Artists urge Guggenheim boycott

From Al Jazeera:

Artists say construction workers at Abu Dhabi landmark art museum are being exploited.




While there is no explicit mention of human trafficking, the precarious conditions (i.e. substandard housing, confiscated passports) some of these workers are facing should merit an investigation. In a press release last month, the Guggenheim stated that there will be some independent monitoring mechanisms in place, although did not say how they would be conducted and by whom. Given that in this statement, they have committed to ensuring these abuses don't take place and then it was discovered through this investigation that 1,400 workers are still living under separate conditions, it might be time to start putting more action behind their words.

This is also not a new issue. The protests were sparked by a report by Human Rights Watch from May 2009. The museum is set to open in 2013.

A Reexamination of The Department of Labor’s List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor

Though it has been several months since the release of The Department of Labor’s List of Goods Produced by Child Labor or Forced Labor, a careful examination of the report’s pros and cons is still in order. The intent of the report is to provide a reliable source for consumers and companies so they can make ethical choices about where they purchase and source products from, with the hope that if people do not purchase products tainted by child/forced labor, we can eliminate the problem.

The study was created by the Department of Labor’s International Labor Affairs Bureau (ILAB) and details the products produced in various countries where child and forced labor are often used (both in the formal and informal economy). The study covers 122 products in 58 different countries, which are in various stages of development and are located in every region of the world. Some of the more commonly listed goods are sugarcane, gold, carpets, coffee, cotton, rice, coal and cocoa.

The findings of the report are certainly useful for those who are interested in pushing for a world free from child and forced labor, but there are also several limitations to the study. Though I cannot provide a comprehensive evaluation of the pros and cons of this study I do want to briefly examine some of them.

The first pro is that the study provides a general guide that consumers and companies can use when choosing where to purchase or source products from. Though some of this information is already public knowledge (in that you could do an online search and find that child labor occurs in Thailand’s shrimp industry), this report puts information about the nature of many different products in one place, while providing further informational sources should one wish to know more.

The second pro, is that the report provides a means of empowerment for consumers. If someone is interested in buying shrimp, they could use this resource to make a more informed decision about their purchase. If the bag or fishmonger says the shrimp comes from Thailand, they can buy from another brand or store that does not. Consumers can also use this knowledge to petition companies not to purchase potentially tainted products from these countries (note: see con below).

The third pro is that the report provides a mechanism for change. Though it is likely that not every country or every product produced using child or forced labor is included in this list, it can provide people and governments a means to put pressure on other governments to make changes. Governments are more likely to take action when they realize that information of this nature is widely distributed. In a similar way to how countries react to the Trafficking in Persons Report each year, no one wants to be portrayed as a safe haven for child or forced labor. This report hopefully will lead to stronger mechanisms for preventing and prosecuting such cases within the countries examined.

Despite the benefit of these reports, there are also a few cons, which should be taken seriously when examining the report. The first and perhaps most important con to this study is that it is not very useful for highly manufactured items. For example, my shirt might be made in Untied States (though unlikely) in a factory where there is no forced/child labor and the shirt says it is made in the US. What I do not know, as a consumer, is where the cotton came from, how the dyes where made, where the machines that made the shirt came from and where the materials used to make the machine that make the shirt originated. I may make this purchase believing I am not contributing to child/forced labor since my shirt was made in the US. In reality though, I may be contributing to the problem because the cotton came from India or the metals came from a forced labor mine in the Congo. This guide while useful cannot help me make an ethical decision about that purchase.

The second con is that while the report acts as a shaming mechanism for governments, it misses a primary contributor to the problem, corporations. While governments are responsible for regulating the production of items in their country, companies are contributing (knowingly or not) to the problem by purchasing from other companies that use child/forced labor. Corporations need to share in the responsibility and blame for this and this report avoids holding them accountable by seemingly placing all the blame on governments. Corporations can be a force for good in this fight, but are still not being held accountable by those who could, including the US Government.

The final con is that there is a danger in condemning a whole industry within a country due to child or forced labor. While it is a good general rule of thumb, it can also severely harm companies that are trying to do the right thing. If we condemn all cocoa producers in a country, but not all of the producers use child or forced labor, they too will suffer when consumers demand a company stop sourcing items from that country. The report in some sense encourages people to punish whole countries for the practices of some or perhaps even a majority of companies in that country with regard to the product of interest. We should encourage companies that do not use child or forced labor, and large corporations should reward them by sourcing from these companies. Additionally condemning every company in a country can be particularly harmful to the companies that are trying to do the right thing since their labor costs etc. tend to be higher. Companies that are trying to do the right thing are likely the first ones to feel the impact of a boycott, which really seems to defeat the purpose of such a ban.

I encourage everyone to take a glance at the report here. It is definitely a great contribution to society and a useful resource for reducing child/forced labor (which sometimes includes trafficking), but the report should be seen both for what it does and does not do.

Thoughts for Thanksgiving: 50 Years Since Harvest of Shame

The day after Thanksgiving in 1960, the documentary Harvest of Shame, a report by Edward Murrow about the situation facing agricultural workers, was aired. 50 years later, agricultural workers in the U.S. still struggle with many of the problems exposed by this film: poverty wages, sub-standard housing, untreated injuries, children being kept out of school, lack of labor regulations and/or enforcement, long, sometimes dangerous journeys to find work, among many others. I kept thinking as I watched the documentary, how many of the quotes in this film could we simply transpire to a modern documentary on agricultural labor?

"We used to own our slaves, now we just rent them."

"But a migrant was just a person who worked on a farm to me."

The response of the employer, who claimed that farmworkers are the happiest race of people in the world. "They just love this."

"They have no voice in the legislative halls. They certainly have no voice in Congress. And their employers do have a voice. Their employers are highly organized, and make their wants and terms and conditions known to our legislators."

We still cling to a romantic view of farm life - the one of commercials of glistening fruit and fields waving back and forth with the wind. The happy farmer- gloved and smeared with dirt. While there is much pride in the act of growing food and nourishing people, the reality is that the problems exposed in this film today are compounded by the industrial agricultural system that has exploded since 1960.

