Farmworker health, safety, and fair treatment should be of paramount importance on every farm in Washington state.
In fact, according to data from the U.S. Department of Labor, our state has ranked among the top five safest states in the country for farmworkers during the last five years. Washington state also has three agencies all dedicated to ensuring the safety of farmworkers on a local level: the Department of Labor & Industries, the Employment Security Department, and the Department of Health.
Yet, HB1847 suggests our state agencies are not completing their tasks as assigned and recommends a “comprehensive study” by an outside source is necessary to determine how best to get each agency to be better at their jobs.
The recommended outside source to conduct the comprehensive study are “Latino non-profit organizations that have well-established connections and relationships with farmworkers.”
Data collection is complicated, particularly when trying to gather sometimes sensitive information. Employing a group or people familiar to that community can be a good thing, or it can result in sample selection bias. “Latino non-profit organizations that have well-established connections and relationships with farmworkers” will likely approach the same people who usually engage in conversation with them for the information they are looking for. Not out of any malicious intent but because human nature is to return to what is familiar. That is sample selection bias.
If lawmakers are interested in what farmworkers think about their work environments, they should ask them. Democracy is about ensuring that all people are empowered to participate. Farmworkers should be part of that democratic process by being allowed to speak for themselves face-to-face with lawmakers, not filtered through third parties that may have a political agenda.
During the debate about agricultural overtime pay in the 2021 legislative session, farmworkers on both sides of the discussion testified and their testimony was powerful. Giving farmworkers as much opportunity as possible to tell their stories, with their own voices and words, is the single best way to take a real picture of what is happening on the farms and ranches in this state.
While many farmworkers have no desire to seek out the spotlight, there are ways to provide platforms for even the most reticent of people to share their stories. Anonymous data collection is not a new or novel idea, but it is something best left to professionals to structure properly so the data gathered is representative of all voices, not just those most willing to speak. Not only does it allow an opportunity for everyone to share their experiences, but it also encompasses farmworkers who may escape the attention of “Latino non-profit organizations,” particularly farmworkers who are not from Spanish-speaking countries but hail from Asia, the Pacific Islands, and parts of Africa or Europe; their stories are just as vital to creating a holistic illustration of Washington state’s agricultural employment landscape.
The stated intent of HB1847 is to ensure that Washington state’s farmworkers are being treated well, being paid properly, have safe working conditions, and have the proper human resources available to ensure they are not being harassed or otherwise abused in the workplace by asking farmworkers directly.
That is an endeavor we should all support. But we should support it in every avenue of employment equally rather than singling out agricultural employers as somehow more guilty of mistreating employees.
Additionally, we should not be taking away the ability of farmworkers to speak for themselves by interjecting third parties into the discussion. Sample selection bias is real, and it is something that must be acknowledged in real world research. If the focus is going to remain only on agricultural employers, then data collection should be done by people who do it for a living – professional researchers from academic areas focusing on agriculture, not from non-profits that may taint their own data.
