Follow Zester Daily on Facebook for the latest in food news, cooking tips and healthy eating Follow Zester Daily on Twitter for the latest in food news, cooking tips and healthy eating Subscribe to our Zester Daily RSS Feeds for the latest in food news, cooking tips and healthy eating

The Profound Impact of a Penny Print
Raising the price of tomatoes by 1 cent a pound would change farmworkers’ lives. Trader Joe's said no.
By Barry Estabrook   |   Monday, 06 June 2011   |   06:13

Barry Estabrook advocates for a penny-a-pound increase to support farmworkers who harvest tomatoes in FloridaWould you pay one penny more per pound to buy a tomato if you knew it would go a long way toward alleviating labor abuse in the fields?

When asked that question, not a single supermarket chain in the country, with the notable exception of Whole Foods Market, said yes.

No grocery giant has a legitimate excuse to pinch that extra penny, but of all the holdouts, the most perplexing is Trader Joe's, which promotes itself as a cheerful bastion of all things ethical.

A penny-a-pound wage increase might seem insignificant, but if you harvest Florida tomatoes, it's the difference between making $50 a day and $80 a day -- the difference between a wage that doesn't allow you to properly feed and shelter your family and a livable, albeit paltry, income. "It's the difference between a 19th-century workhouse and a modern factory," said one member of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), a human rights group based in southwestern Florida that has long struggled on behalf of farmworkers.

Even with the wage increase, the job still falls well below what most Americans would accept -- no overtime, no benefits, no sick leave. But the added penny-a-pound, along with some basic improvements in working conditions, would amount to nothing short of a revolution for the 30,000 workers in Florida who pick nearly one-third of the tomatoes Americans eat.

Last fall, it looked as if that revolution was going to sweep the Florida tomato industry. After nearly two decades of demonstrations, petitions and hunger strikes, the CIW convinced the dozen or so huge companies that grow virtually all Florida tomatoes to sign its Fair Food agreement. The growers agreed to the penny-a-pound increase on one condition: that their customers -- supermarkets, fast-food chains, and food-service corporations -- absorb the difference.

By signing the Fair Food agreement, the participating growers also agreed to abide by a Fair Food Code of Conduct that included the following:

  • A job-training program outlining workers' basic rights
  • A mechanism to ensure harvesters actually get credited for every tomato they pick
  • A grievance system for uncovering and eliminating workplace abuses
  • Health and safety committees to address such common job-site occurrences as pesticide poisoning and sexual harassment

All the large fast-food chains, including McDonald's, Burger King and Subway, have agreed to pay the penny and deal only with growers in compliance with the Fair Food Code of Conduct. The major food service companies that supply colleges, museums and national parks also came aboard.

But the "old" system still applies to about half the Florida tomatoes sold. It is a national disgrace. In 2000, the U.S. Department of Labor described farmworkers as "a labor force in significant economic distress." With annual incomes of between $10,000 and $12,500, their poverty rate is twice as high as other working people in this country.

On trips to Immokalee to research my book, "Tomatoland: How Industrial Agriculture Destroyed Our Most Alluring Fruit," I toured a decrepit trailer with neither heat nor air-conditioning. It had one miserable shower stall and toilet to serve the 10 men who called the place home and paid a rural slumlord $2,000 a month for the privilege. I spoke with a "crew boss" who quit her job after seeing her workers sprayed on an almost daily basis with some of the most toxic pesticides in factory farming's chemical arsenal.

And I did something I never imagined doing in the 21st century: I interviewed a man who had toiled as a slave. He received no pay, was locked in the back of a produce truck at night and was beaten if he refused to work or tried to escape. He was one of more than 1,000 people freed in seven Florida slavery cases successfully prosecuted since 1997. A U.S. deputy attorney told me that southwest Florida was "ground zero for modern day slavery."

