update: Governor vetoes S13

Governor Perdue has issued the first veto of the legislative session (and only the second of her administration.

Toxic Free NC and many other sustainable agriculture advocates argued that removing money from the current year's economic development funds would significantly harm the state's investment in sustainable agriculture and rural jobs, by de-funding the Tobacco Trust Fund and Farmland Preservation Trust Fund.

See the Governor's press release here.

Opposing modest improvements for farmworkers

NC Policy Watch has an excellent article today about the NC Department of Agriculture's efforts to block the legislation to better protect farm workers from pesticides.

This dynamic of inaction at the NC Department of Agriculture has been a problem throughout the Ag-Mart case and ensuing efforts at reform. Too bad we can't legislate compassion.

A challenging victory

This week the NC Legislature passed a small but important piece of legislation to improve the lives of farmworkers who work in North Carolina's fields.

S 847, "Prevent Agricultural Pesticide Exposure," will not prevent agricultural pesticide exposure. However, it will grant a very basic form of workplace dignity to farmworkers: the right to report safety problems on the job without the threat of being fired, demoted or otherwise punished for doing so. Farmworkers who are punished for reporting pesticide safety concerns will have the right to file a complaint with the NC Department of Labor under REDA, the Retaliatory Employment Discrimination Act, and to win their job or lost wages back.

This legislation also directs the NC Pesticide Board to create new rules that improve how agricultural employers keep records when they use pesticides and workers are present. This step is intended to make enforcement of violations easier for the NC Department of Agriculture, and to eliminate the "he-said-she-said" nature of their enforcement cases now.

This is important legislation, and those who worked to pass it should be proud (particularly Rep. Dan Blue, Sen. Charlie Albertson, Health Director Leah Devlin and Governor Easley). But they also shouldn't be lulled into thinking that farmworkers and their families are now safe from harmful exposure to pesticides, or that a disastrous incident like what has been alleged in the Ag-Mart case couldn't happen again.

Toxic Free NC and our allies in the Farmworker Advocacy Network (FAN) have spent years researching workplace pesticide exposure, talking with farmworkers about their experiences, and examining programs in other states. Only one of our long list of recommendations - retaliation protection - made it into S 847 (read more about FAN's recommendations here).

One of the greatest challenges that we face in advocating for and with farmworkers is actually the democratic process, which is designed to ensure that every citizen gets a vote and a voice. Unfortunately, most of the people who labor to plant, tend and harvest our food in the United States are not citizens, and don't get a vote -- or a voice. No elected official in NC is accountable to farmworkers, except perhaps in a moral sense.

Elected officials don't have to listen to farmworkers - even if they could speak to them - but they do have to listen to their constituents, and they especially listen to the lobby groups and business interests - like the Farm Bureau - who are constantly in their offices demanding specific outcomes.

Many, many citizens joined Toxic Free NC and our FAN partners in advocating for worker protection, both before and during the legislative session. Despite all that, we did not get the best possible legislation for farmworkers. We got the best possible legislation in an environment dominated by business interests.

In the future, we can work harder, we can speak louder, and we can recruit more citizens to call on the moral values of our elected officials. We should and we must continue to work for a just and sustainable future for our state, its workers and its residents. To do that, we must also work for the restoration of integrity to our democratic process, to diminish the power of private profit to act as gatekeeper for our health and safety.

What you can do:

• Check out Democracy NC's work to clean up politics in NC
• Know your legislators
• Sign up to volunteer or to get action alerts about issues like this one
• Make a contribution to support our work
• Invite Toxic Free NC or one of our FAN partners to come speak at your school, church or community group.

Legislative wrap-up: Organic agriculture

Momentum, excitement... but no money. That's basically the bottom line of what happened for organic agriculture during North Carolina's 2007 legislative session.

You may recall that Senator Janet Cowell filed a bill called the "Organic Economic Opportunities Study" that would have funded a baseline study to understand the current and potential economic impact of organic agriculture in North Carolina. House and Senate members from both parties signed on to her idea, which would have not only looked at the potential impact, but the potential obstacles to organic growth in the state.

Unfortunately, like many other good ideas, the study didn't make it into the General Assembly's budget this year. The study would have cost $125,000, and legislators didn't manage to pull the funding together.

However, organic advocates took heart in the new excitement around organic agriculture at the legislature this year. Legislators heard from organic growers in their rural districts about the economic benefits of organic farming, and many from urban districts heard from their constituents that the demand for locally-grown, organic foods is nowhere close to being met. At a local, organic breakfast sponsored by the Carolina Farm Stewardship Association in April, legislators heard from several of North Carolina's organic farmers about the hope, and the profit, that organic can provide for small farmers.

We are looking forward to building on this momentum, and the new awareness of organic farming, during next year's legislative session. You can help! Sign up for PESTed Action Alerts (if you don't already get them), and take every opportunity you can to let your elected officials know how important local, organic agriculture is to you.

Legislative committee gets an earful on farmworkers

This week the Agribusiness Committee of the NC House of Representatives heard a bill that is intended make it easier for the state to enforce its pesticide laws in major cases. The Agricultural Family Protection Act, H 1818, was filed by Reps Dan Blue (D-Wake) and Grier Martin (D-Wake) in response to the loopholes in NC's pesticide law exposed by the Ag-Mart case.

The committee did not take a vote, but it heard testimony from many supporters of the bill, representing health and worker advocates, as well as opposition from some in agribusiness.

Steve Davis, a clinic outreach worker from Greene County Health Care, described some of the pesticide injuries he has seen among workers and talked about the importance of adequate showers for workers to decontaminate.

Stephanie Triantafillou of the Farmworker Advocacy Network told the committee that although she works in direct services to farmworkers and their children, her agency can not in good conscience recommend to their clients that they report pesticide problems on the job, because the lack of confidentiality and retaliation protection puts the workers' jobs and housing at risk.

Lawmakers also heard from the NC Farm Bureau and the Agricultural Alliance of NC, who stated that the points in the bill were unnecessary because of existing standards.

The Farmworker Advocacy Network (of which PESTed is a member) has outlined the gaps in NC's laws that gave rise to the proposed legislation:

• NC’s Pesticide Law contains loopholes wherein agricultural employers are not required to keep accurate records documenting their compliance with Worker Protection Standards. While they do have to keep specific information about pesticide spraying for 30 days, that information is not available to the NC Department of Agriculture for inspection and enforcement the way that other pesticide records are.
• Many agricultural workers live in housing that lacks telephones, making it impossible to seek emergency assistance in the case of pesticide poisoning. Many of these units also lack adequate shower facilities to wash off pesticide residues after work or immediately after an exposure. The current standard is 10 workers to a shower, which can mean long lines and increased exposure at the end of the work day.
• Agricultural workers are unable to file confidential complaints to the NCDA regarding workplace pesticide safety, and may be subject to retaliation for such complaints because they are not covered by NC's anti-retaliation law.
• Growers who violate NC pesticide laws pay only $500 per violation in fines, while other violators pay $2,000 per violation. The bill would make the cap $2,000 for everyone, and would explicitly give the NCDA authority to asses lower fines for family farmers.

The flimsy record-keeping provisions have allowed Ag-Mart to argue their way out of the largest pesticide violations case in NC history. Final judgment in that case has not yet been made, however, a judge's December 2006 ruling on the relevant parts of the case make a compelling argument to the legislature for real record-keeping requirements.

The committee chairman, Rep. Bill Faison (D-Orange), stated that he expects the committee to take up this issue during the 2008 short session. Until then, it's business as usual for farmworkers who use pesticides on the job in North Carolina. But you don't hear them complaining, do you?