California’s child farmworkers: Exhausted, underpaid and toiling in toxic fields – Capital & Main

Report on Child Labor in California’s Agricultural Sector and its Contradiction to Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: An Analysis of Labor Practices Against Global Sustainability Benchmarks

An investigation into the agricultural industry in California reveals systemic labor violations, particularly concerning underage workers, which stand in direct opposition to several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This report analyzes the conditions of child farmworkers, the failure of regulatory enforcement, and the direct impact on key SDGs, including SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

SDG 8: Failure to Ensure Decent Work and Eradicate Child Labor

The conditions documented in California’s agricultural fields represent a severe violation of SDG 8, which calls for promoting sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment, and decent work for all. Specifically, the findings conflict with Target 8.7 (end child labor) and Target 8.8 (protect labor rights and promote safe and secure working environments).

Prevalence of Child Labor (Target 8.7)

• Children as young as 12 are legally permitted to work in California’s agricultural sector, with reports of some starting as young as 6.
• An estimated 5,000 to 10,000 minors are employed in the state’s agricultural industry.
• Minors often work long hours, including up to 10-hour days and six-day weeks, particularly during summer and on weekends during the school year, to supplement family income.

Absence of Decent Work and Safe Environments (Target 8.8)

The employment conditions for these minors fail to meet the standards of decent work.

1. Wage Exploitation: Many young workers are paid on a piece-rate basis, such as $2.40 per box of strawberries or $3 per bucket of tomatillos, frequently resulting in earnings below the state minimum wage.
2. Hazardous Conditions: The work is physically demanding, involving hours of squatting and bending, lifting heavy loads, and using sharp tools without adequate safety training.
3. Lack of Basic Amenities: Reports indicate a failure by employers to provide legally required amenities such as shade, cool drinking water, and clean sanitation facilities.

SDG 3 & SDG 1: The Intersection of Poor Health, Well-being, and Poverty

The situation directly undermines SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and illustrates the cycle of poverty addressed by SDG 1 (No Poverty). Families’ economic precarity forces children into hazardous labor, which in turn compromises their physical and mental health.

Health and Safety Risks (SDG 3)

• Pesticide Exposure: Minors report working in fields with strong chemical odors, leading to headaches, dizziness, skin rashes, and burning eyes.
• Heat-Related Illness: Laboring in direct sun without adequate shade or water has led to heat exhaustion, nausea, and nosebleeds.
• Physical Injuries: The physically strenuous nature of the work and uneven terrain result in injuries such as twisted ankles and chronic back, shoulder, and leg pain, which often go unreported for fear of job loss.

Economic Drivers of Child Labor (SDG 1)

The primary motivation for child labor in this sector is economic necessity. Low wages for adult farmworkers mean that children’s earnings are essential for their families to afford basic necessities like food and rent. This perpetuates a cycle of poverty where education and long-term well-being are sacrificed for immediate survival.

SDG 16 & SDG 10: Institutional Weakness and Systemic Inequality

The persistence of these exploitative conditions points to a failure of public institutions (SDG 16) and exacerbates existing inequalities affecting vulnerable populations (SDG 10).

Failure of Justice and Strong Institutions (SDG 16)

State regulatory bodies have demonstrated a significant lack of capacity and effectiveness in enforcing labor laws.

1. Insufficient Enforcement: From 2017 to 2024, the Bureau of Field Enforcement issued only 27 citations for child labor violations to agricultural employers in a state with 17,000 such businesses.
2. Uncollected Penalties: Of the $36,000 in fines issued for these violations, only $2,814 was collected by the state.
3. Inadequate Inspections: Vast agricultural regions have gone years without worksite inspections. Cal/OSHA failed to investigate a majority of the 2,600 complaints regarding heat-illness violations and conducted over 600 “letter investigations” instead of on-site visits.
4. Pesticide Safety Oversight: In 2023, county regulators performed inspections in less than 1% of the more than 687,000 instances of pesticide application.

Impact on Reduced Inequalities (SDG 10)

The burden of these labor abuses falls disproportionately on marginalized communities.

• Vulnerable Populations: The majority of affected families are immigrants, many of whom are undocumented or from Indigenous communities like the Mixtecos from Mexico.
• Climate of Fear: The threat of immigration enforcement discourages workers from reporting unsafe conditions, wage theft, or other violations, leaving them vulnerable to further exploitation by employers.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article connects child labor directly to economic hardship. It states that children work “to help his mother,” “to help their parents pay bills and put food on the table,” and because the “family not making ends meet.” This highlights the role of poverty as a primary driver for underage labor.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The health and safety of the young workers are severely compromised. The article describes numerous health issues, including physical injuries (“twisted his ankle,” “injured his ankles and knees”), and illnesses from exposure to hazardous chemicals (“strong smell of chemicals gave him a headache,” “made her feel dizzy,” “made her eyes burn and she broke out in rashes”). It also mentions the risks of heat exposure (“suffering a nosebleed in the heat,” “triple-digit heat without any company-paid breaks”) and poor sanitation (“filthy portable toilets with no soap to wash their hands”).