As part of the CIW's campaign for Fair Food, a contingent of workers approached a Trader Joe's store in Manhattan this spring to deliver a letter to its manager. They were not met by the usual chipper Hawaiian-shirted greeters but by security guards who turned them away. Following protests at 23 Trader Joe's stores across the country in April, the company, which is owned by the trust of the founder of Aldi, a discount chain based in Germany, posted a headline on its website. "A Note to Our Customers About Florida Tomatoes and the CIW" claimed that the agreement for Fair Food was "overreaching, ambiguous, and improper." It accused the CIW of "spreading misleading and not factual information."

Their charge rings hollow.

The CIW has received awards from Anti-Slavery International of London, the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights, and the U.S. Department of State, to name a few. FBI Director Robert Mueller sent a letter of commendation to the CIW. The lawyers of such behemoths as McDonald's would never have allowed their executives to sign the Fair Food agreement if it was "improper."

At the very least, Trader Joe's management should follow the lead of a past adversary of the CIW and issue a statement like theirs: "The CIW has been at the forefront of efforts to improve farm labor conditions, exposing abuses and driving socially responsible purchasing and work practices in the Florida tomato fields. We apologize for any negative statements about the CIW ... and now realize that those statements were wrong."

The speaker was Burger King CEO John Chidsey during the 2008 ceremony in which he signed the Fair Food agreement.


A two-time James Beard Award winner, Barry Estabrook was a contributing editor at Gourmet. His work has also appeared in The New York Times and The New York Times Magazine, Men's Health, Saveur, Gastronomica, TheAtlantic.com and many other national magazines. He has been anthologized in "The Best American Food Writing" 2005, 2007, 2008 and 2010. His award-winning website is politicsoftheplate.com, and his book "Tomatoland," is an investigative look into industrial-scale tomato agriculture, will be published by Andrews McMeel this month.

Photo credit: Trent Campbell


smaller | bigger
security image
Write the displayed characters
...
This is all part of the illegal immigration issue! I love the way they are going after the businesses that BUY their products versus going after the business man that spend the money lobbying Washington to turn their eye to illegal immigration so that he can pay low wages or have slaves.
a guest , February 10, 2012
...
It's a little hard for me to follow the arguments back and forth, but I found this October 23, 2011 response by Trader Joes. To what extent does this address your concerns?

http://www.traderjoes.com/about/customer-updates-responses.asp?i=60
a guest , December 19, 2011
...
Fair wage for their hard work!
a guest , November 17, 2011
...
Assuming that CIW will be corrupt and take bribes from growers to be on the approved list is silly. They have faithfully represented the interests of the farmworkers so far, so in the absence of any evidence they have failed, we must assume they will continue to do so in the future. It would do no good at all to have the penny raise and then for farms to be able to have slaves or violate other provisions of the agreement and still be able to sell to TJs or the other stores. TJs' customers should indeed put suggestions in every time they shop there, and if this is not successful--time for boycotts again.
a guest , July 21, 2011
...
two sides to every story
a guest , July 16, 2011
...
Just a note about Whole Foods: They stonewalled CIW for at least a year, claiming they had not received a letter CIW sent, refusing to meet with folks from CIW. It took a big campaign--which is the case with all the companies that signed on with CIW--to get Whole Foods on board. I remember one awful stormy morning (heavy rain and howling wind) when a few of us old folks joined many younger ones in a demonstration outside the Whole Foods shareholder meeting at the Hilton Hotel here in downtown Austin, Texas (site of Whole Foods HQ).
a guest , June 12, 2011
...
Barry Estabrook to "a guest June 12.

As the CIW explained to me, the point of the Fair Food program is not to tell companies which farms they must buy from. Every single member of the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange has agreed to participate in the Fair Food program, meaning well over 90% of all Florida tomato growers are participating today. Buyers who have signed Fair Food agreements --not just Whole Foods but nine multi-billion dollar food companies, most of which are far larger than Trader Joe's and buy far more tomatoes -- are free to choose to purchase from any or all of those growers. So would be Trader Joe's.


