat most
ent of a
unt of a
tha
s (o
rvey
FmH
I ,0
some
i d ua
But
d ge
ject
hi ng
tage
at i o
ngth
toge
or f
ort-
of f
PP I i
ss i s
t the
r i n
con-
A
00
ef-
I s
ner-
s
more
of
ns ,
y and
ther
rom
ices
ca-
ta nee
This leads to a third basic problem. That the agency is
understaffed for the job it is
debatable. Since I960, FmHA's
62^ percent; outstanding loans
and collections ha ve • i ncrea sed
same time period, man-hours in
77 percent. In I960, for each
authorized to do is hardly
program level has increased
have increased 427 percent
248 percent. During the
the agency increased only
million dollars invested.
FmHA had 3.4 man years for a dm i n i st ra t i on . 55 |
97 I
55. Testimony by James V. Smith, Administrator, Farmers
127
5786
this ratio will be one man year per million dollars.
I ncr
the
prob
mu st
obv i
that
I n V
ava i
seem
when
pr i a
prev
mate
The
al I
ca n
FmHA
the
thou
the
undo
i n s
year
suf f
cond
of t
the
the
ma y
i n a
va I i
more
I em
a re
I oan
ease
pres
I ems
be
ou s I
a p
ar i o
labl
s to
FmH
t i on
i ous
of
amou
prob
expe
off
prog
gh t
few
u bte
ome
the
er g
i t i o
he i r
righ
proj
obta
jud
d, t
c I o
may
budg
s th
d manpower alone, however, would not greatly help
ent program. A program which would solve the
of providing adequate housing for farm workers
approached with some type of plan. Yet, there is
y no plan for the current programs, in the sense
Ian should encompass a showing of immediate needs
us locations, long range needs, and resources
e to meet these needs. The type of "plan" that
be used for farm labor housing only operates
A seeks new appropriations. It bases its appro-
s request on past performance, carry over from
years' appropriations, and some mystical estl-
grants and loans to be made in the coming year,
nt of money requested is not related to the over-
lem, and only repre'sents what FmHA decides it
nd.
i c i a I
ram o
his d
proje
d I y o
proje
unit
enera
ns ac
gran
t to
ect a
i n sp
i c i a I
hat F
se I y
a I so
eted
at ad
s^^ put some of the blame for the failure of
n mismanagement of some of the projects. Al-
id not seem to present a major problem in
cts visited by this writer, some projects
perate under poor management. For example,
cts, it Is reported that for parts of the
s are extremely overcrowded, are filthy, and
My from a lack of maintenance. If such
tually do exist, these projects are In breach
t and/or loan agreement with FmHA. FmHA has
foreclose on the loan, take possession of
nd operate It. In the case of grants, FmHA
ecific performance of the grani' obligations
proceeding. One excuse, probably quite
mHA has for not monitoring these projects
is, again, lack of personnel. But the prob-
go back to the fact that many of the projects
so closely to enable them to repay large
equate funds are not available to hire pro-
Home Administration, Hea r I ng s Before a Subcommittee of the
Committee on Appropriations, "Department of Agriculture
Appropriations for 1971.", 91st Congress, 2nd Session,
Part 4, p. 228.
56. Malotky interview
128
5787
fessional management. The manager of a housing project,
especially one whose tenants are transient and of a dif-
ferent culture, must not only be a budget wizard and ca-
pable supervisor, but a practical sociologist as well.
Perhaps the basis for nearly all of the problems dis-
cussed in this report is the sad fact that the Farm Labor
Housing Program is an insignificant part of a much larger
FmHA operation. It accounted for only about one-half
of one percent of the 1970 program level for al I FmHA
programs. If not an unwanted child by FmHA, it is for
the most part, forgotten or neglected.
At the national level, labor housing I oa
fall under the jurisdiction of Rural Hou
This division is also responsib-le for ho
persons with low to moderate income (197
$79 million), loans for home repairs to
persons (1970 level: $10 million), renta
(1970 level: $20 million), and self-help
development loans and technical assistan
level: $2,450,000). The division is adm
director, assistant director, and five
a small technical staff and clerical hel
I i ty for the various programs is not for
among the loan officers. 57 Thus, each p
have a separate and distinct head. This
by the fact that 95 percent of the progr
counted for by housing loans to persons
moderate income. Yet, without formal le
of responsibility, the "minor" programs,
people with the lowest incomes rely, mus
so they do.
ns and grants
sing Division,
using loans to
0 p rog ram I eve 1 :
very low i ncome
1 hou sing loans
hou sing land
ce gra nt s (1970
I n i stered by a
oan officers plus
p . Respons i b i -
ma I I y divided
rogram does not
may be exp I a i ned
am I eve I I s ac-
w i th low to
adership and lines
upon which the
t suffer. And
57. In a recent reorganization of the Department of Agri-
culture, announced on June 29, 1970, but yet to be imple-
mented, the Rural Housing Division will be headed by an
Assistant Administrator. It will be divided into four
units: Planning and Analysis Staff, Architectural and
Technical Services Staff, Single Family Housing Loan Di-
vision, and Multiple Family Housing Loan Division.
129
5788
PARTV
Some Conclusions, Suggestions
and Recommendations
People have a right to decent shelter, and
it is the responsibility of government to
help them acquire it. In America "decent
shelter" should mean no less than adequate
space in a sound and safe structure, an abun-
dant supply of clean water, private bath and
toilet facilities inside the house, and means
for sanitary disposal of sewage.'
The ab
Hous i n
right
g rams
Of f i ce
add up
cept t
cent s
Cong re
ma ke a
i n the
app rov
f unded
the va
of ins
or i nt
But wo
that s
can so
such a
g rants
ove p r I
g Confe
to dece
d i scuss
of Eco
to an
he resp
he I ten"
ss , the
full c
Nation
ed that
at tha
r i ous A
uf f i c i e
ent i ona
rst of
omehow ,
I ve the
s I ende
, and t
nc I p
renc
nt s
ed i
nom i
a I mo
ons i
for
Pre
omm i
I
are
t.
dmi n
nt f
I pe
all,
som
p ro
r i n
he I
le,
e d I
hel t
n th
c Op
st t
bl I i
mig
s i de
tmen
nste
not
The
i str
unds
rver
the
eday
b 1 em
tere
i ke .
laid
d not
er .
is s t
portu
Ota I
ty of
rant
ncy a
t to
ad, p
even
I eade
at i ve
, i ns
s i on
Gove
, i nd
s wit
st s u
down
exc
S i ng
udy-
n i ty
fai I
gua
work
nd t
e I i m
rog r
ha!
rsh i
Age
uf f i
of t
rnme
ustr
h a
bsid
at
I ude
I y a
-lab
tem
ure
rant
ers .
he B
i nat
ams
f -me
p ha
nc i e
c i en
he I
nt h
y an
few ,
i es ,
the
far
nd c
or c
pora
of t
ee i n
Th
urea
e a I
have
asur
s c I
s fa
t le
egi s
as p
d th
but
i ns
Fi rst
m wor
0 II ec
amp c
ry fa
hese
g the
e f au
ucrac
1 sub
been
es , a
osed
i I to
gi s I a
I at ! o
erpet
e I en
expe
ured
Nat i o
kers f
t i ve I y
ode en
rm I ab
agenc i
"righ
It lie
y for
standa
advoc
nd i na
its ey
perf o
t i ve a
n by t
uated
ding i
ns i ve ,
loans.
na I
rom
the
fore
or h
es t
t to
s w i
■fail
rd h
ated
dequ
es w
rm b
utho
he A
the
nst i
i nc
i nc
Ru ra I
the
p ro-
ement ,
ous i ng--
o ac-
de-
th the
i ng to
ous i ng
and
ate I y
hen
ecause
rity,
gene i es
myth
t ut i ons
ent I ves
ent i ve
I. Richard J. Margolis (Editor), "People have a right...
The Report of the First National Conference on Rural Housing,"
1969, p. II.
131
5789
WHAT ULTIMATELY MUST BE DONE
The solution of providing decent housing for farm workers
wi I I come only when a comprehensive attack is made on the
total housing problem for all low-income people. An all-
out attack, with bi I I ions of dol lars of direct government
aid, will be required to put an end to the rural and urban
ghettos and company camps and towns which flourish today.
The federal government must initiate and directly subsi-
dize housing development. The subsidies should go direct-
ly to or for the benefit of the occupants of the housing
and not to lending institutions. Where the incomes of
families are very low, i.e., those not being served by
present programs, the principal as well as interest must
be subsidized for home ownership programs, and a greater
share of operation and maintenance costs must be subsidized
for rental projects. Above all, when state and local in-
stitutions fail to take advantage of new, deeply subsi-
dized national housing programs, the federal government
should become the builder of last resort.
A wider range of incomes must be served, and the delivery
system must be made accountable to the people it is de-
signed to serve, i.e., the occupants of the housing. The
legal relationships between landlords and tenents must be
reformed to insure that the occupants are not excluded
from having a voice in the control of their environment.
A national land program must be inaugurated to guarantee
that building sites are available in good locations at a
reasonable price in accordance with overall community and
national plans. Land must be viewed as a national asset
and no longer as a means for a few to get rich by specula-
tion.
The housing delivery system must eventually be consolidated
to enable it to benefit to as great extent as possible from
the economies of scale, new ideas, technology and administra-
tion. Finally, local building codes should be revamped and
2. See also, Herbert M. Franklin, "A New Generation of Lower-
Income Housing: A Proposal For Consolidation and Reform" The
Urban Coalition, 1969, p. iv.
132
5790
made as uniform as possible, taking advantage of the most
recent developments in the building industry. They should
be geared to insure decent, safe and sanitary housing and
not as a tool of securing employment for the trades.
The Need for Direct Federal Action
Congress has the responsibility for seeing that a compre-
hensive program to provide decent housing for farm workers
is initiated. It is the body that controls the authority
of administrative agencies; it-is the body that controls
the purse strings; and it is the body that can establish
the watch-dog committees to see that an effective program
is carried out. Congress need only look back at the pro-
grams it has already enacted for providing farm labor
housing to discover what direction it should take in esta-
blishing a new, comprehensive program. Congress should
realize that a passive loan and grant program (at least
one not deeply subsidized, like the present FmHA Farm Labor
Housing Prog ram) cannot work effectively. It should realize
that a code enforcement program is not enough (though needed)
For guidance. Congress should look at the Camp Program ad-
ministered by the Farm Security Administration in the late
I930's and early I940's. In six years, through direct govern-
ment action, housing for over 19,000 families was built
(however, more than half of this was in mobile, tent camps).
The lesson to be learned here is that terrible conditions
existing in the I930's for farm workers were not signifi-
cantly different, in a relative sense, than they are today.
It required direct action on the part of government then;
it requires the same today.
The Need for a New Agency
No agency existing in the Federal Government is currently
capable of administering a comprehensive program to improve
133
5791
the hous i n
the two ma
Labor Hous
r i cu I ture .
workers ca
p rob I em . "
whose prim
farm worke
hes i tates
comp rehens
the record
I ot of far
is all too
agency i s
p re j ud i ces
most poor I
let us ca I
i st rat i on .
g cond i t i
ons o
jor programs (
i ng ) were
p 1 ac
The p rov i s i o
n no long
er be
1 t i s a
h uman
ary f unct
ion 1
rs and no
t the
to advoca
te th
i ve hous i
ng ag
of subor
d i nat
m workers
when
c 1 ear.^
Thus
requ 1 red ,
f ree
that have kep
y housed
work i
1 the new
agen
f all farm w
FSA Camp Pro
ed within th
n of decent
cons i dered
p rob I em . 1
s meet i ng th
needs of fa
at it be mad
ency ( p resen
ion of measu
i nc I uded i n
, for now , a
d of the sha
t the farm w
ng g roup in
cy The Farm
orke r
gram
e Dep
hous i
an "a
t req
e hou
rm ow
e a p
t ly n
res t
b roa
new
ck I es
orker
the c
Labor
s . His
and Fm
a rtmen
ng for
gr i c u I
u i res
sing n
ners . -^
a rt of
on-ex i
o i mp r
der gr
i ndepe
of my
s amon
ountry
Hous i
tor i ca I I y ,
HA Farm
t of Ag-
fa rm
tu ra I
an agency
eeds of
One
a I arger,
stent) as
ove the
oup i ngs
ndent
ths and
g the
. For now
ng Adm i n-
3. The same can be said of all rurai housing programs.
It is ludicrous to attempt to solve the housing problems
in rural areas through a Department whose major concern is
with commercial agriculture.
