US citizens scramble for food aid - 11 Feb 09

The number of unemployed Americans continues to rise and some are now struggling to put food on the table, becoming increasingly dependent on food stamps to help them get by.

Food stamps are a state-subsidised programme that helps people with a low income buy food at lower prices. But for many US citizens it may not be enough to help them weather the economic crisis, as Lucy Keating discovers in the US town of Knoxville in Tennessee.

THE PERMANENT LABOR CERTIFICATION PROCESS:




A Broken and Dysfunctional System that Serves Neither American Employers Nor American Workers neither applicants.


THE ISSUE:

Current law requires most employers seeking to permanently employ immigrants to obtain a certification from the Department of Labor (DOL) that there are no U.S. workers able, willing, qualified or available for the position offered to the foreign national before they are granted permanent residence (a "green card"). However, the system developed by DOL to meet this requirement has become inefficient and overly bureaucratic and goes far beyond the original statutory requirement. It neither meets the needs of employers looking to fill a position nor protects the U.S. workforce.

BACKGROUND:

From a single clause in the Immigration and Nationality Act, DOL has created 23 pages of regulations, innumerable policy directives, an entire Technical Assistance Guide, a Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals, a multimillion dollar bureaucracy and a system that is often completely unintelligible to employers. This system mandates a DOL-sponsored, supervised, and detailed recruitment process, separate from and conducted often much later than an employer's own unsuccessful domestic recruitment efforts.

The DOL, not the employer, dictates the appropriate methods of recruitment, the correct description of the job, and the "normal" requirements for the job. DOL also receives and reviews all applications, and decides whether the ultimate selection or rejection of a candidate was acceptable.

The entire process can take two years or longer to complete in some areas of the country. Such an extended period of time requires employers and foreign nationals to put their businesses and lives on hold. Any change in the employer, the job, or the recruitment, requires that the process begin again.

CURRENT STATUS:

All parties involved in the system agree that it is dysfunctional. DOL has tried to "reengineer" the program over the last several years. However, inconsistent direction from policy-makers, and inconsistent implementation in the regions has stymied any effective change. Further, DOL's lack of resources to implement the program has led to unconscionable delays and backlogs in most areas of the country

The cycle of scapegoating, banishing the Mexican Legal and Undocumented Immigrants from U.S.(1850, 1880, 1942, 1964, 2007).


The Mexican migratory worker in southwest America is regarded as a necessary part of the bustling harvest season. The need of U.S. employers to import foreign manual labor was heightened first by the expansion of cattle ranches in the Southwest, and by the increase of fruit production in California in 1850 and 1880.

Before Mexican workers supported American agriculture, it was the Chinese who filled the labor hole. Nearly 200,000 Chinese were legally contracted to cultivate California fields, until the Chinese Exclusion Act. Then it was the Japanese who replaced the Chinese as field hands.

Between 1850 and 1880, 55,000 Mexican workers immigrated to the United States to become field hands in regions that had, until very recently, belonged to Mexico. The institution of Mexican workers in the United States was well established at this time in commercial agriculture, the mining industry, light industry and the railroad. The working conditions and salaries of the Mexicans were poor.

The presence of Mexican workers in the American labor scene started with the construction of the railroad between Mexico and the U.S. That presence grew between 1880 and 1890. As much as 60 percent of the railway working crews were Mexican. Rodolfo Tuiran, in his paper "Past and Present of the Mexican Immigration to the United States", reports that the initial flood of migrant workers to the United States were mainly skilled miners, work hands from cattle ranches in Mexico, indentured servants fleeing Mexican farms, small independent producers who were forced north by natural disasters or Indian raids and workers affected by the War of Secession.

In the aftermath of the Mexican Revolution in 1910, the Mexican government was unable to improve the lives of its citizens. By the late 1930s, the crop fields in Mexico were harvesting smaller and smaller bounties, and employment became scarce. The Mexican peasant needed to look elsewhere for survival. World War I also stoked the fire of Mexican immigration, since Mexican workers performed well in the industry and service fields, working in trades such as machinists, mechanics, painters and plumbers. These years were ripe with employment opportunities for Mexicans because much of the U.S. labor force was overseas fighting the war. Agencies in Mexico recruited for the railway and agriculture industries in the United States.

