# data[].attributes.body
https://www.hrw.org/report/2012/05/15/cultivating-fear/vulnerability-immigrant-farmworkers-us-sexual-violence-and

Many migrant women and girls work on farms and deal with sexual abuse and sexual harassment. Of around 160 workers there were 52 workers who went through a sexual assault in the same way in each home. The many stories about women going through harassment on many different farms that migrant workers, especially women.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sexual violence and harassment in the agricultural workplace are fostered by a severe imbalance of power between employers and supervisors and their low-wage, immigrant workers. Victims often then face systemic barriers-exacerbated by their status as farmworkers and often as unauthorized workers-to reporting these abuses and bringing perpetrators to justice. To meet its human rights obligations to these farmworkers suffering sexual violence and harassment, the US government and agricultural employers must take steps to reduce and eliminate these barriers. This report documents the experience of immigrant farmworker women and girls with workplace sexual violence and harassment-with particular attention to unauthorized immigrants-and sets forth detailed recommendations for improving their working conditions and access to services and legal remedies.

Such violence and harassment are rarely singular events; many women reported that perpetrators had harassed and abused multiple victims over a period of time. Human Rights Watch's investigation found that, in most cases, perpetrators are foremen, supervisors, farm labor contractors, company owners, and anyone else who has the power to hire and fire workers as well as confer certain benefits, such as better hours or permission to take breaks. Farmworkers frequently depend on employers for housing and transportation, creating more opportunities for those who seek to take advantage of vulnerable workers. Co-workers are also perpetrators, enabled, in part, by an environment that can seem tolerant of abuses. In interviews with Human Rights Watch, farmworkers noted that certain workers are much more powerless and more likely to be victimized than others, including girls and young women, recent immigrants, single women working alone, and indigenous workers.

The impact of such violence and harassment can be devastating. Survivors of sexual violence experience various responses to the trauma, including depression, physical pain, and damaged relationships with their partners and families. Although many of the farmworkers who reported abuse stated they did so after interacting with a rape crisis center or other similar agency providing assistance to victims of sexual assault, few farmworkers have access to such agencies. Even where such agencies are present in rural communities, they are not always able to provide adequate services to limited-English-proficient immigrant victims.

Farmworkers who push back against the abuse, or report incidents to management, say they suffer retaliation, getting fewer hours, more abusive treatment, or, worst of all, losing their jobs altogether. Because many farmworkers work with family members, retaliation can mean the victim is fired along with her family, resulting in loss of income to the entire household. Those who live in employer-provided housing can even find themselves homeless. Some farmworkers who had filed sexual harassment lawsuits reported they were "blackballed" and shut out of jobs at other farms.

In general, survivors of sexual assault and harassment in the US struggle to report the assault or pursue justice. Nearly one in five women in the US has been raped at some point in her life. Yet despite the prevalence of sexual violence and decades of legal reform meant to hold perpetrators accountable, in 2008 only 41 percent of victims of rape or sexual assault reported the crimes to the police, and in 2010 less than a quarter of reported forcible rapes resulted in an arrest. Similarly, a 2011 Washington Post-ABC News poll found that one in four women and one in ten men have experienced workplace sexual harassment; only 41 percent of women who had experienced harassment said they had reported it to their employers.

Farmworker survivors of workplace sexual violence face the challenges all survivors face, but on top of that, they face particular challenges as farmworkers and as migrants. The agricultural industry has long been treated differently than other industries under US labor law. Agricultural workers are excluded from such basic protections as overtime pay and the right to collective bargaining. The laws that do exist are not adequately enforced, and several studies, including previous Human Rights Watch reports, have found that wage theft, child labor, and pesticide exposure occur with troubling frequency. In such an environment, farmworkers are unlikely to have faith in the ability of authorities to rectify abuses.

The agricultural industry relies heavily on unauthorized immigrants, who make up about 50 percent of the workforce, if not more. Although growers and farmworkers agree that the current situation is unsustainable, the US Congress has failed to pass legislation that would enable farmworkers already here to gain legal status and would reform the existing guestworker system for agricultural workers. Even many immigrants with work authorization lack English proficiency and education, and those with guestworker visas are dependent on their employer to remain in legal status, which can discourage workers from reporting workplace abuses.

The lack of any immediate prospect for gaining legal status affects the ability of unauthorized farmworkers to report sexual violence, sexual harassment, and other workplace abuses in myriad ways. Although US law entitles unauthorized workers to workplace protections and labor enforcement agencies assert that broad application of the law best protects the rights of all workers, the US government's interest in protecting unauthorized workers from abuse conflicts with its interest in deporting them. These competing interests affect unauthorized workers' ability to exercise their rights in several key ways.

Unauthorized workers often struggle to find legal representation, since federally funded legal services organizations are prohibited (with some exceptions) from representing unauthorized immigrants. Moreover, in a 2002 decision, the US Supreme Court in Hoffman Plastic v. National Labor Relations Board held that an unauthorized worker fired from his job for organizing does not have the right to receive compensation for lost work under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). This decision has raised questions about whether unauthorized workers are entitled to the same remedies for workplace abuse as authorized workers. The US government and worker advocates maintain that the decision is limited strictly to a specific provision of the National Labor Relations Act and does not affect the applicability of other labor laws, but the decision forces lawyers to be cautious in the remedies they seek while also emboldening unscrupulous employers who may feel they have less to lose in mistreating unauthorized workers, including tolerating workplace sexual harassment.

The availability of the U visa-a special non-immigrant visa for victims of certain crimes who cooperate in investigations-provides some relief, but the usefulness of the visa is limited by inconsistent certification of victim cooperation by law enforcement agencies and the unavailability of such visas for most witnesses.

And while police are supposed to vigorously investigate crimes against all victims, regardless of immigration status, the increasing involvement of local police in federal immigration enforcement has fueled immigrants' fear of the police and their desire to avoid contact with the police, even to report crimes. State governments' efforts to get involved in immigration enforcement, through laws like Arizona's SB 1070 or Alabama's HB 56, have further fueled fears of the police and discouraged reporting of crimes in immigrant communities.

Some employers have also failed to meet their obligation to protect their employees from sexual harassment. Few of the farmworkers we spoke with said they received training on sexual harassment or information on how to report harassment. Where farmworkers did report the abuses to employers, many supervisors and employers ignored their complaints or retaliated against them, including with threats of deportation.

Both international human rights law and US law state that all workers, regardless of immigration status, have the right to protection from sexual harassment and other workplace abuses, as well as the right to redress when such abuses occur. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by the US in 1992, declares, "Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person." The ICCPR further prohibits discrimination on "any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status." US law specifically prohibits workplace sexual harassment as a form of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and criminal laws prohibiting sexual violence are meant to protect all victims, including unauthorized immigrants. But it is not enough for these laws simply to exist. The ICCPR also requires states parties to "ensure ... an effective remedy" when these rights are violated. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has similarly found that the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man requires the United States to take due diligence to prevent, punish, and provide remedies for acts of violence, by private parties as well as state actors.

Sexual violence and harassment in the agricultural workplace is a complex problem which should be addressed in a comprehensive way. The US government and agricultural employers should take steps to ensure that farmworkers, including unauthorized farmworkers, are able to access "an effective remedy" and gain meaningful protection under these laws.

Pass the Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization bill (S. 1925) or similar legislation that strengthens the U visa and other protection for immigrant victims of sexual violence, including farmworker women and girls.

Enact immigration legislation that would reduce the incidence of serious abuses of immigrant workers' rights, including reform of the existing agricultural guestworker program and enactment of a program of earned legalization for unauthorized farmworkers already in the US.

Enact legislation to ensure equality of remedies for all workers who suffer workplace violations or seek to enforce workers' rights, regardless of immigration status, and thereby rectify the Supreme Court's decision in Hoffman Plastic.

Eliminate the exclusion of farmworkers from important labor protections like the National Labor Relations Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Repeal programs such as Secure Communities which require or encourage local police to enforce federal immigration laws.

Screen immigrants arrested in enforcement actions for eligibility for U and T visas and ensure that appropriate prosecutorial discretion policies, as outlined in Immigration and Customs Enforcement memoranda, are applied to them.

Increase agricultural workplace inspections and the civil and criminal penalties imposed on employers, within the limits allowed by law, to improve their compliance with relevant laws.

Ensure that state laws fill gaps in federal labor protections for agricultural workers and provide alternatives to federal avenues for seeking redress for sexual harassment and other workplace abuses.

To Local Law Enforcement Agencies

Take all necessary and appropriate steps to assure immigrant communities that unauthorized immigrants who report crimes will not be reported to immigration authorities.

Create and enforce clear workplace policies prohibiting sexual violence and harassment, and create accessible channels by which employees can safely report violations.