Farms are larger and must answer to the demands of consumers of supermarkets and fast food chains and the system relies on cheap labor. People are no longer connected to the food they eat. Think about the Thanksgiving meal you enjoyed today - do you know the origin of your ingredients or under what conditions the food was brought to your table? It is very likely migrant or immigrant farm labor helped make that Thanksgiving meal happen.

Harvest of Shame is, unfortunately, not far from today's reality in the fields. The demographics of farmworkers might be different, but slavery, abuse and poverty are still common. And just as there are many relevant quotes to be pulled from Harvest of Shame, there are also relevant questions that we should still be asking ourselves:

"Is it possible that we think too much in terms of charity, in terms of Thanksgiving Day baskets, in terms of Christmas baskets, and not in terms enough of eliminating poverty?"

"Must the 2 to 3 million migrants who help feed their fellow Americans work, travel and live under conditions that wrong the dignity of man?"

Historic Breakthrough in Florida's Tomato Fields

Last week, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers announced that they and "the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange (FTGE) have reached an agreement that will extend the CIW's Fair Food principles – including a strict code of conduct, a cooperative complaint resolution system, a participatory health and safety program, and a worker-to-worker education process – to over 90% of the Florida tomato industry."

In a CIW Press release, Lucas Benitze said “This is a watershed moment in the history of Florida agriculture. With this agreement, the Florida tomato industry – workers and growers alike – is coming together in partnership to turn the page on the conflict and stagnation of the past and instead forge a new and stronger industry.”

An article in the Atlantic points out "One penny a pound might not seem like a very big raise, but when you pick a ton of tomatoes a day, as a Florida farm worker can, one penny represents a raise from $50 to $70, the difference between poverty and a livable (though still paltry) wage. And it doesn't seem radical to suggest that growers should abide by a reasonable code of conduct that includes a mechanism to address complaints, a health and safety program, and training sessions."

According to the CIW website, "The CIW is a community-based organization of mainly Latino, Mayan Indian and Haitian immigrants working in low-wage jobs throughout the state of Florida." The CIW began campaiging for workers' rights in 1993, taking on fast food giants like Taco Bell, McDonalds, and Burger King along the way. They also have an Anti-Slavery Campaign, which they describe as "a worker-based approach to eliminating modern-day slavery in the agricultural industry. The CIW helps fight this crime by uncovering, investigating, and assisting in the federal prosecution of slavery rings preying on hundreds of farmworkers."

Of last week's victory, Benitze said: “Make no mistake, there is still much to be done. This is the beginning, not the end, of a very long journey. But with this agreement, the pieces are now in place for us to get to work on making the Florida tomato industry a model of social accountability for the 21st century.”

Can The Buying Local Movement Help Prevent Trafficking?

Picture from Treehugger.com

At a recent talk at Harvard Kennedy School, John Mackey, Co-CEO of Whole Foods stated that the demand for locally sourced food is exploding. Authors like Michael Pollan and sites like Sustainable Table and Local Harvest, among many others promote the practice of buying organic food from local sources as a way to create a more sustainable food system than the one dominated by fast food restaurants and supermarkets. The environmental benefits to buying local organic food are clear: Buying local reduces the use of fossil fuels needed to bring the food to your plate. According to Food Routes, food travels on average 1,300 miles from farm to table; Buying organic reduces reliance on harmful chemical pesticides and other synthetic agricultural inputs.

Economically, buying local either by demanding it in your local stores, joining a CSA or shopping at local farmers markets often helps sustain smaller farms in your area, which have largely disappeared as a result of the rise of industrial agriculture. This also contributes to many health benefits by avoiding industrial animal production and consuming more fruits and vegetables. So what is the connection to trafficking?

My concern is that a sustainable food system should be about even more than the environmental, health and local economic factors that currently dominate the drive for locally sourced food. All of those factors deserve honest attention, and I personally believe the benefits of buying more local organic foods are sizable.

However, the current rationale behind buying local is not enough. Agricultural cases are a growing percentage of trafficking cases nationwide, and the State Department has listed agriculture as one of the primary industries in which trafficking occurs in the U.S. While many of these often cases involve large or industrial farms, it still affects local food sourcing.

Let's take the Aloun Farms case: Aloun Farms provides produce for local groceries, farmers markets and is intricately connected to the local community through events and food drives. According to an article in the Examiner, "Eliminating their products could potentially mean that local consumers will have no choice but purchase produce that is shipped here..." Yet the farm's owners, Alec and Mike Sou plead guilty to trafficking charges earlier this year and are now facing additional charges connected to the case.

Despite the illustration provided by this case, there is no conflict between the buy local movement and the anti-trafficking movement. In fact, hopefully, the buy local movement can serve as a check on labor practices in agricultural industry and the two movements can complement each other. If people are more aware of the source of their food, hopefully more attention will also be paid to the labor that helps bring that local food to their table because the risk of trafficking is local as well.

It was actually John Mackey's talk that inspired this post: if the demand for locally sourced food is exploding as he says it is, then I am sure more grocery chains and supermarkets will pick up on the trend. While this has many potential benefits, we also run the risk of becoming content with supermarkets telling us that the food is sourced locally and ending our concerns there. The increasing demand for locally sourced food should not be satisfied by the mere knowledge that the food is from a local farm: What are the labor practices of that farm? What are the environmental practices of that farm?

I am not accusing people fighting for a more sustainable food system of ignoring the labor concerns of agricultural workers. On the contrary, there is a lot of potential for the movement for more sustainable food systems to act as a preventive agent against slavery. As demand for local food grows, hopefully the stronger connection between consumers and farms will help lead to fewer victims in the agricultural sector.

Related Movements

Many diverse social justice, human rights, and anti-violence movements intersect with the anti-trafficking movement. Looking at the trafficking nexus in fields ranging from workers rights, to immigration issues, to the environment, to violence against women, provides insights into human trafficking, its causes, and important considerations for anti-trafficking efforts. This month, we explore some of those intersections.

