Sonoma County Without Mexicans

[Tars]

I was curious about the actual cost to Sonoma County ag employers of using foreign migrant labor, and what the effect would be if somehow, the migrant labor disappeared, or became unavailable. I spoke with a couple of friends of mine who are involved in agriculture, and who use foreign laborers to do manual labor of a repetetive physical nature. They gave me their opinions on the subject of "illegal" workers. They both employ Mexican migrant workers. They have both tried to hire American workers in the past, but have given up on that because the few American workers they could get to work for them tended to stay only a short time, frequently missed work, and almost always left with little or no notice. The quality of those workers' work varied quite a bit, but in general was not considered very good. One of the aggies currently pays workers $10/hour; the other pays $12/hour. One said that when they had hired Americans to do the same work, they'd paid $15/hour. One aggie told me that payroll costs, using foreign workers, amounted to about 22% of total expenses; the other aggie, who has a more labor-intensive operation, said that labor costs were closer to 30% of total expenses.

What would happen, if for whatever reason, these two aggies had to rely solely on American labor? They had an "unworkable" situation when they were offering Americans work at $15/hour. What if we assume that if they paid $30 per hour, they could get American workers to remain on the job, and perform reasonably well. If the employer who pays $10 an hour incurs 22% of their total labor costs, then if they triple the pay-per-hour, and all other expenses remain the same, their labor costs would be now be 66% of total expenses.

Since agricultural businesses typically operate on a very small, sometimes non-existent profit margin, these aggies would need to raise the price of their products to generate the revenue to pay for the labor increases. Let's say that they grow radishes. Perhaps they sell radishes to grocers at the rate of...for example only...30¢ a bunch. At 22%, their labor costs them 6.6¢ per bunch; at 66% their labor cost would be 19.8¢ per bunch. Now, to cover the additional labor costs, they'd need to charge grocers 50¢ a bunch instead of 30¢.

The grocer in turn would have to raise their own prices accordingly. The person who would either absorb the price increase, or deal with it some other way, would be the final consumer. Would they pay the increased price? Or, would they buy fewer radishes?

I think, since price on most things affects demand, the grocer would end up selling fewer radishes. Since the grocer depends on sales of radishes to keep their own employees working, they might have to lay some people off. Those laid-off employees wouldn't be able to afford radishes anymore, so the demand for radishes would go down even further. With a decreased demand for radishes by the grocer, the aggies would grow fewer radishes, and probably lay off some of those $30/hour laborers.

Of course, this situation would not apply just to radishes, but to any product that uses foreign labor. Examples would be all kinds of vegetables and produce, all hospitality industries, including restaurants and lodging, construction industries.

[ThePhiant]

very interesting hypothesis, but can you explain why you are paying unskilled workers $30 an hour????????????
$30 an hour is a whole lot more than most skilled and unskilled workers make around town
Barry recently offered someone with computer and customer skills $15 an hour.
whole Foods doesn't pay much more than that, and we all know how much their produce costs
How much are YOU paying your unskilled labor?

I was curious about the actual cost to Sonoma County ag employers of using foreign migrant labor, and what the effect would be if somehow, the migrant labor disappeared, or became unavailable. ...

[Tars]

can you explain why you are paying unskilled workers $30 an hour????????????

Perhaps your question would be answered by reading the post before commenting on it?

The employers I'd talked to were unable to keep Americans in their employ, though they were paying $15/hour for unskilled, physical, repetitive labor. Apparently the Americans who did take the jobs were mostly druggies, who were often "out sick", or just didn't show up, when they did they did a lousy job, and never stayed in the job long. Perhaps physical dusty work was below their exalted status? So the employers resulted to hiring foreign workers for $10-$12/hour. They work harder than the Americans did, they don't miss work because they're hung over or strung out, and they're apparently happy to have the work opportunity.

I supposed for the sake of discussion that those same employers might be able to throw money at the problem and get Americans to do the work if they offered $30/hour; then again, maybe not. Even if they were able to get non "illegal" workers by paying three times as much as they currently do, they may well end up hiring fewer workers and/or maybe even going out of business, as a result of lowered demand brought on by higher costs.
See?

