Latest Competition Workshop Draws Poulty Crowd
The USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice heard stories of intimidation, retaliation and farm-robbing contract demands during a hearing in Alabama today regarding competition issues in the poultry industry.
Compiled by staff
Published: May 21, 2010
In the halls of an institution initially of a traditionally black college, the stories that U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder heard were redolent of the stories once told by turn-of-the-century sharecroppers.
But those speaking at Alabama A&M University near Huntsville, Ala., on Friday were 21st Century poultry growers.
"Growers that are here today are in jeopardy because of intimidation by company personnel," said Kay Doby, a retired teacher and a former North Carolina poultry producer. "Everybody here today is taking a big risk."
Alabama poultry producer Garry Staples is a 20-year veteran of the Army Reserves, where he has spent most of his career in Special Forces. Yet he noted that his poultry contract could be in jeopardy because he spoke on a panel during the joint USDA/DOJ workshop on competition issues in the poultry industry. And that contract – a flock-to-flock contract that is subject to termination each 8-9 weeks – is tenuous at best. Most recently, the contract was cut by $4,500, when figured on an annual basis.
"I hope y'all will help us," Staples finished simply after a matter-of-fact explanation of the contract process that became emotional. As Staple wiped his eyes, the audience applauded loudly – and many stood.
Maryland farmer Carole Morison said her family's poultry contract was terminated after they rejected company-demanded upgrades to their houses that wouldn't pencil out. Same story North Carolina grower Sandra Pridgen told the same story of her seventh-generation family farm. For Robert Lumzy. For Doby.
Doby's contract was terminated shortly after her family was recognized by the same company for being "an outstanding producer".
When a company brings a new growers contract, most often when their houses are empty and frequently midway through an existing contract, a grower must weigh the operation's debt load against onerous new requirements, Pridgen said.
"You either sign it or you don't see your next flock," Pridgen said. Her father made the demanded improvements, took on $80,000 in debt to do so and then was terminated anyway.
Only one producer spoke well of the industry's current operations. South Carolina producer Gary Alexander said new facilities outperform aging facilities and "growers must be held accountable for performance through competition."
Mumbling, throat-clearing and restlessness movement rippled through the crowd and grew louder the longer Alexander spoke.
Ultimately, Alexander said, "There's no need for more government intervention in the poultry industry."
That's when Vilsack was forced to quiet the crowd.
At the close of the morning session, Christine Varney, assistant attorney general for antitrust, U.S. DOJ, said she had a lot of work to do. She asked several questions of producers regarding opportunities to switch companies (limited and often non-existent), whether companies are decreasing capacity when contracts are terminated (rarely, most often moving to growers who built new houses) or whether some demanded upgrades are reasonable (if the companies would be required to pay for them, they might be).
Most importantly, however, Varney reassured Staples.
"I fully expect you will not experience retaliation as a result of your presence today," Varney said. Then she handed Staples a card. "If you do, call me at this number."
Permalink: Click here
Tagged: farm, usda
|