Investigate every reported instance of sexual violence or harassment and take prompt corrective action to remedy the problem.

This report is based primarily on 160 in-person and telephone interviews conducted by a Human Rights Watch researcher with farmworkers, attorneys, members of the agricultural industry, service providers, law enforcement officials, and other experts in California, New York, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, Colorado, Ohio, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and the state of Washington, from March to August 2011.

We spent the longest time in California because it has the largest number of farmworkers-both authorized and unauthorized-in the United States, as well as a large number of farm labor contractors.

Human Rights Watch also reviewed press reports, reports by nongovernmental organizations, and public records of civil litigation involving allegations of sexual harassment in agricultural workplaces, identified primarily through a search of news and legal databases and through consultations with legal service providers representing farmworkers.

We interviewed 50 workers with experience in the agriculture industry, one with experience in poultry processing, and one with experience in both agriculture and poultry processing, or 52 workers in total. The interviewees included 47 women (including several who described experiences they had as girls), two girls under 18, and 3 men. Their experiences included working with a wide range of crops in both fields and packing houses. The crops included fruit (table grapes, oranges, strawberries, figs, blueberries, apples, cherries, and melons), vegetables (tomatoes, cauliflower, broccoli, lettuce, spinach, mixed greens, asparagus, garlic, onions, green beans, sweet potatoes, hot peppers, bell peppers, cucumbers, and cabbage), nuts (pistachios and almonds), and non-food products like cotton and tobacco.

We identified most interviewees with the assistance of rural legal service organizations, sexual assault survivor advocates, and other social service and advocacy organizations serving farmworkers. These interviewees are likely less isolated and less vulnerable on average than those who have no contact with such organizations. Given the sensitive nature of the subject and individuals' fears about their employment and immigration status, many organizations reported knowing or having met victims who were not (or would not be) willing to be interviewed by Human Rights Watch. About 25 interviewees were referred to Human Rights Watch as having been survivors of sexual violence and/or sexual harassment. The majority of the remaining interviewees were not known by the referring agencies to be victims, but were women who had consented to being interviewed by us about their experiences as female farmworkers. Although both male and female farmworkers can be victims of sexual violence and sexual harassment, this report focuses on women and girls, for whom the prevalence of abuses is reportedly higher.

In addition to farmworkers, we interviewed lawyers representing farmworkers in sexual harassment cases, sexual assault survivor advocates, union representatives, social service providers, growers, agricultural industry representatives, regulatory agency staff, and local law enforcement officials in several localities. In total, as noted above, we interviewed more than 160 people.

Most interviews with farmworkers were conducted in Spanish, with the assistance of an interpreter. Some interviews were conducted in English or a mixture of English and Spanish, at the preference of the interviewee. Some individuals interviewed in Spanish were also native speakers of indigenous languages.

Most of the farmworker interviews were done individually, except in a few cases where interviewees preferred to speak in small groups. All but two of the 52 interviews were conducted in person in the interviewees' homes, in agency offices, or in other settings where the interviewee felt private and secure; the remaining two were done by telephone. Interviews ranged from 10 to 90 minutes in length. All participants were informed of the purpose of the interview and consented orally. Care was taken not to re-traumatize any survivors of sexual violence and harassment, and all interviewees were advised that they could decline to answer questions or terminate the interview at any time. Where appropriate, Human Rights Watch provided contact information for organizations offering legal, counseling, or social services.

No interviewee received compensation for providing information. Two individuals were reimbursed for expenses incurred in traveling to the interview location.

Given the sensitive nature of the topic and unauthorized legal status of many interviewees, Human Rights Watch assured all farmworker interviewees that their identities would remain confidential. Therefore, all farmworkers' names have been replaced with pseudonyms, and identifying details, such as the precise date and location of interview, have been withheld.

Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment

Sexual violence and sexual harassment are used in conjunction in this report for several reasons, the most important being that neither term alone, as used colloquially, fully captures the nature of abuses described by farmworkers.

Sexual violence is defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an agency within the US Department of Health and Human Services, as "any sexual act that is perpetrated against someone's will," including rape, attempted rape, abusive sexual contact (such as unwanted touching), and non-contact sexual abuse (such as threatened sexual violence, exhibitionism, and verbal sexual harassment).

Sexual harassment, as defined by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a US agency charged with enforcing federal anti-discrimination laws in the workplace, can include unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal and physical harassment of a sexual nature, as well as rape and attempted rape. Under US law, workplace harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment, or when it results in an adverse employment decision. The harasser need not be the victim's supervisor, but may also be a co-worker or customer.

Most of the incidents described by farmworkers interviewed by Human Rights Watch qualify under these definitions as both workplace sexual violence and sexual harassment. Given this fact and the sometimes narrow colloquial understanding of these terms, both terms are used throughout the report to accurately impart the significance of these abuses.

It is not within the scope of this report, however, to make legal determinations as to whether specific incidents described by interviewees would constitute actionable claims under US law. We gave the farmworkers we interviewed the opportunity to raise any and all concerns they had about workplace sexual harassment and did not limit our interviews solely to instances of sexual harassment that would form the basis for a lawsuit.

Farmworker

Although the type of work most commonly associated with agriculture is planting and harvesting crops, agricultural labor includes a much broader range of tasks, including packing, canning, and working in tree farms and nurseries. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), "'Agriculture' includes farming in all its branches and among other things includes the cultivation and tillage of the soil, dairying, the production, cultivation, growing, and harvesting of any agricultural or horticultural commodities ..., the raising of livestock, bees, fur-bearing animals, or poultry, and any practices (including any forestry or lumbering operations) performed by a farmer or on a farm as an incident to or in conjunction with such farming operations, including preparation for market, delivery to storage or to market or to carriers for transportation to market." The workers interviewed in this report have experience working in a wide range of these tasks.

As noted in the methodology section above, two testimonies come from workers with experiences in poultry processing and some of the secondary accounts and published cases discuss sexual violence and sexual harassment in meat production and dairy and egg production workplaces. These were included because the immigrant workers in these environments face similar challenges to those faced by workers in forms of employment more commonly labeled "agricultural."

Unauthorized Immigrant

This report uses the term "unauthorized" to describe individuals in the United States who lack authorization to live and work in the US. Some in this group came to the US with a visa but stayed past their visa expiration date or otherwise violated the terms of admission. Others came to the US without a visa. Some in this latter group have filed papers seeking legal status but are waiting, and likely will have to wait for years more, to obtain it due to the limited availability of immigrant visas. The term "unauthorized," rather than "undocumented" or "illegal," best captures the diversity of situations in this population.

There are an estimated 1.4 million crop workers in the United States, with an additional 429,000 livestock workers.

Farmworkers are paid an hourly or daily wage or a piece rate. When a worker is paid a piece rate, the day's wages are calculated based on how many containers of fruit or vegetables are picked or packed. With some exceptions, however, the workers must be paid at least the minimum wage. As found in a previous Human Rights Watch study of child labor in US agriculture, Fields of Peril, however, workers who are paid a piece rate are often under extreme pressure not to take breaks, whether to go to the bathroom, drink water, or stand up from stressful, stooped positions. The report also found that workers who are paid a piece rate who do not pick enough to meet the minimum wage are often not paid the difference as required by law. For this report, a woman in North Carolina reported she had just worked an eight or nine-hour day and been paid only $34, well below North Carolina's minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

Should farmworkers lose their jobs, only 39 percent are eligible for unemployment insurance; should workers lose their jobs because of injury, less than 50 percent are eligible for workers' compensation. Unauthorized workers are not eligible for unemployment insurance even when their employers pay into the system. Twenty-one percent live in housing supplied by the employer, meaning the loss of a job would also result in loss of housing. Farmworkers simply cannot afford to lose their jobs, and they often have few options for other employment if farm work is not available.

Seasonal and Temporary Work

Farm Labor Contractors

The role of contractors perhaps most warrants scrutiny because when violations occur under contractors, growers often argue that they should not be held liable because the contractors, not they, are the workers' employers. Many farmworker advocates believe that some growers take advantage of the grower-contractor relationship to distance themselves from abusive working conditions and wages set by some contractors.

One farmworker who has worked in North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida expressed strongly her belief that growers who directly employ workers and do not rely on contractors often feel more responsibility for the workers' working conditions:

Right now, we're working directly for a grower and it's very different.... He knows us personally.... When we went to work on Friday, he asked for a meeting with all of us. He said he wanted a job well done, work slow, that he didn't want anyone to get sick. He said it's going to be really hot, wants to make sure there's water, let women use the bathroom, water on both sides.... He explained to us, if there's lightning, don't wait for him to say so, just note the time and go home. With a contractor, you just keep working.