The point of the Fair Food program is to tell companies -- in the event that human rights violations are discovered in the fields -- which farms not to buy from, and according to the CIW, that should be a good thing, since for years companies like Trader Joe's have loudly trumpeted their codes of conduct that, on paper, do exactly the same thing -- establish purchasing policies that prohibit the company to buy from suppliers involved in human rights abuses like forced labor or child labor.


But the CIW claims that these internal codes have languished, unmonitored and unenforced, for years, only dredged up and dusted off when the companies need to defend themselves in the press in response to some human rights violations discovered in their supply chains. The Fair Food Code of Conduct, on the other hand, is real -- monitored and enforced -- and if slavery or some other egregious abuse is found on a farm, the companies that have signed Fair Food agreements are informed and are obligated to terminate purchases from that supplier until real and sustainable corrective action has been taken.
a guest , June 12, 2011
...
@guest commented on June 8th: "In fact, Trader Joe's pays the extra penny at will, but refuses to sign the contract put to them because curiously, the contract also signs away any choice to buy tomatoes elsewhere. in fact, the contract states that the CIW would have 100% say in who Trader Joe's could buy from in the future"

Barry, would you please address this. Reading this story, I was struck by the lack of discussion around *why* Trader Joes would not sign the agreement, referring to it as ambiguous & overreaching, bizarre terms to use in contract discussions as they are themselves ambiguous. What is the real cause?

The commenter above states categorically that the contract requires signing over choice on sources to the CIW. You avoided addressing that claim in your original response to the commenter and I think it bears discussion. It doesn't surprise me at all that a supermarket chain would not want to contractually obligate themselves to sources for tomatoes chosen by a third party. It also doesn't surprise me that Whole Foods would, given their bizarre sourcing policies and whackaloon CEO. They seem to feel their branding can overcome such weirdness and - hey - whatever makes them feel good. But back on planet Earth, I'm not surprised that other supermarket chains have not.

If the commenter's statement is fact, why can't the contract be rewritten to require only the paying of a penny a pound, not to stipulate what vendor they purchase from? As you can imagine, it creates the motivation for growers to create political connections to the CIW and opens the door for bribes and corruption in order to get onto the list of "approved" growers.

Workers rights in the agriculture industry are important and they have too long lived through deplorable conditions. But it is also important to maintain the credibility of the non-profit human rights group and not taint it with poorly outlined power grabs.
a guest , June 12, 2011
...
From the CIW website:

A Note to Trader Joe's from its Customers, via the CIW:

Over the past several months, we have had the opportunity to speak to thousands of your customers, both in person at dozens of protests and via the web. And they just don't get it.

They don't get why a company like Trader Joe's -- a company most of them really love -- wouldn't jump at the opportunity to help lift farmworkers out of poverty in Florida after decades of well-documented exploitation. They don't get why Trader Joe's -- a company with a reputation for humane, ethical purchasing policies -- wouldn't be leading, instead of fighting, the first real hope for a more humane, more ethical future for farm labor.

They don't get why Trader Joe's is acting like WalMart. And they don't like it.

And, if the initial reaction is any indication, they really don't get your recent "Notes to Our Customers on Florida Tomatoes and the CIW". The notes haven't helped your customers accept or even understand your position at all. If anything, they've only made things worse.

You say you support all the key principles of the Campaign for Fair Food, but then you totally belie that with transparent efforts to gut all its key principles. You cast doubts on the credibility of the Fair Food Program, but then you say you are happy to buy only from suppliers who have signed Fair Food agreements. The "Notes" convey a sense of flailing and confusion that is hardly befitting a company with your reputation.

Fortunately, it is not too late to correct your course. This hasn't gone so far, yet, that it's had any permanent impact on your brand. But if you keep acting so "s**mbaggy" -- and you'll excuse us, but that's a direct quote from a long-time, devoted customer of yours -- then you can be sure it will.