Mexican workers’ complaints about the abuse of their labor rights eventually led the Mexican government to action. Led by Venustiano Carranza in 1920, the Mexican government composed a model contract that guaranteed Mexican workers certain rights named in the Mexican Political Constitution. The contract demanded that U.S. ranchers allow workers to bring their families along during the period of the contract. No worker was allowed to leave for the United States without a contract, signed by an immigration official, which stated the rate of pay, work schedule, place of employment and other similar conditions. Thus, this became the first de facto Bracero Program between the two countries.

In 1924, the U.S. Border Patrol was created, an event which would have a significant impact on the lives of Mexican workers. Though the public did not immediately view Mexicans as "illegal aliens," the law now stated that undocumented workers were fugitives. With the advent of the Border Patrol, the definition "illegal alien" is born, and many Mexican citizens north of the border are subject to much suspicion

The Mexican work force was critical in developing the economy and prosperity of the United States. The Mexican workers in numerous accounts were regarded as strong and efficient. As well, they were willing to do hard work and long hours, in working conditions that were questionably humane. Another measure of control was imposed on the Mexican immigrant workers during the depression: visas were denied to all Mexicans who failed to prove they had secure employment in the United States. The Mexicans who were deported under this act were warned that if they came back to the United States, they would be considered outlaws.

It seemed whenever the United States found a reason to close the door on Mexican immigration, a historic event would force them to reopen that door. Such was the case when the United States entered World War II.

In 1942, the United States was heading to war with the fascist powers of Europe.
Labor was siphoned from all areas of United States industry and poured into those which supported the war efforts. Also in that year, the United States signed the Bracero Treaty which reopened the floodgates for legal immigration of Mexican laborers. Between the period of 1942 and 1964, millions of Mexicans were imported into the U.S. as "braceros" under the Bracero Program to work temporarily on contract to United States growers and ranchers.

Under the Bracero Program, more than 4 million Mexican farm workers came to work the fields of the United States. Impoverished Mexicans fled their rural communities and traveled north to work as braceros. It was mainly by the Mexican hand that America became the most lush agricultural center in the world.

The braceros were principally experienced farm workers who hailed from regions such as Coahuila, "la Comarca Lagunera," and other crucial agricultural regions in Mexico. They left their own lands and families chasing a rumor of economic boom in the United States.

Large groups of bracero applicants came via train to the northern border. Their arrival altered the social and economic environments of many border towns. Ciudad Juarez, across the border from El Paso, Texas, became a hotbed of recruitment and a main gathering point for the agricultural labor force.

The Bracero Program contracts were controlled by independent farmer associations and the "Farm Bureau," and were written in English, and many braceros would sign them without understanding the rights they were giving away nor the terms of the employment.

The braceros were allowed to return to their native lands only in case of emergency, and required written permission from their employer. When the contracts expired, the braceros were mandated to hand over their permits and return to Mexico. The braceros in the United States were busy thinning sugar beets, picking cucumbers and tomatoes and weeding and picking cotton.

At the end of World War II, Mexican workers were ousted from their jobs by workers coming out of wartime industries and by returning servicemen. By 1947, the Emergency Farm Labor Service was working on decreasing the amount of Mexican labor imported. By the 1960s, an overflow of "illegal" agricultural workers along with the invention of the mechanical cotton harvester, diminished the practicality and appeal of the bracero program. These events, added to the gross humanitarian violations of bracero employers, brought the program to an end in 1964

Seasonal worker shortage threatens regional tourism. "Now there's a level of panic with some employers.



In the midst of the snowiest winter in recent memory, Vermont ski resorts are being strained by a shortage of foreign workers who for years have cleaned rooms, taught lessons, and filled other seasonal jobs. The shortfall, caused by cutbacks in the number of work visas issued, is an unexpected consequence of the standoff in Congress over immigration reform.

more stories like this at Mount Snow, west of Brattleboro, fewer ski instructors has meant fewer classes this winter, and more disappointed customers. At Stowe, managers are still recruiting, trying to fill gaps before the busy February school vacations.

"This is hurting Vermont, and as a Vermonter, it's hurting me," said Thorin Magbie, human resources director at Mount Snow. "It's very frustrating to us to have families calling who want to bring their kids to ski and ride, and to have to tell them there's no room."

Cape Cod, Nantucket, and Martha's Vineyard expect to feel the same pressure when warm weather hits. Hotels, restaurants, retail shops, and landscaping businesses on the Cape and islands rely on an estimated 5,000 to 7,000 workers from Jamaica, Bulgaria, Brazil, Poland, Russia, and other economically depressed countries, who come to the US on temporary H-2B visas to bolster the workforce during the busiest season.