Supervisors and Others in Positions of Power

Even growers who do not use contractors to find workers frequently relinquish oversight and responsibility to employees such as supervisors and foremen (frequently called crewleaders or mayordomo). The foreman may, in addition to recruiting and hiring workers, also help find housing, provide transportation to work (usually for a fee), and help newcomers adjust to life in the US. A foreman can have significant authority because he informs workers which fields they should report to and is typically responsible for determining pay.

Some contractors charge employees for transportation, food, and/or housing, either charging them directly or deducting these expenses from their paychecks, reducing their already meager pay. Those who are newcomers and more vulnerable tend to feel obligated to pay for a service like a ride from a raitero, a worker who provides transportation to the worksite. Because many farmworkers do not have cars or other ways to get to work, the raitero has the power to take someone to work and to determine the conditions of transportation.

A punchadora is the person who is assigned the task of counting containers, boxes, or buckets for those who are paid by piece rate. Although it is not a supervisory position, it can be a coveted position because the work is somewhat less strenuous. Because the punchadora 's actions set wages for the day, it can also be a position of power.

For a woman alone, there is much danger.... A man can catch you in the fields where the plants are taller than you.

-Rosario E. (pseudonym), North Carolina farmworker, July 2011.

Nearly every worker interviewed by Human Rights Watch reported that they had either personally experienced some form of workplace sexual violence or harassment or personally knew someone who had experienced it. Our research confirms what farmworker advocates across the country believe: sexual violence and sexual harassment experienced by farmworkers is common enough that some farmworker women see these abuses as an unavoidable condition of agricultural work.

As one rural legal aid lawyer put it, sexual harassment is a "recurring, day in and day out, significant problem for women farmworkers.... It's not a made-up issue, it's real." A 2010 survey of 150 farmworker women in California's Central Valley found that 80 percent had experienced some form of sexual harassment, while a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center found that a majority of their 150 interviewees had also experienced sexual harassment. In 1995 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency in charge of enforcing anti-discrimination laws, began specifically conducting education and outreach on sexual harassment of farmworkers. This initiative followed a meeting in which farmworkers and advocates told the agency that sexual assault and harassment were serious problems, with one worker referring to one company's field as the "field de calzon," or "field of panties," because of the number of rapes that had occurred there.

As described below, farmworkers reported experiencing a wide range of unwanted sexual violence and harassment.

Rape and other forms of coercive sexual conduct are the most egregious forms of sexual violence and harassment experienced by farmworkers. Several women interviewed by Human Rights Watch reported they had been raped by a supervisor or co-worker.

Rape was similarly reported to farmworker advocates in Texas, California, Arizona, and Florida. Several of the sexual harassment lawsuits brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission have alleged rape as well as other forms of workplace harassment. In EEOC v. Harris Farms -a landmark case because it was the first and thus far only farmworker sexual harassment case to go to a jury trial-Olivia Tamayo, a Mexican immigrant who had worked for more than 15 years at Harris Farms, one of the largest agribusinesses in the country, won a damages award of almost $1 million in 2005 after testifying that her supervisor forcibly raped her several times, sometimes at knife or gun point. Other suits alleging sexual assault have involved a tree farm in Oregon and an egg farm in Iowa.

In many cases, moreover, relationships that appear consensual may be the product of psychological coercion or desperate economic circumstances. Veronica Z., a woman who has worked with onions and cotton in California, explained why she ended up in a sexual relationship with her supervisor:

My son broke a leg riding a bike when someone ran him over. I arrived at work late, and the foreman fired me. I returned to work because [the perpetrator] was able to get me a job, only because we had relations. I needed the job for my children.

Although they were not in a relationship, she reported that he continued to coerce her to have sexual relations with him for years. Veronica said when she tried to end it, he threatened her with a gun and began harassing her at work. When she eventually filed a lawsuit against the company he worked for, the company argued that she had been in a consensual relationship with him.

The forms of sexual violence and harassment most commonly reported to Human Rights Watch were unwanted touching, verbal abuse, and exhibitionism.

Several women reported that supervisors would touch them as they stooped or bent over to plant or harvest crops. Mercedes A., for example, who picked potatoes and onions two years ago in New York, said her supervisor would touch women's bottoms and breasts as they worked.

Women also reported verbal harassment and gestures that were obscene and humiliating:

Bianca H. described working for years with men who would touch themselves, simulate sex with each other, and make comments like, "Last night, I dreamed about you; if you only knew how I dreamed about you! How many things I did to you!"

Claudia L., while working in grapes last year, reported she had a supervisor who made obscene and vulgar statements. "One time, my zipper was down, and he told me to zip it because he could see my vagina and he would want it if he saw it." Although she tried to ignore him, she was frightened when he saw her working alone, ahead of the others. "He said there were coyotes who would eat me, but he said, 'I'm going to eat you instead.'"

Four women who worked together in a cauliflower packing house from the end of 2010 to the beginning of 2011 reported being abused by a supervisor who every day shouted things like, "Women, move your hands like you fuck!" "You guys are fucking all day! You idiots!" "This is dick! You guys are worth a piece of dick!" Ana D. remembered, "He was all powerful. He'd say, 'Nobody does shit to me! Everybody can suck my dick!'.... He would say to the men [because I don't have a husband], 'Ana needs to be fucked!'" Women were not the only ones who had to suffer his abuse, as he would also take his penis out of his pants and shake it at all of his workers.

For farmworkers, sexual violence and harassment are not generally limited to a single isolated incident. Harassment often lasts for months, even years, and perpetrators often victimize multiple workers, regardless of whether complaints are made to company management.

Bianca H. reported that she packed spring mix and spinach for a greens company that did nothing to stop men from making obscene comments and gestures, despite complaints from Bianca and her female co-workers. She worked in this environment 12 hours a day over a seven-month season, day in and day out, for four years. Bianca cried as she remembered: "I felt horrible. Every day, you feel they are just using you.... It makes you feel like you're worth nothing."

Many of the sexual harassment lawsuits brought by the EEOC on behalf of agricultural workers have been brought on behalf of multiple survivors, often as a class action. In recent years, the EEOC has brought sexual harassment lawsuits involving multiple plaintiffs against:

Evans Fruit in Washington State, on behalf of three individuals and a class of women;

Cyma Orchids in California, on behalf of four women;

Spud Seller in Colorado, on behalf of several female employees;

Willamette Tree Wholesale in Oregon, on behalf of two female employees and two male relatives, also employees, on charges of severe sexual harassment and retaliation;

Holiday Specialtrees in Oregon, on behalf of two male victims of same-sex harassment and racial discrimination;

Knouse Foods in Pennsylvania, on behalf of a class of female employees who suffered harassment on the basis of sex and national origin;

DiMare , a large tomato farm in Florida, on behalf of at least three female employees.

Four of the companies have settled with the EEOC-Cyma Orchids, Willamette Tree, Holiday Specialtree, and Knouse Foods-and in their settlement agreements agreed to broad, company-wide changes including one or more of the following: new policies and procedures to address unlawful discrimination, new trainings for managers, supervisors, and employees, and EEOC monitoring. The other cases remain pending.

The foreman is the law.

- Santiago I. (pseudonym), California farmworker, June 2011.

Immigrant women and girls in agricultural work face unique vulnerabilities to sexual violence and harassment. Contractors, supervisors, foremen, growers, and others with connections and authority wield tremendous power. William Tamayo, a regional attorney at the EEOC who has litigated several farmworker sexual harassment cases, described a pattern he has seen repeatedly in the cases on which he has worked:

The owners of the major farms tend to be white, English speaking longtime family members who turn over operations of the farm to "Jose," a longtime employee who is bilingual and who is expected to maintain the operations and keep labor problems to a minimum-you know, "out of sight, out of mind." The workers are geographically isolated from community services, have few options in life and are in desperate poverty. They are dependent on Jose to navigate the English-speaking world for them. If Jose is a predator and/or his supervisors below him are predators, it is the ideal situation for sexual harassment to occur-unfettered, unpunished, and unstopped.

Although anyone can be a victim, members of some groups may be more vulnerable than others. Unauthorized workers are particularly likely to be fearful of reporting abuses, and girls and young women, single women, and indigenous workers are particularly likely to be targeted, as well as unlikely to report inappropriate sexual speech or conduct.

[Another woman is] splitting up with her husband because the same supervisor [who harassed me] caused problems.... She received a promotion. People think she did something. They [assume] when he retaliates, it's because they won't let him [have sexual relations]. When he promotes someone, they [assume] she said yes.

Young women, many of whom are recent arrivals to the US, are also at risk for similar reasons. An attorney who has worked on many sexual harassment cases involving farmworkers observed, "There's no hard and fast rule, but frequently [women who report are] older, in their late 30's and 40's, [who] are more sure of their rights.... A lot of younger women never make it into the office."

