http://www.aglinenews.com

" I heard it
through the
AgLine"

 

June 21, 2010

 

 

·        Bill backs overtime pay for farmworkers

·        How Frankenfood prevailed in global ag

·        Regulators may broaden E. coli testing

·        Potato batteries may provide cheap power

·        Bee collapse may have Australian link

 

 

Bill backs overtime pay for farmworkers

 

(fresnobee.com) – Overtime pay after eight hours is the law for wage earners across California -- except for those who do some of the hardest work, harvesting fruit and vegetables in the state's fields and orchards.

 

Now Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, is trying to change that.

 

Florez is pushing for a law that would give farmworkers the same overtime benefits as other hourly employees.

 

"I think it is wrong that we have laws that discriminate against the people who pick and pull crops in the fields by treating them differently in terms of pay," Florez said by e-mail. "I don't see the difference and the logic of excluding farmworkers from overtime. It has never made sense to me."

 

But Florez faces an uphill battle: Such a law would undo the long-standing practice of allowing farmers to avoid higher labor costs during periods of peak demand for workers.

 

Even some farmworkers are leery of the bill, which passed the Senate and now heads to the Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment for a hearing Wednesday.

 

"Right now, what we want is to work," said Jose Hinojosa of Los Banos, who was recently weeding a cantaloupe field in Firebaugh. "Because of the drought, we all have been working less. And if this means that growers will cut back even more, then I don't think it is a good idea."

 

Already, California is the only state in the nation that provides overtime for farmworkers after 10 hours a day or 60 hours a week.

 

Farmers say the new law would put California at a competitive disadvantage in an agriculture marketplace that spans state borders, because other farmers in the nation don't have to pay overtime to farmworkers.

 

That means California farmers would have to absorb costs that their counterparts elsewhere don't.

 

And those costs can't be passed along to the consumer, because food prices are set at the retail level.

 

Less for workers?

 

Some say the result could be fewer hours for farmworkers.

 

"The troublesome part is that the consequences of something like this will be felt more negatively on the worker," said Barry Bedwell, president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League.

 

Bedwell's organization is one of more than two dozen of the state's largest and most influential agricultural groups opposing Senate Bill 1121.

 

He said farmers may reduce workers' hours to avoid paying overtime. There are ways of doing this and still getting the work done, he said. The hours can be spread among more workers.

 

There's plenty of labor available to make that happen, critics say, because many farmworkers are unemployed as a result of a multiyear drought in western Fresno County. In Mendota, one of the hardest-hit communities, the unemployment rate rose to 45% this March.

 

Florez doesn't buy that argument.

 

He said farmers will have to weigh the costs of hiring more workers against the cost of paying someone overtime. Any time an employer adds an employee, there is a cost, he said.

 

"So the question remains, is it worth the effort?" Florez said. "And is it worth the effort to disappoint your best farm laborers by denying them the extra pay that they are entitled to?"

 

His bill has supporters, including the California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation and the California Labor Federation.

 

"We think it is only fair that we extend the same overtime protection to farmworkers that is given to virtually every other private sector employee in California," said Steve Smith, spokesman for the California Labor Federation.

 

Long hours, low pay

 

At their busiest, workers harvest fruit seven days a week, sometimes more than 10 hours a day, and at times for as little as minimum wage.

 

Agriculture labor experts say farmers have been allowed to limit their overtime usage because of the intense demands for labor during certain times of the year. Perishable crops have a limited window to be harvested and must be taken from the fields quickly to be packed and shipped worldwide.

 

"Some years, we don't even know if we will make our costs of production, because we are subject to the ups and downs of the market," said west-side grower Joe Del Bosque. "This is going to be a challenge economically for a lot of growers."

 

Del Bosque, who is also a farm labor contractor, said he sympathizes with his workers, who want to work as many hours as they can. During the height of cantaloupe harvest, his crews will work seven days a week, earning overtime on Sunday.

 

"I think the workers are really being caught in the middle of this thing," Del Bosque said.

 

The United Farm Workers union, a Florez ally, has not offered much support for his bill. Political observers say they are putting their political muscle behind Senate Bill 1474, which makes it easier for farmworkers to join unions.

 

UFW spokeswoman Maria Machuca said that its members have mixed feelings on the issue of overtime.