But this year, the seasonal worker program became entangled in the contentious immigration debate, and the number of workers allowed in the country was curtailed, catching many business owners by surprise and leaving them scrambling to fill positions.

"We're all in deep trouble if nothing gets done," said Mark Hogan, owner of the landmark Nantucket breakfast spot the Downyflake, whose veteran crew returns every year from Jamaica. "I don't know what I would do with our business, whether I would close or move tables out because I wouldn't have people to serve them. People don't understand how it will devastate our economy."

In 2005, in response to increasing demand for foreign labor, Congress relaxed the cap of 66,000 foreign workers admitted each year on H-2B visas in legislation that said workers who had held visas in the previous three years could return without being counted as part of the quota.

That allowed some 50,000 more visas to be issued.

But last fall, as proponents sought to renew the exemption for returning workers, Hispanic members of Congress said they would insist on comprehensive reform of immigration laws and oppose all piecemeal legislation, which included the exemption. The renewal stalled and the cap on workers reverted to 66,000.

Supporters of the seasonal worker program say it has little to do with immigration, though it has been swept up in the larger issue.

"This is designed to meet a seasonal need - it isn't about illegal immigration," said US Representative William Delahunt, who represents the Cape and islands and supports the cap expansion.
Delahunt said a bipartisan coalition in Congress has drafted a letter to President Bush asking him to reinstate the exemption, and may also propose adding the measure to the forthcoming economic stimulus package.

more stories like this"We have reports from all over the country that businesses can't function and will close down unless this program is reauthorized," Delahunt said. "It's not helping an economy that is in serious trouble."
But critics say the foreign workers drive down wages and take jobs from Americans. Steve Kropper, co-chairman of Mass Citizens for Immigration Reform, said the roadblock to finding local labor is the low pay the business owners offer.

"Americans will fill any job for the right wage, and we're all advanced when the people on the bottom of the scale get paid better," he said. "We have our own low-skilled people; let's help them out."

But proponents say Americans get the first shot at the jobs. The government requires that employers advertise positions in the United States before filling them from overseas, and mandates that foreign workers be paid the prevailing wage, said Jane Nichols Bishop, a consultant in West Dennis who assists Cape businesses seeking foreign workers.

"These are seasonal destinations that do not have a workforce for their busy season, because most Americans need year-round jobs," she said. "These workers are not immigrants; they are not illegals."

At Mount Snow and other ski resorts, managers said they were caught off guard by the government's announcement on Oct. 1 last year, that the cap for the first half of the fiscal year had been reached and that no more visas would be processed. Like other resorts, Mount Snow hired some foreigners with other types of visas, such as exchange students, but could not bring back experienced instructors recruited in previous years from Europe, Australia, and South Africa, said Magbie.

"Our guests had the luxury of a diverse staff, and I think we all miss that," he said.

At Stowe Mountain Resort in Vermont, the workforce of 1,000 people, including 250 ski instructors, previously included 30 to 40 foreign workers, most of whom taught ski classes or worked as housekeepers. None of those employees returned this winter, said Julie Frailey, Stowe's director of human resources, and the resort east of Burlington is still trying to beef up its staffing in time for February school vacation.

"It wasn't a large number, but these were key, key people for us for the full season," Frailey said. "We back-filled with part-time people and squeaked by, but we still don't know what we're going to have for the summer."

On Cape Cod, where the later tourist season dictates later deadlines for visa applications, business owners learned on Jan. 3 that the 33,000-visa cap for the second half of the fiscal year had been met. Nichols Bishop said she does not know of any Cape businesses that submitted applications before then.
Wendy Northcross, chief executive of the Cape Cod Chamber of Commerce, said the agency has long sought alternatives to the visa program, trying to recruit on campuses and in the US Virgin Islands, but with limited success.

"Now there's a level of panic with some employers," she said. "It's almost too late."

For Hogan, the Nantucket restaurant owner, that could mean the loss of longtime employees from Jamaica, including cooks and counter help to sell his homemade doughnuts. The Downyflake serves 1,200 customers a day in the summer, he said, with a kitchen staff of 10 and 10 more workers on the floor.

At the Nantucket Regional Transit Authority, administrator Paula Leary said she is struggling to plan summer bus schedules without knowing who will drive the buses. The authority, which employs 30 to 40 drivers in the summer, normally hires 20 to 25 of them from Bulgaria, many on H-2B visas, she said.