Indigenous farmworkers are particularly vulnerable to workplace abuses, including sexual violence and harassment, for a multitude of reasons. They are subject to discrimination in their home countries, then come to the US only to find that non-indigenous or mestizo immigrants continue to discriminate against them. As one farmworker reported, they are mocked for not speaking Spanish well: "They say obscene words to them, and when they don't understand, they laugh more." Luz S., an older woman who had worked in agriculture for many years, agreed: "They are treated like they have no value ... like they're not normal people." She further noted that people who speak Spanish defend themselves, but indigenous people do not. One farmworker, who is herself indigenous but speaks Spanish well, agreed: "People scream at them and they let them. They don't know how to defend themselves. They stay quiet; they don't even stop to drink water." Indigenous women in particular tend to speak little or no Spanish because they are less likely than men to have received much formal education.

The lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) farmworker population faces its own particular challenges with regard to both sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination.

CRLA and the National Center for Lesbian Rights discovered there was a serious need for improved legal services for LGBT people in rural California communities and created Proyecto Poderoso (Project Powerful) in 2007. Dan Torres, director of the program, told Human Rights Watch that the anti-LGBT animus is so strong that the comments and actions that create a hostile work environment for LGBT workers can also hurt those who are not

LGBT or even perceived to be LGBT. The stigma also discourages victims from reporting.

Belen F., a transgender woman who said she had experienced discrimination in Mexico and had hoped life in the US would be different, reported she was sexually harassed and her partner was assaulted at an asparagus packing plant in California four or five years ago. Belen had been working at the same packing plant for several years when she was promoted to foreman. She said she then began to hear the owner of the plant calling her " joto or faggot," and they repeatedly reduced her wages to the point that she was making less than her assistant.

Even after workplace sexual violence or harassment ends, survivors continue to suffer the consequences of the abuses. They may have physical injuries and psychological trauma. The abuses sometimes destroy relationships with family members, particularly husbands and partners. And many farmworkers face significant challenges obtaining necessary medical treatment for their physical injuries and mental trauma. Survivors who report abuses to company management or rebuff advances risk getting fired and experiencing other forms of retaliation, including being reported to immigration authorities.

Several survivors of workplace sexual violence and harassment told Human Rights Watch they suffered serious physical and psychological trauma as a result of the abuse:

Maria A. said she was initially scared to report her rape in the summer of 2010, but when she found herself still in pain three months later, she sought medical treatment in a hospital, which then referred her to a social services agency. Now, she said, "I try to be strong.... Sometimes when I am sad, I begin to cry. I ask God not to let this happen to me again and protect me from bad people. I am going to see a doctor because every time I have intercourse with my boyfriend, it hurts and I bleed. I think something was hurt or damaged.

Patricia M. (whose story begins this report) reported that she still feels pain resulting from physical assault and rape. She feels lucky to be in a good relationship now, but "sometimes, I remember [being raped] and I can't be intimate with my husband."

Veronica Z., who reported being coerced into a sexual relationship with a supervisor, became deeply depressed, according to her caseworker: "She used to come see me every day, so depressed. She would clench her teeth because of the pressure."

Verbal harassment can be debilitating as well. Four years after leaving the job where she was harassed, Lucia A. was brought to tears as she recounted her story. For over 10 years, she said, she endured daily harassment while packing broccoli: "Every time I went to the bathroom, [my supervisor] would make comments about my bottom and say vulgar things.... I feel a lot of pain remembering this." Although she was interested in talking to a professional therapist, she believed she could not afford it.

Irma Luna, a community worker at California Rural Legal Assistance, has encountered victims who similarly were blamed by their husbands. "We had a female working in a packing house with her husband in the Arvin/Lamont area. She was harassed by the foreman.... She tried telling her husband; it went pretty ugly. She kind of got discouraged and disappeared."

The experience of the women we spoke with most likely does not convey the full extent of the problem, as they at least made contact at some point with a social service agency. Many farmworker survivors of sexual violence and harassment most likely are never in touch with agencies. Lideres Campesinas, an organization that has been working to improve services for farmworker women throughout California, told Human Rights Watch that the culture of rape crisis centers and hotlines can be "incomprehensible" to farmworkers: "When women call into a number, it asks them to call another number. Or the numbers have letters [in English] like 'GET HELP.'"

Developing the capacity to serve farmworkers who do not speak English is obviously a major challenge, particularly in states where there are few bilingual Spanish speakers, let alone speakers of other relevant languages. In upstate New York, a community worker found that when she looked at websites of local agencies, "[they're] not in Spanish or Haitian Creole; they don't have advocates or interpreters."

Some farmworkers expressed fear that if they were to report the abuse, they would not only lose their jobs, but also be blacklisted by other employers. Since bringing a complaint against an onion packing plant in 2005, Veronica Z. reported she has had difficulty finding steady work: "Every packing shed where I get a job, I start for a couple of days, and then I get laid off. I think they're checking my record. My son and I applied to work at a tomato cannery, and my son was hired but not me."

International human rights law requires that basic rights protections apply to all persons in a state's territory, including authorized and unauthorized non-citizens. This is critical to protecting US citizen workers, as well as non-citizen workers, because it minimizes employers' incentives to hire easily exploitable immigrant workers.

Yet when immigrant farmworkers experience sexual violence and harassment, many choose not to report these abuses under either civil or criminal law. Many factors discourage farmworkers from reporting abuses, including the desperation that comes from poverty and lack of community support, but one of the most significant is their immigration status. Whether they are working without authorization or with guestworker visas, immigrant farmworkers live with a constant fear of deportation.

Several farmworkers we interviewed reported that fear of deportation was a major reason they chose not to report sexual violence, sexual harassment, or other workplace abuses. Even some farmworkers with work authorization who had filed sexual harassment claims said they would not have done so had they been unauthorized. Some attorneys pointed out that fear of deportation is particularly acute for women with children, as they fear separation from their US citizen children and loss of ability to support their families.Another legal services lawyer noted that fear of deportation can also affect the willingness of witnesses to participate in investigations. Blanca Rodriguez, an attorney representing farmworkers in a sexual harassment lawsuit, reported that the foreman in the case had worked at the company in question for more than 40 years and had sexually harassed women the whole time, but the women had not reported it because they were unauthorized and afraid.

Uncertain immigration status both increases worker vulnerability to exploitation and diminishes their willingness to interact with government officials. Although reporting employees to immigration authorities for asserting workplace rights constitutes illegal retaliation, workers still have reason to fear that employers may do so. The increasing involvement of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement further fuels worker fears that contact with the police could lead to deportation. Should they nevertheless decide to file a civil claim, unauthorized workers face a system that treats them differently from other workers, from more limited access to legal services to limited remedies. The US government, instead of directly addressing the problem, continues to delay much-needed immigration reform and enables the industry's reliance on a vulnerable workforce.

When people ask about food justice, I tell them you have to go contact your congressman about immigration.

-Sandy Brown, Human Resources, Swanton Berry Farm, California, July 21, 2011.

The H-2A program is unpopular with both employers and farmworker advocates. Employers argue that the program is too limited and complicated to meet their labor needs. When applying for H-2A visas for workers, employers must certify that they are unable to find domestic workers and that bringing in guestworkers will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of US workers. H-2A visa holders are allowed in the US for a limited period of time, generally less than 10 months, and then are required to go back to their home countries before they may return.

In response, Congress has recently debated several different bills proposing revisions to the H-2A guestworker program. While the precarious immigration status of many farmworkers can only be fully addressed through comprehensive reform, reforming the H-2A program to be more protective of workers' rights would help to ensure greater workplace safety for farmworkers, including prevention of sexual violence and harassment.

There is a fundamental conflict between the priorities of ICE and the priorities of worker protection agencies such as the Department of Labor (DOL), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and others. ICE has taken some important steps to address the conflict, but they do not fully address the scope of the problem.

As important as it is for ICE to enact MOUs and follow its own memoranda and operating instructions, these policies can only be applied if workers report workplace abuses. All too often, unauthorized immigrant workers are too afraid to report abuses altogether, and these policies are not triggered.

Several farmworkers we interviewed had applied or were in the process of applying for U visas. Legal services organizations funded by the federal Legal Services Corporation are generally barred from representing unauthorized immigrants but are permitted to represent those who are eligible for U visas, and so the availability of the visa has been critical in enabling some farmworkers to get legal representation.

US law in theory protects all workers, including unauthorized workers, from sexual violence and sexual harassment. Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. The law also prohibits retaliation, including threats to report a worker to immigration authorities, against people who report discrimination. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination prohibited under Title VII.