4, Margolis, p. 36, "We recommend the creation of a separate
agency or division, with its own staff and grant and loan
funds. To administer a mi g ratory and seasona I farm labor
housing program. We urge that this agency, created by spe-
cial legislation, be provided funds from an appropria te
sou rce , such a"s the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor
and Health, bducation and Wei fare, fhe b i tte r pi i gh t o7
migrant and seasona I workers Ts emblazoned across the face
of America, told and retold ad nauseam, but the results of
all the cries of pity and outrage are minimal. The present
farm labor housing program is a great disappointment. The
initial impetus under this program should come from the
farm worker, not the commercial agricultural interests. This
nation cannot leave mi I I ions of the 'poorest of the poor' to
the mercy of local groups whose concern frequently runs in
other directions, or, however i I logically, are opposed to
the effort and expense necessary to provide decent housing
for farm workers.'*
134
5792
Authority of the New Agency
The Farm Labor Housing Administration (FLHA) should be
authorized to do a complete program survey of the need
for farm labor housing. Such a survey should discover
where new housing should be located, what type of housing
is needed, what effects mechanization will likely have
on the need for a large farm labor force in all locales,
and the possibility of diversification of the existing
farm labor force into the general labor market. In ad-
dition, it should discover the extent to which existing
local institutions are capable of receiving large Govern-
ment subsidies to provide housing for farm workers in a
manner compatible with overal I needs of farm workers.
FLHA should be authorized to provide total financial as-
sistance foV the planning, development, and construction,
purchase, lease or rehabilitation of the needed housing
and related facilities in any area for use by farm workers.
In addition, FLHA should be authorized to provide supple-
mental funds for operation and maintenance when project
income is insufficient to provide for it.
In most cases, permanent housing, capable of year-round
occupancy, should be provided. Housing of this type should
be considered even in areas where most of the farm workers
are migrants, in an effort to eliminate the need of tra-
veling long distances.
In areas where it is considered total ly impractical to
build permanent type structures because of (a) very brief
periods of occupancy, (b) a rapidly declining need for farm
labor, (c) a forseeable end for the need of farm labor and
(d) a showing that permanent housing is not needed for other
low-income persons in the immediate future, temporary housing
may be provided. Such housing should include adequate
space for the occupants, indoor plumbing, cooking facili-
ties, furnishings, and recreation areas. Whenever possible,
it should be designed so that it will have some future use
to the community in which it is located.
Institutions eligible to receive Federal funds to provide
housing and related facilities for farm workers should be
States, public organizations within States organized spe-
cifical ly to meet the needs of farm workers, and private
non-profit organizations of farm workers. Where no
State, public or private organization makes application
135
5793
for funds within a reasonable time after the Agency has
documented the need for farm labor housing within a state,
or portion of it, FLHA, itself, should have the authority,
and obligation, to develop, construct and operate the need-
ed housing.
FLHA
s i m i I
Thus ,
t i on
chase
rehab
deve I
hous i
tenan
( the
rent )
t i on
manen
the e
shou
art
i n
of n
of
i I it
oper
ng.
ts i
I ow
I
of h
t ye
vent
Id make
o those
add i t i o
ew proj
exi st i n
at i on ;
s after
Rents
ncome ,
er the
nail c
av i ng a
a r-roun
ua I pur
aval la
in exi
n to f u
ects, t
g hous i
the pur
it is
for the
based o
i ncome ,
ases, t
port io
d dwe I I
chase o
b I e a
sting
nd i ng
he Ag
ng fo
chase
comp I
hous
n a s
the
he te
n of
i ngs )
f the
numbe
Pub I i
the d
ency s
r i mme
of ne
eted ;
i ng sh
I i d i ng
I ower
nants
thei r
go i n
house
r of
c Hou
eve I o
hou I d
d i ate
w hou
and t
ou I d
sea I
the p
shou I
rent
to an
a I tern
sing I
pment
allow
occup
s i ng f
he I ea
be bas
e up t
ercent
d be g
( in th
"equ i
at i ve
eg i si
and c
for
ancy ,
rom p
si ng
ed up
o 20
of i
i ven
e cas
ty fu
p rograms
at i on .
onstruc-
the pur-
er for
r i vate
of
on the
percent
ncome for
the op-
e of per-
nd" for
FLHA should be provided with funds for the purpose of
training all managers of projects to enable them to ef-
fectively operate the project and to be sensitive to the
needs of the tenants.
Each project should have a tenant's council, democratically
elected, to advise the management and assist the organiza-
tion in setting local policy. An appeal apparatus should
be established, with the Director of FLHA as the final ar-
biter with subsequent access to the judicial process, to
settle differences between the tenant's council and manage-
ment and local organizations.
FLHA should be authorized to exercise the power of eminent
domain in areas where building sites are not readily avail-
able. It should make available to applicant organizations
planning services and technical assistance in order that
all housing needs might be met in the local area. FLHA should
also be authorized to pre-empt local zoning regulations and
building codes in appropriate circumstances.
The Agency should be authorized to enforce a strict national
code concerned with housing provided for farm workers who
travel across state lines, or housing used by farmworkers
which is owned or operated by or for the benefit of growers
or corporation farms engaged in interstate commerce. Perman-
ent housing should not be built in a compound or labor camp
136
5794
type setting. Rather, scattered sites should be used, or
at the very least, subdivisions should be developed. Sites
should be carefully selected, to provide for integration
within the existing community and proximity to existing
jobs and community services. Finally, the Agency should
be authorized to make payments to the local governments
and school districts for any increased burden on services
rendered by them caused by the location of housing for
low-income persons in a particular area.
THE NEED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION
An Agency with powers such as those outlined above is es-
sential If there Is to be a final solution to the farm
worker housing problem. The formation of such an Agency
should be undertaken immediately. Realistically, the forma-
tion of such an agency would take a great deal of time even
If it were readily acceptable to the Congress. In the mean-
time, less complex measures can be taken to stimulate con-
struction of farm labor housing.
FmHA Farm Labor Housing Amendments
With regard to the present FmHA Farm Labor Housing Program
several legislative changes should be made. It should be
remembered, however, that these changes are just more "half
measures" that will solve only part of the problem. Yet
the condition of farm labor housing Is so bad that even
another program offering only a partial solution would be
better than what exists now. Therefore, Congress should
amend the authority of FmHA under Section 514 to permit
loans to be made to non-profit organizations of farm workers
Under Section 516 Congress should make the following changes
by way of amendment:
137
5795
1. Organizations which are truly broad-based non-
profit, i.e., those which reflect, not only the
established community, but farm worl<ers as well,
should be eligible for grants.
2. Non-profit organizations of farm workers should
be eligible for grants.
3. Organizations receiving grants should be allowed
to build housing anywhere in the state of incorpora-
tion where a need is demonstrated, not just in the
community in which most of its members reside.
4. Grants should be made for up to the total cost
of the project.
5. Housing built with loan or grant funds should be
durable and suitable for year-round occupancy.
6. Loan and grant funds should be allowed to be
expended for furniture and other furnishings when
the housing is to be used by occupants for short pe-
riods of t i me .
These few changes would enable additional institutions to
provide housing for farm workers. Yet there will still be
areas where there wi I I be no response to the incentives
offered by the federal government. In addition, manage-
ment in the projects may continue to be a problem. Above
al I , many farm worker occupants wi I I sti I I not have any
say as to the operation and management of many of the pro-
jects .
Creating a Strict National Standard for Migrant Labor Camps
The present Federal farm labor housing code administered by
the Bureau of Employment Security is totally inadequate by
today's standards of decency. It should prevent overcrowd-
ing in dwellings, and should require, among other things,
that in-door plumbing be furnished in all units and that
each family unit contain a shower and adequate furnishings.
It should be enforced by Federal Inspectors who have an in-
terest in seeing that migrant farm workers are provided
decent housing when they are working away from their home
base. These inspectors should not work through the State
Employment Agencies. These agencies have yet to prove that
they are capable of enforcing regulations already entrusted
138
5796
to them, which are designed to protect farm workers. 5
Broaden and Balance the Office of Economic Opportunity
Migrant Division's Approach in the Field of Housing
for Migrant and Seasonal Farm Workers
The Migrant Division has sought to deplete the migrant la-
bor force by providing a means for escape to m i g rants--f or
settling out — through education, job placement, and other
means. That it has been successful is doubtful; that it
has failed to significantly "improve housing and sanita-
tion" of migrant and seasonal farm workers, as legislated
by Congress, is sadly true. The Migrant Division has de-
voted a very small percent of its resources to improving
the housing conditions of migrants. Most of the resources
for "housing" have gone into the formation of mutual self-
help housing projects. Although the concept of mutual
self-help is admirable, it does not meet the needs of most
nigrant farm workers. Such a program can only serve a
population which is stable. Where the Migrant Division
has tried to assist migrant farm workers with improved
housing, the attempt has been misdirected. In California,
the only area where Migrant Division funds were used to
actually construct shelters for migrants, most of the
housing built is substandard.
The Migrant Division must re-evaluate the role that housing
plays if all migrant and seasonal farm workers are to be
given a true economic opportunity. In areas where job
training and education centers have been established or
permanent employment is to be found for migrants, housing
is often in such short supply as to discourage participa-
tion. Present housing situations hamstring the Migrant
Division's outreach function, in that growers who provide
housing foi- their workers often misguidedly and illegally
prevent workers from receiving OEO services and benefits.
Therefore, housing production must become an integral part
of its "settling out" program.
5. See generally. Complaint, 250 California Farm Workers et
a I . V. Shu 1 tz et . a I . , U.S.D.C. San Francisco, Civil Action
No. C-70 481 AJZ, Filed March 5, 1970.
139
5797
The Mi gr
which en
migrant
its prim
to trave
I n other
mi grancy
the othe
migrant
c i I i t i es
plan she
fundi ng
ass i s t g
sona I fa
deve I ope
creased
ant
V i s i
and
any
I gr
wor
, no
r ha
farm
wh i
ul d
gran
rant
rm w
d, i
fund
Di vi
ons
seas
goa I
eat
ds,
t ne
nd ,
wor
ie t
P ut
tees
ees
orke
t w i
i ng
s I o
the
ona
th
d i s
it
ces
it
ker
ra V
an
i n
rs
I I
I ev
n mu
al I
I fa
e en
tanc
shou
sari
cann
s , w
e I i n
end
It s
meet
i n t
be e
el s
St i
ev i a
rm w
d i ng
es f
Id a
ly f
ot i
h i ch
g i n
to t
hou I
i ng
heir
as i e
for
naug
t i on
orke
of
or e
ttem
a rm
gnor
i nc
the
he s
d se
the
a re
r to
the
urat
s of
rs .
the
xten
pt t
work
e th
I ude
str
eem i
t pr
need
a .
jus
Di vi
e a comprehensive plan
all major problems of
It shou I d reta in as
need for farm workers
ded periods of time.
o end the need for
as an occupation. On
e ex i st i ng needs of
improved housing fa-
eam. A comprehensive
ngly £d_ hoc nature of
ogram guidelines to
s of migrant and sea-
When such a plan is
tify to Congress i n-
s i on .
