FARMWORKERS IN OREGON

Study Findings
The Oregon Farmworker Experience
Part I - History of Agricultural Labor and Immigration; Current Farm Workforce
Part II - Agriculture
Part III - Employment Rights and Practices; State Laws and Programs
Part IV - Enforcement of Laws
Part V - Farmworker Housing
Part VI - The Political Environment
Part VII - Consumer issues
Interviews and Other Contacts
Bibliography
Acknowledgements

Leaving home and crossing the border: Manuel comes from Oaxaca, in Southern Mexico. He is 17, the oldest son from a large family; his uncle has been migrating to the United States for five years, and the money he has earned has brought improvements to his uncle’s home. Manuel hopes to earn the same improvements for his own family. His family supports itself by working in onion fields outside his village. Manuel has six years of schooling. This year he will leave with his uncle in February to plant trees in Lane County. The first challenge is to clear the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) blockade. They travel 1800 miles from Oaxaca to the border town. Manuel and his uncle find a guide, called a coyote, who charges $800 each. They are caught by INS officials four times, thus delaying their departure several weeks, but on the fifth try they are across.

First job, with an unlicensed labor contractor: The uncle’s connection gets Manuel to Oregon to a Mexican labor contractor and crew. They show Manuel where to get his residency papers – forged documents — for $50. They live in a wilderness camp in a tent, cook their own food at a campfire, and use an open pit for a latrine. The work is hard: a large bag is carried over the back filled with Douglas fir seedlings. The crew boss wants him to work faster. At the end of two weeks, he is given $300. He pays back some of his debt to his uncle. He learns later he has earned less than others. Maybe he can find another boss. He knows if he complains, his boss may call “la migra” and he will be sent back across the border.

Many jobs through the season and a lonely first winter in Oregon: Manuel finds a new boss, another labor contractor in Junction City. First there is spring orchard work, then jobs planting row crops, moving irrigation pipe in mint and grass fields, harvesting grapes in the fall and Christmas trees in the winter. Many weeks there is no work. He lives in a labor camp in bunk housing with 60 other men for which he pays $20 a week. He works with Christmas trees 10 to 12 hours a day, from dark to dark in the late fall. He cuts trees, bundles them, and brings them to the machine where they are put in netting. He catches his finger in the netting machine and breaks it. He makes his own splint and keeps working. He sends money home every month. He stays the winter in Oregon because of the difficulty and expense of re-crossing the border. Most weeks there is no work. He takes some of his meals at a program at the Catholic Church. He feels isolated and lonely in Oregon. He speaks Mestican, and without Spanish or English many people take advantage of him.

Five Seasons in Oregon: During the following seasons Manuel acquires some English. He learns he must keep track of his hours to see if he has been paid minimum wage. When he and three co-workers complain, the boss fires them. They hear of work in Eastern Oregon and travel there but find no jobs: onions were not planted because the farmers could not pay the workers. On the way back, the workers find jobs in pear orchards near Hood River. Here the housing is better. This is the first time they have worked directly for a farmer. They return to this farmer every year and travel around the state to find their own jobs during the other seasons.

After a decade, a permanent job and hope for amnesty: By now Manuel has a wife and child in Mexico. He sends them $300 a month, which is enough to live on. He would like to have them in the U.S., but he could never support them here. He has found year-round work at a nursery in Boring and takes language classes offered by his employer. He notices that in town, the people who don’t speak English get treated worse. He has heard of the farmworkers’ union but doesn’t know much about it. He expects and hopes that somehow the U.S. will grant amnesty to workers like him. Then he will have more job security to advance and settle his family in Oregon. 

AGRICULTURAL LABOR

Twenty-eight Oregon counties imported 15,000 workers under the bracero program. Many observers think the bracero program continues to influence farmwork today because it established Mexico-to-U.S. migration and settlement patterns and depressed farm wages and working conditions. Although most farmworkers in Oregon today are immigrants from Mexico and Central America, in previous decades youth, housewives, and the unemployed did hoeing, irrigation, and hand harvesting.

IMMIGRATION LAW

IRCA also codified the H-2A Agricultural Guestworker Program, through which farmers can obtain documented foreign workers by following complicated application procedures requiring long processing times. In Oregon, only one large nursery has used H-2A since 1997 to hire skilled workers. The other major feature of IRCA was that, for the first time, employers were required to verify the identity and employment eligibility of everyone they hire. Fines for violations of this law were established.

In sum, the approach taken by IRCA was to grant existing foreign workers legal status and then close the border, with the new H-2A program taking care of any need for additional workers. At first this seemed to be working for farm labor. But the newly legal residents moved on to jobs in other industries and were replaced by a new wave of undocumented workers, whose number is now believed to equal or surpass the number in the U.S. in 1986.

INS Enforcement

Proposals to Change Immigration Law

With the support of the agriculture industry, Oregon senators introduced a bill in 1998 to revise the H-2A program. This failed. Two new versions are currently before Congress: one, HB 4548, was passed by the House Judiciary Committee in September, 2000; while the Smith/Graham bill has languished in the Senate. Both attempt to meet the need for a supply of documented farmworkers by allowing temporary workers to be brought in as needed. Standards for housing, transportation, and wages are weakened from the H-2A program. The Senate version would allow workers to become legal residents after working in agriculture for 180 days a year for five years, while the House bill makes no provision for amnesty or legal residency. Labor organizations fiercely oppose both bills as thinly disguised “indentured servitude” because workers are tied to one employer.

Farmworker unions argue that there is no labor shortage, an argument they say is bolstered by a 1997 General Accounting Office (GAO) study finding, and that any apparent labor shortage is instead a shortage of good wages and working conditions. However, the GAO report did not distinguish between legal and undocumented workers, and under present conditions massive labor shortages would exist if only legal workers were available. This spring the AFL/CIO announced support for a general amnesty for unauthorized residents, a new position for the union movement.

Scholars studying the farmworker issue have generally agreed that the present system needs revision. Daniel Rothenberg argues that unionization is the answer. Another researcher, Douglas Massey of the University of Pennsylvania, says our legislative approach is based on an erroneous understanding of the incentives that bring foreign workers to America and that our immigration policies actually increase illegal immigration. Massey proposes a 12-step program “for a healthier North American labor market.” In brief, this involves liberalizing immigration quotas from Mexico and Canada and issuing large numbers of visas for agricultural workers while also instituting effective steps to improve economic conditions in Mexico. Such a program, he says, “will not eliminate” the problem but will “reverse the deleterious consequences of our current policies.”

A binational study of migration authorized by the Mexican and U.S. governments predicts that demographic and economic factors will soon reduce future migration. It calls on both governments to assess strategies to reduce demand for unauthorized workers and provide increased economic opportunities in Mexico. It says a guestworker program might actually add to, rather than substitute for, unauthorized workers by stimulating new migration networks. The report deplores the social costs to Mexican families of migration and calls for ways to alleviate the disruption to families and communities. These same themes were emphasized by Mexico’s president-elect in his August, 2000 visit to the U.S.
 

CURRENT FARM WORKFORCE

• Permanent workers have year-round jobs in agriculture of at least 150 days a year.
• A migrant farmworker moves from his home location to one or more work locations and is absent from his permanent home for months at a time.
• A seasonal worker works for part of the year in agriculture within commuting distance of his home.

The combined total of migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States is estimated at four million.

Research for this report indicates that Oregon farmworkers fit this national portrait except that most observers think at least 50-70% of Oregon farmworkers are not authorized to work in the U.S. Community and Shelter Assistance Corporation of Oregon (CASA) estimates that about half of Oregon farmworkers are settled here and half migrate to Oregon for all or part of the summer season. In the early 1990s the migrant population included many families. People who provide services to migrant workers are now reporting a new wave of unaccompanied males. Many women and children have also been observed in farm labor camps. It is speculated that families are moving north sooner because the men are prevented from returning to them seasonally by the difficulty and expense of border crossing. 

OREGON’S AGRICULTURE

Oregon is an average state in agricultural production (ranked 26th according to the 1997 Census of Agriculture) but a major user of agricultural labor (ranked 6th in payroll expenses). Like its neighbors, California and Washington, Oregon grows commodities that require the use of human hands. The largest sector of Oregon’s agriculture—nursery and greenhouse crops—is labor intensive. Oregon produces berries, pears, cherries, Christmas trees, and other crops that require hand harvesting or pruning. In addition, workers drive tractors and combines, move irrigation equipment, feed cattle, and milk cows on Oregon’s farms and ranches.

Oregon’s farmers grow a greater variety of crops than farmers in any state except California and Florida. Oregon is the country’s only commercial producer of black raspberries, blackberries, hazelnuts, loganberries, and various kinds of grass seed. Oregon is a leading producer of many other crops including peppermint, azaleas, onions, sweet cherries, and vegetable and flower seeds.

Table 1 summarizes the relationship between agriculture production and farm labor by looking at six regions with distinct crops and labor needs. The Willamette Valley, home to 70% of Oregon’s residents, is also the most productive agricultural region. More than half the state’s farmworkers are employed in this valley. They pick berries, grow nursery plants, cut Christmas trees, and tend other crops. Irrigated parts of Eastern Oregon produce the second highest level of farm sales but employ a smaller share of farmworkers because the growing and harvesting of the major crops—potatoes, sugar beets, and seed crops—is highly mechanized. Dry parts of Eastern Oregon grow traditional commodities—cattle, wheat, and hay. The Coast specializes in dairy products. The latter two areas require a small, year-round workforce. Mid-Columbia and Southern Oregon are both areas with orchards that require large numbers of workers for short picking seasons.

The graphs in Table 1 show that all areas have year-round farmwork, but each region has a unique pattern of seasonal work. Some areas need bursts of workers for harvests of strawberries, cherries, wheat, and other crops. Other places need workers for four to six months. The needs for housing, daycare, medical clinics, and other services for farmworkers and their families likewise vary by season and region.

OREGION Gross Farm Sales % of Oregon Sale	COUNTIES BY RANK IN SALES	NUMBER OF FARMWORKERS EMPLOYED BY MONTH (Note: scales of vertical axes vary.)	MAJOR COMMODITIES (Harvest Times for Labor-Intensive Crops)
Willamette Valley Sales = $1,708,266,000 54% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 59%	Marion 1 Clackamas 2 Washington 4 Linn 5 Yamhill 6 Polk 10 Lane 11 Benton 13 Multnomah 15		Nursery crops (Feb.-June) Berries (June-Sept.) Vegetables (June-Nov.) Hazelnuts (Sept.-Oct.) Wine grapes (Sept.-Oct.) Christmas trees (Nov.) Ryegrass seed
Eastern Oregon – Irrigated Sales = $713,688,000 23% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 16%	Umatilla 3 Malheur 7 Klamath 8 Morrow 9 Jefferson 18 Union 22		Vegetables (May-Sept.) Onions (June-Sept.) Potatoes (July-Oct.) Peppermint (Aug.-Sept.) Sugar beets (Oct.-Nov.) Vegetable & flower seeds (Aug.-Sept.) Cattle, Hay, and Wheat
Eastern Oregon – Ranching and Dry Farming Sales = $282,051,000 9% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 8%	Baker 20 Lake 21 Harney 23 Crook 25 Wallowa 26 Sherman 28 Deschutes 29 Grant 30 Gilliam 34 Wheeler 36		Cattle Hay Wheat Potatoes (Aug.-Oct.) Peppermint (Aug.-Sept.) Vegetable & flower seeds (Aug.-Sept.) Farm forestry products
Mid-Columbia Sales = $113,079,000 4% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 7% (12% in July)	Hood River 16 Wasco 17		Cherries (June-July) Pears (Sept.-Oct.) Apples (Oct.-Nov.) Wheat Cattle Farm forestry products
Southern Oregon Sales = $140,043,000 4% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 8%	Douglas 14 Jackson 19 Josephine 31		Peaches (July-Aug.) Pears (Aug.-Oct.) Apples (Oct.-Nov.) Nursery crops (Feb.-June) Vegetables Farm forest products Cattle and dairy products
Coastal Sales = $199,126,000 6% of Oregon sales Average share of farmworkers = 4%	Tillamook 12 Coos 24 Columbia 27 Clatsop 32 Curry 33 Lincoln 35		Dairy products Farm forestry products Cranberries Bulbs

Sources: Gross farm sales and commodities from Oregon Agriculture Information Network, http://ludwig.arec.orst.edu/oain/. Estimates of farmworkers from Oregon Employment Department. (Employment may be part time.)

THE ECONOMICS OF AGRICULTURE

Most farmers, like the wheat and strawberry growers described below, must take the prices the market gives them. Farmers with specialized products can sometimes set prices or even adjust them to reflect the cost of production.

The consolidation of the food industry and competition from other countries have pushed down the price of many farm products. In 1994 twelve supermarket chains accounted for 40% of U.S. food sales, but in 1999 only four supermarket chains accounted for the same 40% of sales. Chains with large market shares can insist on lower prices because wholesalers and food processors cannot afford to lose these accounts. Processors, in turn, must cut costs. They can pay U.S. farmers less or look for cheaper sources in other countries.

Farmers also have little control over the cost of inputs. In recent years, the price of high quality land in the Willamette Valley has increased due to land demand from nurseries. The cost of borrowing operating capital has increased as the prime rate has climbed. Prices for feed, fertilizer, and agricultural chemicals have risen at the rate of inflation, and fuel costs have gone up faster. The U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that production expenses in Oregon rose by 15% between 1994 and 1998. The largest single factor pushing up costs was labor, accounting for half the increase. Between 1994 and 1998, Oregon’s minimum wage rose from $4.75 to $6.00, while the federal minimum wage increased from $4.25 to $5.15.

Ed Merriman, Capitol Press staff writer, comments that “expenses associated with favorable treatment of workers and the environment may pencil out in an economic vacuum. But the real world for U.S. processed vegetable producers means competing in a less-than-compassionate global economy with many countries where wages and environmental regulation are lower. For regions like the Northwest, with a high minimum wage, competition is especially tough.”

Farmers have adopted a number of strategies to survive in this competitive world:

• Mechanizing to reduce labor costs
• Supplementing their income with off-the-farm jobs
• Switching to more profitable crops (specialty grass seed, nursery crops)
• Raising new products (native plant seeds for riparian habitats)
• Selling directly to consumers (farmer’s markets, U-pick)
• Adding value to farm products (drying nuts, processing sweet potatoes)
• Expanding production (lease or buy additional land)
• Reducing inputs (using fewer chemicals or workers)

In addition to economic pressures, farmers face other challenges including adverse weather; conflicts with urban neighbors over noise, dust, etc.; finding an adequate supply of qualified labor; government regulation and extensive paperwork; environmental regulation; increased transportation costs due to a declining number of processors; and a declining supply of farmland as gravel is mined, urban growth boundaries are expanded, and additional non-farm uses are permitted on farmland.

FUTURE TRENDS

Unless drastic changes are made, several agricultural professionals predict that the U.S. will no longer be food self-sufficient. As pressure mounts for land to go to the “highest use,” growing food will lose out to industrial uses, housing, malls, golf courses, and lawns. This issue is international in scope and countries that still attempt to defend their own production of food within their borders inevitably do so through some form of subsidy.

It is difficult to predict the future of Oregon agriculture. Some fear that it will lose its diversity as farmers reduce costs by getting out of crops that require hand labor or switch to currently profitable sectors. Others see promise in the growing number of farms that fill specialty niches in the market, such as organic producers. Perhaps the only certainty is that agriculture and the jobs of those who work on farms will change. 

Most Americans take for granted basic worker protections and guarantees including minimum wage, overtime provisions, Social Security, unemployment insurance, child labor protections, and the framework for union organizing. These standards, initiated as federal reforms of the 1930’s, excluded farmworkers. Agriculture groups were a powerful lobby that argued that the industry needed to be protected from harvest strikes and higher labor costs because of the importance of agriculture to the national economy and the need for food security. Others assert racism against African American workers in the South was a strong factor in the exclusion of farmworkers from these laws.

Before the 1960’s, working conditions for farmworkers were virtually unregulated. During that decade, Americans became more concerned about poverty and civil rights. The Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act of 1963 set forth rules to protect farmworkers hired by farm labor contractors. These laws were replaced in 1983 by the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, which provided more protections for farmworkers and extended liability to farmers as well as labor contractors. Oregon’s involvement in passing laws to regulate farmwork dates back to 1959. When state and federal laws differ, the law providing more protection to employees or setting higher standards applies.

We continue today with a set of laws for farmworkers that is different and less stringent than laws that regulate the working conditions for the majority of Americans.

FARMWORKER WAGES

• Minimum wage in Oregon is $6.50/hour, which along with Washington’s, is the highest rate in the U.S.
• Minimum wage applies to all farmwork, with the exemptions of certain small farms and family employees.
• Many farmworkers are paid by “piece rate.” This is an amount paid per pound or other unit picked at harvest times. Under this system, farmworkers can earn well over minimum wage when the crop is good. However, most incidents of underpayment to farmworkers are in situations where piece rate is used.
• If piece rate is used, the weekly amount paid divided by the number of hours worked must equal minimum wage. Employers are required to keep extensive records on employees, hours, and wages paid. Workers are encouraged to keep records also.
• Deductions for services may reduce a worker’s pay below minimum wage; this may be legal or illegal, depending on a variety of factors.
• Tax and Social Security deductions are made, but unauthorized workers will most likely never benefit from these deductions.
• Statistics show Oregon field workers earn an average of $7.73 an hour (1999: Oregon Agricultural Statistics Service). While most harvest work earns minimum wage, higher wages are offered in some areas. Examples are tree and vineyard pruners ($13 -$17/ hour), chemical applicators (more than $12/ hour), and equipment operators ($9.50/ hour).
• An Oregonian survey of berry pickers in 1998 showed an average pay of $5.60 an hour, with a range of $3.06 to $9.30 an hour.
• Compliancewith minimum wage law varies. Non-English-speaking workers, new immigrants, and those employed by unlicensed labor contractors are most likely to be underpaid.
• Most farmwork is seasonal and temporary: farmworkers work an average of 24 weeks a year in agriculture. Migrant workers are not paid for their time traveling to a harvest or for delays due to weather. The seasonal nature of the work as well as low wages make many farmworkers among the poorest of all workers; nationally, the median annual income of a single worker is below $7500, and for families, between $10,000 and $14,000.

HOURS WORKED

• Federal and state laws requiring overtime pay (more than 40 hours a week) do not cover agricultural workers.
• Many farmworkers work long hours, especially during harvests. The number of hours worked may be at the discretion of the employee to allow maximum earnings for the day. Long working days of 10 to 12 hours may also be a requirement of the job.
• California requires payment of overtime to farmworkers if they work more than 10 hours a day or more than 60 hours a week.

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

• Oregon and federal laws exempt agricultural employers with payrolls of less than $20,000 per quarter or with fewer than ten employees in each of 20 weeks during a calendar year.
• Washington and California require full coverage.
• Unauthorized workers cannot collect unemployment insurance. The OED must verify status of non-citizens with INS before paying insurance.
• Nationally, fewer than one-third of farmworkers apply for unemployment benefits.

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION (reimbursement for on-the-job injury)

• Oregon, Washington, and California all require full coverage insurance by employers.
• Most unauthorized workers are reluctant to report work injuries for fear of losing their jobs.

BREAKS AND REST PERIODS

HEALTH AND SAFETY IN THE WORKPLACE

Field Sanitation

Pesticides

• Protective equipment for workers and handlers as specified by the pesticide used.
• Restriction from entering fields where pesticides have been applied for four to 72 hours, depending on the chemical used.
• Posted warning signs in sprayed fields that are proximate to workers.
• Records of applications, safety training, display of safety posters, and use of decontamination sites.
• Farmers are required to have a material safety data sheet (MSDS) on file for each hazardous substance in the workplace and ensure that MSDSs are readily accessible to employees when they are in the work area. Still, farmworker advocates find the system does not make it easy to anonymously access information regarding specific pesticides used at worksites.

The Oregon Department of Agriculture is developing a statewide pesticide use reporting system, the result of 1999 state legislation. The system, when implemented in 2001, will provide information on all types of pesticides used in Oregon, including agriculture, forestry, and others in both urban and rural settings. This data will be collected, evaluated, summarized, and reported by quantities and locations.

In Oregon, the Pesticide Analytical Review Center (PARC) is a multi-agency response program for pesticide poisoning incidents in the state. PARC prepares and distributes bilingual educational publications on pesticides and also summarizes incidents and cases investigated. Incidents are reported by doctors, service agencies, workers’ compensation claims, and self-referrals. The system is not comprehensive. Many poisonings go unreported as they are mistaken for flu or because workers may fear losing their jobs if they report. PARC keeps information confidential at the individual's request.

In 1996, The Oregon Child Development Coalition (OCDC) with the Center for Research on Occupational and Environmental Toxicology (CROET) at Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) began a community-based environmental research program to prevent pesticide exposure to farmworker families. Their aims are both to advance scientific knowledge of health effects of pesticide exposure and to empower the farmworker community. They interviewed workers and growers on culturally effective training methods for migrant workers and their families and developed a video. Their work is ongoing, collaborative, and a good model for other projects.

Two Oregon experts interviewed for this study observed that rules for safe pesticide application are not always followed. A 1998 EPA study was unable to fully assess compliance rates of farmers but was able to identify potential areas of concern for non-compliance. These areas were posting of chemicals used, training, and maintenance of personal protective equipment.

Workers housed proximate to fields are vulnerable to exposure through air drifts and water contamination. Culturally appropriate education is crucial. The OHSU research project suggests that people may be aware of some danger but may not understand how or believe they will be affected, nor do they always understand the risk to their children. Children may ingest toxins by eating unwashed fruit or vegetables, playing in fields, or through residue on their clothing, sometimes acquired through laundering with parent workers’ clothes. The EPA's Pesticide Reentry Interval (REI) is the minimum period of time workers must be kept out of the field after pesticide application. This standard has been determined by using the model of a 154-pound male: many women, children, and migrant men, for that matter, are smaller.

FARM LABOR CONTRACTORS (FLC)

State law requires:

• Licensing by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) either as a farm labor contractor, or a farm and forest labor contractor.
• Bonding of $10,000 for contractors with up to 20 employees and $30,000 for 21 or more employees.
• Workers’ compensation insurance
• Insurance for vehicles used to transport workers.

Labor contractors can also provide greater job security to workers. Some contractors may operate farm labor camps and then coordinate a variety of jobs with different growers to keep their housed workers employed over a longer season, with weeks of work from early spring through late fall.

DISCLOSURE

• Both farmers and contractors are required by federal law to give migrant farmworkers written statements of the conditions of employment. This statement must include place of employment, wage rates, crops and kinds of work, period of employment, housing, transportation, or benefits provided and their cost to the worker, and information about workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance.
• Payroll records must also be kept for migrant and seasonal workers. An itemized written statement of payroll information must be provided to the worker at the time of payment, which cannot be for more than 35 days per pay period.
• Bilingual posting of workers’ rights and protections is also required at the place of employment.

DISCRIMINATION

CHILD LABOR

The GAO reports, "Children can legally work in agriculture under conditions that would be illegal in other work settings." Oregon law allows children 16 years or older with minimum training to operate machinery on farms. Children 14 to 16 may be employed in farmwork outside school hours for as much as ten hours a day, six days a week. Even children age nine to 12 may do farmwork under specific conditions.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimates that nationally as many as 100,000 children are injured and 100 are killed in farmwork yearly. Human Rights Watch is advocating new child labor laws. The Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs and National Consumers League are sponsoring the Children in the Fields Campaign in response.

There is a history of lax enforcement of existing laws in Oregon and Washington; no citations for child farm labor were issued from 1994 until 1998. In August 1998, The Oregonian published a series of articles on child farm labor in the Northwest. In 1999 after the Department of Labor launched an initiative targeting selected crops for increased compliance in child labor practices, state and federal inspectors found 109 children younger than the legal age of 12 working in berry fields and cited the farmers involved. Children of farmworkers often work to supplement the family income which is usually below the poverty level.

Child Care and Migrant Education

HEALTH SERVICES

Average life expectancy for a migrant farmworker is 49 years, compared to 73 for the general U.S. population (Center for Disease Control, 1988). Infant mortality is 25% higher than the national average. Farmworkers’ dental health is that of a third-world population. From their work in the fields, farmworkers frequently have back and muscle problems as they grow older. Depression (related to isolation and economic hardship) is also common among farmworkers. Poverty, stress, mobility, and lack of recreational opportunities make farmworkers vulnerable to substance abuse.

The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration funds 14 migrant and community health clinics in Oregon. Some of these clinics are augmented by funding from the farming community. Even so, services are not sufficient to meet the need: nationally, migrant clinics serve less than 20% of farmworkers. Bilingual staff, outreach, health education, and transportation to health services are all important in serving farmworkers. The Oregon Health Plan does not serve farmworkers who do not meet residency requirements, except on an emergency basis. 

The Wage and Hour Divisions, Farm Forest Labor Unit of the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI)

In the case of underpayment of wages, BOLI tries to collect from the employer. Critics say collection of back wages alone is not sufficient; penalties are needed to encourage compliance with the law. BOLI assesses penalties (paid to farmworkers) only if forced to pursue collection through a contested case. In the 29 months ending May 31, 2000, 354 wage claims were filed and $73,000 was collected in payments to workers. BOLI does not possess legal authority to assess civil penalties on employers who underpay workers. They can assess civil penalties for contractor violations, and these fines are sent to a state fund for farmworker housing.

Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services; Occupational Safety and Health Division (OR OSHA)

In early 2000, PCUN filed a complaint with federal OSHA alleging that OR OSHA was not adequately enforcing laws. Points of concern were failure to inspect labor camps and workplaces at times workers were present and when pesticides were being applied, the need to interview workers out of the presence of employers, failure to make referrals to other agencies (Department of Health), and inadequacy of penalties. In response, OR OSHA drew up an Agricultural Action Plan and meets with PCUN quarterly to review their progress in implementation. OR OSHA recently worked with a group of growers, labor organizers, legislators, and other agency representatives to revise the standards for farm labor camps; some rules were weakened, others strengthened. OR OSHA improved its system of labor camp inspections in 1998, coinciding with media attention. The agency seems generally responsive to criticism and has shown a willingness to work with outside parties.

Other Agencies’ Roles in Awareness and Enforcement

In 1998 The Oregonian featured articles on farmworker issues that described poor conditions in farm labor camps, lack of enforcement of child labor laws on farms, and lack of payment of minimum wage. Since the series, some increase in enforcement has occurred.

Complaint-driven Enforcement and an Unauthorized Workforce

Enforcement of laws governing working conditions for individual farmworkers is hampered by the immigration status of many workers as well as by such factors as cultural and language barriers, lack of education, and isolation. While regulations apply to all workers, regardless of residency status, undocumented and even legal alien workers’ willingness to file complaints or answer inspectors’ questions is profoundly affected by their distrust of government agencies and fear of deportation or loss of employment. 

Although farmers have traditionally been the suppliers of housing for migrant farmworkers, the state has become involved in regulating the housing farmers provide and in finding other solutions to the shortage of decent and safe housing for migrant as well as seasonal and permanent farmworkers. In 1989, the Legislature adopted a policy that the state was “to insure adequate agricultural labor accommodations commensurate with the housing needs of Oregon’s workers that meet decent health, safety and welfare standards.” Also adopted were policies to encourage communities to site more housing within their boundaries. A tax credit program was created to help finance the construction and rehabilitation of farmworker housing. Today the shortage of farmworker housing is as bad as (if not worsen than) it was in 1989. The last decade has also been a time where many exemplary models for farmworker housing have been introduced in the state.

Farmworkers encounter special problems in finding adequate housing. Most cannot afford market rate rents, rental deposits, and other costs of private housing in the community. Finding short-term housing for seasonal work is difficult, if not impossible. Many migrants send money home to support family members and need to spend a minimum on housing for themselves. Language and cultural barriers are also a factor.

Farm Labor Camps

The state requires operators of farm labor camps to register annually. Failure to register results in penalties, recently increased from $250 to $2500. A pre-occupancy inspection for new camps determines if health and safety standards are met. Registered camps are required to meet state standards and are visited randomly or in response to a complaint. Inspectors cite problems which must be corrected and issue fines, depending on the seriousness of the violation. Before 1998, OR OSHA inspection of camps was minimal, averaging one inspection per registered camp every 17 years. OR OSHA has increased inspections to 150 camps a year.

Many unregistered camps exist. In some cases farmworkers are living in a farm building not intended for human habitation – a barn or other outbuilding. Old housing trailers have been observed which are not hooked up to any sewage or septic system. Workers may use irrigation water for drinking, cooking, and bathing. The number of unregistered camps is unknown but has been estimated to be as high as twice the number of registered camps. The living conditions in unregistered camps have been described as abominable.

Some further issues related to farm labor camps include:

• The landlord and the employer (either a farmer or labor contractor) are usually the same party with a great deal of power over the farmworker, who may not complain for fear of losing both housing and employment.
• Rural locations isolate farmworkers from communities and services. Transportation is an additional service need.
• Tenants’ access to outside parties may be limited. State law allows access by medical, public and other service providers, and religious representatives, but workers may fear reprisals from employers if they talk with these people.
• Even though some camps are substandard, the closure of a camp leaves workers with no housing. If a camp is closed, state law requires the farm labor camp operator to provide housing to workers free of charge for seven days.
• Living in labor camps used to be free; now it costs about $20 a week per person. Charging for housing, some say, is a method to offset costs incurred by the raise in minimum wage.
• Farm labor camps intended for single men are often unsuitable places for families with children.
• Farmworker advocates say fines for bad conditions in camps are not enough to motivate operators to comply with state standards. Farmers resent inspections and fines when they know unregistered camps exist with much worse conditions.
• Tenant/landlord law may or may not apply to the worker/farmer relationship, depending on a variety of factors, such as proximity of housing to work.
• One third of the state’s registered farm labor camps are in Hood River County. Farmers built these camps decades ago to attract workers to their orchards. These camps have been noted for their above average conditions, probably among the best in the Northwest.
• Farm labor camps qualify for the state’s tax credit, and farmers would like the state to continue this program.

Publicly Financed Community-based Housing

• The community location gives farmworkers access to services and a better chance to become integrated into the community.
• Housing meets building code standards and is relatively affordable.
• The farmworker’s landlord and employer are separate parties.
• Some projects encourage a sense of community and offer on-site services to assist farmworkers to improve their lives.

Market-rate Housing in Communities and Homelessness

Farmworkers who are best able to locate and afford market-rate housing are those who have year-round work, have been working in this country for several years, and are becoming permanent residents. Farmworkers who are just arriving in this country to work, are migrants, or are sending money elsewhere to support family members are housed in the poorest conditions.

Proposed Solutions

• Solving the problem of farmworker housing will require significant investment. The 1999 Legislature allocated $1 million this biennium for migrant farmworker housing. Washington state has a comprehensive farmworker housing strategy supported by $40 million over ten years ($8 million this biennium). Funding is needed not only for development costs but to support planning, start up costs, operating subsidies, emergency housing, and capacity building for organizations developing and operating community-based housing.
• Community-based farmworker housing provides many benefits over farm labor camps, but farm labor camps use private as well as public resources to house farmworkers. There is a question as to whether the state should encourage both types of housing with public support.
• The local review process has prevented many multi-family farmworker projects from occurring. Making farmworker housing an outright allowable use in some land-use zones is a possible solution.
• Infrastructure (water, sewer, utilities) is lacking in many rural areas where farmworker housing is needed.
• CASA of Oregon has developed a prototypical multi-family project for use in rural Oregon communities. The use of prison-manufactured housing, yurts, and tents has been discussed.
• There is agreement that the state should be more involved in locating unregistered farm labor camps, assessing fines, and requiring operators to become compliant with state standards.
• A great variety of agencies is involved in farmworker issues without a process in place to coordinate their efforts.

UNIONS

Efforts to attain collective bargaining rights for farmworkers in different states have met with different results. In California, the United Farm Workers’ (UFW) campaign led to the passage of laws in 1975, creating an agricultural labor relations board to oversee union elections and contracts. This model places farm labor in a political arena, with funding decisions and board appointments at the discretion of elected officials. With the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC) in Ohio and more recently in Washington state, labor relations have been successfully overseen by a private commission, not by state laws. Such a private commission is established with rules for union elections and contracts that are agreeable to farmworkers and farmers who are equally represented on the board. Grants and private contributions are the funding source. The advantage of such a model is its independence from state politics.

While labor organizing is naturally adversarial, when union contracts are established, the relationship may change to be more collaborative. In the best examples of current UFW contracts, the words “trust” and “communication” are used to describe relations between workers and employers. Nationally, few farmworkers work under a union contract. Union involvement can achieve improvements in working conditions, wages, and most importantly, the right to speak up about unfair labor practices.

Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste

• a service facility (for information and advocacy on immigration, financial, legal, consumer and employment issues)
• educational workshops
• language and citizenship training
• a women’s project (offering leadership and economic development through making and marketing Christmas wreaths)
• advocacy work in all arenas (Legislature, legal cases, labor camps, state and federal agencies, etc.)
• a pesticide project
• a media and archives project which includes newsletters and updates to more than 2700 supporters
• an immigrant rights coalition
• farmworker housing activities

PCUN has negotiated contracts with three small-scale Oregon farmers. The boycott against NORPAC Foods continues to be a major effort.

Collective bargaining

PCUN as advocate

Many recognize the important role of PCUN as an advocate for a group of workers that has little voice. Efforts by PCUN and legal aid attorneys as well as media attention have increased awareness and enforcement of farm labor laws. The union is seen as an effective organization in increasing attention to farmworker issues and bringing pressure for improvements.

FARMER ORGANIZATIONS

Farmer associations have been proactive in many agricultural labor issues. The unauthorized status of many of Oregon’s farmworkers is a major concern. Without a legal workforce, farmers fear that Social Security audits or INS investigations will force them to lay off their workers at critical times and cause them to lose their crops.  A major legislative focus is to obtain a legal workforce. Farmers agree with Senator Gordon Smith, who has said, “It’s an impossible situation to have farmers as felons and farm workers as fugitives.”

Farmer organizations and unions

Farmers need certainty in employment practices and are uncomfortable with the present situation where some firing practices may be countered by law suits. (See: Oregon Roses Case) Some farmers believe it is time for a collective bargaining law to clarify the rules under which working conditions are negotiated. Two pillars of any act supported by farmers would be prohibitions of secondary boycotts and harvest strikes.

Farmers and regulations

Farmers find that compliance with a large number of state and federal labor laws is costly and difficult. When labor rules and their enforcement become too onerous, farmers say they will stop raising crops that require workers. Farmers think that the number of farmers who willfully violate laws and fail to treat their employees with respect is small. They think these lawbreakers should be punished. The Coalition of Agricultural Employers—a coalition of OFBF, Oregon Association of Nurserymen, Northwest Food Processor’s Association, and other agricultural groups—is discussing ways to help members work with their peers to assure that all employees are treated with respect.

Other issues

OFBF is a strong supporter of the state’s land use system, especially the preservation of agricultural lands. Farmer organizations are concerned over the shortage of farmworker housing. They favor retention of state programs that assist farmers to build and rehabilitate agricultural labor housing.

STATE LEGISLATION

The last comprehensive package of worker-oriented legislation was enacted in the 1989 session. Laws were passed to reform farm labor contracting rules, increase regulation as well as access to farm labor camps, establish the farm worker housing tax credit program, and commit the state to address the housing needs of farmworkers.

The sessions of the early and mid 90’s saw minor revisions to state laws. Registration of farm labor camps was transferred from the BOLI to OR OSHA. Revision of farm labor contracting law, including licensing and bonding requirements, was enacted.

Farmer associations introduced a variety of bills in 1997 and 1999. In both sessions, legislation concerning farmworkers’ rights to bargain collectively was proposed (See: Oregon Roses Case). The governor vetoed both proposals. Also in both sessions, proposals to exempt some agricultural workers from minimum wage were sponsored, both times without success. Other proposals included looser requirements for farm labor contractors’ written agreements with workers, some exemptions of requirements for a workplace safety committee, and less use of citations by OR OSHA on non-serious violations during first inspections of farm labor camps. All three of these bills failed.

Bills passed included a 1997 requirement that operators of farm labor camps provide housing free of charge for seven days to residents in the event of closure of a farm labor camp. A task force was appointed and an allocation was made for migrant farmworker housing in the 1999 session (see discussion under “Farmworker Housing”). Laws were enacted to increase fees and requirements for farm labor contractor licensing, and a labor mediation program was approved under the Department of Agriculture.

In the area of increased worker protections, all legislative sessions of the last decade have seen unsuccessful proposals to extend unemployment insurance coverage to all farmworkers. In 1999, a law was enacted to establish a pesticide use reporting system administered by the Department of Agriculture. (See discussion under “Pesticides.”)

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The courts are an important arena for interpretation and enforcement of state agricultural labor law. Farmworker attorneys initiate lawsuits seeking correction of individual infractions, interpretations of the law to clarify worker protections, and increased awareness and enforcement of the law. Farmers are increasingly aware of lawsuit vulnerability. Many attend seminars sponsored by The Farm Employers Labor Service on “Trends in Farm Labor Litigation.” In the legislative arena, the agricultural industry introduces most of the legislation which worker advocates work to defeat. In the area of litigation, the worker advocates are the proactive party, with the farmers in the reactive role.

Both Legal Aid Services of Oregon and the Oregon Law Center represent farmworkers in litigation on matters of noncompliance with state and federal laws. Both agencies have active outreach programs to make farmworkers aware of their legal rights and the legal representation available. If farmworkers meet income guidelines, services are provided free of charge.

Farmers must hire their own attorneys when cases are brought against them. Farmers think that many of the cases are on minor technical violations. Many believe they would win in the courts but will settle out of court to avoid the cost and stress of a court case. In most cases, the result of the lawsuit is compensation to the worker, correction of the situation, and/or payment of penalties.

MEDIATION PROGRAMS

The Oregon Department of Agriculture offers a labor mediation program as an alternative to court legal proceedings. In demand letters sent by Oregon Legal Services or the Oregon Law Center, farmers are normally told of the availability of this mediation program at no cost. If the farmer wishes to participate, the mediator meets initially with the lawyers representing both the farmer and the worker. After researching the case, the mediator sets up a time where all parties and their legal representatives meet to express their grievances. Most mediated cases require a one-day proceeding to reach settlement. The program has handled 40 to 50 cases since its inception in 1996 and has a high rate of resolution. Farmers may feel that a legal complaint is unwarranted, but they will participate in this program to avoid the expense and stress of a court proceeding.

Services to Agricultural Workers (SAW) is a mediation program funded by the Coalition of Agricultural Employers to promote dialogue between workers and farmers in a labor dispute. The goal is better communication between the two groups through private discussion. Farmers and farmworkers can invite the SAW mediators, the Latino clergyman and his wife from the House of Zion Ministries, to facilitate a dialogue which is kept confidential. The program has been in existence for about a year. A separate, non-agricultural Board of Directors oversees the program. The program is designed to address misunderstandings that may arise due to language and cultural differences, fear of speaking out, and any area where greater communication is needed.

OREGON COMMUNITIES

Many communities in Oregon are experiencing a change in demographics due to large farmworker populations. The reactions are many and range from welcoming these residents and the diversity they bring to being resentful of community change. In “Immigrants in Rural Communities; Policy Implications,” Susan Martin from Georgetown University presents a model for communities in serving their farmworker population:

• Newcomers need orientation services including explanations of U.S. laws, principles of democracy, and financial institutions; drivers’ training; and an understanding of how to obtain services including housing, health care, child care, and schools.
• Educational opportunities should be emphasized and enhanced for adult immigrants without a high school education as well as for immigrant children and U.S.-born children of immigrants. Education and language acquisition are crucial for integration.
• A final suggestion is that governments provide aid to communities that are experiencing an influx of immigrants and that this be part of a national immigration policy. Without such assistance, communities struggle with limited resources to serve the needs of immigrants, setting the stage for a backlash against these new residents.

In Oregon today, a broad array of programs and services has been created by churches, service providers, and community organizations attempting to respond to the needs of farmworkers. Several programs receive financial support from farmers. All these efforts are too numerous to be listed in this report.

FARMWORKERS AND RACISM

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the relationship between farmworkers and their employers is racism. Although pay and working conditions are important to all workers, being treated with respect and dignity is considered crucial. Most farmworkers come to Oregon from Latin America desperate to find work. For persons of color from another culture, often with little education and a language barrier and performing a type of manual labor that is not desired by others, the potential for exploitation is high. Although most employers believe themselves to be fair, open, and decent (farmers frequently mention the loyalty of their workers and warm personal relationships) it is important to recognize and guard against patronizing behavior.

Problems of race and class also pervade life outside farmwork. Latin Americans who come to do this work often want to stay on and find non-agricultural jobs as soon as possible. But the stigma of color follows them to the new job, housing, community, and school. Often, even proficiency in English, educational achievement, and job skills do not protect an individual from racist discrimination. White people are frequently unaware of the pervasiveness of white privilege, which gives subtle advantages to them and disadvantages to people of color. 

Prejudice and discrimination are manifest in many ways, all of which are a denial of a person’s civil and human rights. If our neighboring country with serious economic problems were Canada instead of Mexico, would workers encounter the same difficulties? Any efforts to improve the situation for farmworkers in Oregon will need to address the problems caused by race, class, culture, language, and educational differences.

Do consumers bear any responsibility for our country’s system of food production, including our treatment of farmworkers? The average U.S. family uses 8% to 10% of its expenditures on food to be prepared for home consumption. This percentage is the smallest of all counties in the world. For comparison: 14% is spent on food in England, 20% in Japan, 50% in India and China; the percentage is even higher in the developing world.

In 1900 the average American family spent 60% of its income on food. Much has changed in farming in the last 100 years. Improved technology has allowed global trade of agricultural goods. Items sold in American grocery stores travel an average of 1300 miles from production to the market shelf. Most Americans know little about the chain of food production, the pressures on American farmers, or the treatment of workers on U.S. farms. They know even less about the way food is produced in other countries. U.S. food policy has long emphasized cheap food, and most Americans shop for the lowest prices without considering the larger consequences of their spending choices.

Efforts do exist to help the consumer consider the political nature of food buying: consumer boycotts aim to draw attention to unfair production methods. Some food is labeled for its method of production, union labor, or limited use of pesticides. The Food Alliance markets food produced according to a certification process that includes some labor standards; however, this food is found almost exclusively in higher priced markets. While most Americans are primarily interested in low prices for food, the potential exists, through awareness campaigns, to educate consumers about issues that can be supported through food purchase: socially just labor practices, support for local agriculture, and environmentally healthy farming methods.