Lauren: Internal Displacement and Political Refugees
Upon returning to NYU for my senior year, I decided to take a course in NYU’s journalism program concerning topics and issues surrounding the Middle East, which opened my eyes to two much larger issues that are still taking place in that region, internal displacement and political refugee. At the end of 2009 there were an estimated 3.8 million Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in the Middle East, according to the Internal Displacement Monoritoring Centre. Internal displacement occurs when a person is forced to move due to human rights violations or endangerment to their life, yet unlike political refugees who flee the country, internally displaced persons stay within that country’s borders. IDPs around the globe outnumber the amount of political refugees two to one, and yet this group is not guaranteed the protection or aid under the 951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol that political refugees are. Considering historical evidence of violence and terrorism that can arise from ostracizing groups of people from society, it seems negligent that the international community is not taking higher measures of precaution in providing aid to IDPs and refugees. I also cannot help but wonder, are internal displacement persons and political refugees not victims of Human Trafficking? Are they not subjected to the same human rights violations, violence, and subjection that would allow them the attention that human trafficking victims are allowed?

Jennifer: Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault
Domestic violence and sexual assault have many intersections with human trafficking. Victims of sex trafficking are also victims of sexual assault, and intimate partners may be traffickers for both forced labor and commercial sex. Insights into victims' mindsets and the ways that psychological coercion is used by perpetrators to keep victims from leaving pioneered in the domestic violence movement are also valuable for assisting trafficking victims. Understanding the cycle of violence and the ways that power dynamics are used in relationships to control people can help those assisting victims. Victim-centered approaches and empowerment approaches that were developed in the domestic violence and sexual assault contexts also provide a framework for helping trafficking victims. In many places that do not have specific anti-trafficking service providers, domestic violence and sexual assault agencies provide shelter and other services to trafficking victims. Many of these organizations have expanded their programs to include anti-trafficking work, in recognition of the intersections with domestic violence and sexual assault, as well as in recognition of the expertise that many of these organizations bring to assisting victims of abuse and violence.

Amanda: Anti-Sweatshop Movement:
While the anti-sweatshop movement has more broad range workers rights goals than the anti-trafficking movement, there are quite a few intersections between the two groups. Primarily, the industries that attract attention from the anti-sweatshop movement should attract the attention of the anti-trafficking movement. These industries are largely free from real outside scrutiny and therefore are "ideal" places to exploit workers or victims of trafficking. An additional intersection is in how we approach fighting the problem. One approach is through consumer power. The anti-sweatshop movement asks concerned citizens not to buy from companies that use sweatshop labor. More recently the anti-trafficking movement has asked supporters not to buy from companies whose product chains may contain slave labor (think electronics or the shrimp industry in certain countries). There are still many things to learn from the anti-sweatshop movement though, including effectively utilizing national media to draw attention to the issue, as they did with several major clothing and athletic wear companies.

Slave Trader Joe's?

Is Trader Joe's Selling Slave Picked Produce?

By Amanda Kloer
September 09, 2010

Trader Joe's presents itself as a hip, progressive place to shop, full of vegetarian options and free from the plethora of hot orange processed snacks found elsewhere. But Trader Joe's refuses to take one very critical progressive step and join the Coalition of Immokalee Workers' (CIW) Campaign for Fair Food. And because of their refusal, you might just be buying slave-picked produce from those friendly, Hawaiian shirt-wearing joes.

Modern-day slavery is a reality for many farm workers right here in the U.S. In Florida, over 1,000 people have been identified as trafficked in fields and on farms, picking the food we eat every day. Farm workers have also been trapped in slavery or seriously abusive conditions in California, Washington, North Carolina, Maryland, and several other states with large agricultural industries. Because the laws governing agriculture are different than those regulating other industries in the U.S., many of these workers don't have the same legal protections the rest of us do.

Trader Joe's is no stranger to dealing with labor and transparency concerns. Two years ago, a 17-year-old girl suffered a fatal heat stroke while picking grapes for Charles Shaw wine, the "Two Buck Chuck" Trader Joe's is famous for. And folks over Change.org's Sustainable Food property are asking the company for better transparency in their organic food sourcing. TJ's has also gotten flack for selling un-sustainable seafood and fish from places like Thailand and Bangladesh, where slavery in the fishing industry is common. That's a pretty poor track record for a company with a progressive, conscious customer base.

This is where you, that conscious customer, come in. As a consumer, you have the power to ensure the workers who grow and harvest your food are getting fair pay for their work and are being treated with dignity. The CIW's Campaign for Fair Food harnesses the purchasing power of the food industry for the betterment of farm worker wages and working conditions. Over the past decade, CIW has used the campaign to get some of the largest food purchasers in the country to support fairer labor standards for farm workers in the U.S., including a zero tolerance policy for slavery and transparent supply chains. Current participants include Subway, McDonald's, and Whole Foods. Now, Trader Joe's has the opportunity to join them and take a stand against slavery and farm worker exploitation.

Please, take a minute to ask Trader Joe's to join the Campaign for Fair Food and ensure that they aren't selling their customers slave-picked produce.

*******************************************************************************************************************************

Trader Joe's has a wide reputation for being a company where people can purchase food and feel good about it. Unfortunately the secrecy of the organization, their unwillingness to join the Coalition of Immokalee Workers' (CIW) Campaign for Fair Food and some of their practices put this feeling into question. One of these practices includes sourcing unsustainable seafood from Thailand and Bangladesh where slave labor in the seafood industry is unfortunately not uncommon. Additionally, the death of a 17 year old who was picking grapes for Trader Joe's wine has also created concern among activist. Please visit this site and click the take action button to sign your name to the petition asking Trader Joe's to ensure fair and safe labor practices. Let them know their customers (and the community as a whole if you are not a customer) care.

Tobacco's Other Dirty Secret

From the Independent:

Tobacco giant Philip Morris sold cigarettes made using child labour: Marlboro manufacturer admits 10-year-olds worked on Kazakh plantations

By Shaun Walker in Moscow Thursday, 15 July 2010 Tobacco giant Philip Morris has been forced to admit that child workers as young as 10 have been subjected to long hours working on tobacco farms with which it has contracts in the Central Asian state of Kazakhstan.