But many survivors of workplace sexual violence and harassment find it difficult to gain meaningful protection under these laws. Several of the farmworkers identified for this report had filed claims for sexual harassment under Title VII or similar state law, but the vast majority had never filed a claim for sexual harassment or for any other workplace violation they had experienced.

Historically, US labor law has excluded agricultural workers from federal protections that apply to workers in nearly every other industry.

Agricultural workers do not have collective bargaining rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Agricultural workers are also excluded from many of the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). As a result, agricultural workers are not entitled under federal law to overtime pay, rest periods, or meal periods during the workday. They are also exempt from minimum wage requirements if they work on small farms. The child labor provisions of the FLSA treat agricultural work differently from work in other industries. While the minimum age to work in most industries is 16, the standard minimum age for agriculture is 14; on small farms, there is no minimum age for children to work outside of school hours with their parents' permission. Although agricultural work includes some of the most dangerous work in the country, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) does not enforce federal workplace health and safety standards on farms with fewer than 11 employees, effectively excluding a third of all farmworkers. Similarly, agricultural employers may require or allow 16- and 17-year-olds to work in particularly hazardous occupations, while in nonagricultural occupations, the minimum age for particularly hazardous work is 18.

I would like to see the Department of Labor come. They should not announce their visits; they should show up without warning.

-Mercedes A., New York farmworker, August 2011.

Although farmworkers are highly vulnerable to a wide range of workplace abuses, the federal and state agencies charged with enforcing laws that do apply to farmworkers are seriously understaffed and unable to address the full scope of violations.

Many farmworkers interviewed by Human Rights Watch reported having worked at some point with an employer who violated wage and hour laws or occupational health and safety laws. This is significant because, as Daniela Dwyer, a legal services attorney in Florida, stated, there is a "broken windows" problem: "You can have all the workplace rights posters that you want, [but] if two out of three requirements are not being met, it gives people less confidence in their ability to act on their rights."

The same supervisor who sexually harassed several women at a cauliflower packing plant in California had also created a dangerous and abusive workplace. The women reported that when another woman was seriously injured at work, she was not taken to the hospital. And while workers were told to gather at 6 a.m., the work would not start until 9 a.m., and they were not paid for the hours they spent waiting. Workers were never given lunch breaks or other breaks, and the bathroom was placed far away, further than allowed under California law. Magdalena C. said that when she complained about the bathrooms being far away, the supervisor lifted his middle finger, "as if he were sticking it inside [my vagina]," and said, "Now where are the bathrooms?"

In the rare instances in which unauthorized farmworkers decide to bring claims under civil sexual harassment law, they face significant barriers. Legal services organizations that receive federal funding through the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) are prohibited, with some exceptions, from representing unauthorized immigrants, and in many rural areas, LSC-funded organizations are the only legal service organizations that exist.

Furthermore, although US law is clear that Title VII and its provisions prohibiting sexual harassment apply to unauthorized workers, the Supreme Court's 2002 decision in Hoffman Plastic v. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has raised questions about which remedies are available to unauthorized workers. In Hoffman Plastic, the Supreme Court ruled that the NLRB had erred in awarding back pay (as defined under the NLRA) to an unauthorized worker wrongfully terminated for participating in a union organizing campaign.

This decision has led some employers to argue that unauthorized workers are not entitled to other remedies beyond the specific remedy at issue in Hoffman Plastic, including those under Title VII, which prohibits sexual harassment. The decision has also emboldened employers to argue that inquiries into immigration status are relevant during discovery. For example, in Rivera v. Nibco, where immigrant workers brought claims of national origin discrimination under Title VII, the employer sought to inquire into their immigration status. In a decision in the case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals noted, "[T]he overriding national policy against discrimination would seem likely to outweigh any bar against the payment of back wages to unlawful immigrants in Title VII cases. Thus, we seriously doubt that Hoffman applies in such actions." Although the court ultimately declined to decide this question, it did hold that the harm to employees would outweigh benefit to the employer if discovery into immigration status were allowed. Other courts have similarly declined to extend Hoffman to analogous cases, and the EEOC has sought and won protective orders prohibiting inquiries into immigration status.

The issue, however, has not been decisively settled. A federal court in Washington held in 2010 that immigration status is relevant to determination of actual damages, although the court bifurcated the liability and statutory damages determinations to limit the chilling effect of the decision. Liz Chacko, a farmworker attorney in Pennsylvania, stated that even though she believes Hoffman Plastic does not apply to remedies under Title VII, in practice, "we can't guarantee [unauthorized workers] that the employer won't try to inquire into immigration status."Out of caution, she sometimes chooses not to seek certain remedies.

Chacko further noted that if sexual harassment is severe, she can seek compensatory damages based on emotional distress to make up for the remedies she is not claiming. But this strategy does not work for clients who suffer less severe, though real, sexual harassment. Limited remedies not only reduce compensation for the survivor, of course, but also weaken the deterrent effect of the law on employers who engage in unlawful practices.

EEOC investigators and attorneys display a wide range of understanding and sensitivity about different forms of discrimination-some truly do not understand the unique challenges faced by farmworkers and particularly indigenous farmworkers. As a result of this combination of factors, the EEOC process is cumbersome, inefficient, and often causes repeated re-traumatization and/or loss of interest among clients. Put bluntly, the administrative process, handled incorrectly, can sometimes be worse for complainants than if they had made no complaint at all.

-Megan Beaman, Attorney, California Rural Legal Assistance, May 1, 2011.

The Terra Linda case is a good example of how long and difficult a civil harassment claim can be and how contractors can complicate the issue of liability. In 2006 two women filed claims against Terra Linda Farms, a grower, and Green Valley Ag, Inc., a farm labor contractor, with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), alleging sexual harassment and retaliation by a supervisor working for Terra Linda Farms. In 2008 the Department of Fair Employment and Housing Commission (Commission) issued a decision, after a three-day evidentiary hearing, ordering Terra Linda Farms to pay $110,000, deciding that although the women were employees of Green Valley, Terra Linda Farms was a joint employer. Terra Linda Farms appealed, and in 2009 a California superior court affirmed the Commission decision. Terra Linda Farms appealed again, and in January 2012 the Fifth Appellate District Court of California issued a decision upholding the superior court decision. In all, it took almost six years before the women received this decision, and as this report went to publication, they had yet to receive the money awarded to them.

Better that I not call the police, better that I not say anything.

-Marisol Z., New York farmworker, August 2011.

If I had called the police, they wouldn't have helped me because I'm undocumented.

-Monica V., New York farmworker, August 2011.

Many of the acts of sexual violence and sexual harassment experienced by farmworkers can also be classified as crimes and are prohibited by criminal law. But in most of the cases we investigated, the workers did not report the crimes to police or did so only after making contact with a social service agency that actively encouraged and supported them. Human Rights Watch did not do extensive interviews in any particular jurisdiction, and due to confidentiality concerns, we were unable to follow up with police departments about specific cases. While we thus can reach no conclusions about the adequacy of efforts of any particular police department or other law enforcement agency, the incidents described show that law enforcement agencies can and should do more to investigate and prosecute sexual violence against farmworkers.

Failure to Investigate Sexual Assault

Survivors of sexual assault in the US-regardless of ethnicity, occupation, or legal status-face significant barriers to justice, including police departments that fail to adequately investigate their complaints.

Even when rapes are reported, US law enforcement agencies often fail to adequately investigate them. Human Rights Watch has previously documented the failure of Illinois and Los Angeles County authorities to test rape kits (the results of medical examinations intended to collect DNA evidence), while a recent investigation by the Baltimore Sun uncovered serious and pervasive problems with Baltimore police response to allegations of sexual assault, including an unusually high rate of classification of such allegations as "unfounded" (meaning the police did not believe a crime had occurred) and aggressive and rude questioning of victims by police.

There are a lot of businesses that benefit from a cheap, docile labor supply that won't cause any problems because they don't want any attention. It's why nothing happens; the status quo works economically.

-Rick Rominger, California farmer, September 9, 2011.

When I tell a lot of workers what their rights are, they say, "Could you tell the grower?"

-Daniela Dwyer, Attorney, Florida Legal Services, Migrant Farmworker Justice Project, May 12, 2011.

Some employers work hard to keep their workers safe from sexual harassment and comply fully with worker safety laws. One California farmworker who reported suffering harassment from a supervisor had also worked for companies who did things differently: "I've seen companies that take care of their workers. Where they provide bathrooms, have you wash [your] hands, have everything ready."

Unfortunately, some do not. Some are ignorant of, or choose not to see, what is happening at their workplace, while others retaliate against employees who try to report violations and abuses. Some are even actively belligerent toward those who seek to provide farmworkers with information about their rights.