But turn around now and join the Campaign for Fair Food to put your purchasing power to work to improve the lives of Florida's farmworkers -- in a way that respects and honors not only the years of undervalued labor they have contributed to your company's bottom line, but the years of sacrifice they have had to endure to build this Campaign -- and it will only help build your brand.

And it's not like this is some kind of untested idea we are trying out on Trader Joe's. You would be the tenth, not the first, retail food company to implement the Fair Food principles in your supply chain. At this point, there's no longer any ground to be broken, no unknown to fear. The path is well-trodden already, by companies much larger than yours.

So do the right thing, Trader Joe's. Let WalMart be WalMart. You be the Trader Joe's your customers have come to believe in.

(http://www.ciw-online.org)
a guest , June 10, 2011
...
From Barry Estabrook

I'd like to assure the commenter who said that this piece smacked of being Whole Foods propaganda that what I wrote is in no way a "PR planted story." I, too, have many misgivings about Whole Foods, but it a fact that they are the only supermarket chain to have signed the Fair Food agreement.
a guest , June 10, 2011
...


We take the issues raised by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers seriously. Our not signing what we feel would be an overreaching and ambiguous agreement does not mean we are dismissive of the concerns presented.

Here’s what we are doing:

We will only purchase Florida-grown tomatoes from growers signed on to and abiding by the CIW code of conduct.

Trader Joe’s is working directly with wholesalers and growers to pay an extra penny per pound to those growers from whom we buy tomatoes grown in Florida. We have no problem paying an extra penny per pound as a “fair food” premium to certified growers or having those growers' pass-through of the premium audited by a third-party.

Again, we take this issue seriously and address such matters in our agreements with our suppliers. In fact, we require that our suppliers:

…represent and warrant that the goods sold to TJ's were produced, harvested, manufactured, processed, packaged, labeled, transported, delivered, and sold in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations of the United States of America and all of its subdivisions and, if applicable, the laws of any other country, state, or international governing body… that the goods sold to TJ's were not produced, harvested, manufactured, processed, packaged, labeled, transported, or delivered using forced or prison labor or forced or illegal child labor.

If any of our suppliers are not in compliance with our agreement, we will terminate our relationship.


Alison Mochizuki
Director, National Public Relations
Trader Joe’s
a guest , June 10, 2011
...
@a guest (first comment) with math problems, who write: "Increasing daily pay from $50 to $80 is a 60% increase. Is a $.01/lb increase in price the same 60% increase in price? Obviously not."

Is the pay for laborers the only cost involved in growing and selling tomatoes? Obviously not. That penny can go to wages, not seeds, land, transportation, etc., and cover a relatively large increase.

a guest , June 10, 2011
...
Increasing daily pay from $50 to $80 is a 60% increase. Is a $.01/lb increase in price the same 60% increase in price? Obviously not. The entire article falls apart as soon as anyone bothers to think. The question should be "If Florida tomatoes are $1 a pound and are increased to $1.60 a pound and imported tomatoes remain $1 a pound, will you still buy Florida tomatoes?" The answer for nearly all consumers will be "NO."
a guest , June 10, 2011
...
Not surprising at all given that Trader Joe's and Whole foods are notoriously anti-union with their own employees.
a guest , June 09, 2011
...
WHOLE FOODS HAS BEEN CAUGHT LYING ABOUT IT'S OWN FOOD SEVERAL TIMES.

THEY LOBBIED HEAVILY IN tEXAS TO KEEP COMPETITOR TRADER JOES OUT OF THEIR MARKETS.

THE WHOLE FOODS OWNER IS A RIGHT WING NUTCASE

SOMEHOW THIS SMACKS OF WHOLE FOODS PROPAGANDA TO ME AS THEY ARE THE ONLY COMPANY MENTIONED IN A POSITIVE LIGHT.