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, migrant workers at the farms, mostly from neighbouring Kyrgyzstan, were subjected to conditions that often amounted to forced labour, as employers contracted by tobacco farms that sold their produce to Philip Morris International had their passports confiscated and were often made to do additional work for no pay. The company, which sources tobacco from Kazakhstan for cigarette brands sold in Russia and other former Soviet states, said it was taking "immediate action" to stop the abuses. In many cases families were expected to pay back unrealistic debts to intermediaries who had arranged for their journeys to Kazakhstan, in schemes that bear all the hallmarks of people trafficking.

The report also documented 72 cases of children working on the farms. Philip Morris produces brands such as Marlboro and Chesterfield in over 150 countries around the world, and purchased 1,500 tonnes of tobacco from Kazakh farms in 2009.

The company issued a statement yesterday saying it is "grateful" to Human Rights Watch for raising the issues, and "is firmly opposed to child labour and all other labour abuses". The company says it is implementing a range of measures to ensure the abuses end, such as working with local government and NGOs to ensure school access for children of migrant workers, and implementing a system of third party monitoring to ensure tobacco farms comply with strict guidelines.

Jane Buchanan, the report's author, blamed the Kazakh government as well as Philip Morris for the abuses. She said yesterday that progress had been slow with the authorities in discussions over bureaucratic hurdles and the need to provide schooling for migrant workers' children. "The commitments from [the government] have been very vague," she said. "It has been a lot of work to get them to accept the idea that migrant workers, even if they are working illegally, still have fundamental rights." According to Ms Buchanan, Human Rights Watch had first approached the tobacco conglomerate with the allegations in October last year, and there has been a "regular and constructive dialogue" since. "However, we have done some more research recently, and it's clear that not all the things they promised have been fully implemented yet," she said.

One woman told the report's authors that young children had developed red rashes on their necks and stomachs after working with the tobacco, and there were also cases of dangerous pesticides being stored in living areas. During a single work day, tobacco harvesters can be exposed to a similar amount of nicotine as would be found in 36 average-strength cigarettes, and workers are at risk of contracting Green Tobacco Sickness, where nicotine is absorbed through the skin from contact with tobacco leaves. The illness causes nausea, vomiting, headache, muscle weakness and dizziness, and children are particularly susceptible due to their small body size. Migrant workers come to Kazakhstan from impoverished neighbouring countries such as Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan where there are few job possibilities. They are allowed to enter for up to 90 days without a visa, and the complications in securing official work permits mean that many end up working illegally, and are thus at their employers' mercy.

In one of many such stories, Almira, 45, travelled to Kazakhstan from Kyrgyzstan with her husband and two children last year. They were promised by the intermediary who drove them to a tobacco farm in rural Malybai that they would be paid a minimum of $2,300 (£1,500) for their work over the season. However, when they arrived they were told they would have to work off debts from the journey, and had their passports confiscated by the landowner. "He treated us really badly," recalls Almira. "We couldn't defend ourselves, since we were on his land after all. We worked for 11 to 13 hours a day. The work was really hard." The family contemplated running away, but this was impossible. "Our passports were with the landowner, and we had no money. If we left, then all of our work would be for nothing. And without money, how would we even get back home from there?"

__________________________________________________

According to a recent report by Human Rights Watch, Hellish Work, Philip Morris has benefited from child and forced labor through contracts it holds with tobacco farms in Kazakhstan. Migrant workers from neighboring countries, come to work in Kazakhstan’s tobacco fields and occasionally bring their families. In total, Human Rights Watch found 72 children working in the fields, some of whom were as young as 10.

Additionally, there were incidences of passport confiscation and workers not being paid. Workers face unsafe conditions such as exposure to pesticides, and levels of nicotine equaling around 36 regular cigarettes in one day. Workers are also at risk for contracting Green Tobacco Sickness, which causes symptoms such as dizziness, nausea, vomiting and headaches; children are particularly vulnerable.

Some workers owed large debts to recruiters who arranged their travel and therefore felt unable to leave. Philip Morris promised immediate action, and committed to working with NGOs and local governments to ensure the children of migrant workers are in school. They also pledged to develop third party monitoring systems to ensure that strict policies are followed in the fields. Human Rights Watch is skeptical since they provided information from their research to the company last fall and recent research shows that conditions still have not improved. Since the story broke, the United States Congressional Committee on Energy and Commerce has asked Philip Morris to hand over any information it has about allegations of child or forced labor in the production of the tobacco it uses, as well as any allegations of document confiscation or unsafe living conditions. The committee also requested information on what the company has done to address these issues. It is unclear whether Philip Morris will respond to these requests, but the committee has asked them to provide the information towards the beginning of next month.

Missed the Goal for Workers: the Reality of Soccer Ball Stitchers in Pakistan, India, China and Thailand

Last month, the International Labor Rights Forum (ILRF) released a report entitled "Missed the Goal for Workers: the Reality of Soccer Ball Stitchers in Pakistan, India, China and Thailand." The report details a variety of abuses, from child labor to hazardous working conditions to the practice of hiring temporary stitchers, leaving the workers vulnerable to exploitation.

The report notes that, despite a commitment in 1997 to end the use of child labor in the industry, children are still sewing soccer balls. Moreover, even as the apparent crackdown on child labor failed to eradicate this practice, it also did nothing to address the poor working conditions in the industry, according to the report (In one Chinese factory, workers were found to work up to 21 hours a day during high seasons and without one day off in an entire month).

The report concludes, "Over a decade after the signing of the Atlanta Agreement child labor still exists in the soccer ball industry. As the preceding data clearly demonstrates, although action was taken to eradicate child labor in the late 1990s, very little was done to end its root causes. The parents working in the soccer ball industry are still receiving next to nothing for their work. They are working as temporary or casual employees and therefore receiving none of the benefits that can keep their families healthy. Despite each countries’ cultural and governmental differences, the soccer ball industries in these countries share the same problems: casual or temporary work, poverty level wages, discrimination, restriction of the right to organize or collective bargain, and health and safety violations."

The ILRF is using this report to put pressure on FIFA to take a lead in eradicating the use of child labor and abusive labor practices in the production of soccer balls. While the World Cup has concluded, it will take consistent efforts to end this abuse. The ILRF is conducting an email campaign to Joseph Blatter, president of FIFA.