Despite industry interest in reforming immigration, there are unscrupulous employers who take advantage of their workers' unauthorized status. As discussed above, the ever-present fear of deportation helps to create a workplace where workers will put up with abuses rather than report them. The threat of an employer calling ICE does not have to be stated explicitly for it to silence workers, but some supervisors and employers go further and explicitly use workers' unauthorized status to intimidate them.

Few farmworkers interviewed by Human Rights Watch had ever received training on workplace safety, including sexual harassment. At most, they received brief instructions on how to do their tasks, such as how to cut plants when harvesting crops. Mercedes A. reported that "sometimes ... we get a video saying we have a right to water, etc.," but such trainings are perfunctory and the workers "still do not receive water."

In California, state law specifically requires employers with at least 50 employees to provide trainings on sexual harassment to supervisors and managers once every two years. They must also create anti-harassment policies, provide information on these policies to all employees, and post a copy of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing's anti-harassment poster.

These organizations, however, represent only a tiny percentage of farmworkers in the US.

Human rights law imposes an obligation on states to take measures to protect all persons against human rights violations-including sexual violence and sexual harassment perpetrated by private actors-and also to provide a remedy where fundamental protections, such as those relating to the right to life and bodily integrity, have been violated.

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has also ruled that under the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, a state can be held responsible for acts perpetrated by private actors in certain circumstances. Specifically, the IACHR has recognized that "gender-based violence is one of the most extreme and pervasive forms of discrimination, severely impairing and nullifying the enforcement of women's rights," and that "a State's failure to act with due diligence to protect women from violence constitutes a form of discrimination and denies women their right to equality before the law."

Reform federal laws to better protect unauthorized immigrant farmworkers from sexual violence and harassment:

Pass the Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reauthorization bill (S. 1925) or similar legislation that strengthens the U visa and other protections for immigrant victims of domestic and sexual violence, including farmworker women and girls. However, because more protections are needed, also pass legislation that:

Removes the arbitrary caps on the number of U and T visas available for immigrant victims of serious crimes.

Allows immigrant victims to present secondary evidence that they have been helpful in the investigation of the crimes against them, in lieu of law enforcement certification, for U visas.

Allows immigrant witnesses who are helpful in the investigation of serious crimes, such as sexual violence, to be eligible for legal status similar to that conferred by the U visa.

Reform immigration law to reduce the vulnerability of farmworkers to sexual violence and sexual harassment, as well as other abuses:

Enact legislation that creates a program of earned legalization for the unauthorized farmworkers already in the US.

Enact reforms that better protect migrant workers entering the US on guestworker visas from workplace abuses:

Eliminate worker dependency on abusive employers by making visas portable between employers, with a grace period in which workers can find new employment if their current job ends for any reason.

Protect guestworkers from discrimination during recruitment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability, in accordance with anti-discrimination laws applied to other workers in the US.

Include guestworkers in protections under the Seasonal and Migrant Agricultural Worker Protection Act, as well as the National Labor Relations Act.

Create a path to permanent resident status for guestworkers and family members who have been in the US for a set period of time.

Reform or repeal federal laws that dissuade agricultural workers, both authorized and unauthorized, from reporting workplace sexual violence, sexual harassment, and other abuses:

Enact legislation to ensure equality of remedies for all workers who suffer workplace violations or seek to enforce workers' rights, regardless of immigration status, and thereby rectify the Supreme Court's decision in Hoffman Plastic.

Revise the caps on damages available under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to keep pace with inflation and to provide a sufficient deterrent to unscrupulous or irresponsible employers.

Eliminate the exclusion of farmworkers from the National Labor Relations Act and acknowledge that, like all other workers, they have the right to collective bargaining.

Amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to:

Give agricultural workers the right to overtime pay, ensure payment of the minimum wage, and cover small farms, in keeping with the protections available to workers in most other industries;

Apply the same age and hour requirements to children working for hire in agriculture as already apply to all other working children;

Set or raise the minimum age for agricultural work to at least 14, with the sole exception being children working on farms owned and operated by their parents.

Halt yearly approval of a rider exempting almost all farms with 10 or fewer employees from the jurisdiction of OSHA.

Eliminate restrictions on the ability of organizations funded by the Legal Services Corporation to represent unauthorized farmworkers.

Repeal programs such as Secure Communities which require or encourage local police to enforce federal immigration laws.

Screen immigrants arrested in enforcement actions for eligibility for U and T visas, and ensure that appropriate prosecutorial discretion policies, as outlined in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) memoranda, are applied to them.

Ensure consistent, accurate application of U visa laws and regulations by local law enforcement agencies by disseminating information on the specific legal requirements for U visa certification and the role played by certifying law enforcement agencies.

Issue a directive to all ICE field offices to abide by the terms of Operating Instruction 287.3, which requires agents to determine whether employers or others have supplied information about unauthorized workers in an effort to interfere with their workplace rights, and ensure all agents and local law enforcement agents involved in immigration enforcement are trained on the use of the Operating Instruction.

Continue outreach and prioritization of services to low-income immigrant victims of sexual violence and sexual harassment, including those in rural areas.

Eliminate unnecessary delays in processing claims, and ensure investigators are trained to work with victims of sexual violence, are aware of and responsive to cultural differences, and, wherever possible, have appropriate language capacity.

Increase agricultural workplace inspections, particularly those targeting child labor and minimum wage violations, and increase civil money and criminal penalties within the limits allowed by law to improve compliance with relevant laws.

Make referrals to the appropriate agencies when evidence of sexual harassment is encountered during an investigation, and promulgate regulations and remedies related to sexual harassment as an occupational health and safety issue.

Make use of the joint-employer concept under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (AWPA) and the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to hold growers responsible along with farm labor contractors for providing farmworkers protections under the AWPA.

Make use of the "hot-goods" provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act to allow courts to issue emergency orders barring companies from shipping or selling goods produced by improperly paid workers.

Vigorously enforce OSHA's Field Sanitation Standard, which requires employers to provide workers with drinking water, toilets, and hand-washing facilities.

Ensure that state laws provide farmworkers adequate protection from sexual harassment and other workplace abuses where federal legislation fails to accomplish this.

Enact comprehensive anti-sexual harassment laws if no such laws currently exist, and, if they do exist, eliminate exemptions for agricultural workers and ensure broader coverage of employers with provision for remedies sufficient to deter employers from violating these laws.

Ensure that victim services, including services to address the short- and long-term physical and psychological consequences of sexual violence, are available and accessible for all victims, regardless of immigration status, and that farmworker communities are made aware of these services.

Assess the linguistic needs of farmworker populations in the state and, wherever possible, take steps to increase the capacity of state labor agency staff to provide effective assistance to immigrant farmworkers, including indigenous farmworkers who cannot communicate effectively in English or Spanish.

Refrain from passing immigration legislation similar to Arizona's SB 1070 or Alabama's HB 56, which increase fears of police and discourage reporting of crimes in immigrant communities.

Investigate vigorously all complaints of sexual violence by immigrants, regardless of immigration status.

Hire bilingual and culturally sensitive staff; do not call upon federal immigration officers as interpreters.

Take all necessary and appropriate steps to assure immigrant communities that unauthorized immigrants who report crimes will not be reported to immigration authorities.

Undertake outreach to build relationships with farmworker and immigrant communities.

Ensure that the agency's U visa certification process is transparent and accessible to eligible immigrant victims of crime.

Create and enforce clear policies prohibiting sexual harassment and abuse and accessible channels by which employees can safely report sexual harassment and other workplace violations.

Provide culturally and linguistically appropriate trainings on sexual harassment and abuse, and, where possible, work with farmworker advocacy organizations to create materials and conduct trainings.

Investigate every reported instance of sexual violence or harassment and take prompt, corrective action to remedy the problem.

Contract only with licensed contractors who can demonstrate that they are able to comply with worker protection laws and create and enforce policies prohibiting sexual harassment.

Conduct culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate outreach to immigrant workers, including, wherever possible, indigenous farmworkers who cannot communicate effectively in English or Spanish.

Advocate for additional resources to increase access by rural immigrant workers to bilingual therapists.

This report was researched and written by Grace Meng, researcher in the US Program, with research assistance from Zama Coursen-Neff, Children's Rights Division deputy director. It was edited by Alison Parker, US Program director; Clive Baldwin, senior legal advisor; and Joseph Saunders, deputy program director. Chris Albin-Lackey, Zama Coursen-Neff, Rasha Moumneh, and Meghan Rhoad also reviewed and commented on the report.

Vikram Shah and Elena Vanko, US Program associates, provided important research, editing, and production assistance, as did US Program interns Elana Bildner, Sarah Efronson, Megan Kordenbrock, Jocelyn Wolf, and Megan Worman. Gabriela Haymes translated the report into Spanish; Xabay Spinka, senior web editor, reviewed the Spanish-language version. Grace Choi, publications director, Kathy Mills, publications specialist, and Fitzroy Hepkins, administrative manager, provided production assistance.