Mi gr
and
ad va
dece
gran
Hous
use
able
hous
be u
i n e
oppo
ro I e
of t
only
farm
work
i s h
to b
( It
p rov
ten ,
harv
ant
p rov
ntag
nt h
t wo
i ng
by m
for
i ng,
sed
d uca
rtun
of
he p
a s
wor
ers
ous i
e a
i s a
i des
a va
est
Di vi
i de
e of
ous i
rk f
bui I
i gra
yea
whe
as i
t i on
i t i e
ass i
hi lo
ubs i
kers
them
ng a
dri I
gree
hou
i I ab
seas
sion funds
techn i ca ! a
existing h
ng to be us
orce and du
t wi th OEO
nts for on 1
r-round I i v
n not used
nter i m hous
programs o
s . The Mi g
sting m i g ra
sophy that
dy to growe
, I ocated o
se I ves i s n
ss i stance t
I press ope
d however,
sing, that
I e f o r occu
on, then gr
shou
ss i s
ous i
ed b
ri ng
fund
y pa
i ng ,
by p
i ng
r p u
rant
nt f
" i n
rs .
ff t
o mo
o a
rato
tha
is I
pane
ower
I d be
tance
ng pro
y mi gr
the s
s and
rt of
Wher
ersons
for th
rsu i ng
Di V i s
a rm wo
stream
Decen
he far
re a s
settle
r a su
t when
ittle
y only
s a re
used
to en
grams
ants
etti i
tech n
the y
ever
doi n
ose f
more
ion,
rkers
" hou
t hou
m , an
ubs i d
d out
bs i dy
the
more
dur i
the p
to organ i ze g
able them to
, and to cons
while in the
ng out period
i ca I ass i stan
ear should be
possible, th i
g farm work,
arm workers e
stable emp I o
in carrying o
, must pu rge
sing for migr
sing for migr
d contro I I ed
y to growers
migrant who
to Genera I M
Migrant Divis
than a pi ywoo
ng the g row i n
rimary benefi
roups
take
truct
m i -
ce for
s u i t-
s
should
nro I led
yment
ut i ts
i tsel f
ants is
ant
by the
than
happens
otors .
i on
d s he I -
g and
claries
Since the Migrant Division's constituency is so poorly
housed, a much greater portion of its funds should go for
funds to hire full time staffs to deal only with housing
140
5798
problems of migrant and seasonal farm workers.^
A FINAL NOTE
These are some of the measures, then, that must be taken to
fight a wrong which has been caused by the economic system
and perpetuated by a Federal Government sensitive to the
power of agri-business. The persons that need the help are
nearly powerless.. If there is hope at all, that hope comes
from the farm workers themselves,, currently engaged in the
process of awakening to their own potential strength. But
until that potential strength becomes reality, and even
when it becomes reality, dilapidated housing, ill-health,
pollution, disease, lack of equal opportunity and the shame
and degradation of farm workers rests on the conscience of
the total community and makes the moral pretenses of this
country ugly and hypocritical.
6. As this report goes to press, the OEO Administration
is considering "regionalizing" the migrant program, i.e.,
splitting Its pitifully Inadequate budget among ten regions
and doing away with the central staff. The worst enemies
of farm workers will doubtless applaud this proposal, but
if the program is regionalized the friends of farm workers
should encourage the Congress to remove the program from
OEO entirely and set it up as a separate agency.
141
5799
APPENDIX A
FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR HOUSING FOR ARGRICULTURAL WORKERS
FEDERAL
REGISTER
VOLUME 33 • NUMBER 213
Thursday, October 31, 1968 • Washington, D.C.
PART 620— HOUSING FOR AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
2. The new Part 620 reads as follows:
Explanation
See.
620.1 Ptirpoee and scope.
630.3 Amendmeuta.
620.8 VartatloDs.
EoiTSiNa StansakdS
nO.4 BouBlng alte.
630.5 Water supply.
630.6 Excreta and Uquld waste dlq>OBaI.
630.7 Bousing.
630.8 Screening.
See.
620.9 Heating.
620.10 Electricity and lighting.
620.11 Toilets.
630.12 Battling, laundry, and handwastilng.
620.13 Cooking and eating facilities.
620.14 Garbage and other refuse.
620.15 Insect and rodent control.
620.16 Sleeping facUlUes.
620.17 Fire, safety, and first aid.
AuTHOMTY : The provisions of this Part 820
Issued under 48 Stat. 117. as amended; 29
U.S.C. 49k.
EjtPLANATIOlf
§ 620.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) The Bureau of Employment Se-
curity, Manpower Administration, of the
U.S. Department of Labor' has estab-
lished facilities to assist agricultural em-
ployers In recruiting workers from places
outside the State of intended employ-
ment. The experiences of the Bureau
indicate that employees so referred have
on many occasions been provided with
Inadequate, unsafe, and imsanltary hous-
ing facilities. To discourage this practice
the Bureau has established a policy of
denying Its Interstate agricultural re-
cruitment services to employers until the
State agency affiliated with the U.S. Em-
ployment Service which receives the or-
der for Interstate recruitment has as-
certained that housing and facilities : (1)
Are available; (2) are hygienic and ade-
quate to the climatic conditions of the
area of employment; (3) are large
enough to accommodate the agricultural
workers sought; and (4) will not en-
danger the lives, health, or safety of
workers and their families.
(b) In order to Implement this policy,
Interstate recruitment services will be
denied If the housing facilities Intended
for use by the worker or workers and
their families fall to comply (1) with
an applicable State or local law or regu-
lation concerning safety, health, or
sanitation, or (2) with the minimum
standards set forth In this Part 620,
whichever Is more stringent.
(c) The services of the Bureau will also
be denied when there exists an Insani-
tary or hazardous condition not contem-
plated by applicable State or local law
or the standards contained In this part,
or where past failures to provide safe
and sanitary housing Indicate that the
employer cannot be relied upon, to
comply with this part.
(d> In establishing this code, due con-
sideration has been given to short term
or temporary occupancy. The standards
set forth In this part are minimum
standards used to determine whether
conditions are so Inadequate as to require
the Bureau to withhold services generally
made available upon request. These
standards shouid not in any way dis-
courage (1) voluntary institution of
higher standards by employers or their
associations, (2) the institution and en-
forcement of adequate standards by ap-
propriate authorities for the main-
tenance of safe and sanitary conditions
for workers throughout the period of em-
ployment, and (3) the institution and
enforcement of more stringent standards
5800
by other governmental agencies with
regulatory authority.
§ 620.2 Amendmenls.
(a) Any interested person may at any
time file a petition for a change In the
regulations contained in this part ■with
the Administrator of the Bureau of Em-
ployme^it Security, Manpower Adminis-
tration, U.S. Department of Labor,
Washington, D.C. 20210.
(b) Any interested persons and or-
ganizations are invited to cooperate with
the Bureau of Employment Security by
submitting suggestions and requests and
to provide information to the Bureau
concerning the problems of safety and
sanitation In housing for agricultural
■workers. In addition, the Director of the
Farm Labor Service of the Bureau of
Employment Security shall have author-
ity to obtain information by calling con-
ferences to which he may Invite various
persons who have had experience or ex-
pert knowledge concerning this matter.
§ «20.3 Variations.
(a) A Regional Administrator of the
Bureau of Employment Security may
from time to time grant ■written permis-
sion to Individual employers to vary from
particular provisions set forth Jn this
part when the extent of the variation Is
clearly specified and it is demonstrated to
his satisfaction that (1) such variation is
necessary to obtain a beneficial use of an
existing facility, (2) the variation Is
necessary to prevent ft practical difBculty
or unnecessary hardship, and (3) ap-
propriate alternative measures have
been taken to protect the health and
safety of the employee and assure that
the purpose of the provisions from ■Which
variation is sought will be observed.
(b) 'Written application for such var-
iations shall be filed with the State em-
ployment security ofHce serving the area
In which the employment Is to take
place. No such variation shall be effective
until granted In writing by a Keglonal.
Administrator,
Housing Stamdahss
§ 620.4 Housing site.
(a) Housing sites shall be well drained
and free from depressions in which water
may stagnate. They shall be located
where the disposal of sewage Is provided
in a manner which neither creates nor Is
likely to create a nuisance, or a hazard
to health.
(b) Housing shall not be {lubjecl to, or
In proximity to conditions that create
or are likely to create offensive odors,
flies, noise, trafBc, or any similar hazards.
(c) Grounds within the housing site
shall be free from debris, noxious plants
(poison tvy, etc.) and tmcontroUed weeds
or brush.
(d) The housing site shall provide a
space for recreation reasonahly related
to the size of the facility and the t;pe of
occupancy.
8 620.5 'Water nipply.
(a) An adequate and convenient Bup>
ply of water that meets the atandards
RULES AND REGULATIONS
of the state health authority shall be
provided.
(b) A cold water tap shall be available
within 100 feet of each individual living
imlt when water is not provided in" the
unit. Adequate drainage facilities shall
be pro'vlded for overflow and spillage.
(c> Common drinking cups shall not
be permitted.
§ 620.6 Excreta and liquid waste dis-
posal.
(a) Facilities shall be provided and
maintained for effective disposal of
excreta and liquid waste. Raw or treated
liquid waste shall not be discharged or
allowed to accumulate on the ground
surface.
(b) 'Where public sewer systems are
available, all facilities for disposal of
excreta and liquid wastes shall be con-
nected thereto.
(c) 'Where public sewers are not avail-
able, a subsurface septic tank-seep? "e
system or other type of liquid wat 3
treatment and disposal system, privies or
portable toilets shall be provided. Any
requirements of the State health au-
thority shall be complied with.
§ 620.7 Housing.
(a) Housing shall be structurally
sound, in good repair. In a sanitary con-
dition and shall provide protection to
the occupants against the elements.
(b) Housing shall have flooring con-
structed of rigid materials, smooth fin-
ished, readily cleanable, and so located
as to prevent the entrance of ground and
<c). The following space requirementa
shall be provided:
(1) For sleeping purposes only In
family units and in dormitory accommo-
dations iislng single beds, not less than
SO square feet of floor space per occu-
pant;
(2) For sleeping purposes In dormi-
tory accommodations using double bunic
beds only, not less than 40 square feet
per occupant;
(3) For combined cooking, eating, and
sleeping purposes not less than 60 square
feet of floor space per occupant.
(d) Housing used for families with one
or m'ore Children over 6 years of age shall
have a room or partitioned sleeping area
for the husband and wife. The partition
shall be of rigid materials and installed
So as to provide reasonable privacy.
(e) Separate sleeping accommoda-
tions .shall be provided for each sex or
each family,
'(f) Adequate and separate arrange-
ments for hanging clothing and storing
personal effects for each person or fam-
ily shall be provided.
(g) At least one-half of the floor area
In each living unit shall have a minimum
ceiling height of 7 feet. No floor space
shall be counted toward minimum re-
quirements where the celling height is
less than 5 feet.
(b) Each habitable room (not includ-
ing partitioned areas) shall have at
least one ■window or skylight opening
directly to the out-of-doors. The mini-
mum total window or skylight area,
including windows In doors, shall equal
at least 10 percent of the ■usable floor
area. The total openable area shall equal
at least 45 percent of the minimum win-
dow or skylight area required, except
where comparably adequate .ventilation
ii> supplied by mechanical or some other
method.
§ 620.8 Screening.
(a) All outside openings shall be pro-
tected with screening of not less than
16 mesh.
(b) All screen doors shall be tight
fitting, in good repair, and equipped wltli
self-closing devices.
§ 620.9 Heating.
(a) All living quarters and service
rooms shall be provided with properly
installed, operable heating equipment
capable of maintaining a temperature of
at least 68° F. if during the period of
normal occupancy the temperature in
such quarters falls below 68°.
(b) Any stoves or other sources of heat
utilizing combustible fuel shall be in-
stalled and vented in such a manner as to
prevent flre hazards and a dangerous
concentration of gases. No portable
heaters other than those operated by
electricity shall be provided. If a solid or
liquid fuel stove is used in a room with,
wooden or other combustible flooring,
there shall be a concrete slab, insulated
metal sheet, or other fireproof material
on the floor under each stove, extending
at least 18 Inches beyond the perimeter
of the base of the stove.
(c) Any wall of ceiling within 18 inches
of a solid or liquid fuel stove or a stove-
pipe shall be of flreproof material. A
vented metal collar shall be Installed
around a stovepipe, or vent passing
through a wall, ceiling, floor or roof.
(d) 'When a heating system has auto-
matic controls, the controls shall be of
the type which cut off the fuel supply
upon the failure or interruption of the
flame or ignition, or whenever a pre-
determined safe temperature or pressure
Is exceeded.
§ 620.10 Electricity and lighting.
(a) All housing sites shall be provided
with electric service.