In addition to putting pressure on FIFA and the professional wing of the sport, we can also take action to end abuse and ensure fair labor practices through the products that we buy. Soccer enthusiasts and other sports players can check out Fair Trade Sports, which sells soccer balls and other sporting equipment that is certified Fair Trade and certified green. Please see an example, pictured above.

New Minimum Wage for Kuwait's Expat Workers Paves the Way for Domestic Worker Reforms

Despite the overall inaction seen across the Gulf Region to institute a universal minimum wage for workers outside of the public sector, progressive measures are being taken by Kuwait to implement upgrades to its newly approved labor law.

The Trade Arabia News Source released an article recently that revealed the approval of a minimum wage for expatriate workers of approximately 207 USD per month. Although the salary is relatively small, this is a major milestone across the GCC countries, and especially within Kuwait, a country that has traditionally neglected the establishment of legal safeguards to protect its foreign population from exploitation and coercion by Kuwaiti citizens.

Kuwait's new labor law was approved earlier this year, and until that time, had not been reformed in over forty years. Although a minimum wage is certain to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of Kuwait's foreign workers, domestic workers are currently excluded from the new labor law. The article also focused on promulgating legislation that would enforce a new minimum wage for Kuwait's estimated 600,000 domestic workers, employed as maids, drivers, gardeners and security guards.

A proposed salary of 45 Kuwaiti Dinars (approximately 154 USD) is one of several reforms that will be included in the draft domestic worker law, along with amendments to enforce working hours, payment of wages and protection from abuse.

Such legislation would vastly improve the lives of domestic workers who are often forced to work 16-hour days. If the current draft law is approved by parliament, working hours for domestic workers would be limited to eight per day, employers would no longer be allowed to withhold passports, and workers would be allowed one day off per week and time-off during national holidays.

Skeptics still question the extent to which the government would be able to enforce the new law given the high sensitivity associated with domestic issues (within private homes) and how they should be regulated by the Ministry of Social Development (responsible for regulating all other foreign workers). For example, the new law would impose fines on employers who fail to pay their domestic workers, but there are no mechanisms in place to enforce or prove that a violation has been committed. Since most sponsors do not allow their domestic workers to contact their embassies or law enforcement agents, most cases go unreported.

Qatar: How The World's Wealthiest Nation Per Capita Relies on Migrant Worker Labor

In an attempt to further expand the scope of my research, I recently attended a few meetings and conferences in the State of Qatar to better assess the human rights and migrant labor issues that this majestic city-state currently faces.

Qatar hosts the most dramatic demographic contradictions between its local population and the migrant worker community that it must outsource in order to accommodate its rapid and unparalleled Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Industry. With only 350,000 Qatari citizens inhabiting a nation that boasts the highest production and export of LNG in the world, Qatar ranks number one for the world's highest GDP per capita income and embodies a rentier welfare-state in its most basic description.

However, the wealth that Qataris enjoy is at the expense of hundreds of thousands of migrant workers that are brought to the country on two-year contracts to work in nearly every sector and industry that the country has consecrated, mostly because the Qataris have no interest in working in positions that are not managerial or administrative. They hold a reputation that is even more negatively slanted than their Kuwaiti counter-parts, attributed largely to the country's massive natural resource wealth that provides a backbone for lavish lifestyles that are serviced and maintained by the hands of poor, outsourced laborers.

However, it is unfair to immediately dismiss the Qataris in their efforts to regulate and protect their migrant worker population. Higher income for Qataris has trickled down the economic ladder and raised income levels for migrant workers to higher salaries than anywhere else in the region. Legitimacy of private sector employment contracts is upheld and regulated by the Ministry of Interior. Unlike other parts of the region, Qatar maintains a strict turn-over of migrant workers to prevent long-term residency and the potential to reap attractive welfare benefits.

As a result, sponsors are less able to withhold wages and force their employees to stay in the country longer than the 2-year period the law allows. Although issues like withheld passports, coercive employment tactics (i.e. false contracts), and rights to change employers continue to remain crucial issues for anti-trafficking and human rights advocates, Qatar has seen rapid advancements under its labor law, with many foreseeable positive developments on the horizon.

Some of these developments have already come to fruition, and include, the abolition of the Camel Jockey industry. Previous to the Qatari Government's intervention in this regionally cultural tradition, underage children or "camel jockeys" were recruited from south Asia to participate in extremely dangers recreational races for entertainment purposes. Many were seriously injured and malnourished to keep them within race-weight standards. Now, the industry has made use of electronic jockeys instead, which has allegedly stopped the flow of the children who were previously trafficked into the country and exploited.

Another major development is the incorporation of anti-trafficking statutes under the current labor law. I will underscore that there is still no anti-trafficking law (although talk of drafting one has been reported); nevertheless, statutes exist that make use of similar language and highlight relative clauses that penalize trafficking of laborers. Qataris have even been tried, convicted, and imprisoned under these statutes-something barely seen in arguably more labor-friendly countries like Bahrain.

Like its neighbors, Qatari labor law maintains a crucial fault with regard to its domestic worker population (including housemaids, drivers, cooks and gardeners) who are not offered any legal protection under the current labor law or benefits that are awarded to private sector employees. Salaries, days-off and contracts are the responsibility of the sponsor and offer considerable room for ambiguity and abuse to exploitative employers. However, in response to growing criticisms from the international communities towards Qatar and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), new interest has developed in drafting a formal labor law that will better regulate Qatar domestic worker population.

Featured on the front page of one of the country's principle English-speaking newspapers, The Peninsula, an article described the development of a new domestic labor law being drafted by a special panel tasked with finalizing the regulation of rights and duties of domestic workers. The panel will incorporate representatives from several government agencies and will review with other GCC countries. The draft law may finally provide privileges to domestic employees, like end-of-service benefits, annual leave, and free medical care. These and other formal arrangements would have to be included in contracts between sponsors and their employees and would require endorsement by the Labor Department to be considered legally valid. The law might also regulate the functioning of manpower agencies and their role in hiring domestic workers in the country, The Peninsula reported.