 

"Many want to be treated like other workers who receive overtime after eight hours," Machuca said. "At the same time, they fear growers will reduce their hours if the general standard on overtime is applied to them."

 

Machuca said the union's solution to better overtime benefits can be won through union contracts.

 

"If farmworkers are organized, they can negotiate overtime pay in their union contracts if that's what they want," Machuca said.

 

Other worker advocates say that while they support fair treatment of farmworkers, the bigger issue in farm labor is providing undocumented farmworkers a path to legal residency.

 

"Workers who are undocumented are fearful to stand up for their rights," said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworker Justice in Washington, D.C.

 

Uncertain politics

 

Florez reaches his term limit this year. And the overtime legislation could cap a series of laws he's pushed through to improve the lives of farmworkers. The Kern County politician has fought to make riding in farm vans safer, tighten the rules for farm labor contractors, and enact restrictions to prevent pesticide drift.

 

The chances of his bill passing the Assembly and being signed by Gov. Schwarzenegger remain unclear. The Governor's Office generally does not comment on bills until they reach his desk.

 

But Florez holds out hope.

 

"I think Gov. Schwarzenegger has been fair to the plight of farmworkers in certain instances -- not in all, but in specific instances," Florez said. "I'm hoping that the governor recognizes the injustice of discriminating against one class of workers, and if he can imagine for a moment and put himself in the shoes of an immigrant farmworker, I trust that he will do the right thing."

 

Return to Top

 

 

How Frankenfood prevailed in global ag

 

(Time) – Few companies spin financial growth out of crop growth better than Monsanto. By making an early, successful R&D-heavy bet on biotechnology, Monsanto transformed itself from an agricultural-chemicals company in an increasingly commoditized sector into a cutting-edge seed-and-biotech firm. Because its rivals are still catching up to its prowess in creating biotech traits — the software of seeds — Monsanto has become the standard bearer and lightning rod for the controversial advance of genetically modified (GM) crops, sometimes derisively described as Frankenstein foods.

 

But it looks as if the monster has prevailed. The company's juggernaut is so impressive that the usually levelheaded market bible Barron's hyperbolically referred to "Monsanto's stranglehold on the planet's food chain." Some 740 million acres (300 million hectares) are planted with GM crops, about equally divided between North America and the rest of the world — primarily Argentina and Brazil. (See pictures of urban farming around the world.)

 

The difference is that Monsanto's home market uses virtually everything the firm has ever invented; elsewhere, its growth has been more restricted, a result of fewer regulatory approvals. But that's changing as more countries adopt biotech crops, first for fiber (cotton), then for feed (especially corn for animals) and then for food for human consumption. There are 25 countries — collectively home to more than half the world's population — that have planted commercialized biotech crops. Another 32 countries have approved biotech imports for either animal feed or food. The walls of even biotech's most ardent opponent, Europe, have been breached. In March the European Union approved a biotech potato, developed by the chemical company BASF for industrial use, which is the first GM planting approval since a moratorium was imposed some 12 years ago.

 

In fact, there are already 120 genetically modified plants approved or in the process of being approved in the E.U. (The moratorium has always been full of exceptions.) This is hardly broadcast by Europe's officialdom, whose scientists have no major disagreements with their colleagues in the U.S. over food safety. That silence certainly suits European firms that might otherwise be forced to compete more directly with Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences and Pioneer Hi-Bred International. "Neither the government nor companies seem to see much upside in being more candid with the public," suggests Brett Begemann, international executive vice president at Monsanto. "It's a difficult line to walk because when I talk to consumers in Europe, it comes across as 'Gotcha! You are eating it anyway.' There is a lot of work to be done to help people understand what's really going on."

 

Biotech is the most rapidly adopted crop technology in human history — faster than the corn hybrids introduced in the U.S. in the 1930s and faster than the planting changes that took place during the Green Revolution. Advocates see biotech as a no-brainer, the only way to boost yields while escaping the trends of a growing world population (now 6.8 billion, heading beyond 9 billion by 2050) and finite cropland nourished by stressed water resources.