(b) Each habitable room and all com-
mon use rooms, and areas such as: Laun-
dry rooms, toilets, privies, hallways,
stairways etc., shall contain . adequate
ceUing or wall-type light fixtures. At
least one ■wall-type electrical conven-
ience outlet shall be provided hi each
individual living room.
(c) Adequate lighting shall be pro-
'vlded for the yard area, and pathways
to common use facilities.
(d) All wiring and lighting fixtures
sliall be installed and maintained in a
safe condition.
§ 620.11 Toilets.
(a) Toilets shall be constructed,
located and maintained so as to prevent
any nuisance or public health hazard.
(b) Water closets or privey seats for
each sex shall be In the ratio of not less
than one such unit for each 15 occupants,
144
5801
RULES AND REGULAHONS
with a minimum of one unit for each sex
In common use facilities.
(c) UrlnalB, constructed of nonab-
«orbent materials, may be substituted
lor men's toilet seats on the basis of
one urlnai or 34 Inches of trough-type
tirlnal for one toilet seat up to a max-
imum of one-third of the required toilet
seats.
(d) Except In Individual family units,
separate toilet accommodations for men
and women shall be provided. If toUet
facilities for men and women are in the
same building, they shall be separated
by a solid wall from floor to roof or cell-
ing. ToUets shall be distinctly marked
"men" and "women" In English and in
the native language of the persons
expected to occupy the housing.
<e) Where common use toUet facili-
ties are provided, an adequate and ac-
cessible supply of toilet tissue, with hold-
ers, shall be furnished.
(f) Common use toilets and privies
shall be well lighted and ventilated and
shall be clean and sanitary.
<g) Toilet facilities shall be located
Within 200 feet of each living unit.
(h) Privies shall not be located closer
than 50 feet from any living »mit or any
laclllty where food Is prepared or served.
(I) Privy structures and pits shall be
fly tight. Privy pits shall have adequate
capacity for the required seats.
I 620.12 _ Bathing, laundry, and hand-
iv ashing.
(a) Bathing and handwashing facili-
ties, supplied with hot and cold water
imder presstore, shall be provided for the
use of all occupants. These facilities
shall be clean and sanitary and located
Trtthin 200 feet of each living unit.
(b) There shall be a minimum of 1
showerhead per 15 persons. Shower-
heads shall be spaced at least 3 feet
apart, with a jnlnimum of 9 square feet
of floor space per unit. Adequate, dry
dressing space shall be provided In com-
mon use facilities. Shower floors shall be
constructed of nonabsorbent, nonskld
materials and sloped to properly con-
structed floor drains. Except In Individ-
ual family units, separate shower facili-
ties shall be provided each sex. When
common use shower facilities for both
sexes are In the same building they shall
be separated by a solid nonabsorbent
•wall extending from the floor to celling,
or roof, and shall be plainly designated
"men" or "women" In English and In the
native language of the persons expected
to occupy the housing.
(c) Lavatories or equivalent units
ehall be provided In a ratio of 1 per 15
persons.
(d) Laundry facilities, supplied with
hot and cold water imder pressure, shall
te provided for the use of all occupants.
Laundry trays or tubs shall be provided
In the ratio of 1 per 25 persons. Mechan-
ical washers may be provided In the
ratio of 1 per 50 persons in lieu of laun-
dry trays, although a minimum of 1
laundry tray per 100 persons shall be
provided in addition to the mechanical
washers.
§ 620,13 Cooking and eating facilities.
(a) When workers or their families
are permitted or required to cook in
their individual unit, a space shall be
provided and equipped for cooking and
eating. Such space shall be provided
with: (1) A cookstove or hot plate with
a minimum of two burners; and (2)
adequate food storage shelves and a
counter for food preparation; and (3)
provisions for mechanical refrigeration
of food at a temperature of not more
than 45° F.; and (4) a table and chairs
or equivalent seating and eating ar-
rangements, all commensurate with the
capacity of the imit; and (S) adequate
lighting and ventilation.
(b) When workers or their families
are permitted or required to cook and
eat In a common facility, a room or
building separate from the sleeping fa-
cilities shall be provided for cooking and
eating. Such room or building shall be
provided with: (1) Stoves or hot plates,
with a minimum equivalent of two
burners, in a ratio of 1 stove or hot plate
to 10 persons, or 1 stove or hot plate to
2 families; and (2) adequate food stor-
age shelves and a counter for food prep-
aration; and (3) mechanical refrigera-
tion for food at a temperature of not
more than 45° F. ; and (4) tables and
chairs or equivalent seating adequate
for the intended use of the facility; and
(5) adequate sinks with hot and cold
water under pressure; and (6) adequate
lighting and ventilation; and (7) floors
shall be of nonabsorbent, easily cleaned
materials.
(c) When central mess facilities are
provided, the kltcjien and mess hall
shall be In proper proportion to the ca-
pacity of the housing and shall be
separate from the sleeping quarters. The
physical facilities, equipment and oper-
ation shall be in accordance with pro-
visions of applicable State codes.
(d) Wall surface adjacent to all food
preparation and cooking areas shall be
of nonabsorbent, easily cleaned ma-
terial. In addition, the wall surface ad-
jacent to cooking areas shall be of fire-
resistant material.
^ 620.14 Garbage and other refuge.
(a> Durable, fly-tight, clean con-
tainers In good condition of a minimum
capacity of 20 gallons, shall be provided
adjacent to each housing unit for the
storage of garbage and other refuse.
Such containers shall be provided in a
minimum ratio of 1 per 15 persons.
(b) Provisions' shall be made for col-
lection of refuse at least twice a week,
or more often If necessary. The disposal
of refuse, ■which Includes garbage, shall
be in accordance with State and local
law.
§ 620.15 Insect and rodent control.
Honslng and facilities shaH be free of
Insects, rodents and other Termln,
§ 620.16 Sleeping faciUtie*.
(a) Sleeping facilities shall be pro-
vided for each person. Such facilities
shall consist of comfortable beds, cots
or bunks, provided with clean mat-
tresses.
<b) Any bedding provided by the
housing operator shall be clean and
sanitary.
(c) Triple deck bunks shall not be
provided.
(d) The clear space above the top of
the lower mattress of a double deck
bunk and the bottom of the upper bunk
shall be a minimum of 27 Inches. The
distance from the top of the upper mat-
tress to the ceiling shall be a minimum
of 36 inches.
(e) Beds used for double occupancy
may be provided only in family accom-
modations.
§ 620.17 Fire, safety, and first aid.
(a) All buildings in wliich people sleep
or eat shall be constructed and main-
tained In accordance with applicable
State or local flre and safety laws.
(b) In family housing and housing
units for less than 10 persons, of one
story construction, two means of escape
shall be provided. One of the t .vo required
means of escape may be a readily acces-
sible window with an openable space of
not less than 24 x 24 Inches.
(c) All sleeping quarters intended for
use by 10 or more persons, central dining
facilities, and common assembly rooms
shall have at least two doors remotely
separated so as to provide alternate
means of escape to the outside or to an
Interior hall.
(d) Sleeplng^uarters and common as-
sembly rooms on the second story shall
have a stairway, and a permanent, affixed
exterior ladder or a second stairway.
(e) Sleeping and common assembly
rooms located above the second story
shall comply with the State and local flre
and building codes relative to multiple
story dwellings.
< f ) Fire extinguishing equipment shall
be provided in a readily accessible place
located not more than 100 feet from each
housing unit. Such equipment shall pro-
Tide protection equal to a 2!4 gallon
stored pressure or 5-gallon pump-type
water extinguisher.
(g) First aid facilities shall be pro-
vided and readily accessible for use at all
time. Such facilities shall be equivalent
to the 16 imit first aid kit recommended
by the American Red Cross, and provided
in a ratio of 1 per 50 persons.
(h) No flammable or volatile liquids
or materials shall be stored In or adja-
cent to rooms used for living purposes,
except for those needed for current
household use.
<1) AgricoUural pesticides and toxle
cbemlcals shaU not be stored In tho
bousing area.
[P.R. Doc. 68-13185; FUed, Oct. »0, 19Wt
8;«« ajn.)
145
5802
APPENDIX B
CALIFORNIA TEMPORARY HOUSING STATISTICS
The statistics that follow in this appendix were gathered
by the Department of Human Resources Development (the
State Office of Economic Opportunity). They relate to
the 23 farm labor housing centers built with OEO Migrant
Division and California State Funds.
CONTENTS
Tab le
Labor Center Occupancy I
Family Size 2
Population (Adults Per Center) 3
Population (Children Per Center) 4
Number of Arrivals and Departures at all Center
locations per week) 6*
Source of Referral (all Centers) 7
Family Size and Annual Income 8
Annual Income by Center 9
School Years Completed (All Participants, All
Centers) 10
Home Base II
Next Work Stop 12
^Table 5 not in this Report.
147
5803
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 1
Labor CcnLer Occiifjdncy
Families
Number
Averac[e
Center Location
Number of
Turned
of
Indi-
Family
and Code
Families
2,61H
Per Cent
100,0
Away a/
4,337
vi<
duals
Size
TOTAL
13
,802
5.3
1 Gridley
133
5,1
0
677
5.1
2 Yuba City
181
6,9
113
901
5.0
3 Madison
112
4.3
101
629
5.6
4 Dixon
145
5.5
85
730
5.0
5 Harney Lane
276
10,5
711
1
,412
5.1
G Mathews Road #2
101
6,9
407
969
:'.4
7 Mathews Road #3
148
5,7
437
732
5,0
3 Empire
121
4,6
77
601
5,0
9 Patterson
86
3.3
15
450
5,2
10 Westley
131
5.0
21
653
5,0
11 Watsonville
107
4.1
37
598
5.6
12 Turlock
70
2.7
122
363
5.2
13 Merced
69
2.6
54
448
6.5
14 Los Banos
114
4.4
145
652
5.7
15 Hollister
105
4.0
717
618
5.9
16 Davis
85
3.2
136
404
4.8
17 Parlier
138
5.3
0
723
5.2
18 Raisin City
95
3.6
48
630
6.6
19 Livingston
87
3.3
44
483
5.6
20 Planada
79
3.0
185
471
6.0
23 Indio
155
5.9
802
658
4.2
a/ Migrant Family Housing Center at Indio, only November 1968
through July 1969.
5804
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table
2
Family
Siz
-e
Size
No
. of Families
1
2
2
313
3
378
4
461
5
416
6
347
7
236
8
173
9
107
10
95
11
43
12
20
13
13
14
8
15
5
16
1
Total No. of Families 2,618
Mean Family Size 5.3
Median Family Size 4.4
Mode Family Size 4
149
5805
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 3
Center Location & Code
1.
Gridley
2.
Yuba City
3.
Madison
4.
Dixon
5.
Harney Lane
6.
Mathews Road #2
7.
Mathews Road #3
8.
Empire
9.
Patterson
10.
Westley
11.
Watsonville
12.
Turlock
13.
Merced
14.
Los Banos
15.
Hollister
16.
Davis
17.
Parlier
18.
Raisin City
19.
Livingston
20.
Planada
23.
Indio
Adults Per Center
271
398
261
314
602
404
333
266
198
303
246
158
155
263
241
206
325
213
210
195
3 50
Total
5,910
Mean No. of Adults per Family:
2.3
150
5806
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housina Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 4
Center Location & Code
1.
Gridley
2.
Yuba City
3.
Madison
4.
Dixon
5.
Harney Lane
6.
Mathews Road #2
7.
Mathews Road #3
8.
Empire
9.
Patterson
10.
Westley
11.
Watsonville
12.
Turlock
13.
Merced
14.
Los Bancs
15.
Hollister
16.
Davis
17.
Parlier
18.
Raisin City
19.
Livingston
20.
Planada
23.