THAT'S USUALLY THE MARK OF A PR PLANTED STORY IN THE MEDIA.
a guest , June 09, 2011
...
How can we consumers help you keep this information as a mission to help others to a better life that they deserve...

I had no idea that behind the tomatoes I buy for my BLT's there is a sad story.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
From Barry Estabrook:

I have seen no evidence that Trader Joe's is paying an extra penny a pound. The company is highly secretive and does not even reveal who it gets its tomatoes from. Their Note to Customers says they are "working directly with wholesalers and growers to pay an extra penny a pound," which is a long way from actually paying it.

Contrary to what "a guest" alludes to, the CIW is not a union. It is a nonprofit human rights group, and it does not get any of the extra penny.

It is completely wrong to suggest that Trader Joe's is the only retailer paying the whole penny to the workers. Those who sign the Fair Food agreement pay slightly more than a penny a pound for the tomatoes they buy to make certain that workers receive exactly one penny extra for what they pick (not all tomatoes that are picked get sold--there is breakage etc; the growers receive a small amount to cover the costs of cutting checks, etc.).

And, yes, the Fair Food agreement does require companies who sign to only deal with Florida growers that are in compliance with its terms--that's the whole purpose of the agreement.

Bottom line: Whole Foods and nearly a dozen other companies have seen fit to sign the agreement. Why can't Trader Joe's?

Barry Estabrook
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
The assertion that Trader Joe's refusesto participate in the penny a pound difference is a half-truth at best. In fact, Trader Joe's pays the extra penny at will, but refuses to sign the contract put to them because curiously, the contract also signs away any choice to buy tomatoes elsewhere. in fact, the contract states that the CIW would have 100% say in who Trader Joe's could buy from in the future. It also begs the question, what part of that penny is going to trickle over to the union for "representation" costs. Seems to me, by that logic, that Trader Joe's is the only retail chain paying the whole penny directly to the workers.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
How about a web based write in campaign to Trader Joe's coordinated by CIW. Let's put these good words into action
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
(cont'd from previous...)

Today, as a result of the Campaign for Fair Food, virtually the entire Florida Tomato industry is indeed working to "supply better working conditions." (See here http://www.ciw-online.org/dotherightthing/ and here http://www.theatlantic.com/lif...ds/237593/ for details).

These changes are happening because of the commitment and buy-in of the industry, but the tomato industry doesn't exist in a vacuum and can't make change happen on its own. To quote the CIW (http://www.ciw-online.org/dotherightthing/),

"That's because the solution to farm labor exploitation and abuse contained in the Fair Food principles depends on the participation of all the major purchasers of Florida tomatoes. Each buyer must contribute its fair share -- its penny-per-pound -- for the pay raise to reach its full potential. Each buyer must commit to direct its purchases to those growers complying with the code of conduct -- and away from those who don't -- for working conditions to get better and stay better.

The solution is only as strong -- the raise is only as big, the change in working conditions is only as durable -- as the number of buyers that support it. In the words of the FTGE's Reggie Brown, "Everybody in the system has to be invested for it to work.""

That /everybody/ includes Trader Joe's.

As for the workers being "free to find another job at any time," in other words, farmworkers shouldn't try to organize to improve their jobs as countless Americans have done, but instead should just quit their jobs and allow the invisible hand of the labor marketplace do its work. This in an economy with double digit unemployment. The $900,000 figure is also off; in fact, for some of the participating retailers, the cost of participating in the Fair Food Program amounts to significantly less than that /per year/. Remember, we're talking about each retailer -- Trader Joe's, Walmart, Kroger, Publix -- paying only its fair share of the penny-per-pound bonus based on its tomato purchases. The cost is spread out and not borne unduly by any one single company.