[ThePhiant]

Perhaps your question would be answered by reading the post before commenting on it?

Tars no reason to be so terse

The employers I'd talked to were unable to keep Americans in their employ, though they were paying $15/hour for unskilled, physical, repetitive labor. Apparently the Americans who did take the jobs were mostly druggies, who were often "out sick", or just didn't show up, when they did they did a lousy job, and never stayed in the job long. Perhaps physical dusty work was below their exalted status? So the employers resulted to hiring foreign workers for $10-$12/hour. They work harder than the Americans did, they don't miss work because they're hung over or strung out, and they're apparently happy to have the work opportunity

'.Let me see if I can grab your logic.
Your friends, you called them aggies I believe, pay some lousy employees $15 an hour, but hispanics who do a good job, have to take a pay cut.
but now you think that we should pay americans $30 an hour???????
why don't you tell your friends to pay the latinos $8 an hour, that might make them work twice as hard! and your friends will have more time to count their money!
just one more question,
if your friends WERE paying $15 to "americans", why are the hispanos getting less???????
would you call that rascism, imperialism, capitalism or just GREED???

[Tars]

Tars no reason to be so terse

You'd rather I wax rhapsodic? I'm flattered when someone hints that I should talk more...especially when I'm correcting them. But I digress...

if your friends WERE paying $15 to "americans", why are the hispanos getting less???????
would you call that rascism, imperialism, capitalism or just GREED???

I'd call it fiscal prudence. By your type of...er... logic, why didn't the aggies offer the Americans $1000/hour? Are they anti-American racists, because they only offered $15/hour? Those dispicable greedhead "imperialistic" (? but, I digress...) exploitive Nazi entrepeneurial bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The aggies I refer to I know rather well. They want to pay a fair wage for manual labor. If they have a fault, it was trying to be supportive of American workers, even after they realized those "workers" wouldn't "work". Though the state requires a minimum of $8.00 plus change, these employers think the work is worth $10-$12/hour. They tried to hire Americans at that rate; couldn't find any serious takers. They raised the rate to $15 & were finally able to attract at least the dregs of the workforce. But even when paying a higher-than-fair wage the results of their American-worker wage investment resulted in very poor work quality.

In desperation they turned to foreign workers, who were eager to do the work, and the going rate for which is $10/hour for ag work here in Sonoma County. the foreign workers were very happy to get the work, paid for at a fair ag wage.

But what if the aggies had said, "U.S. law uber alles! We will only hire legal U.S, workers!" Then, their only recourse would have been to offer a higher wage in hopes of attracting effective workers. If they couldn't get those workers at $15/hour, then perhaps they might attract some american who's actually willing to do the work, if they offered much more, say $30/hour.

But if they did that, they'd have to raise the prices of their products to cover the higher wage. Most likely they'd price themselves out of a lot of sales, and end up having to lay off the $30/hour workers, and maybe even go out of business themselves.

They made the fiscally prudent decision to hire foreign workers at a fair wage, offer a reasonable price for their products to their customers, and contribute to a better quality of life to everyone in the product chain.

Tars

[ThePhiant]

"

You'd rather I wax rhapsodic? I'm flattered when someone hints that I should talk more...especially when I'm correcting them. But I digress...

... Are they anti-American racists, because they only offered $15/hour? Those dispicable greedhead "imperialistic" (? but, I digress...) exploitive Nazi entrepeneurial bastards!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Are your friends aware you talk about them like that!

The aggies I refer to I know rather well. They want to pay a fair wage for manual labor. If they have a fault, it was trying to be supportive of American workers, even after they realized those "workers" wouldn't "work". Though the state requires a minimum of $8.00 plus change, these employers think the work is worth $10-$12/hour. They tried to hire Americans at that rate; couldn't find any serious takers. They raised the rate to $15 & were finally able to attract at least the dregs of the workforce. But even when paying a higher-than-fair wage the results of their American-worker wage investment resulted in very poor work quality

so I am still trying to grasp your logic, but I think I am getting it now.
if you are an english speaking "American", (FYI Mexicans are Americans too!) your friends, (see above) will pay $15 especially when you are able to do lousy and inconsistent work.
If you are a spanish speaking "American" your friends will pay $10/$12 but only if you work twice as hard and show up when needed for what Tars described as unhealthy, repetitive, physical labor.
now with this what Tars called "fair" wage, I must surmise they get some health benefits? do you friends guaranty them work? what about taxes does your friend take out taxes? and when he does, does he send this to Uncle Sam?