We thank the many legal services and farmworker advocacy organizations that assisted us with this report, as well as the farmers, industry representatives, and governmental authorities who were willing to be interviewed. We are particularly grateful to Alina Diaz, Monica Ramirez, California Rural Legal Assistance, Lideres Campesinas, NC Field, Farmworker Justice, Vecinos, Western North Carolina Workers Center, Westside Family Preservation Services Network, and others who do not wish to be named. Most of all, we thank the farmworkers who shared their experiences with sexual violence, sexual harassment, and other workplace abuses in the hope that, by doing so, they will help prevent these abuses from happening to others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This 95-page report describes rape, stalking, unwanted touching, exhibitionism, or vulgar and obscene language by supervisors, employers, and others in positions of power. Most farmworkers interviewed said they had experienced such treatment or knew others who had. And most said they had not reporte…

# data[].attributes.body
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18257868

"Some 18.4% of participants had impairing levels of anxiety, 41.6% met caseness for depression, and 37.6% answered yes to 2 or more questions on the CAGE."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

Context: The number of Latinos in rural regions of the United States is increasing. Little is known about factors that undermine the mental health of this segment of the rural population.

Purpose: The goal of this study is to determine which stressors inherent in farmwork and the farmworker lifestyle contribute to poor mental health.

Methods: An interview containing the Migrant Farmworker Stress Inventory (MFWSI) and 3 mental health scales (the PAI [anxiety], CES-D [depression], and CAGE/4M [alcohol abuse]) was administered to a sample of 125 male migrant farmworkers. Factor analysis differentiated discrete domains of stressors in the MFWSI. Regression models identified associations of the MFWSI stressor domains with mental health outcomes.

Findings: Thirty-eight percent of participants had significant levels of stress as determined by the MFWSI. The MFWSI reduced to 5 stressor domains: legality and logistics, social isolation, work conditions, family, and substance abuse by others. Some 18.4% of participants had impairing levels of anxiety, 41.6% met caseness for depression, and 37.6% answered yes to 2 or more questions on the CAGE. Social isolation and working conditions were associated with both anxiety and depressive symptoms. However, social isolation was more strongly associated with anxiety, and working conditions were more strongly linked to depression.

Conclusions: Specific categories of stressors (social isolation, working conditions) inherent in farmwork and the farmworker lifestyle are associated with mental health among immigrant farmworkers. Isolating specific categories of stressors helps in designing programs and practice for the prevention and management of mental health disorders in the immigrant, farmworker population.

Similar articles

Stress Factors Contributing to Depression Among Latino Migrant Farmworkers in Nebraska.

Ramos AK, Su D, Lander L, Rivera R. Ramos AK, et al. J Immigr Minor Health. 2015 Dec;17(6):1627-34. doi: 10.1007/s10903-015-0201-5. J Immigr Minor Health. 2015. PMID: 25840517

Stress among migrant and seasonal farmworkers in rural southeast North Carolina.

Kim-Godwin YS, Bechtel GA. Kim-Godwin YS, et al. J Rural Health. 2004 Summer;20(3):271-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-0361.2004.tb00039.x. J Rural Health. 2004. PMID: 15298103

Cited by

Refining the Migrant Farmworker Stress Inventory among Latino Migrant Farmworkers in Rural Nebraska.

Haws JK, Andrews AR 3rd, Acosta Canchila MN, Ramos AK. Haws JK, et al. Rural Ment Health. 2022 Apr;46(2):100-116. doi: 10.1037/rmh0000202. Epub 2022 Jan 31. Rural Ment Health. 2022. PMID: 35814869

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
national center for biotechnology information

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Migrant farmworker stress: mental health implications - PubMed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Specific categories of stressors (social isolation, working conditions) inherent in farmwork and the farmworker lifestyle are associated with mental health among immigrant farmworkers. Isolating specific categories of stressors helps in designing programs and practice for the prevention and manageme ...

# data[].attributes.body
"The most an individual project can get from the USDA is $3 million, but most farmworker housing projects cost $10 million to $20 million. "

# data[].attributes.body
https://nfwm.org/farm-workers/farm-worker-issues/modern-day-slavery/

Even though back then there was many issues with migrant workers feeling likes working slaves. They found that recently it's the exact same thing and that nothing has changed. It was founded in 2013 that around 27 million workers are still enslaved and that 15 million of those suffer with trafficking. No change has been done with enslavement of farm workers and that must change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Background

Farm workers are some of the most oppressed workers in the United States. In some cases, they are subject to physical and psychological abuse in the fields. In the worst and most extreme cases, they live in conditions constituting modern-day slavery.

The United States formally abolished slavery in 1865, however, well over a century later, workers are still enslaved and experience threats, violence, coercion, and manipulation.

In 2013 there are an estimated 27 million enslaved persons in the world. In the United States, nearly 15,000 enslaved men and women are trafficked into the country annually. Of those, about half will be forced to work in the sex trade with the other half forced into other industries including agriculture.

Definition of Terms: Smuggling vs. Human Trafficking vs. Modern-Day Slavery

These three terms differ from each other, though they are intertwined. Smuggling refers to the facilitation of the entry of a person into a place of which they are not a citizen, resident, or authorized visitor in order to obtain financial or other material benefit. In cases of human trafficking, victims experience a loss of freedom and are transported by traffickers, who buy and sell them in pursuit of profit. If a victim of smuggling or human trafficking is forced into labor and/or sexual exploitation, it can become a case of modern-day slavery. Slavery is working against your will with little or no pay under the threat of violence or other punishment.

Farm Workers and U.S. Slavery

From the country's inception, landowners in the United States have always had a source of free or cheap agricultural labor. During the early years of colonization, landowners in North America used indentured servants from Europe to tend the fields. Beginning in the early 17th century, thousands of enslaved persons were imported from Africa into forced farm labor. Despite the passage of the Emancipation Proclamation in 1865, many laws and ordinances were subsequently applied to limit the rights of freed slaves. This set of laws were collectively known as the Black Codes (modeled after the Slave Codes).

Often times former enslaved persons would find themselves back in the fields, working as punishment for civil infractions or to pay off unjustly levied debt. Situations in which workers were tricked or forced into signing contracts that kept them in debt or limited their rights were not uncommon and were legal in some states. The conditions of many black farm workers remained bleak in the years after the Emancipation Proclamation.

Freed enslaved persons and their descendants could not claim full citizenship until the passing of civil rights legislation nearly 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation.

Farm workers of all races still suffer from the enduring legacy of slavery and racism. Although the demographics of the workforce have shifted, agricultural systems in the U.S. remain oppressive and in some uncommon and horrific cases, constitute slavery itself. While extreme situations like these are uncommon, there have been multiple legally recognized cases of modern-day slavery in U.S. agriculture.

Immigrants and Human Trafficking

Although immigrants are not the only group vulnerable to slavery, they are a population especially at risk.

Factors including debt-causing World Bank initiatives and U.S. economic policies such as NAFTA and CAFTA have created instability and economic catastrophe in countries around the world. Populations vulnerable to exploitation increase in direct relation to declines in the standard of living.

People from affected countries find themselves with few choices other than to migrate from their home to places where markets exist for their labor. Many will incur debts to smugglers as well as other costs associated with this journey.

Immigrants may be lured to the United States with promises of jobs only to then be forced into servitude. Many may be trafficked from place to place. Undocumented immigrants are particularly vulnerable to threats of deportation, arrest, and violence. Those with H-2A visas are specifically vulnerable to abuse and coercion, as employers are able to withhold wages, passports, and identification.

In one of the largest cases of human trafficking in the country (U.S. vs. Orian) it was alleged that more than 1,100 Thai workers were brought to the United States through the H-2A guest-worker visa program and then forced to work under horrific conditions. In some cases, workers were allegedly stripped of their passports and kept under 24-hour guarded surveillance while living in rat and insect-infested housing. These workers each paid $8,000 to $20,000 to recruiters for their jobs, taking out loans, and using their ancestral land as collateral and were told that they would be sent back home if they complained about their pay or working conditions. Despite three of the defendants' guilty pleas, federal prosecutors dropped all charges one month prior to the trial. The Criminal Section of the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division felt they could not prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, the case against Global Horizons Manpower Company, and its CEO Mordechai Orian, ( The New York Times). Armed with four years of investigation and evidence from interviews with Thai farm workers, the Thai Community Development Center in L.A. continues to seek justice for these workers.

