California’s Farms and Meatpackers Had More Covid Violations Than all Other Industries Combined

And getting dinged for breaking safety rules didn’t appear to make these workplaces any safer.

Aleksandar Georgiev/Getty

The coronavirus is a rapidly developing news story, so some of the content in this article might be out of date. Check out our most recent coverage of the coronavirus crisis, and subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

At the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, millions of Americans continued their jobs from the safety of home. But you can’t break down a chicken carcass or harvest a strawberry via Zoom. To keep slaughterhouses and farms humming, a portion of the workforce had to keep showing up, often toiling shoulder to shoulder. Generally speaking, their employers did not do a great job of shielding these “essential workers” from the harms of Covid. 

A new study shines a bright light on just how bad things were for food workers in California, the state with the most food-production jobs and highest agricultural output. From April 2020 through December 2002, the report found, food-production facilities (think farms, meat-processing plants, produce packing houses) got cited for violations of Covid protocol more than all other industries combined—and at four times the rate of any single industry, including other high-risk ones like hospitals, nursing homes, and prisons.

“Decades-long systemic failures, entrenched food production cultures that sacrifice worker health and safety for profits, and industry-state compromises are all implicated in the disproportionate burdens of harm documented in this report,” authors Don Villarejo, Dvera Saxton, and Ildi Carlisle-Cummins of the California Institute for Rural Studies state.

Their eye-popping result came from crunching data from the California Division of Occupational Health and Safety (Cal/OSHA), the agency responsible for enforcing workplace safety laws in the state. The researchers looked at Cal/OSHA citations of employers for failing to follow COVID-19 regulations, which included requiring employers to provide face masks, enforce physical distancing, and notify public-health agencies of outbreaks in a timely manner. 

Here’s a look at the results. Note that “public agencies” refers mostly to correctional facilities such as prisons and jails, Saxton says. 

California Institute for Rural Studies

Getting dinged by Cal/OSHA so often did not make food-production workplaces safer than those of their peers, though. A 2021 University of California, San Francisco, study found that the state’s food and agriculture workers experienced a 39 percent jump in deaths during the pandemic’s first phase—significantly higher than their counterparts in any other industry. 

The Cal/OSHA numbers are just the latest way the Covid crisis has exposed the grim safety conditions faced by the workers who stock US grocery stores and restaurant larders. Within the pandemic’s first year, at least 44 percent of US meatpacking workers tested positive for Covid, and 269 died, a 2021 report from the US House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis concluded. It added: The meat industry “prioritized profits and production over worker safety, continuing to employ practices that led to crowded facilities in which the virus spread easily.” 

As for fruit and vegetable harvesters, a 2021 Berkeley analysis found that farmworkers tested positive for Covid at four times the rate of their peers in other occupations in one of California’s most agriculture-intensive counties between June and November 2020. 

The question now is whether all the revelations will make a difference going forward. Just as they did pre-pandemic, meatpacking workers endure repetitive-stress injuries at shockingly high rates; whereas farm workers, on top of chronic low pay and a long-brewing housing crisis, face the prospect of deadly heat stress from ever-rising temperatures due to climate change. The demographics of two workforces are similar: disprortionately people of color, many of whom are immigrants. In California, the Cal/OSHA researchers suggest, the state should create a new occupational health agency that will “prioritize the needs and concerns of BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and people of color] and immigrant workers, with a special division dedicated to food production workers.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate