Re: white house's proposal for new guestworker legislation

[Guest guest]

Open discussion right now is a very healthy thing for this list.

The fact that there is some disagreement is understandable. For

example, when I lived in rural Mexico, many people, especially older

males who remembered the Bracero program, puzzled over why the US did not

institute a similar program, which would then get rid of the coyotes and

make it safer for Mexicans to come to the US to do what business wanted

them for: work. Sitting in Mexico with limited options and a long

history of outmigration, potential workers might see Bush's proposal as a

hopeful light in a dark tunnel BUT since many also have family members

and friends en el Norte, I think they will also see through

this.

Below is my contribution to this thread...sorry if it is redundant but

obviously the more voices on this, the better.

Bush’s Proposal for Fair and Secure

Immigration Reform says that it will “serve America’s economy by matching

a willing worker with a willing employer” across industries. Bush

contends he does not support amnesty programs because “individuals who

violate American’s laws should not be rewarded for illegal behavior and

because amnesty perpetuates illegal immigration.” Bush acknowledges

that employers hire undocumented workers on a consistant basis.

Isn’t it illegal for these companies to knowingly hire undocumented

persons? The fact that Bush simultaneously acknowledges this while

pushing for a program that “matches” foreign workers with willing

employers would be laughable if it weren’t for the seriousness with which

the proposal is presented. What this proposal really does is expand

an existing program, known first as Bracero, which was first initiated in

1942 by the US Department of Labor coordinated with the Mexican

Department ofLabor to bring needed agricultural workers on a temporary

basis from Mexico to the US during the worker shortage caused by WWII (US

Executive Agreemet Series 278). By 1951, Congress passed

Public Law 78 which created the Migratory Farm Labor or Bracero or

Guestworker Program (Herrera-Sobek 1979xiv). PL 78 was unilaterally

terminated when Congress let it expire in 1964. Bracero never

really went away, it has lived on as the Temporary Employment of Aliens

in Agriculture in the US - H 2A Program (1998) and many states, including

Florida, and producers utilize workers known as “guestworkers” as

temporary contractual employees who are often confronted with

exploitation and fear of being deported if the employer finds any faults

whatsoever. At issue: who will monitor this program to make sure that

past exploitations do not recur? Will employers be held accountable

to preserving human rights?

Since 1986, when the Republicans initiated the Immigration Reform and

Control Act - known to many immigrants as " la

amnestía " - that regularized

citizenship status for millions of immigrants, there has not been any

positive movement on immigration reform that recognizes human

rights. As a land of immigrants, the US should be able to find a

way that immigrants who come here to work and build our economy are

offered a path to citizenship, which would allow them to truly enjoy the

American Dream: life, liberty and the pursuit of

happiness. This proposal will do none of this - it only helps

businesses bring in more " Guest " workers, puts them in a

vulnerable place for three year renewable contracts and sends them

home. We can do better. As Yzaguirre of the National

Council on the La Raza stated so eloquently, " This is at best an

empty promise and at worst a political ploy aimed at vulnerable

immigrants and those of us who care deeply about them. "

I will share these comments on Monday in Gainesville,

Florida.

Best

A

At 06:41 PM 1/8/2004 -0800, you wrote:

I thought

our listservs would be interested in this position paper from The

Farmworker Justice Fund about the new white house " immigration

reform " proposal. I'm including the comments I made to fellow

staff at my clinic when sending it earlier today to them.

Tina Castañares

______________________

The breaking news about a White House

immigration reform proposal has big ramifications for farmworkers, if

passed by Congress. Unfortunately this proposal like its

predecessors is largely a guestworker program, designed for corporate

interests, which has serious drawbacks for those workers whom it purports

to serve. (They have been backed by large agriculture, restaurant,

and hospitality industry (hotels, etc) lobbies, and are generally opposed

by consumer, labor, immigrants' rights and faith-based organizations,

with a few exceptions.)

Given that the press may turn to clinics like ours for quotes and

reactions, I thought I should share at least one resource for

perspective. The Farmworker Justice Fund has been a very trusted

source to me for many years, esp. on guestworker legislation. If

you find this of interest and feel it is worth sharing with others on our

staff, please feel free to forward it. -- Tina

FJF Position: Reject Pres's Proposal and Pass AgJOBS

Farmworker Justice Fund's Message: The President's Temporary

Foreign Worker

Proposal Is Ill-Conceived -- The AgJOBS Compromise on

Farmworker

Immigration Should be Supported

The President's proposal in his immigration policy speech on Wednesday

was

vague but is specific enough for us to know that he is essentially

proposing

a new era of indentured servants. This nation has experimented

with

indentured servitude and " guestworker " programs; they failed

miserably and

caused great misery. His proposal should be rejected as

inconsistent with

our nation's democratic traditions and our history as a nation of

immigrants.

Under the President's proposal, Congress would create a new

temporary

foreign worker program. A person from another country, whether

living here

or abroad, could gain a temporary, nonimmigrant work visa if he or she

finds

an employer willing to participate in the guestworker program. If

the

employment ended, that person would not have a right to stay in the

United

States unless another employer was willing to participate in the

guestworker

program. After three years, but a renewal of the visa may be

possible

If the employer agrees.

The temporary work visa will essentially be controlled by the employer.

The

worker's ability to remain in the U.S. will depend on keeping that

employer

satisfied. Consequently, the worker will know that he or she

risks

deportation by challenging unfair or illegal conduct. Employers

will gain

docile workers who often will work for lower wages and fewer benefits.

With

potentially several million guestworkers, the U.S. citizens and

full-fledged

immigrants will experience reduced bargaining power with their

employers.

Union organizing and bargaining will be impeded.

The President's proposal lacks the labor protections against

exploitation

that the notorious " Bracero " program had and that are present

in the abusive

H-2A and H-2B temporary foreign worker programs. There will be

no

protections against depression in wage rates through the use of

exploitable

guestworkers. The minimum wage is not enough. If a poultry

processing

plant is paying citizens and immigrants $12 per hour but has access

to

guestworkers, it might choose to offer $10 per hour. This bill does

not

protect wage levels or other working conditions from depression.

This and

other protections existed even under the old Bracero program despite

its

reputation for abuses. The President's proposal is a shocking

departure

from longstanding policy.

Generally, such programs are called " guest worker " programs

because the

participating employees have no right to become immigrants or citizens

of

the United States. In this case, the visas would be temporary but

many of

the jobs they would hold are permanent. Some of the undocumented

workers

who would want a legal status have been employed in the U.S. for a decade

or

more in year-round jobs. The disconnect is not explained. On

the other

hand, there is significant unemployment in some geographic areas and

industries; the proposal seems to lack a meaningful labor market test as

a

prerequisite for bringing in new guestworkers from abroad.

These workers will not be able to earn their way to a " green

card " with

immigration status even after years of employment. Guestworkers

would

apparently only be permitted to apply for the multi-year, perhaps

multi-decade, waiting list to become an immigrant. In this sense,

such

workers will not even be granted the right to earn their freedom

that

indentured servants had.

The fact that the President's proposal would grant a " legal

status " to

undocumented workers does not by itself mean anything: slavery was

a " legal

status " too. The President's proposal raises a

fundamental question about

the nature of citizenship and immigration status in this country and

answers

it in the wrong way.

This is a nation of immigrants, not a nation of guestworkers. It is

also a

nation of basic freedoms; guestworkers, however, are subjected to a

status

that deprives them of meaningful economic bargaining power and, as

nonvoters, of political representation or influence. Undocumented

workers

who are contributing to this society and other foreign workers who

are

needed should be converted to legal immigrant status, not into

indentured

servants under a guestworker program.

The President's proposal should be rejected. As to farmworkers, the

White

House should support the AgJOBS compromise (S.1645, HR 3142). It

would

provide undocumented farmworkers with the opportunity to earn

immigration

status by continuing to work in agriculture and revise the H-2A

guestworker

program. It's a reasonable compromise based on arduous negotiations

after

years of bitter battles in Congress. No more delay is

warranted.

Bruce Goldstein

Farmworker Justice Fund, Inc.

1010 Vermont Ave., NW, Ste. 915

Washington, D.C. 20005

202-783-2628 fax: 783-2561

www.fwjustice.org

To Post a message, send it to:

Groups

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:

-unsubscribe