Finally, to address the concern of "strong arm tactics by a group of farmers" (sic) and the ridiculous use of the term "extortion," no one involved in the Campaign for Fair Food wants the Campaign for Fair Food to exist. No one involved in these efforts is involved "mindlessly" or because protest is fun. The campaign is a necessary and temporary step on the way to achieving justice in the fields. Unfortunately, "if there is no struggle, there is no progress," as a great American once said. The CIW has tried to quietly establish dialogue with Trader Joe's and other retail industry leaders for years now, only to be ignored. Farmworkers will not continue to sit idly by with their arms crossed while companies profit from their sweat. It's shameful, really, that this campaign is even necessary; the shocking and abysmal conditions that farmworkers face are well-known, especially to the corporations who buy and sell produce. And as Estabrook points out, a working model already exists, spearheaded by one of the most lauded, serious and knowledgeable (in the area of farm labor) community organizations in the country in partnership with tomato and retail industry leaders.

For the first time, the "no-questions-asked," "what happens in Florida stays in Florida" purchasing practices of multi-billion-dollar companies like Trader Joe's is being called out and challenged by a scrappy group of workers from one of the poorest communities in the US with some consumer and faith allies. To refer to this with a straight face as "extortion" is quite the feat.

What the workers are asking of Trader Joe's and other supermarket chains is not that complicated, does not cost that much, is the right thing to do, and in the end benefits all parties involved -- workers, growers, retail companies and consumers alike. This really isn't that hard, Trader Joe's.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
Nice work, Mr. Estabrook. I think the piece (as well as some of the recent postings by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers -- see http://www.ciw-online.org/TJ_point_by_point.html and http://www.ciw-online.org/TJ_decoded.html) lay bare the shocking hypocrisy and mean-spiritedness displayed thus far by Trader Joe's toward the farmworkers and their supporters. One might expect this behavior from other companies, but not from one that banks so much of its brand image on being an "ethical" place to shop. Here's hoping that, as one of the previous commentators mentioned, "TJ's is (genuinely) misunderstanding certain aspects" and will soon come to its senses and agree to sit down and talk with the CIW to reach a mutually beneficial resolution and the same kind of open, productive working relationship toward the end of reforming American agriculture that the CIW has established with other industry leaders.

I think it's worth clarifying some of the comments made below. The notion that the CIW's Campaign for Fair Food gives the growers a "free pass" is false. What has actually happened is for the first time, accountability has been institutionalized vis-à-vis the growers and the way they treat their workers. Furthermore, improved working conditions have also for the first time been linked to positive market incentives/consequences. It is this market-based approach that makes the CIW's strategy so effective and groundbreaking (http://www.ciw-online.org/101.html#cff).

When it comes to the retail companies paying the (measly) penny-per-pound, anyone who knows anything about agriculture will tell you that margins for growers are extremely thin; squeezed on one side by the banks, fertilizer and pesticide conglomerates, tractor and equipment suppliers; and on the other side by an increasingly powerful and consolidated retail sector that demands more and more produce at a lower and lower cost through bulk purchasing practices. The growers, thusly, are in no position to increase wages even if they wanted to. The entity that is in that position -- that has the clear ability and responsibility to increase farmworker wages with its billions in sales and profits and its decades of enjoying the fruit of artificially low-priced inputs -- are the retail food giants.