Indio
Children Per Center
406
503
368
416
810
565
399
335
252
350
352
205
293
389
377
198
398
417
273
276
308
Total
7,892
Mean No. of Children Per Family 3.0
151
5807
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 6
Number of Arrivals and Departures
(All Center Locations)
Number
Month and
Weekly Period
Number
Arri vals
Monthly
Totals
Percent
Depar-
tures
Monthly
Totals
Percent
November
1968
1-8
9-16
17-24
25-31
34
23
14
3
74
.2.8
2
1
3
6
0.2
December
1968
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
5
8
1
14
0.5
3
3
7
2
15
0.6
January
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
2
3
1
1
7
0.3
3
1
4
0.2
February
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
1
1
1
3
0.1
1
1
1
3
0.1
March
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
6
2
9
4
21
0.8
7
2
8
4
21
0.8
April
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
4
5
151
24
184
7.0
4
3
6
2
15
0.6
May
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
439
211
120
107
877
33.5
16
36
24
44
120
4,6
June
1969
1- 8
9-16
17-24
25-31
271
191
119
53
634
24.2
85
152
73
44
354
13.5
152
5808
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 7
Source of Referral
(All Centers)
Referred By No. of Families Percent
Totals 2,618 100.0
26.3
27.5
2.8
4.6
4.4
6.6
0.8
3.2
23.8
Here Before
688
Family or Friend
720
Other Migrant
72
Employer
120
Labor Office
116
Self
173
Mass Media
22
Other
85
Unknown
622
1S3
5809
a)
>
n
2'^
z
u
(0
a
0)
Q
(U
C E
CTl
(0 0
f-H
Q) U
o
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1
s. c
M
Q> -O
B 0)
0 -P -u
CO
un
■HCOr-ll-(^^Lna^ln^Dln
u 0 nj
^
•
rsl (N r-H rH rH
C Z 4J
.-H
»*
H W
1 u
O 0)
in
CO
oo^,-ir^r~oocNrHr~-r^rM^Mr-H ^
o >
(N
•
o o
^
•^
^
</> u8
1
O CTi
'^
in
(Nl(N^(NOror^rH.H^ n rH
o <ri
't
•
^^^^^(Nf^^M -^r^
o a\
rH
in
in lo
</>
1
o a\
r~
r^
rOTtCTi(NOrMr»roo<ri'4'(N^rH
O <Tl
ro
•
m»^\Ovoi^inro(Nm
o <n
'd-
\D
t 'T
r-<
</>■
OJ
O ON
(N
r^
rH^«t'^<ri'nr^\O^<TiC0<N<NM
e
o 0>
in
r^OfNfNCXiooiorntN
o
O 0^
r^
00*
rH rH r-l
o
ro ro
(N
c
w
H
r-(
1
fO
o U^
^
o
rM'^'^r~(TiiDCTi'd*'*'*criir>rnnM
3
O (Ti
in
•
OOO^i-ir^rorOiHiH
C
O Oi
■•D
in
rH ^ r-H
c
<N <N
CM
<
w
O <J\
a\
0>
"^(NOOoOrHr-o^r^i^ (NrH
o <n
m
•
iD r~ vD >* ^ fW ^
o en
n
fN
rH rH
r-l
<rt-
o <n
tN
^
ro 00 in in (Ti cN
O 0^
•^
rH
un ON
^
VI-
U
dJ o
r~
n
(N rO —1 rH
XI o
•
C in
o
D </>
l-l
00
o
(NrooOrH^r«vornr^LnmoroooinM
(d
.-I
r-(l^l£)r-l^nr^r-l(Tl^CN^
4->
^
o
nn>^«;rro(NrH^
0
o
e^
<N
^
■p
>i
•-{ u
c
.H (U
n) (U
0)
•H N
^•i
CI
.HrMrn^invDr^oocTio^fNfnTj'invD
6 ■r^
^
^ ^ ^ .H ^ iH ^
(0 en
Eh 3
(U
b
Z
cu
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 28
5810
4J
c
<u
E
a
0 ,„
rH « cr.
0) ^ vD
> ,"" cn
M
111
■P
W U (1)
c
U S d)
(U
C)
3 '„ 0
>1
Reso
- De
in
XI
0)
ai
.-1
R
C >'00
in
0
o
ni'-*\0
H
c
3 S --<
H
a: "J
rH
f^ ^^
(0
^ . <u
3
nt o
rant
vemb
<
0) O' 0
Bs«
M
(0
a
(U
Q
\.
IQ|
(U
c e
(Ti
invoo^oor'4r^ococri<*^(NOOr~rH(ri'5'r^(Ti'3>
(0 o
nH
ONncriinr^ao.-i(T><Ti^fNnr--r-ioo^r^inooo
0) o
s c
H
o
1
inroaO'^(TiM(NOOi^aooocyirHr~<TiotN^oor»
rorocNrncNrorocNCsj^'Nj'rorsirocNCNCNrnrocNrsi
w
<o-
Q) X)
e -p Q)
0 0 -P
00
in
tNncO(Nr-<n 1 .-Hinro^ 1 1 ^inin^'^t I rvjin
0 Z (0
rH
•
^ <N -H ^ ^
C -P
iH
■<*
H W
1 u
O dJ
in
00
^ iTi vf \o a^ O 1 nnfN<;j'"^r-(inr--cN I i^^roro
° ^
fN
•
^ ^ i-l .H rH
O O
r-H
^
^
</> >4
r
o a>
^
in
i-(0>r--^rorMronTtcriO'*r-ir~cNn^coinrMiH
O (T\
^
•
■H 1-1 CM rH rH
O CT>
■H
in
in in
</)■
1
o a>
r^
r^
r~ vD O.rH .-l^aa^rrlr»Mln(N00C0r^O^--CT^a^00r^
O <T\
ro
•
(NnrHminrO'a'rH (Nrvlr-I cm rH rHrH rH
O (Ti
"*
vO
■* -*
.H
w-
0)
o <n
(N
r^
rHONvoorMr^cTv^joincNOO^frHrHOOr^vorooOrH
e
o en
in
•
^^(Nin(~.^in^n(N^rHrnnmrHrHrMnrH'5t
0
O (71
r~-
00
u
n n
(N
c
40-
H
r-t
1
Ifl
O CTi
CN
o
lX>0(*1fMinOi^tNCNOrNTlrH'a'\£)r^rHCnO(Nr»
D
O CTi
in
•
(N<itcNnin'^tN^(NrnrHrH(N<Nrri(NinrHfNmin
c
O (Ti
VD
in
c
(N rM
(N
<
</)-
1
o cn
(7>
ON
OCNfNOOror'-rHrr^crirnrHfMrHflO't'^in^rri
O Oi
m
•
rHrHrH intNrHrHrHrH rH .HrHrHinrH rH(N
o cri
ro
fN
>-H rH
i-l
</>■
1
o en
<N
vD
CNVOfNlrHVOIrHrHCMlrHrH'^tNl | IrHlfN
O <T\
■>*
•
rH
in cTi
rH
v>
»^
0) o
r^
ro
IrHl IrHl 1 1 1 1 IrHrHlCNIrHI 1 1 1
TJ O
•
C in
O
D«>
^
Id
00
O
pirHrMinvOrHOOrHvDrHt^ocn^ininooinr^criin
+J
r-l
•
noOrHxtr^co^trMOOroor^i£rHOOOro(Tioor>in
0
kO
O
^r^r-t>-tC<)r-tr-in^ •-* ,-^ n-i r-{ r^ ,-i
H
«
o
CM
.-1
+J
M
•-^ u
c
(U
n) 01
01
4J
^•i
o
rHtNn^}'invDr*oo<T>o<-ir>4m'*invor^ooCT»on
c
u
^^,-^^^r^^^,-{^(^(\)
0)
t« 3
v
u
z
a,
5811
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 10
School Years Completed
(All Participants, All Centers)
Education
Level Totals Percent
None 401 6.3
1-7 3,825 60.5
8 529 8.4
9-11 799 12.6
12 347 5.5
13 - 16 49 0.8
17-19 1 0.0
Unknown 375 5.9
6,326 100.0
156
5812
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Table 11
Home Base
Home Base
Total
Percent
Arizona
180
6.9
California
895
34.2
Oklahoma
11
0.4
Texas
770
29.4
Other Western
States
100
3.8
All Other States
71
2.7
Mexico
502
19.2
Not Stated
89
3.4
2,618
100.0
If?
5813
Department of Human Resources Development
Migrant Family Housing Centers
November 1968 - December 1969
Tabl
e 12
Next
Work Stop
Next Work Stop
Totals
Percent
Arizona
]04
3.9
California
1,079
41.2
Oklahoma
1
0.0
Texas
376
14.4
Other Western
States
181
6.9
All Other States
13
0.5
Mexico
263
10.0
Undecided or
Not Stated
601
23.0
2,618
100.0
158
5814
NATIONAL RURAL HOUSING CONFERENCE
Airlie House, Warrenton, Virginia
June 9-12, 1969
Background Paper Number 10
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION AND FARM -LABOR HOUSING:
MISSING THE MARK
Jim Hightower
Associate Director of
Program Development
Rural Housing Alliance
5815
FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRATION AND
FARM-LABOR HOUSING: MISSING THE MARK
By Jim Hlghtower
This paper does not pretend to be an in-depth analysis of
the attempts by the entire U. S. Government or even by the
Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) to house the domestic farm
workers of the United States. Much more simply and modestly,
this paper reflects one person's examination of readily-available,
public information relevant to just two of FmHA's housing pro-
grams that are designed especially for farm labor: (1) Farm-Labor
Housing Loans, and (2) Domestic Farm-Labor Housing Grants. 1
More than any thing else, the function of this paper is to
stimulate questions about these two programs in order to assist
the National Rural Housing Conference generally, and the Farm-
Labor Housing Workshop specifically, in their consideration of
this country's present efforts to help farm workers obtain decent
housing.
THE NEED FOR FARM LABOR HOUSING
The Departr,.3nt of Agriculture reports that there were 3-1
million persons who did farm work for wages in 1967-2 These 3-1
million people, plus their usually-large families, range in type
from the "hired hand" on a small farm, to migrant families,
moving from state to state to serve the labor needs of American
agribusiness .
Probably the one common characteristic of these 3-1 million
Americans is their poverty. In 1967, just over 2 million of them
did farm work only; they earned an average of $1,247 for their
— ' The insured loan program is section 51'< of the Housing Act of
19^9. It was approved June 30, 1961, as part of the Housing
Act of 1961 (PL 87-70).
The grant program is section 516 of the Housing Act of 19't9.
It was approved "September 2, 196'*, as part of the Housing Act
of 196** (PL 88-560).
1/ U. S. Department of Agriculture. "The Hired Farm Working Force
of 1967." Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic
Report No. l48. September, I968. Table 1, p. 8.
5816
labor. The other 1.1 million people tried to make ends meet by
combining non-farm work with their farm efforts; this helped a
little — they averaged $1,903 in 1967.3 This is poverty by any
bureaucratic standard. It also is some indication of their ability
to provide any kind of decent housing for themselves and their
families .
Nor is housing farm labor simply a matter of hurdling the
formidable barrier of poverty; the difficulty is further aggr vated
by the migratory and seasonal nature of much of the work force.
Of 3-1 million farm laborers, 1,065,000 — something over a third —
were seasonal workers.^ Of the total 1967 farm labor force,
276,000 — including 137,000 seasonal farm laborers — were migrant
farm workers. 5 Thus, some 43 percent of the hired farm working
force of 1967 either were migrants or were seasonally employed.
Apparently, no national survey has been taken of the housing
needs specifically of farm laborers. In an interview, an FmHA
official could offer no estimate of the condition of farm labor
housing, nor of the number of units, cost, and time that would be
required to ensure adequate and decent housing for 3.1 million
farm workers and their families." To the knowledge of this writer,
no one actually has measured the present condition of farm-labor
housing in the United States.
Nonetheless, there are ail-too clear indicators of that con-
dition and need. The President's National Advisory Commission on
Rural Poverty reports that "nearly 60 percent of all rural fami-
lies with incomes of less than $2,000 lived in houses that were
dilapidated or lacked complete plumbing. ■'"? It has been pointed
Ibid, Tables 11 and 12, no. 21 and 22
3/
_' Defined by the Department of Agriculture as persons v*ho did
25-l'J9 days of farm wage-work.