And finally, the sponsorship system. Found in all countries except for Bahrain officially, but actually found in all countries of the Gulf unofficially, Qatar's sponsorship system seems to be the most archaic and limited with regard to a worker's access to mobility. As is required in Kuwait, Oman, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, a sponsor must provide consent for his employer to change to a different sponsor. In Qatar, the process is further complicated with the addition of a second party that must approve a change of employment as well-the Ministry of Interior. Qatar, like Bahrain, Oman and Kuwait has embraced a new economic development model that "ization-izes" the national population and encourages locals to enter the job market. Limiting positions for expatriates is an effective way to open up the job market to locals but discourages the professional development of expatriates.

Qatar presents an intriguing case study for human trafficking and migrant worker issues in the Arabian Gulf. I intend to keep my attention partially focused on the peninsula as it embarks on a proactive course of action to improve its labor laws and the lives of its expatriate workforce. I am sure there will be some follow-up.

Proposed Labor Town to Rid Bahraini Neighborhoods of Migrant Workers

Recent reporting from the TradeArabia News Source revisits the Bahraini Government's interest in constructing "labor towns" for thousands of migrant workers, with the goal of eliminating the hundreds of make-shift labor camps dotted throughout the country and segregating expats from Bahraini neighborhoods.

This new proposed labor town, which plans to accommodate a 10,000 worker capacity would be established in central Bahrain's East Rifaa District on a selected vacant piece of land behind several factories and plants that are already located in the area. According to the article, the project has already been approved by the Southern Municipal Council and received the backing of surrounding Municipalities and the Minister of Agriculture.

Rifaa's Municipal Councilor and pioneer of this initiative has stated that a new labor town is a necessary mechanism to cope with the expanding expat community currently living, and negatively affecting Bahraini residents in the area. Grouping migrant workers together is argued to improve the lives of Bahraini citizens who often complain of having to live in such close proximity to make-shift labor camps within their neighborhoods. The Municipal Councilor further noted that Bahraini citizens are being forced to move from the area due to deteriorating living conditions-like sewage overhaul-and increasing incidence of crime as a result of the increasing population of migrant workers.

New accommodations are argued to improve the lives of the migrant workers living in cramped, dilapidated housing complexes.

Rifaa is not alone in its quest to rid its national population of migrant workers. Requests for labor townships from all of Bahrain's governates have been made following years of complaints from local Municipal Councils.

The Minister of Agriculture recently banned a request to enact formal legislation that would prevent migrant workers from living in residential areas alongside Bahraini citizens; however, a proposed draft law has been submitted to Parliament by the Municipal Councils that would allow landlords the right to rent property only to expats and professionals, disallowing migrant laborers and unskilled bachelors from acquiring a residence and permitting only 6 months for such individuals currently living in designated areas to vacate before being evicted.

Rifaa's Municipal Councilor is still in the process of locating the landowners of the proposed area for the labor town to approach them about acquiring the plot.

Peruvian Sheepherders File Lawsuit Against Ranch

*Picture from CLS's Migrant Farm Worker Division

From the Denver Post

Two Peruvian sheepherders who left a Craig ranch with only the clothes on their backs filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday saying they were abused by ranchers with a 20-year record of federal labor complaints.

John Peroulis & Sons Sheep Inc., Louis Peroulis, Stanley Peroulis and Crisologo Damian — a recruiter of workers for the ranch — are named in the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Denver.

Roel Espejo, 25, and Juvencio Samaniego, 32, are experienced sheepherders who participated in the federal H-2A visa program, which allows foreign workers to come to the U.S. for temporary agricultural work.

Espejo arrived in Colorado in March 2009, and Samaniego came in June with the promise of a $750 monthly salary, a camper to sleep in and food provided by their employer.

While both men worked on the Peroulis ranch in Colorado, they did not know each other because they were there at different times that year.

The lawsuit, filed by attorney Jennifer Lee of Colorado Legal Services, says each man paid Damian thousands of dollars in recruitment and travel fees to come to the U.S., fees prohibited in the H-2A program.

The men claim Stanley Peroulis confiscated their passports and visas so they couldn't leave the ranch. Much of the time, they were hungry because they didn't have enough food, the suit says.
"The workers we meet are very much about working hard, and they take pride in how they work," said Lee, who litigates cases involving migrant farmworkers. "They don't expect amazing conditions, but they expect to be treated fairly."

Stanley and Louis Peroulis did not return a call seeking comment.

Both men are accused of verbally abusing the sheepherders and not allowing them to take more than 15 minutes to eat or to read books. The suit claims Stanley Peroulis knew about the recruitment fee that the workers paid to get to the U.S.

The lawsuit accuses Louis Peroulis of kicking a sheep and hitting a horse with a plank of wood when he was in a rage over the performance of his workers.

Samaniego says he was beaten.

In July, Samaniego left the ranch and walked for 10 hours until he came across help. In November, Espejo walked two hours on a highway in order to get away from the ranch, and police officers took him to a hotel for the night.

Lee filed the lawsuit after she was made aware of the workers' complaints by the Peruvian Consulate. The U.S. Department of Labor is investigating the complaints.

In 2000, the Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against Peroulis & Sons alleging similar complaints of worker abuse.

Peroulis & Sons settled the case without admitting wrongdoing but had to produce a handbook on proper working conditions made available to workers and prohibit acts of workplace violence.

As early as 1990, the Department of Labor levied fines against the Peroulis ranch for mistreatment of immigrant workers, according to a 2000 Denver Post story.

In September 2000, federal agents, including some from the FBI, raided the ranch but criminal charges were not filed.

Felisa Cardona: 303-954-1219 or fcardona@denverpost.com

Yet another case highlighting the broken system of our H-2A guestworker program here in the U.S. The laws guiding the program look good on paper - for example, H2A workers are not supposed to pay recruitment and transportation fees. As the article points out, however, in this case and in other cases, guestworkers have been forced to pay these fees to the tune of thousands of dollars. With immigration reform about to come to the table again, hopefully a comprehensive model will pass that incorporates better oversight of the H-2A and H-2B programs so as to prevent these abuses and help prevent cases of human trafficking (this particular case does include TVPRA claims). I mention oversight specifically because the program already has some protections and benefits on paper (establishes wage rates, worker protection, safety and health standards, etc.), but a lack of oversight leaves these workers extremely vulnerable to abuse. Close to Slavery by the Southern Poverty Law Center is worth a read if you want to learn more about how vulnerable guestworkers really are. Colorado Legal Services also produced a report called Overworked and Underpaid: H-2A Herders in Colorado.