 

Monsanto is trying to protect its lead with a $1 billion R&D budget in the U.S., Brazil, India and, since November, China. But Switzerland's Syngenta has a comparable budget, Pioneer Hi-Bred International is part of DuPont, and Monsanto's next-generation corn seed SmartStax includes genes from Dow AgroSciences and Germany's Bayer CropScience. These arrangements hint at the complexity of the seed industry. Competitors can become cross-licensing collaborators, even partners, as companies seek innumerable seed-and-trait permutations to help farmers boost yields.

 

The most significant news on this front was China's decision in November to press ahead with two nationally developed biotech crops — one for corn and the other for rice. Rice is a huge market, with about 1 billion rice farmers and their families in Asia alone. But because it's farmed mostly at subsistence levels, with seeds readily retained and used in consecutive seasons without much quality degradation, it was not a market of high interest to Monsanto. Corn, the most important animal-feed crop, is a different story, especially as meat becomes more common in the Chinese diet. There are also some 7 million small farmers already growing cotton with Monsanto traits in China, where Monsanto has held a 49% stake in the leading National Seed Group Corp. since 2001.

 

"They want to have their piece of the game too, and we're O.K. with that," says Monsanto's Begemann. Make no mistake: cooperation today doesn't mean Monsanto is loosening its grip. "Just give us the opportunity to compete on a level field with our products, and we'll have to win it."

 

Return to Top

 

Regulators may broaden E. coli testing

 

(AP via Yahoo! News) YAKIMA, Wash. – The food industry and government regulators have focused for years on finding the most virulent strain of E. coli bacteria, which every year sickens thousands.

 

But they don't regularly test for six less common E. coli strains that can cause illnesses equally as serious. Most recently, two dozen illnesses in four states were tied this spring to bagged romaine lettuce contaminated by an uncommon E. coli strain that can be difficult to detect.

 

Industry officials said tests aren't available to do widespread monitoring of these other strains, but food safety advocates have begun pushing the government to step up surveillance after several outbreaks.

 

They're motivated by what has happened to people such as Shiloh Johnson, who two years ago picked at a roll, fried chicken, sunflower seeds and olives from a restaurant buffet. Within days, the 10-year-old was hooked to a ventilator in an Oklahoma hospital, one of 341 victims of an E. coli outbreak. She remained hospitalized for six weeks.

 

Investigators tied the outbreak to one of the six less common E. coli strains, and her mother, Belinda Johnson, has endorsed a petition that includes their story in urging the U.S. Department of Agriculture to test for additional E. coli strains.

 

The agency is reviewing the petition, filed by a Seattle law firm that represents Shiloh Johnson and is known for food-illness lawsuits.

 

"I was so shocked then. I thought that everything was tested for," Belinda Johnson said. "I want there to be a safe food supply. I don't want any other kids or anyone to have to go through this."

 

Hundreds of strains of E. coli live in the intestines of cattle and other animals and can get into the food supply. Many don't cause illness. For those that do, symptoms often go unreported or undiagnosed because people don't realize it was food that made them ill.

 

The food industry screens for the most prevalent strain, O157:H7, which belongs to a class of E. coli that produces a sickening toxin and causes an estimated 73,000 illnesses each year. Symptoms include bloody diarrhea, dehydration and, in severe cases, kidney failure. It is the only strain the USDA considers an adulterant in meat, requiring regular screening and recalls.

 

Six other E. coli strains that also produce the toxin account for the majority of non-O157 E. coli cases — estimated at 30,000 illnesses in the U.S. each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But just 5 percent of public health laboratories nationally test for these strains, so there is no reliable way to know whether the number of illnesses is increasing.

 

The CDC recommended last year that labs test for other potentially dangerous strains when they test for E. coli O157 during an outbreak of illness.

 

There have been no known outbreaks of the other six strains in meat, but the Seattle law firm that specializes in food-related illnesses, headed by attorney Bill Marler, has petitioned the USDA to list them as adulterants in meat.

 

Marler said he hopes his call for more screening of meat will prompt other industries, such as produce, to follow suit.

 

Many food producers have balked at such a move, questioning the feasibility of eliminating all toxin-producing strains from products.

 

Dr. Patricia Griffin, head of the CDC's food-borne illness epidemiology section, said she's sympathetic to their argument because not all strains of E. coli appear dangerous.