"The dismissal of the largest human trafficking case in U.S. history comes on the 17th anniversary of the famed El Monte Thai Garment Slavery Case, considered the first case of modern-day slavery in the U.S. However, instead of moving forward to combat labor trafficking and prosecute its perpetrators, the Justice Department has sent a signal to all traffickers that they have nothing to fear if they go through the motions of obtaining a temporary visa [H2A]". - Chanchanit Martorel, Thai CDC Executive Director.

Focus: Modern-Day Slavery in Florida

In Florida, there have been several cases of modern day slavery in the fields among immigrants and citizens. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers, helped to uncover and start federal prosecution of many of these cases.

Since 1997, more than 1000 enslaved persons have gained freedom in Florida. An African American man, Jewel Goodman, was held against his will and forced into debt-bondage in Hastings, FL. Like many farm workers, he had been threatened with violence if he tried to leave the camp. After several failed attempts, Goodman escaped in the middle of the night. It took him two hours to get to the safety of a friend's place in town ( Tampa Bay Times).

Camps are often isolated, with little governmental oversight, making it easy for such horrific conditions to exist. In Florida, bosses have used crack cocaine and alcohol to keep workers dependent and perpetually in debt. Many people are recruited from homeless shelters and soup kitchens and immediately become indebted.

Ronald Evans, Sr., was one such boss. "The owner of two migrant labor camps was sentenced to 30 years in prison Friday after he was found guilty of hiring drug addicts and homeless people at minimum wages and then selling them crack cocaine, beer and cigarettes at inflated prices. [Evans] was convicted in August on 57 charges of engaging in a criminal enterprise, distributing crack cocaine, dealing in contraband, spoiling the environment, violating federal farmworker statutes and more than four dozen counts of improper financial transactions.he was convicted of running a drug ring and fixing financial records and is currently serving a 30-year jail sentence ( The Associated Press).

Another case from Southern Florida as reported in 2007 by The Independent: "Three Florida fruit-pickers, held captive and brutalized by their employer for more than a year, finally broke free of their bonds by punching their way through the ventilator hatch of the van in which they were imprisoned. Once outside, they dashed for freedom. When they found sanctuary one recent Sunday morning, all bore the marks of heavy beatings to the head and body. One of the pickers had a nasty, untreated knife wound on his arm. Police would learn later that another man had his hands chained behind his back every night to prevent him escaping, leaving his wrists swollen." The people responsible for enslaving these workers are serving a 12-year sentence.

In Alachua County, home to the University of Florida, three people were arrested and charged with "conspiring to commit forced labor and visa fraud." After persuading 34 Haitians to travel to Florida with the promise of well-paying jobs, the suspects held the workers' passports and threatened them with deportation. The indictment included claims that the workers lived in substandard housing, were malnourished, and denied access to medical care. As in the U.S. vs. Orian case, these charges were also dropped by the federal prosecutor. Despite evidence and testimony given by the Haitian guest workers and findings from numerous federal and state agencies (including ICE, Department of Homeland Security, and the Alachua County Sherriff's Office), the prosecutors claimed they were unable to prove culpability beyond a reasonable doubt. ( Gainesville Sun).

These cases speak to many inadequacies and injustices in our society. Immigration policies that keep immigrants isolated and in fear of reporting abuses, a guest worker program with a drastic lack of oversight, and the need for cheap labor are all factors that foster environments where slavery can exist. The legacy of racism in the United States can be seen in punitive and xenophobic laws against immigrants, an inept justice system, and exclusion of farm workers from labor protection standards that had been won in the early 20th century.

Slavery remains a lucrative business. Until we have an agricultural industry and government policies that encourage human rights over profits, we must continue the fight against slavery that began 400 years ago until slavery itself is truly abolished.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Farm workers are some of the most oppressed workers in the United States. In some cases, they are subject to physical and psychological abuse in the fields. In the worst and most extreme cases, they live in conditions constituting modern-day slavery.

# data[].attributes.body
Many farm migrant workers had health issues when it came to bad pesticides that would kill many. To the heat stress making people feel sick instantly and also stating that many migrant farm workers didn't have the health care they deserved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Farmworker Housing and Working Conditions

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
'A lot of abuse for little pay': how US farming profits from exploitation and brutality 

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/25/us-farms-made-200m-human-smuggling-labor-trafficking-operation

"They paid the traffickers 20,000 pesos, about $950, loaned from their mother, taking frequent trips back and forth to Monterey, before being told it was safe to leave. Then they were finally transported across the border. Initially, the worker was told they would be working on a blueberry farm but was sent to a corn farming operation instead."
The way they abused workers physically and mentally while being paid nothing was one of the biggest problems farm workers went through.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In June, a farm worker from Mexico, who requested to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation, was transported through a trafficking network from Monterey to work on farms in Georgia.

They paid the traffickers 20,000 pesos, about $950, loaned from their mother, taking frequent trips back and forth to Monterey, before being told it was safe to leave. Then they were finally transported across the border.

Initially, the worker was told they would be working on a blueberry farm, but was sent to a corn farming operation instead.

"We arrived at the house where we would live, and had to clean the rooms ourselves. There were roaches, spiders, mosquitoes, and the mattresses were covered in lice," the worker said. "The bathrooms and showers were dirty and clogged. The kitchen was horrible. We had no air conditioning in hot weather."

The worker began work daily at 3 or 4am and worked until 3 or 4pm with just one 15-minute lunch break, making just $225 for 15 days of work. They heard rumors that several workers had died. The worker claimed that Haitian immigrants were also brought into the same network.

After 20 days at the corn farm, the worker was sent to a cucumber warehouse where they weren't paid anything for their work, and then transferred to Texas before escaping the operation and returning to Mexico in July.

"There was a lot of abuse for little pay," the worker added. "It was a total fraud."

The contractor the worker said he worked under, JC Longoria Castro, was one of two dozen defendants indicted on federal conspiracy charges in October, based on findings from a multi-year investigation into a massive human smuggling and labor trafficking operation based in southern Georgia that extended to Florida and Texas.

The indictments characterized the operation as "modern-day slavery", a longstanding problem in the US agricultural industry where workers were smuggled from Central American countries to the US and imprisoned as contracted farm workers.

Farmworkers in the US, especially immigrant workers, have few protections. They were excluded from the National Labor Relations Act passed in 1935, and from the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Workers in America's agricultural fields are regularly subjected to abuses ranging from high occurrences of sexual assault and harassment, wage theft and safety issues including injuries, fatalities on the job and exposure to hazardous chemicals.

The investigation, Operation Blooming Onion, found the conspirators forced workers to pay fees for transportation to the US, food, and housing through the H2-A work visa program, while withholding their travel and identification documents and forcing them to work for little to no pay in inhumane living conditions.

The two dozen conspirators made $200m from their operation, laundering the money through land, houses, more than a dozen vehicles, the purchase of a restaurant and nightclub, and through a casino, according to the investigation. More than 100 workers were freed from the operation.

The H2-A visa program is an often-used avenue for exploitation of migrant workers in the US, as it ties immigration status to employment on a temporary basis with no pathways to permanent citizenship. Many of these workers are forced to take on debt to recruiters to enter the H2-A visa program, with several cases of debt peonage, forced labor and human trafficking reported through the program.

"It's really the structure of the program that facilitates this kind of stuff happening, often with impunity," said Daniel Costa, director of immigration law and policy research at the Economic Policy Institute.

He cited a severe lack of labor law enforcement in the agricultural industry as a driving factor in widespread abuses of workers, and the lack of regulation of recruiters outside the US who connect migrant workers with temporary jobs. Inspections conducted by the wage and hour division of the US Department of Labor declined significantly over the past few decades due to underfunding, and the low number of inspectors responsible for overseeing a vast number of employers.

"If you're an agricultural employer, there's only around a 1% chance that you'll be investigated for anything in any given year, so they can pretty much get away with not treating your workers the way they should," added Costa.

The Georgia workers were threatened with deportation or violence if they did not comply with the conspirators. The indictment includes allegations of "raping, kidnapping and threatening or attempting to kill some of the workers or their families, and in many cases sold or traded the workers to other conspirators". At least two workers died as a result of the living and working conditions and another was repeatedly raped, the indictment said.

Some of the workers were promised up to $12 an hour in pay, but instead were ordered by armed overseers to dig up onions by hand for $0.20 per bucket.

A grand jury indicted the 24 conspirators in a federal court in Waycross, Georgia, on counts including forced labor, mail fraud, witness tampering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Arraignments in the case were scheduled for 21 December and 6 January at the southern district of Georgia federal courthouse in Waycross, Georgia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'A lot of abuse for little pay': how US farming profits from exploitation and brutality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In June, a farm worker from Mexico, who requested to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation, was transported through a trafficking network from Monterey to work on farms in Georgia. They paid the traffickers 20,000 pesos, about $950, loaned from their mother, taking frequent trips back and forth to Monterey, before being told it was safe to leave.