5./ Defined by the Department of Agriculture as persons who left
their home counties to do farm wage-work.
h/ Interview, Rural Housing Loan Division, FmHA, Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D. C, May 2,^, 1969-
U The President's National Advisory Commission on Rural Poverty,
The People Left Behind. September, I967. p. 93-
5817
minimum standards of health, safety and sanitation; 65 percent of
that housing was deteriorated and dilapidated; 33 percent had
inadequate sanitation facilities; 30 percent had no bathing faci-
lities; and 25 percent was without running water. ^^ To varying
degrees, this inhuman — even Immoral — condition is repeated
again and again off the main highways and behind the rustic beauty
of rural America.
But decent and adequate farm-labor housing is not just a need.
It is also a very real, human aspiration. A 1962 survey in Fresno
County, California, revealed that farm workers there ranked housing
second, just below pay, in seeking employment .15 From its own
interviews, the Migratory Labor Subcommittee found in 1967, that
"numerous workers place housing even ahead of wages in making a
job selection."!" In the California survey, a quarter of all single
workers, and a third of the married workers, ranked housing first
in importance to them.
THE FmHA RESPONSE
In 1961, Congress amended the Housing Act of 19^9 by authoriz-
ing FmHA to Insure loans to farm owners, associations of farmers,
governmental bodies, or non-profit organizations so that they could
build or repair housing for domestic farm labor. In 1965, Congress
again amended the 19'J9 Housing Act, this time authorizing FmHA to
make grants to governmental bodies or non-profit organizations to
pay up to one-half of the cost of developing low-rent housing for
domestic farm workers.
In spite of some celebration by the friends of farm workers
when these two laws were passed by Congress, it Is doubtful that
either act ev&r really held much promise for the ill-housed, farm-
working family. Whatever promise was there, has been only slightly
lii/ California- Department of Industriai Relations, Division' of
Housing. "Housing Deficiencies of-Agrlcultniral Workers and
Other' Low-Income Groups in- Rural and Urban Fringe Communities.
November 27, 1962. p. 13-li(.
iS./ John Mac Gillivary. "Motivation of Domestic Seasonal Farm
Workers." Vegetable Crops Series 127. University of
California at Davis. April 1963.
!§/ Op.cltv , "The Migratory Labor Problem in the United States:
1967 Report." p. 30.
5818
out above that the average annual Income for all those in the 196?
farm labor force was under $2,000. Another important Indicator
offered by the President's Commission is that "rural families
who rent are twice as likely to occupy substandard housing as fami-
lies who own their homes. "8 Of the 3.1 million in the 1965 farm-
labor force, 1,756,000 — over 56 percent — lived in rental
housing. 9
Another indicator of bad farm labor housing comes from the
Migratory Labor Subcommittee of the Senate, which reported in
February of this year that "forty-two percent of all farm housing
is substandard. "10 In 1967, Just under one-fourth of the total
farm-labor force lived on a farm residence . ■'■■'• In addition, a
great many more farm workers — especially migrants and those who
were seasonally employed — lived in farm housing at least part
of the year.
Also, as this same Senate committee reported in 1967, "the
lack of adequate on-the-farm housing has caused the place of hired
farmworkers to change significantly during the last 15 years. "12
In 19U8-I\9 , some 65 percent of America's farm workers lived on
the farm; by 1966-67, only 27 percent remained in farm housing. 13
Though there is no extensive survey of farm labor housing con-
ditions in America, there have been endless studies on a local
level — particularly of labor camps. Anyone's worst suspicions
are confirmed by a review of these studies. One unhappy example
of farm-labor housing was uncovered by an eight-county survey
taken in the heart of the California farm community. In this one,
local situation, 80 percent of the farm workers' housing violated
£/ U. S. Department of Agriculture. "Domestic Migratory Farmworkers,
Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic Report No. 121.
September, 1967. Table 7, p. 9.
10/ U.S. Senate. Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. "The Migratory
Labor Problem in the United States: 1969 Report." 91st Congress,
1st Session; Report No. 91-83. February 19, 1969. p. 3'^.
11/ Op.cit. "The Hired Farm Working Force of 1967." Table h, p. 10.
— / U. S. Senate. Subcommittee on Migratory Labor. "The Migratory
Farm Labor Problem in the United States: 1967 Report." 90th
Congress, 1st Session; Report No. 71. March 15 » 1967. P- 36.
1^/ Op.cit. "The Hired Farm Working Force of 1967." Figure 1, p. 3.
5819
kept in the performance. Neither the insured loan program nor the
grant program have proven a match for the clear need and obvious
desire for at leaut decent farm-labor housing. 17
PmHA has operated the loan program since 1962, and the grant
program since I966. As of December 31, 1968, II6 loans had been
made in 30 states for a total of $13,728,560; 13 grants totalling
$9,292,770 had been made in 6 states. All told, these two farm-
labor housing programs, funded and operating for a total of 12
program years, have expended $23,021,330 on 129 projects in 30
states — all this has produced 7,078 housing units, 45 percent of
which are dormitory units built for one person each.l° In light
of the need, the response seems pitifully weak.
The geographic distribution of these loans and grants appears
to have no relation to the national need. Of $13,728,560 obligated
since 1962 for Insured loans for farm-labor housing, $11,306,800
(82 percent) went to three states — Florida California, and Texas.
These same three states received $8,637,510 (93 percent) of the
funds that have been expended by FmHA for farm labor housing grants
since 1965. Of the 3,903 family units financed since 1962 by both
the loan and grant programs, 3,218 of them were built in these
three states. Florida, California and Texas also have been the
sites for over half of the dormitory units built under these two
programs . 19
Of couise, these three states have a sizeable farm workers
population — and they are especially noted for their huge migrant
populations. But consider the three states that rank next in
migrant and seasonal farm-worker population: Michigan, Arizona
17,/ There are several other Federal housing programs that relate to
the special need for farm-labor housing, but the insured loan
and the grant programs of FmHA represent the specific and
primary governmental effort to deal with the problem.
See "Housing Handbook: A Guide to Improved Farmworker Housing.'
U. S. Department of Labor. Manpower Administration. 1967.
l£/ U. S. Department of Agriculture. FmHA. "Labor Housing Loans
and Grants Approved; Cumulative as of December 31, 1968."
Unpublished tabulation. NOTE: Reprinted as Appendix A of
this paper.
-^' Figures in this paragraph are computed from: FmHA. "Labor
Housing Loans and Grants Approved," Ibid.
5820
and Oregon. 2'-' Since 1962, Michigan received one loan for $10,300
and built 4 family units; Arizona has obtained no loans or grants
under these programs; and Oregon has taken one loan and one grant
for a total of $417,150 to finance 175 units. 21 While the top
three states in migrant and seasonal farm-worker population split
$19,941,310 to finance 4,866 units of farm-labor housing, the next
three states divided only $427,450 among them (except for Arizona,
which got none of it) to finance 179 units.
It is interesting to note the particularly high — even
disproportionate — shares of loan and grant money that have gone
to two states: Florida and Mississippi. Florida has been the
recipient of just under half of the total financing offered by
these two farm-labor housing programs since 1962, and Florida has
been the site of over half of the units built under the programs. 22
Mississippi is a state with a high percentage of its population
engaged in agricultural work, though it does not rank particularly
high nationally in total number of farm workers. Nonetheless,
riississippi ranks second in the number of farm-labor housing loans
Insured, and fourth in the amount of those loans. Mississippi has
fared considerably better under the loan program than have its
neighbors in the south — Louisiana, Alabama and Georgia. 23
In its 1967 Report, the Migratory Labor Subcommittee of the
Senate noted that "the improvement in farm labor housing and thus
the fulfillment of the congressional intent to ease our Nation's
farm labor problems by making farmwork more attractive, especially
to Migrant farmworkers, has not been met." The Subcommittee
blamed Congress:
20/
21/
22/
23/ Ibid.
Op.cit . , "The Migratory Farm Labor Problem in the United States;
1969 Report." Appendix A, p. 115-129. (Top six states, in
declining order of seasonal and Migrant population in 1967-68,
are Texas, California, Florida, Michigan, Arizona and Oregon).
Op.cit . FmHA. "Labor Housing Loans and Grants Approved."
Ibid.
5821
"This failure is due to the fact
that for fiscal 1965 and again
In 1966 only $3 million was
appropriated for farm labor housing
grants under the act. The need for
appropriations many times over this
amount is obvious. "24
Certainly, Congress must appropriate far-greater sums than
they are appropriating now if the clear need for farm-labor housing
Is to be met. But under the insured loan and the grant programs,
FmHA has failed to make full use of even the small amount that
Congress has been willing to spend. As of April 30, 1969, Congress
had appropriated a total of $17,024,000 for the farm-labor housing
grant program, yet FmHA had expended only $9,727,550 — just 57
percent. 25 The story is worse for the insured loan program: since
1962 Congress has authorized FmHA to obligate $60,000,000 for
farm-labor housing loans; yet FmHA actually has obligated only
$14,224,630 — a mere 23 percent of their authority. 26
Each year. Congress has appropriated more money for these two
programs than it had in the previous year; yet each year, FmHA
continues to expend about the same percentage — if not less — as
the previous year. In fiscal year 1965, to choose the worst excimple.
Congress allocated $6,000,000 to the insured loan program. This
represented a 100 percent increase over the obligational authority
approved the previous year. Yet FmHA obligated only $47,480 —
eight-tenths of one percent of their authority!
Officials at FmHA explain that their agency responds to the
demand that comes into their offices — if the demand is small,
FmHA's response is small. 27 They point out that the demand does
1-1/ Op.cit . , "The Migratory Farm Labor Problem in the United States
1967 Report." p. 29.
i^/ See Appendix B
26/
See Appendix C
27/
— i-' Op.cit . , Interview
5822
not come from the farm workers, but from growers, associations of
growers, governmental bodies, and non-profit organizations. "Under
the law, the laborer himself is not a customer of ours," says an
FmHA official. "Our customers are those who are willing to take
responsibility for housing farm workers."
In short, the response of these two programs is to the demand,
not the need, for farm-worker housing. It is not too surprising
that growers, and the Institutions that they dominate, do not
make a heavy demand on the Federal treasury to house their laborers.
As the Migratory Labor Subcommittee observed in its 1969 Report:
"... Many farmers are unwilling
to make the capital investment re-
quired for the construction of
housing for migratory workers in
spite of the liberal terms of
financial assistance available under
some Federal Government programs.
Moreover, they are reluctant to build
housing and maintain it in good con-
dition since they know that it may
be vacant for much of the year. "28
Housing farm workers — even with Federal aid — is a large
and sometimes-risky business expense for growers; and too much
business expense cuts into prof its. 29 Yet, under these two Con-
gressional acts, thousands of farm workers in critical need of
decent housing must wait on the doubtful willingness of growers
to walk into an FmHA office and ask to be saddled with such an
expense. FmHA officials say that the actual amount of loans and
grants that they make is a fair reflection of the demand for
farm-labor housing under their two programs.
Inevitably, the failure of FmHA to spend its farm-labor hous-
ing appropriation will lead to a cut -back on these programs. The
cut-back already is underway for the grant program. The new Nixon
budget requests a cut in these grants from the $6,215,000 appro-
priated for fiscal year 1969, to $3,700,000 for fiscal year 1970.
28/ Op cit . , "The Migratory Farm Labor Problem in the United States:
1969 Report." p. 35.
29./ For an example of this expense, see: U. S. Department of Labor.
"Housing for Migrant Farmworkers." Farm Labor Developments.
October, 1968. p. 15-16.
5823
As of April 30, 1969, FmHA had granted only $2,192,500 (35-3 percent)
of its 1969 appropriation. 30 in Justifying the budget cut for
this program, the communication from the President states that
"this reduction is made possible by reducing obligations in line
with the fiscal year 1959 experience. "31 In short, reasons a budget-
minded President, since you don't spend it, we won't burden you
with it.
COMMENT ON THE FmHA RESPONSE
The fundamental — and fatal — flaw in both the insured loan
and the grant programs for farm-labor housing is not that they are
starved for funds, nor that they suffer from evil or corrupt admin-
istration; rather it is that the programs are mis-directed. Congress
has shown a willingness to fund these programs to the extent that
there is a demand. But what Congress also has done is to write a
housing law in which demand bears no relation to need. Rather than
directly helping the farm worker to meet his basic, human need for
decent housing, these programs offer just another subsidy to help
the growers meet their economic needs. If the quality of farm-
labor housing is to be elevated at least to a level of decency, it
will not be accomplished by more bribe-offers to growers. As is
happening in these programs, when the growers fail to respond, the
ill-housed simply are out of luck.