Hiring new, inexperienced drivers - if they can be found - means long delays while they are licensed, said Darren Morris, general manager of Transit Connection Inc., which operates buses on Martha's Vineyard. Morris said he is trying to recruit foreign workers from Western ski resorts.

"Immigration is such a hot topic, it's thrown this program in a bad light," he said. "It's something that works, and it's been beat up."

The underlying problem of an unworkable immigration policy for workers. The Fence.

The federal government is preparing to take legal action against landowners along the Mexican border who do not want to give up property for construction of a fence. The underlying problem of an unworkable immigration policy for workers remains unsolved.

More than 100 people who own land along the Mexican border are facing legal action by the Department of Homeland Security because they refuse to negotiate with the federal government for land to build a border fence.Homeland Security wants to build 370 miles of fence and 300 miles of vehicle barriers by the end of the year, which is part of the Bush administration's plan to build 700 miles of fence along the border to stem the inflow of illegal immigrants - mostly Mexicans coming to the United States to work.


The Border Patrol has stepped up patrols and arrests, but most days it is overwhelmed. Government officials have indicated they will use eminent domain to take the property if some settlement can't be reached with the property owners. The deadline for negotiations passed last week, but it appears a last-ditch effort will be made to purchase the property. It seems certain that some of the owners will take their dispute to court. What also seems certain is that nothing will be done to draw up new policies governing the movement of undocumented workers across the border. The U.S. economy is a magnet for poor workers in Mexico and Central America. Menial labor jobs that pay minimum wage here are minor financial windfalls in those countries, and as long as that balance remains in place, workers will try to cross the border. Immigration policy must recognize that fact and provide documentation for non-resident workers. It must also provide a tamper-proof system of registering workers and set up significant penalities for U.S. businesses that knowingly hire undocumented workers. If those goals are achieved, the need for a border fence will diminish, and the money earmarked for construction could be better used for enforcement and documentation. In this age of international terrorism, border security has become more important than in the past. Physical barriers may stop some from entering the country, but those barriers can be breached, as has been seen in the southwest where police have found tunnels from Mexico into the United States and not wall or fence thru Canada. Used primarily to smuggle drugs, they illustrate the determination of criminals to infiltrate the U.S. market for illicit trade. A comprehensive system of documenting those who want to enter the country to work would free the Border Patrol and law enforcement agencies to concentrate on criminal activity along the border. Building a fence is not the answer to either of those problems

Immigration amendment could 'impede' farm bill.

Farm Bureau analysts warn there are risks in introducing “divisive” immigration issues into an already controversial farm bill debate.

Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) argued AgJOBS, a stalled immigration reform proposal that would grant temporary legal status to an estimated 800,000 migrant farmworkers, should be offered as a farm bill amendment on the Senate floor.
AgJOBS champion Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D.-Calif.) reportedly has been canvassing senators and staff seeking support for a floor amendment.

The American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) seeks reforms in the face of increased immigration enforcement and its impact on farm labor availability. But AFBF analyst Stefphanie Gambrell fears immigration debate “could have the ability to impede the farm bill.”

“We have not been supportive of having a divisive immigration debate taken up in the context of the farm bill,” AFBF policy specialist Paul Schlegel told FarmWeek.

“If members (of Congress) were to coalesce around a modified version of AgJOBS or anything else that addressed our needs in agriculture, if it wasn’t divisive and there was a consensus, that would be another question entirely.”

Further, Gambrell argued AgJOBS does not adequately address deficiencies in the existing H2-A ag guestworker program.

Under AgJobs, workers could obtain a temporary “blue card” to stay in the U.S. if they have been working on farms for at least two years.

Schlegel agreed the plan initially would “stabilize” the ag labor force, but Gambrell suggested many blue card workers likely would move into other fields such as construction once they eventually obtained their permanent residency or “green card.”
According to USDA, the number of hired ag workers nationwide is down this fall over the third quarter of 2006. Over the past year, federal Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials have ramped up raids and other activities, including last week’s arrest of a Vermont hotel owner for hiring illegal workers.

Gambrell attributed a quarter-by-quarter reduction in worker numbers in part to a “fear of enforcement.”

At the same time, a federal court has temporarily barred the U.S. Department of Homeland Security from enforcing new “no-match” letters that alert employers to mismatches between a worker’s name and reported Social Security number and ask them to help resolve the problem. Employers would have 90 days to comply with the letters.

Schlegel was uncertain how long the injunction against no-match implementation would remain in place, and advised farmers that “ignoring these letters is not an appropriate approach.” — Martin Ross