In desperation they turned to foreign workers, who were eager to do the work, and the going rate for which is $10/hour for ag work here in Sonoma County. the foreign workers were very happy to get the work, paid for at a fair ag wage.

I do like that "in desperation" bit.
In desperation they paid them 33% less!!!!!!!!!!!!!
but unlike before, THIS time you can call it a FAIR WAGE
I am glad this story has a happy ending
at least they didn't have to pay them a living wage
according to Mykill, 20 of them live in his old house in Forestville
spending their FAIR WAGE on rent

They made the fiscally prudent decision to hire foreign workers at a fair wage, offer a reasonable price for their products to their customers, and contribute to a better quality of life to everyone in the product chain.

TarsA better quality of life for EVERYONE??????????
hahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaa!
is that what you tell your self before you go to sleep?
are you sleeping with 20 other guys in an old rundown house with 1 bathroom?

[Jaime]

Although over all you make a good point here, and shed light on a perspective too often unseen, you slightly discredit your conclusion with the presumption that $30 would be necessary for quality, reliable American labor. Actually the rule of thumb for (often under-the-table) California farm labor is $15, to $20 or $25 which is considered good pay. Your hypothosis would be more accurate using $20 instead of $30.
With experience as an American/California farm worker myself, this is based on my personal experience. (Most farm jobs pay $15. And ironically usually the more pleasant jobs are those that pay more and the larger the farm the lower the pay rate, and the less motivated the workers.)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I hope that in the future the immigrant/Mexican populaion here will be more a respected integrated part of our community.

[Sabrina]

I have to say, if any of you on this thread are actually offering some kind of labor job for $15 or $20 per hour let us know. I'm looking for part time work as is my husband, 22 yr. old daughter, and 18 yr. old son. We are all American Citizen or legal to work. My daughter is currently working as much work as she can get and only gets a measly $11 per hour. She could REALLY use the raise to $15 to help make her ends meet, and she is VERY reliable. All of us will probably accept independent contractor status.

Although over all you make a good point here, and shed light on a perspective too often unseen, you slightly discredit your conclusion with the presumption that $30 would be necessary for quality, reliable American labor. Actually the rule of thumb for (often under-the-table) California farm labor is $15, to $20 or $25 which is considered good pay. Your hypothosis would be more accurate using $20 instead of $30.
With experience as an American/California farm worker myself, this is based on my personal experience. (Most farm jobs pay $15. And ironically usually the more pleasant jobs are those that pay more and the larger the farm the lower the pay rate, and the less motivated the workers.)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, I hope that in the future the immigrant/Mexican populaion here will be more a respected integrated part of our community.

[Tars]

I have to say, if any of you on this thread are actually offering some kind of labor job for $15 or $20 per hour let us know.

I think the $15/hour figure may be wishful thinking. True, construction companies were frequently paying that amount, for skilled laborers...before construction came to a screaming halt, along with the rest of the economy. A more common amount paid to day laborers in this area currently, is more like $10/hour....when they can get the work.

[lynn]

The problem with a lot of illegal labor available...is that it does lower the pay for certain jobs...And illegal workers do take certain jobs that could go to citizens sometimes...
We really do need to have only legal workers in this country...
And from what I understand, it use to be that 'migrant workers' are not the same as illegal workers...

[LenInSebastopol]

The problem with a lot of illegal labor available...is that it does lower the pay for certain jobs...And illegal workers do take certain jobs that could go to citizens sometimes...We really do need to have only legal workers in this country...And from what I understand, it use to be that 'migrant workers' are not the same as illegal workers...