The focus of a farm-labor housing program should be on farm
laborers, not on their employers. Yet the insured loan and the
grant programs discussed here treat the farm workers almost as
incidental to the housing.
If a farm-labor housing program is to deserve the name, it
must have a human rather than an economic orientation. If such
a program is to be successful, it must have a clear and detailed
assessment of the need, as well as a visible, comprehensive plan
for responding to the specifics of that need. Also, the admin-
istering agency must be authorized and expected to initiate housing
In response to need, rather than sitting passively in Washington,
waiting for demand to walk in the door. Further, if the adminis-
tering agency is successfully to minister to such a human need as
30/ See Appendix B.
11/ Communication from the President of the United States.
"Reductions in 1970 Appropriation Request." 91st Congress,
1st Session. House Document No. 91-100. April 15, 1969-
5824
farm-labor housing, it must operate independently of the economic
pressures and biases of growers.
Until a law is passed that would establish a farm-labor housing
program containing these basic features, there need be no concern
for how much Congress appropriates — nor need there be any real
hope that the condition of ill-housed farm workers will be much
improved.
5825
APPENDIX A
LABOR HOUSING LOANS AND GRANTS APPROVED
CUMULATIVE AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1968
Loans
Grants :
Number
Family
of : Dormitory
State .
NUSTB'
er: Amount
:Nu
mber: Amount :
unitsJNo. Persons
Alabama
7
$
35,150
6
30
Arkansas
5
20,590
5
California
5
3
,29'J,380
5
$3,896,500
9i\3
Colorado
2
26'f,'i00
1
2^4 i(, 960
66
32
Florida
16
6
,865,220
3
3,815,750
1950
1643
Georgia
1
5,000
1
Idaho
6
595,570
252
99
Illinois
2
155,300
1
150,000
fJS
Indiana
2
42, "00
1<5
Kansas
1
77,500
20
Louisiana
3
72,590
8
Maine
i)
iJO.jOO
5
Michigan
1
10,300
4
Minnesota
2
20,590
2
Mississippi
10
297,750
41
Missouri
2
16,530
2
New Jersey
8
35,300
14
89
New York
2
83,000
839
North Carolina
7
i\k,550
5
98
North Dakota
H
32,000
4
Ohio
2
38,890
26
36
Oklahoma
1
2, ;oo
1
Oregon
1
156,850
1
260,300
85
90
South Carolina
1
7, '120
30
South Dakota
1
10,500
1
Texas
7
1
,1147,200
2
925,260
325
5
Virginia
4
28,670
3
16
Washington
3
275, 60
75
140
West Virginia
1
1^4,300
28
V/isconsin
5
37,fl50
5
TOTAL :
116
$13
,728,560:
13
$ ,292,770
; 3903
■• 3175
Source: U.
Department of Agriculture,
"mHA. Unpublished tabulation.
36-513 O - 71 - pt. 8B - 29
5826
APPENDIX B
PROFILE OP INSURED LOANS FOR FARM-LABOR HOUSING
(Section 51'^)
OBLIGATIONAL APPROVED OBLIGATIONAL NUMBER
FISCAL AUTHORITY AUTHORITY ACTUALLY OP LOANS
YEAE APPROVED BY USED BY PmHA INSURED
CONGRESS Amount Percent
1962
1963
ige^j
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969*
1, TOO, 100
1,000,000
3,noo,000
6,000,000
9,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
15,000,000
52,500
5
221,i450
22
88t,300
30
^^7,^80
0.
3
,'J65,8iJ0
33
3
,818,360
33
H
,49'<,620
33
1
,2iJ0,^80
8
2
8
8
11
22
26
31
21
iOTALS
50,000,000
lii, 22H ,630
23.7
129
•■ As of April 30, 1969 — i.e., ';ith two months remaining in the
fiscal year.
"OURCE: Chart structured by the author; figures filled-in
by FmHA, through the Rural Housing Loan Division.
The author also sought figures by year for the
number of units built and the number of persons housed, I'Ut
was told by PmHA that these figures were unavailable.
5827
O
o
O
O
^
o
CO
CM
m
nH
LA
CO
in
C
'-
«
o
4-)
a\
m
m
CO
4J tH
c
OO
in
a%
m
•H 4->
3
o
r^
CM
c^
CO
4-1 n]|o 1
^(
O O Mlp 1
,_(
■a
J-> f-. -H
<
•co-
•e>
as
B^ n
^
0) 1 a)
73 C tx
V3
nj o Sh
o
■p
s z o
o
rn
C\J
ro
CO
c
o
o
o
o
o
o
r\j
o
OA
f\j
m
4-1
m
no
t^
>JD
o
o
f— 1
^
•«
n
n)
■p
VD
CTn
vo
VD
ON
>!
4->
c
LTV
CO
.:3-
ON
fn
C
3
t—^
CO
.^
C\J
o
dJ
o
«
«
A
»,
hC
O E
e.
Oj
(-H
C\J
i-H
CO
(U
■P C W
■a:
<«
<J>
JJ
Ch <d
(D 0) -H
T3 > -a
n) O O
o
•a
E O CQ
£:
^
rvj
m
.J
m
c
1
ctf
1
0)
L
r
J3
(0 ^
E
p e
.;:r
in
in
t~-
rH
3
O 3
CM
Z
E-i I^
^
o
o
t^
U\
6^
t—
[~-
vo
m
t—
w ^
c c
O 0)
•H D.
4J CO
O
o
o
o
o
n) <
O)
-ZT
cr\
o
in
•H >,a:
ro
^
CM
in
in
£h rH E
<*
•%
D.-H fc
p
VO
CO
o
rvj
r-
O (fl
c
in
[^^
o
ON
CM
t, 3 >=
3
r-l
VO
t—
fH
t^
D. -P CD
o
-»
D. O
E
C\J
f\J
<M
CM
ON
< <
<
■«•
■¥>
(0
c
o
■H >5
-i-> cp tn
o
o
o
o
o
rtJ (0
o
o
o
o
o
•H ■O (U
o
o
o
o
o
^^ <D t<
*N
n
D. > bO
o
^
L'^
Ln
.;3-
O O C
o
.zr
vo
iH
C\J
U U O
o
CO
a\
C\J
o
a D o
r.
'^
«i
a c
CO
on
ro
KO
t—
a: <
•eg-
i-H
1-1
CO
CO
*
tj
o ^
vr>
r-
oo
ON
<
w n)
VD
vo
VJD
U5
E-i
•H q>
O
(j\
ON
ON
o
fc >
"■
1
^
f-H
rH
rH
6^1
•- c
bC W
t. o
■H C 1>
O -H
<u. o ■-<
x: tn
m jQ
4-> -H
jj ti <D
3 >
x: (U iH
Ctf iH
hO a-^
Q
3 cd
0)
O t-l >
x: c
V) O ">
4-> (d
o
O U 3
>>lJ
m 0)
i3
rH X) a>
bO
<is e u
■a c
3 <u
01 T-l
Sh C E
U to
o
3 3
x: 0) to
4-> O
+j x: <D
o X
3 4J t.
3
« 3
•a w
-P (0
4) C -H
(0 ti
x: (d Vm
3
H
■P K
-P 0)
U
»H to
nJ (U
•H 0)
J3 £
3 x:
O JJ
X3 -P
5828
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
WASHINGTON
JUN 2 6 1970
Honorable Walter F. Mondale
Chairman, Subcommittee on Migratory Labor
Committee on Labor and Public Welfare
United States Senate
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This is in further reply to your request of May 1, 1970, for
information concerning housing facilities and enforcement
procedures. I am enclosing the information you requested.
I regret the delay in furnishing the desired data. However,
much of it had to be obtained from regional or State offices.
If further information becomes available, I will be happy to
promptly furnish it to you.
Sincerely,
h^-^e^^-^
Secretary of Labor
Enclosure
5829
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON MIGBATORI LABOR
TO THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR CONCERNING
MIGRANT & SEASONAL FARMWORKER HOUSING
1. Q. With regard to housing code and sanitatloD codes and regulations:
(a) Please describe the general method of compelling compliance
with, and enforcement of, housing and sanitation regulations.
Please include appropriate references to each regulation.
(b) 5y way of illustration, please attach the relevant
documents for the States of Michigan, Washington, Idaho, Texas,
and Florida.
A. (a) In those states having housing regulations, in general a
license is required to operate the housing, and enforcement of
those regulations is administered by the State Department of
Health, and violations are punishable as a misdemeanor. For
exajnple, the State Sanitary Code of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, in their State Sanitary Code Article III,
Regulation 22.2, states, "A farm labor cajap shatLl not be
operated by any person or occupied by workers until a current
certificate of occupancy has been issued and posted in the
headquarters or main building of such camp. "
Generally, the state codes contain a provision for violation of
the housing code by providing punishment as for the commission
of a misdemeanor. The New Jersey Code 3k:9A-3k provides, "Any
person, or the agent or officer thereof, who violates any
provisions of this article or of any rule or regulation duly
issued under this act, ehall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and
upon conviction thereof, shall be punishable by a fine of not
more than $1,000 or imprisonment of not more than one (l) year
or both."
(b) The state of Texas has no housing code relating to migrant
housing. However, enclosed are copies of the state rules and
regulations governing agricultural labor camps for the states
of Michigan, Washington, Idaho, and Florida.
2. Q. Please describe in detail the procedures followed to compel
enforcement of federal regulations by States using the federal
recruitment system or otherwise subject to federal control.
A. Title 20 CFR 602.9 provides in part that: "No order for
recruitment of domestic agricultural workers sheill be placed
into interstate clearance unless: (d) The State has
ascertained that housing and facilities which comply with the
provisions of part 620 of this chapter are available."
Part 620 contains the Department's standards for housing of
agricultural workers.
5830
When filing an order requesting interstate recruitment of workers
an employer furnishes information as to where those workers will
be housed. Inspection is then made by State Health officials, or
by Employment Security personnel in those States that do not have
regulations relating to such housing. If the housing designated
by the prospective employer fails to meet the higher requirements
of the federal. State or local requirements, the employer is
informed that his order for interstate recruitment of workers
cannot be accepted.
3. Q. How does the Labor Department assert control over labor camps in
the various States in which migrant and seasonal labor are relied
upon? Are bases other than federal funding of State and local
agencies, or the operation of the federal recruitment system used
to support this control? If so, describe in detail, with
references to all such devices and to the States where each is
relied upon. If not, why not?
A. The only control the Department has over the housing provided
migrant workers is to deny usage of its interstate recruitment
services. We are informed that the Farmers Home Administration
of the Department of Agriculture now requires that all housing
financed with labor housing loans at lea^t meet the standards
set out in 20 CFR 620 a^ well as State and local requirements.
k. Q. For all States relying on migrant labor, please list all private
and publicly-owned camps and other facilities used to house 10 or
more migrant workers. Please describe generally the procedures
followed in regulating the camps or other housing not previously
discussed in question 3 above.
A. We are unable to furnish a list of privately owned facilities
housing 10 or more workers. Usage of such facilities vary from
year to year and only come to our attention when a request is
made that workers recruited through our interstate clesurance
system be housed in such facilities.