As for the suggestion that the issue should be taken up with the growers, I would suggest reading the article a bit more closely: "After nearly two decades of demonstrations, petitions and hunger strikes..." This is a direct reference to the CIW's many years of trying to directly pressure local crewleaders, farm bosses, growers and even state legislators before launching the Campaign for Fair Food. Certain commentators may have also glanced over Barry's mention of modern-day slavery. Short of participating in the Fair Food Code of Conduct, how can Trader Joes guarantee to its consumers that the tomatoes it sells are free of slave labor? To put it another way, did the nine federal prosecutions for slavery involving Florida farmworkers since 1997 change Trader Joe's purchasing practices in any way? (cont'd...)
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
To those complaining that the one tomato farmer out there will pay almost a million dollars extra: no, there are tens of thousands of farms, so the amount they would pay extra would be more in the four-digit area, depending upon the size of the farm.
Secondly, they can pass the extra penny on to us. I certainly don't mind paying an additional penny for good tomatoes (and a better conscience - not perfect, but better).
Thirdly: (is that a word?) you get what you pay for. If you want productive workers you have to pay for them. Sometimes that pay goes up by a whopping penny per.
I'm done with TJ's tomatoes til they fix this. They lose nothing. The farmer loses nothing. I pay an extra penny per pound. Big freakin' whoop. It's nothing compared to what the oil companies do to us.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
Tomato picking seems to be open to near-slavery conditions in other places too: southern Italy (in particular Puglia) is infamous for disgraceful working conditions that take advantage of the labor of people (mostly north Africans and other recent immigrants) whose working papers may not be in order and who can therefore easily be exploited by local bosses. Canned plum tomatoes are no exception, sadly.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
Our food always has a story...from beginning to end...and we demand fairness to farmers...and no loyalty to those who would deny them. Trader Joes is aware that we have many farmer's markets, Whole Foods, Earth Fare.Thousands of us do research to see if fair trade is used...along with making sure we are supporting organic farmers.big agriculture has pushed out many honest wage earners...but they can make a very strong come-back with our support...and we will know our families are consuming a product that supports other families.
a guest , June 08, 2011
...
I worked for the United Farm Workers for two years, 40 years ago, when a grape boycott and a lettuce boycott brought good results. But how sad to see that all these years later conditions have hardly changed for the farm workers. For many of us who read zesterdaily, we're not buying those tomatoes anyway; how about a ketchup boycott?
marthashulman , June 07, 2011
...
Bravo Berry, keep up the good work. It would be in the fitness of things for people to put a suggestion in the box at the Trader Joe's every time they visit the store for shopping. The management can't ignore their customers for ever.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
What's the continued myth of "what Americans would accept?" I didn't have health insurance until I was 30 years old and then, not constantly. I scrubbed dormitories, waited tables, washed dishes - I'm from an American middle class family (though perhaps before we got SO demanding about the jobs we'd take?). College instructors with doctorate degrees earn as little as $1,800 per course, and a course runs over three or four months - no benefits, no nothing - and some of them only can get ONE course at a time (it's under $100 PER WEEK after taxes). I do think Trader Joes should pay the extra penny - they could forego some of the orchid sales or something - but low paying jobs aren't just for illegal immigrants.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Thanks Barry. I will never look at tomatoes the same way again.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Here's the CIW's point-by-point response to TJ's:

http://www.ciw-online.org/TJ_point_by_point.html

Isn't this a situation where everyone should get in the same room and discuss? It seems like TJ's is (genuinely) misunderstanding certain aspects, and the CIW isn't looking at it form TJ's perspective. A little mediation?
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
As stated below, THIS IS NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GROCERY STORES so all of you "disappointed" in TJ, et al need to get over yourselves. The farm companies are responsible for their employees. They should be dealing with this. Dropping this on the grocery stores is unfair and nothing more than a red ehrring to allow feel-good-environmentalists to ahve a face to bully in public. You are targeting the WRONG businesses.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
A big shout-out to Whole Foods and fast food joints for doing the right thing. And a Big Red Flag for Trader Joe's and the rest of corporate America -- we care deeply about issues of basic fairness and decency, and expect the companies where we shop and eat to be attentive and responsive to these issues. Thanks Barry, great piece!
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
I must say I disagree with most of you here. I don't think you are seeing the facts. You are allowing the people who own the farms a free pass in this ordeal. They are the ones who should supply better working conditions. It shouldn't be put on the stores to do so. And the pickers are free to find another job at any time. If they all left, the market would have to correct itself with better wages and working environments. Otherwise, we'd have no tomatoes. Stop blaming the end user. According to this artice it amounts to $30 per day for 30,000 workers. That's an increase of $900,000 per day. No business would want that all passed along to them in the form of higher costs. Hold the farmer responsible as well as the end user, us. If we all pay a little more for tomatoes, the problem could be solved. But don't hate a store because they don't subcome to strong arm tactics by a group of farmers.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
I had no idea about all this and am deeply disturbed. And disappointed by TJ's response. Not that I buy their tomatoes. I look forward to reading the book. Because now I am wondering about the source of the tomatoes in the canned products I do buy.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
And how much of the profits from the book Tomatoland is going to poor tomato pickers? ZIP.. it seems to be zero.