 

"The problem is it's a little slippery to say which ones cause human illness. We don't have it defined yet," she said. "We know those six, and we know a few others, but the others are still in a gray zone."

 

Illness from eating tainted meat can be avoided by cooking it thoroughly and using a meat thermometer to confirm it has reached a temperature of at least 160 degrees.

 

Marler hired a private Seattle area lab, IEH Laboratories, to sample ground beef nationally for these strains to determine their prevalence. So far, about 1 percent of samples have been tainted and could have potentially caused illness.

 

IEH Laboratories President Mansour Samadpour said his lab has worked with some in the produce industry to monitor for these strains in the past three years, though there is no required testing. As for meat, Samadpour argued the USDA needs to set standards for testing.

 

"There has not been demand from the industry, but if the demand is created, I'm sure a lot of kit makers will be happy to make tests available," he said.

 

At least one food safety group and U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., support the effort.

 

"This has become an issue that is too important and too urgent to ignore any longer," Gillibrand wrote in a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.

 

The USDA has worked for three years on a screening test that could be widely used. So far, the agency has developed a test that is reliable on four of the six strains, said Dr. David Goldman, assistant administrator for the Office of Public Health Science for the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service.

 

"We are hopeful that in the next six months or so we would have a screen that would reliably find all six," he said.

 

The meat industry also wants to eliminate pathogens from meat, but James H. Hodges, executive vice president of the American Meat Institute, says banning six more E. coli strains won't solve the problem.

 

"The food safety strategies in place in plants today are far more effective in enhancing food safety than outlawing a pathogen that nature presents us," Hodges said.

 

Michael Doyle, director of the University of Georgia's Center for Food Safety, said requiring beef to be free of all E. coli would be economically unfeasible.

 

"You would probably be condemning a lot of ground beef and meat that would otherwise be considered to be safe because it's not contaminated with a harmful strain," he said.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Potato batteries provide cheap power

 

(Reuters via HAARETZ.com) – An electric battery based on boiled potatoes could provide a cheap source of electricity in the developing world, according to the technology transfer company of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

 

The treated potato battery generates energy that is five to 50 times cheaper than commercially available batteries, Yissum Research Development Co. said last week. A light powered by the battery is at least six times more economical than kerosene lamps often used in the developing world.

 

"The ability to provide electrical power with such simple and natural means could benefit millions of people in the developing word, literally bringing light and telecommunication to their life in areas currently lacking electrical infrastructure," Yaacov Michlin, chief executive of Yissum, said in a statement.

 

The findings were published in the June issue of the Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy.

 

Haim Rabinowitch and research student Alex Golberg at Israel's Hebrew University jointly with Boris Rubinsky at the University of California at Berkeley discovered a new way to construct an efficient battery using zinc and copper electrodes and a slice of an ordinary potato.

 

They found that boiling the potato prior to use in electrolysis increased electric power up to 10-fold over the untreated potato and enabled the battery to work for days and even weeks.

 

Potatoes are produced in 130 countries over a wide range of climates and thus available year round. It is the world's number one non-grain starch food commodity.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Bee collapse may have Australian link

 

(McClatchy Newspapers) WASHINGTON — Scientists are unsure what is responsible for a mysterious disorder that has decimated beehives across the country, but the latest suspect is imported honeybees from Australia.

 

By some estimates, beekeepers in the past several years have lost from a third to half of their hives to what is called colony collapse disorder. Each hive, or colony, can contain as many as 100,000 bees. The bees disappear, never to be seen again.

 

"A link between the disorder, first reported in the United States in 2006, and honeybee imports from Australia has been suggested," according to a recent notice in the Federal Register by the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.

 

The department was seeking comment on a draft report that concluded "zoosanitary" measures or restrictions might be needed to reduce the risk that viruses carried by Australian honeybees could reach the U.S.

 

Such measures might include inspections, quarantines and genetic testing. Agriculture Department officials don't rule out a ban on imports of Australian bees.

 

"It's a possibility, but not at this point," said Colin Stewart, a senior entomologist at the Agriculture Department.

 

Officials at the Australian Embassy in Washington insist their bees aren't a threat to U.S. beekeepers, though they say Australia is facing an invasion of exotic Asian honeybees.

 

Return to Top

 

End Transmission