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  This is the most central SDG in the article. The core issues discussed are child labor, unsafe working conditions, and the violation of labor rights. The article details how children as young as 11 (and in one case, 6) are engaged in hazardous agricultural work, are paid less than minimum wage, and work in environments that lack basic safety measures like shade and clean water, all of which are direct affronts to the principles of decent work.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article highlights the vulnerability of a specific demographic: young, often immigrant, and Indigenous (Mixtecos) workers. These children and their families are exploited through low wages (“paid piece-rate wages for less than minimum wage”) and are reluctant to complain due to fear of retaliation and their precarious immigration status (“fear has made families more reluctant than ever to complain about unsafe working conditions”). This points to systemic inequalities that allow for such exploitation to persist.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  A significant portion of the article is dedicated to the failure of state institutions to enforce labor laws. It provides evidence of weak governance and lack of accountability, stating that “enforcement of child labor laws has been inconsistent,” “the number of workplace safety inspections and citations issued to employers have dropped,” and that agencies are “understaffed and they don’t have the capacity.” The failure to investigate complaints, issue meaningful citations, and collect fines demonstrates a systemic weakness in the institutions meant to protect vulnerable workers.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 1.2: By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.

   The article implies this target by repeatedly citing economic necessity as the reason for child labor. The statement, “What really needs to change is how much ag workers get paid, so that minors don’t have to help out their parents,” directly links fair wages for adults to ending child labor, which is a manifestation of household poverty.

2. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.

   This target is relevant due to the numerous accounts of pesticide exposure. Workers described harvesting in fields with a “strong chemical odor” that caused “headaches,” “dizziness,” “burning eyes,” and “rashes.” The article notes that in 2023, “county regulators performed inspections in less than 1% of the more than 687,000 instances in which fields and orchards were sprayed with pesticides,” indicating a failure to mitigate these chemical hazards.

3. Target 8.7: Take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour… and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms.

   The entire article is an exposé on child labor in California’s agricultural sector. It details the experiences of dozens of minors, some starting as young as 6, working in punishing conditions. The estimate that “5,000 to 10,000 underage youths labor in the state’s agricultural industry” shows that ending child labor is a highly relevant and unmet goal.

4. Target 8.8: Protect labour rights and promote safe and secure working environments for all workers, including migrant workers… and those in precarious employment.

   This target is addressed through descriptions of numerous labor rights violations. These include failure to pay minimum wage (“earned less than minimum wage for the hours he worked”), lack of safety measures (“failed to provide shade for workers,” “no extra water breaks”), and exposure to physical hazards leading to injury (“he fell on the uneven ground and twisted his ankle”). The fear of retaliation for reporting these conditions further underscores the lack of a secure working environment.

5. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   The article directly critiques the effectiveness of regulatory bodies. It states that over an eight-year period, “state officials issued just 27 citations for child labor violations” among 17,000 agricultural employers and that “More than 90% of the fines were never collected.” Furthermore, it highlights that Cal/OSHA “failed to investigate a majority of the 2,600 complaints filed against agricultural employers for not providing heat-illness training, shade or cool water,” which is a clear indictment of institutional ineffectiveness and lack of accountability.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article provides specific data and qualitative descriptions that can serve as or inform indicators for measuring progress.

• For Target 8.7 (End child labour):
  • Indicator 8.7.1 (Proportion and number of children aged 5-17 years engaged in child labour): The article provides a direct estimate that can be used as a baseline: “a fair estimate would be that 5,000 to 10,000 underage youths labor in the state’s agricultural industry.” It also gives specific ages of child workers (14, 13, 12, 11, 9, 6), which helps in understanding the scope of the problem.
• For Target 8.8 (Safe working environments):
  • Indicator 8.8.1 (Frequency rates of fatal and non-fatal occupational injuries): The article provides anecdotal evidence of non-fatal injuries, such as “twisted his ankle,” “injured his ankles and knees,” and being “sideswiped… by a small tractor, injuring his hip.” Tracking the number and type of such reported injuries would be a direct measure.
  • Wages below legal minimum: The article repeatedly mentions workers earning less than minimum wage through the piece-rate system (e.g., Angelica earning “$9 for her labor” after five or six hours). The prevalence of sub-minimum wage payment is a clear indicator of labor rights violations.
• For Target 3.9 (Reduce illness from chemicals):
  • Reported symptoms of chemical exposure: The article lists symptoms like “headaches,” “dizziness,” “skin rashes,” and “burning eyes” following exposure to pesticides. The frequency of such health complaints among farmworkers can serve as a direct indicator of progress in reducing chemical-related illnesses.
• For Target 16.6 (Effective institutions):
  • Number of inspections and citations: The article provides hard numbers that serve as performance indicators for regulatory agencies. For example, “the Fresno office conducted an average of less than four inspections a year” in an area with over 3,000 employers. An increase in the number and effectiveness of inspections would indicate progress.
  • Rate of fine collection: The fact that “the state collected only $2,814” out of “$36,000” in fines for child labor violations is a stark indicator of institutional failure. An improved collection rate would signify stronger enforcement.
  • Complaint investigation rate: The article states that a “majority of the 2,600 complaints” regarding heat safety were not investigated. Tracking the percentage of complaints that are fully investigated would measure institutional responsiveness and accountability.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: latimes.com