the proceeds will "help" keep estabrook solvent it seems..

He lives on a 30 acres in Vermont, so it's not like he is struggling on a florida tomato farm. http://politicsoftheplate.com/?page_id=2
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Gee whiz.. why don't all you consumers readily pitch that extra penny multiplied by the number of lbs of tomatoes/tomato sauces you consume..

Also it is interesting that the growers "agree" to wage increase of 1 penny, but want the produce buyers to absorb all of the increase..
well hello! Considering that the grower's don't to need match benefits increase etc.. (wonder if they even contribute to Soc security match), it is very convenient for them to pass the buck.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
From Barry Estabrook

They get about 1.5 cents a pound now.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Trader Joe's makes some convincing points. Enough so that I believe the propaganda directed at them is extortionist in nature. I'm completely in agreement with the concept of better pay and conditions for these people. A subject not completely unfamiliar to me, having once worked on an award winning television special that featured a segment on the plight of migrant farm workers picking tomatoes. Of course they deserve better conditions than what was described. The problem is with the terms of the agreement. It involves more than "just a penny". Some people like mindless protest, the rest should go read Trader Joe's "note to our customers".
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
If one cent/pound equals $30, doesn't that mean that the workers are harvesting tomatoes for less than two cents/pound now?
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Did you read the note to customers? I think they have a valid point.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
One of the many reasons I don't shop at Trader Joe's.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
My favorite market, Traders Joe's, should be ashamed!
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Hi, "a guest." Thanks for the comment. Your point is well taken. I didn't have the space to go into the CIW's point-by-point rebuttal of Trader Joe's "A Note to Out Customers." So I argued that if McDonald's, Whole Foods Market, and nine other huge food companies (who have some pretty good lawyers) had no problem signing the agreement, and if the head of the FBI, State Department, and other groups say that the CIW is an honorable organization, why does Trader Joe's resist?

If you want to read the CIW's full rebuttal, click on the link below and scroll down a couple of posts. Barry

http://www.ciw-online.org/
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Those of us who shop at Trader Joe's, and especially those of us shoppers who blog about food, should get noisy on this. Trader Joe's will listen to the shopping public. Much as I love them, no more TJ's tomatoes for me until Trader Joe's gives a substantive - and reasonable - answer to CIW. And I'll blog and tweet about it - how about you?
Laura @MotherWouldKnow , June 07, 2011
...
we must boy-cott trader joes. make copies of this article and give them to the employees in the trader joes stores .
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
I'm certainly not saying it's impossible Trader Joe's would make an unethical decision, but I do wonder what the answers to the points they raise in "A Note to Our Customers" are. Any ideas?

Reading through them, it doesn't a "ring hollow" to me. There do seem to be questionable issues here. Perhaps there are explanations that resolve all these concerns. It would be interesting to hear those explanations to better understand the situation.
a guest , June 07, 2011
...
Gee whiz, TJs, it's a freaking penny!
a guest , June 07, 2011

busy
Last Updated on Monday, 06 June 2011 08:44
 

Zester Daily | Food News | Cooking | Dining Out | Healthy Eating | Wine

Copyright © 2012 Zester LLC.

Site Design & Hosted by digical