DOL to start certifying U Visa applications

From the Department of Labor:

US Labor Department to exercise authority to certify applications for U visas.

Action will help victims who aid law enforcement

WASHINGTON — Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis . . . announced [on March 15th, 2010] that the U.S. Department of Labor will begin exercising its authority to certify applications for U Nonimmigrant Status Visas. U visas — as they are known — are designed to help victims of qualifying criminal activities who have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse and are willing to assist law enforcement or other government officials in the investigation or prosecution of those crimes.

"Regardless of immigration status, no one should have to suffer criminal abuse silently. U visas give some measure of security to immigrant victims who are desperate to escape an abusive situation and are willing to cooperate with law enforcement," said Secretary Solis. "I have instructed Labor Department investigators to identify potential U visa applicants as they conduct workplace investigations. This action will help local law enforcement rescue vulnerable immigrants from suffering and help put criminals behind bars."

Individuals who receive U visas may remain in the United States for up to four years and may eventually apply for permanent residency. The U visa was created by the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Prevention Act of 2000. Qualifying criminal activities involve violations of certain federal, state or local criminal laws, including: abduction, abusive sexual contact, blackmail, domestic violence, extortion, false imprisonment, female genital mutilation, felonious assault, hostage-taking, incest, involuntary servitude, kidnapping, manslaughter, murder, obstruction of justice, peonage, perjury, prostitution, rape, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, slave trade, torture, trafficking, witness tampering, unlawful criminal restraint and other related crimes.

Labor Department authority to certify U visas will be delegated to its Wage and Hour Division, which will identify potential applicants in appropriate circumstances during the course of workplace investigations. Among other U visa application requirements, a federal law enforcement agency or official must certify that the U visa petitioner has been helpful, is being helpful or is likely to be helpful in the investigation or prosecution of the criminal activity.

To view a fact sheet and more information about the certification of U visas, click here.

Read this news release en Español.

While the U Visa is not strictly for trafficking survivors, this is potentially big news for service providers, particularly legal service providers. The Department of Labor is involved in many investigations and task forces around the U.S., and the Wage & Hour Division's access to farms and workplaces make their inspectors particularly important eyes and ears for detecting trafficking. For those of you who are not familiar with the recent history of DOL inspectors, the number of inspectors plummeted and remained low during the last two decades. Just this year, the GAO released a report detailing their findings on the inadequacy of the Wage & Hour Division's Complaint Intake and Investigation Process, which the GAO felt left many low-wage workers unprotected. In addition to this new certification ability, the Obama administration earmarked funding to improve the Wage & Hour Division earlier this year.

Kuwait's New Private Sector Labor Law Still Neglects 1/3 of its Population

Kuwait's new labor law became official on February 21 following its publication in the government-produced Kuwait Gazette Al Kuwait Al Youm, marking a new, significant, and uncomfortably overdue step forward taken by the Kuwaiti Government to protect its private sector workers. Shockingly, no reforms were made to the country’s previous archaic and historic labor law in over 45 years, promoting a racially-discriminate law that tended to only favor Kuwaiti employers/sponsors and neglected the rights of the majority of Kuwait’s workforce outsourced from abroad.

The new law includes updated provisions that address issues of salaries, working hours, public holidays, paid leave, sick leave and suitable end of service payments was approved by the National Assembly in 2009 and approved by His Highness Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, the Amir of Kuwait for endorsement.

Despite these highly anticipated gains, housemaids and domestic drivers are absent from this law’s jurisdiction, and even today, despite encouragement from local enthusiasts and an indication that such a law is forthcoming, there is still no legislation that addresses the rights of these domestic workers in private homes.

Such a law is said to be forthcoming but delayed since its jurisdiction will fall under the Ministry of Interior, given the sensitivity of addressing legal disputes that emerge in the privacy of the homes of Kuwaiti citizens. Many are hopeful that this law will be presented in Parliament within the next six months, hopefully ending the perpetual cycles of abuse and illegal withholding of wages and documentation that leave an estimated 800,000 housemaids vulnerable to coercion. I will underscore that there are 800,000 maids working in Kuwait within a total population that is just under three million.

Many remain skeptical as to how these new provisions will profoundly impact or improve conditions in the private sector and question whether the new law will actually be implemented. According to an anonymous journalist interviewed by the Kuwait Times, employers can still easily devise schemes to puncture loopholes in the new law and avoid paying indemnities or other forms of remuneration payable to workers. For example, an employer can transfer workers to a different division within their company or simply fire them and find new workers to avoid paying salaries. For detailed information on the new labor law’s provisions, click here to be taken to the Arab Times Online.

Kuwait still struggles to responsibly accommodate its expatriate population, which currently amounts to over 65% of the country’s total population. A renewed focus on its previously dormant labor law demonstrates the Kuwaiti Government’s interest in reform; however, 45 years of neglect indicate that continued reform will be an arduous process that will require expanded legislation to better address vulnerable contracted and domestic workers that are excluded from current jurisdiction, a legal mechanism to confront perpetrators of human trafficking, and the abolishment of Kuwait’s sponsorship system.

Recent news sources have revealed that new legislation to protect Kuwait's domestic workers is now in the works. Kuwait's Minister of Social Development, Mohammad al-Afassi revealed that a new law would be issued as early as this coming May. A new interest in passing legislation that addresses Kuwait's domestic labor force, affecting housemaids, drivers and landscapers follows international pressures, NGO lobbying, and heightened criticism over the grievances that were not addressed in the new private sector labor law.

The Kuwait Times profiled several interviews with domestic housemaids, asking them what they believed would be the most important clauses the new labor law should include. One worker insisted that matters dealing with domestic workers should be addressed by civilian authorities, and not the "scary and unfriendly" uniformed representatives of the Ministry of Interior. Two other housemaids highlighted the need for one day off during the workweek. They stated that they had been working for their current employers for 5 years and were only allowed one day off a year under their current contracts!

The vulnerability of domestic workers and the lack of freedoms they are awarded under the current laws has been exposed recently with heightened statistics on suicide rates in the country. There is currently no option for employees to switch employers without consent, and low or sometimes non-existent salaries in exchange for their work make it impossible for most to repay the debts they owe for their work visas.

One Kuwaiti official has suggested reducing the number of domestic workers who are allowed to enter Kuwait and shortening the current validity periods of worker visas to shift current demographic ratios and potentially prevent human trafficking.

California State Senate Approves Supply Chain Bill

The California State Senate recently approved a progressive new human trafficking bill, SB 657, that would require manufacturers and retailers to develop, implement, and maintain policies to help eliminate human trafficking in their supply chains. One of the bill's more interesting points is the requirement that companies take good faith measures to eradicate human trafficking in their existing supply chains, rather than merely stopping business in areas found to be tainted by slavery. The bill as written would not apply to companies with less than $2 million in annual sales.

The bill was passed to the California State Assembly for consideration on January 28.

The executive director of the Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking, a Los Angeles-area organization that works on behalf of human trafficking victims, has issued the following statement:

“We commend the California State Senate for its passage of SB 657, which will require the California business community to pro-actively prevent forced labor by ensuring that all of the suppliers in its supply chain will comply with the laws regarding slavery and human trafficking in the countries in which they do business, and that where slavery and human trafficking is found in its supply chain, it will seek eradication.

The advancement of this legislation comes at an opportune time, as we are in the midst of commemorating National Human Trafficking and Slavery Prevention month to raise awareness for the at least 17,000 people trafficked into the United States every year, and California as one of the top four points of entry into the U.S.

SB 657 represents a significant step towards the elimination of modern-day trafficking and slavery and, with the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation soon approaching, we are reminded of the need to eliminate human trafficking and slavery once and for all.”

Photo credit: Bill Ferris

Problems with U.S. Guest Worker Program

From the New York Times:

Suit Points to Guest Worker Program Flaws
By Julia Preston

Immigration authorities worked closely with a marine oil-rig company in Mississippi to discourage protests by temporary guest workers from India over their job conditions, including advising managers to send some workers back to India, according to new testimony in a federal lawsuit against the company, Signal International.

The cooperation between the company and federal immigration agents is recounted in sworn depositions by Signal managers who were involved when tensions in its shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., erupted into a public clash in March 2007.

Since then, hundreds of the Indian workers have brought a civil rights lawsuit against the company, claiming they were victims of human trafficking and labor abuse. Signal International is fighting the suit and has sued American and Indian recruiters who contracted with the workers in India. The company claims the recruiters misled it — and the workers — about the terms of the work visas that brought them to this country.

The Departments of Justice and Homeland Security have opened separate investigations. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined in September that there was “reasonable cause” to believe the Indian guest workers at Signal had faced discrimination and a work environment “laced with ridicule and harassment.”

The Signal case has come to represent some of the flaws and pitfalls, for immigrants and for employers, in the H-2B temporary guest worker program. As Congressional lawmakers weigh moving forward this year on an overhaul of the immigration system, they are debating whether to include an expansion of guest worker programs.

A lawyer for Signal, Erin C. Hangartner, said the company could not comment on the suit.

As it rushed to repair offshore oil rigs after Hurricane Katrina, Signal International hired about 500 skilled metalworkers from India in 2006. Numerous workers have said that they paid as much as $20,000 to Signal’s recruiters, many going into debt or selling their homes. They said recruiters had promised that their visas would soon be converted to green cards, allowing them to remain as permanent residents.

Once the workers realized they would not receive green cards, many complained of fraud and banded together to seek help from American lawyers.

In a deposition in the lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in New Orleans, Signal’s chief operating officer, Ronald Schnoor, said he grew frustrated with Indian workers who were “chronic whiners.” In early 2007 he decided to fire several who were encouraging protests.

Those workers “were making impossible demands” for the company to secure green cards for them or to repay the high fees, Mr. Schnoor said. They were “taking workers away from their work and actually trying to get them to join some effort they were organizing,” he said.

Mr. Schnoor and Darrell Snyder, a manager in the shipyard, where the Indians were living in a labor camp, said they had consulted with agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement for “guidance” on how to fire the workers, following the rules of the H-2B program.

Mr. Schnoor said the “direction” he received from an immigration enforcement agent was this: “Don’t give them any advance notice. Take them all out of the line on the way to work; get their personal belongings; get them in a van, and get their tickets, and get them to the airport, and send them back to India.”

Signal managers said they tried to carry out those instructions on March 9, 2007, putting several Indian workers into vans to take them to the airport. They were prevented from leaving the shipyard by immigrant advocates gathered at the gates.

In an internal e-mail message 10 days later, Mr. Snyder reported that another immigration official had assured him in a meeting that day that the agency would pursue any Indian workers who left their jobs, “if for no other reason than to send a message to the remaining workers that it is not in their best interests to try and ‘push’ the system.”

Carl Falstrom, an immigration lawyer in New Orleans who is not associated with the Signal case, said there were rules for employers who fired guest workers. They are required to provide return airfare to the workers’ home countries, and they are supposed to notify the visa agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, when workers are no longer employed. But, Mr. Falstrom said, private companies cannot carry out deportations.

Saket Soni, director of the New Orleans Workers’ Center for Racial Justice, which represents some workers in the lawsuit, said the managers’ testimony showed that immigration enforcement agents had “advised the corporation on how to retaliate against workers who were organizing.”

An ICE spokesman, Brian Hale, said he could not comment on a continuing investigation. But Mr. Hale said ICE agents were generally aware that a company that fires workers in the H-2B program “is prohibited from compelling individuals to get on the plane.”

This particular story is not new, but this account is only one of many that illustrates that we are dealing with a broken guest worker program. Probably the most extensive account of these issues is outlined in the Southern Poverty Law Center's report "Close to Slavery." 2010 will likely be the year that immigration reform is taken up again, and the anti-trafficking movement will need to pay close attention to the reforms that are proposed. Real comprehensive reform will be extremely important to addressing some of the larger policy issues surrounding human trafficking.