We are informed that the following housing is used to house
migrant workers:
California:
Migrant Housing:
1. Rt. 1, Box 355
Oroville Gridley Road
Gridley, Butte County
5831
2. p. 0. Box 631
Yuba City, Sutter County
3. Rt. 1, Box 150
Nusted Road
Williams, Colusa County
k. MsidlsoD
Yolo County
5. Rt. 1, Box 625
Car Yolo Co Rd 105 & 36
South & East of Davis
6. P. 0. Box A
Pedrlck & Casey Road
Dixon, Solano County
7. 1^320 East Harney Lane
Lodl, San Joaquin County
8. 225 W. Mathews Road
French Ceunp, San Joaquin County
9. J.77T W. Mathews Road
French Camp, San Joaquin County
10. 5130 South Avenue
Empire, Stanislaus County
11. P. 0. Box 63
Westley, Stanislaus County
12. Walnut Avenue
Patterson, Stanislaus County
13. I6l40 N. Santa Fe Drive
Turlock, Merced County
Ik. 2753 N- Santa Fe Drive
Merced, Merced County
15 . Planada
3830 E. Gerard Avenue
Le Grand, Merced County
16. 637 Harkins Slough Road
Watsonvllle, Santa Cruz County
5832
17 . Livingston
9200 Wests ide Blvd.
Atwater, Merced County
18. 18926 W. Henry Miller Road
Los Banos, Merced County
19. 3235 Souths ide Road
Hollister, San Benito County
20. 7520 West Manning
Raisin City, Fresno County
21. 6800 S. Acadeny
Parlier, Fresno County
22. P. 0. Box 638
Shaft er, Kern County
23. 47-094^ Van Buren Avenue
Indio, Riverside County
Idaho:
1. Caldwe3J. Housing Authority
Caldwell Lahor Camp
Caldwell, Idaho
Florida :
1. Fort Iify-ers Housing Authority
Fort Hyers, Florida
2. Pompano Housing Authority
Pompano Beach, Florida
3. Belle Glade Housing Authority
Belle Glade, Florida
k. Pahokee Housing Authority
Pahokee, Florida
5. Homestead Housing Authority
Homestead, Florida
5833
Washington:
1. Farm Labor Housing Corp.
Othello, Washington
2. Locsil Slope Farm Labor Housing Corp.
Royfiil City, Washington
3* Stateline Feirm Labor Cajnp
Wall aval la, Washington
The health and sanitation conditions in housing, both public and private,
are within the jurisdiction of the State and local health agencies and
are regulated by them.
Q. In any of the States discussed above, have there been efforts to
use persuasion, threats of the loss of federal funds, or other
such actions, to secure enforcement of the States' housing and
sanitation regulations? If so, please describe with examples,
particularly relating to the States of Michigan, Washington,
Idaho, Texas, and Florida.
A. The regulations of the Department relating to migrant labor
housing (20 CFR 620) only provide that our services shall be
denied if housing meeting those standards is not provided. In
order to secure upgrading and effective administration of State
or local standards we have had recourse only to our powers of
persuasion. Members of our national office staff and members of
the staffs of the Regional Manpower Administrators have met
numerous times with State Employment Service and Health Department
offici8d.s in attempting to secure better administration and
better housing and sanitation standards. As a result of those
efforts a number of States now have revised their standards so
they equal or exceed those of this Department. Among the States
that have amended their housing standards are: New York,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, Michigan,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Washington.
With regard to compliance and enforcement of housing and
sanitation codes: (a) Is there an agency of the Labor Department
regularly assigned to any of the duties described in questions 2,
3, and 5 above? (b) How many persons are so employed? (c) What
were the total budget outlays for FI-68, 69, and projected 1970
for performance of all enforcement and compliance duties? (d) How
maqy complaints have been investigated? (e) How many complaints
5834
have been referred to State officials and in particular, to
Michigan, Washington, Idaho, Texas, and Florida officials?
(f ) How often have sanctions been Imposed against State or local
regulatory bodies? (g) Hov often have sanctions been imposed
against farmers and. growers using migrant workers? (h) Have aqy
of the above complaints involved matter covered by Title VI of
the Civil Rights Act? Were any Title VI proceedings instituted
by your department? If so, please detail; if not, please explain.
A. (a) Included in the functions performed by the Office of Farm
Labor and Rural Manpower Service is that of administering and
enforcing the Secretary's Regulations relative to the interstate
recruitment of agricultural workers, dose regulations Include
20 CFR 620, Housing for Agricultural workers.
(b) Due to budgetary limitations the enforcement of housing
standards is limited to one employee in the national office and
l6, on a part time basis. In the Manpcwer Administration Regional
offices. Additional staff in the HationjuL Office is used as
needed on a short time peak period basis only.
(c) Since the administration of the housing requirements Is only
one of the functions performed in connection with the interstate
recruitment of workers, no separate budget amount has been
allotted for this purpose. However, it is estimated that
approximately $265,000 has been expended yearly during I968, 69,
and 70 for this purpose by time utilization in the national.
State and local offices.
(d) This information is not available. Ccxnplaints involving
violations of State or local housing or sanitation codes are
referred to the appropriate State Agency. In those cases where
there is no State or local regulation relating to housing or
sanitation the State En^loyiaent Service investigates the cwnplaint
and if found justified endeavors to have corrective action taken.
If the employer is unwilling or unable to correct the hazardous
or unhealthy condition, efforts are made to find other employment
for the workers and the employer is Informed that we will be
unable to aid him in securing workers through use of the inter-
state clearance system until he is able to show that his housing
fully meets the prescribed standards.
(e) This information Is not available. Most complaints are
presented orally and are referred to the health authorities in
the same manner.
(f ) No sanctions have been inqposed against either State or local
regulatory bodies. In the few instances where either State or
local health officials have been unwilling or unable to
adequately Inspect or enforce housing standEu:^, the State
Depeirtments of Employment have performed necessazy Inspections
before placing employment orders into the Interstate clearance
system.
5835
(g) This iDformatiOD is not available. Saactioas as such are
not used except in the form of denial of our recruitment
assistance. No record is kept of the number of times such
service is denied because the housing provided fails to meet
the appropriate standards.
(h) No complaints involving violation of the Civil Rights Act
have been called to the attention of the Depjurtment in connection
with housing workers recruited through its interstate clearance
system.
Q. Has the Labor Department ever considered intervening in State
proceedings to secure the enforcement of housing or sanitary
regulations? Has your department done reseeuxh on the problems
likely to be encountered in such an intervention? If so,
please give details; if not, please explain.
A. As indicated earlier, the Department's representatives, in
cooperation with the state agencies, continually work with
appropriate state officiails to secure improvement in state
housing regulations and enforcement.
Our instructions provide that any violations of housing and
sanitary regulations coming to the attention of our state agencies
are to be promptly referred to the appropriate state enforcement
agency.
We have conducted no research as to the problems likely to be
encountered if we intervened in state proceedings to secure the
enforcement of housing or sanitary regulations. We have
encountered no problems in dealing with state officieO-s in our
efforts to secure improved standards and enforcement.
8. Q. Are there published or unpublished statistics which show the
proportion of privately -owned labor camps that house workers
recruited with the help of the federal recruitment process?
If so, please detail by State. Please also indicate the
proportion of these that have been reported to federal and state
officials for housing or sanitation violations; and describe the
administrative hearings or private litigation resulting from
such reports or complaints, and the results thereof. If no such
information is available, please explain.
A. To our knowledge there are no published or unpublished statistics
showing the proportion of privately owned housing used by migrant
laborers. Ihe demand for workers varies from year to year and
fran area to area so that the housing used by interstate workers
one year may not be used the following season, or may be used to
house intra-state or privately recruited workers.
5836
iDformatloD coDceralng hearings or litigation procedures or
results is not available since the Department has not been
Involved in such proceedings.
9. Q. Please provide an account similar to that requested in question 8
above for all other camps under State regulations. If no such
information is available, please explain.
The Department has no reliable infozviatlon on the number of
units used for housing agricultural workers of all kinds. In
those states having housing licensing requirements this
Information may be partial 1y available from the Department of
Health of such states. However, since such requirements vary
from state to state, the information would likewise vary.
10. Q. As to publicly -owned camps in all user-States: (a) Are
regulations published which distribute maintenance responsibilities
between the management and the occupants? If so, please provide
copies, (b) How are such regulations communicated to occupants?
(c) What are the standards of eligibility for occupancy, and by
what procedures are these administered? (d) Describe the extent
to which occupants or their representatives participate in
regulating the operation of these caji^s.
A. We have no information on these matters. However, there are
forweurded copies of rental aigreements used by the Homestead,
Florida Housing Authority and the Belle Glade, Florida Housing
Authority.
U. Q. Describe the procedures by which the user-States police their
own requirements for the management of canips whose construction
or operation is funded by the State if, in fact, any such steps
are taken beyond the inspectlon-and-llcensing procedures
followed with respect to other camps.
A. We have no Information concerning the states' policing
procedures in managing the can^s funded by the state.
12. Q. As to privately-owned and-operated camps: (a) Are housing
agreements between the camp operators, owners and occupants
standardized by law in aqy user-State? (b) Do growers
associations ever utilize or recommend standardized agreements?
(c) Are there other ways of determining what might be "typical"
teram of such agreements? If so, please document with exaiiples
from each user-State, (d) Has your department ever conducted
5837
research in this area? If so, or if other such studies are
known, please describe the results, (e) Are housing agreements
ever handled by, or distributed or posted on the premises of
State or FedewLL recruitment offices? If so, please give
details .
A. Apparently housing agreements between owner/operator and tenant
are neither required by the various states nor have they resulted
in uniform agreements between growers. We axe furnishing a copy
of the registration card used by the Wasco County (Washington)
Fruit and Produce League which contains "conditions of tenancy,"
as well as lease agreements used by the Castro County
Agricultural Housing Association and Cypress City Agricultural
Housing Association, both located in Texas.
We have conducted no reseeurch in this area and. know of no other
studies.
We know of no housing agreements handled by, distributed, or
posted on the premises of federal or state offices.
13* Q« Are there public records kept by user-States, or by any a^ncy
of your department, of the insurance carried by farmer and
growers for migrant workers' housing? If so, please supply a
summary of such records. If not, please explain.
A. To our knowledge there are no public records maintained of the
insurance carried by farmers for migrant worker housing. We
do not believe that any state housing code requires insurance.
Ik. Q. As to housing and sanitation complaints by migrant tenants:
(a) What is the procedure in each user-State to be followed by
migrant tenants? (b) What is the proper procedure for a migrant
tenant to follow in complaining to the federal government about
a camp to which the standards promulgated under the Wagner-Peyser
Act may apply? (c) What steps are taken by federal and state
agencies to publicize regulations and to explain to migrant
occupants the proper methods of pressing their complaints?
A. (a) Generally, housing or sanitation complaints are filed with
representatives of the Housing or Health Agency of the State in
which the facility involved is located.
(b) Complaints regarding failure to meet the federal standards
should be filed with the local representative of the State
finployment Service.
5838
(c) dls DepsurtBtent has prepared and distributed to growers,
grower orgaDlzatlons, workers and their organizations, and to
the general public the following documents In the past four
years:
(1) Good Farm Worker Housing Is Good FEinn Business!
(General) (1966) 100, CXX) copies
(2) Housing Regulations of the U. S. Department of Labor
for Out-of-state A^lcultural, Woods, and Related
Industry- Workers Recruited through State £^loyment
Service (General) (I967) 75,000 copies
(3) Housing Handbook. A Guide to Intproved Farm Worker
Housing (General) (I967) 20,000 copies
(4) Reprint of Federal Register of 20 CFR 620, Housing
for Agricultural Workers frcxn Volume 33 > Humber 213 •
(General) (I968) 150,000 copies
(5) Feutb Worker, Want a Job with Good Housing? (Workers)
(1969)
English Version - 50,000 copies
Spanish Version - 25,000 copies
It Is known that a number of the states have prepared and
distributed similar publications.
We are Informed that the Agricultural Reseaxch Service of the
Department of Agriculture has prepeired and Is having printed an
Agricultural Handbook, "Housing Migrant Agricultural Workers"
that Incorporates the Department's housing standards and
Illustrates plans for construction of facilities that meet
those standards.
15. Q. What steps have State or Federal a^ncles taken to explain and
secure the rights of migrant tensuats to have visitors at
reasonable hours?
A. Ihe Depeurtment has taken no steps to explain or secure such
rl^ts since this Is regulated by the States. We have no
Information as to what steps have been taken by other agencies
or by the states to explain or secure such rl£^ts.
Senator Mondale. This concludes today's hearing. Thank you
very much for your attendance and interest.
(Whereupon, at 3:45 p.m. the subcommittee recessed, to recon-
vene at 9:30 a.m. on Friday, July 24, 1970.)
o
AMHERST COLLEGE LIBRARY
DATE DUE
•m
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11