Daniel Rothenberg reminds us:
“The apparent invisibility of production is a form of social forgetting, a politics of glossing over the real social and economic relations that allow for our high standard of living. Considering the world of farm laborers presents a powerful corrective to a society easily enamored with its own self-serving myths. Still, it is Americans’ deep-rooted desire to believe in equality and the march of progress that makes farmworkers’ situation so poignant, creating a discomfort born of our country’s failure to live up to its own ideals.”

Members of both the League’s statewide committee and local League committees interviewed or obtained information from a wide range of individuals in the course of this study. Many of these people are listed below.

FARMERS AND FARMER ORGANIZATIONS

CHURCH AND COMMUNITY GROUPS

FARMWORKER ORGANIZATIONS

PCUN – Ramon Rameriz, Erik Nicholson, Susan Dobkins, Leonidos Avila.
Unete - Dagoberto Morales.
Western Farm Workers Assoc. – Lazaro Gomez et al.

FARMWORKERS AND TREEPLANTERS

A number of farmworkers and tree planters were interviewed as part of this study. They wish to remain anonymous.

FORESTRY/TREE PLANTING

Bureau of Land Management – Bill Bentley.
Douglas County Woodlands Assistance Program – Gary Groth.
Menasha Corporation - Mike Enyeart.
Messerle and Sons, Inc. - Donald E. Messerle.
Miller Timber Services – Lee Miller.
Oregon Dept. of Forestry – Bob Young.

STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES

Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries – Jack Roberts, Nedra Cunningham, Raul Ramirez.
Oregon Dept. of Agriculture – Phil Ward, Brent Searle.
Oregon Employment Dept. – Virlena Crosley, Larry Hanson, Mary Lewis, Elaine Morales, Jan Swander, Christina Dunker, Chuck Wood, Joe Eddy, Don Baldwin, Eric Villegas, Susan Austermiller.
Oregon OSHA – Rod Comstock, Nancy Cody, Tom Hoffman.
U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service – Kelley Slaughter.

HEALTH, EDUCATION AND HUMAN SERVICES

Ad Hoc Health Care Group – Nancy Abrams, Millie Lane, Tina Castnares.
Centro Latinoamericano – Maria Maldonado.
Clinica del Valle – Rachel Linder.
Family Medical Center, Walla Walla – Sylvia Arroyo.
Hermiston Community Health Clinic – Jim Gallagher.
Jackson County Head Start – Alan Berlin.
Malheur County Migrant Head Start – Lori Clarke.
Migrant Education - Crook, Deschutes, Jefferson, Grant and Wheeler Counties – Frank O’Hearn.
Milton Freewater WIC Office – Micki Winnett.
Morrow-Umatilla County ESD – Yadira Gonzalez.
Oregon Child Development Corporation – Juanita Santana, Graciela Howard, Gracie Cortez, Martha Elena Molitar.
Salud – Carlos Medina, Esther Madrigal.
Talent Schools, ESL – Julia Garcia
Umatilla County Migrant Head Start – Roxanne Malmberg.
Bruce Campbell, Health Consultant.
Tom Maravilla, Teacher.
Linda Johnson, Teacher.
Terri Jimanez-Sutton, Social Service Worker.

HOUSING

CASA of Oregon – Peter Hainley, Lucia Pena.
Farm Worker Housing Development Corp. – Roberto Franco.
Malheur County Housing Authority – Sierra Vista – Jane Rodriguez.
Oregon Legislative Farmworker Housing Task Force.

LEGAL SERVICES

Oregon Dept. of Agriculture Mediation Services– Ken Pallack.
Oregon Law Center – Michael Dale.
Oregon Legal Services – Denise Harrington, Bob Turner, Raul Herrera, Magdalena Reyes.
Mike Unfred, Attorney.

OSU EXTENSION SERVICE

College of Agricultural Sciences – Thayne Dutson, Mike Burke, Peter Bloome.
Dept. of Agricultural and Resources Economics – James Cornelius.
Linn County Extension Service –Alex Muñoz, Mark Mellbye.
Malheur County Extension Service – Marilyn Moore.
Malheur Experiment Station – Clinton Shock.
Marion County Extension Service – John Burt, Dan Hoynacki, Mary Lou Cornejo
North Willamette Research and Extension Center - Hannah Mathers.
Willamette Valley Vegetable Crops – Dan McGrath.

OTHER

City of Independence – John McArdle.
Consul General de Mexico - Alma p. Soria Ayusa.
Hasta Aqui, Inc. – Zulma Huggins.
Human Rights Watch – Darlene Adkins, Coordinator, National Consumers League Child Labor Coalition.
Marion County Sheriff – Raul Ramirez.
Medford Police Dept. – Maria Swann.
OSU Dept. of History – William Robbins
Senator Ron Wyden’s Office – David Blair.
Senator Susan Castillo.
The Food Alliance – Jennifer Allen.
The Oregonian – Alex Pulaski.
TILTH – Chris Schreiner.
West Medford Community Coalition – Gigi Michaels.
Sandy Meyers, Safety Trainer.

Click here for the complete bibliography used in the study. This is a fuller bibliography than that printed in the LWVOR publication.

This publication was prepared by members of the League of Women Voters of Oregon Education Fund Farmworker Study Committee: Patricia Osborn (Board of Trustee), Chair; Mercedes Altizer (Marion/ Polk Counties), Connie Brown (Lane County), Judy Davis (Portland), Nancy Farrell (Marion/Polk Counties), Lois Kenagy (Corvallis), Rose Lewis (Marion/Polk Counties), Leeanne MacColl (Portland), Jean Milgram (Rogue Valley), Adele Newton (Washington County), Emily Schue (Lane County), Kathleen Shelley (Lane County), Judith VanDuzer (Coos County), and Paula Krane, Ex Officio, LWVOREF Chair.

This study was supported by many local League members who conducted research through local study committees throughout the state.

Outside readers were Senator Susan Castillo; Michael Dale, Oregon Law Center; Norene Goplen, Lutheran Advocacy Ministry; Larry Pearmine, Gervais farmer; and Brent Searle, Oregon Department of Agriculture.

LWVOREF Editing Committee: Dorothy Anderson, Merle Bottge, Vi Fietz,Paula Krane, Sally Hollemon, Patricia Osborn, and Kathleen Shelley.

Layout: Rebecca Smith; mounted on Web page by George Struble