You understand it correctly. Technically, folks from 'over there' are undocumented aliens. There ain't no papers. Once an individual comes before the authorities they become 'illegal aliens' and are subject to all laws, though unenforced here. Although I would be stopped in Arizona, I like what they did and hope they get more support (I know not from Wacco-Ville) but the issue is so complex it needs to be addressed post haste and with a firm will, which will not be forthcoming. People in need here should access jobs AND be paid a fair wage. Supporting the "slavery" the Mexicans bring over due to their cheaper labor is ethically and morally wrong. A worker needs a decent wage, living wage, and although I have distant cousins 'over there', it is more important that we take our 'over here' people. Let my cousins start their revolution.

[Tars]

The problem with a lot of illegal labor available...is that it does lower the pay for certain jobs...And illegal workers do take certain jobs that could go to citizens sometimes...

Another way of saying that is that by their presence foreign workers cause the actual value of some specific types of labor to become more apparent. These are the good ol' days too. Americans are learning that we are now in a global economy. Americans now have to compete for the full range of jobs with virtually every other worker on the planet.

We really do need to have only legal workers in this country...
And from what I understand, it use to be that 'migrant workers' are not the same as illegal workers...

They were called "guest workers" before they were "migrant workers".

The current SNAFU (Situation Now All ****ed UP) in Arizona provides a useful example of how not to address the situation. This is yet another situation where prohibition just doesn't address the problem. It seems to me to be a purely bureaucratic problem. Our country needs to find ways to enable "guest workers" to come here, get jobs, pay taxes on their work here, then return home. After which they can repeat the process if they desire.

I've hired, fired, supervised, and "coordinated" a fairly large variety of workers. My experience is that any native-born people who are willing to seriously work their asses off all day long, six days a week, for $10 an hour consistently, just like the "Mexicans", will be able to find work, They aren't "taking the jobs away from Americans", they're just doing it better for a lower price; our free competition and capitalist system at work.

[LenInSebastopol]

Another way of saying that is that by their presence foreign workers cause the actual value of some specific types of labor to become more apparent.

More apparent to.......what?
In English that mean that most are paid too much, or so you find, is that it?

These are the good ol' days too. Americans are learning that we are now in a global economy. Americans now have to compete for the full range of jobs with virtually every other worker on the planet.

I don't understand you. There are not the good old days, or are you being facetious? This competition you write of, is this also glib? As we have old dilapidated plants and exported all that once made us strong to countries that have new facilities, we make...what? buggy whips? tennis shoes? Your words are as magic to me as I don't understand them.

They were called "guest workers" before they were "migrant workers".
The current SNAFU (Situation Now All ****ed UP) in Arizona provides a useful example of how not to address the situation. This is yet another situation where prohibition just doesn't address the problem. It seems to me to be a purely bureaucratic problem. Our country needs to find ways to enable "guest workers" to come here, get jobs, pay taxes on their work here, then return home. After which they can repeat the process if they desire.

The situation in Arizona is desperate. The bureaucratic problem is made so by the feds that have ignored the issue for decades, going back at least to when the 1986 Reagan administration made Mexicans legal. How soon we ignore! We've got a ton of undocumented AND illegal aliens with the only response from the any gov't being sanctuary cities! It's getting past the Kum By Yah stage but the feds response was hiring 140 more cops to patrol a 3, 000 mile border. Great use of tax dollars.

I've hired, fired, supervised, and "coordinated" a fairly large variety of workers. My experience is that any native-born people who are willing to seriously work their asses off all day long, six days a week, for $10 an hour consistently, just like the "Mexicans", will be able to find work, They aren't "taking the jobs away from Americans", they're just doing it better for a lower price; our free competition and capitalist system at work. (BTW, why are you putting that word in quotes? Are they so distasteful that you need to simply separate you from "them".)

No, what you practiced is not true and complete capitalism. You just practiced greed, the worst part of all the economic systems. Can't blame you, being a fellow human being and all. But six days a week and working their asses off? That's not slave labor simply because you paid them sub par wages? You want the cheapest labor for the work, and I gather it is grunt stuff maybe to hard for US to do at that price. You could raise the wage to what is equitable and still hire Mexicans or citizens and pass the cost on to your boss; or absorb the hit yourself if it is you, since you are, presumably, better off than the labor you hired, or do it yourself, as a rugged American individualist (also associated with capitalism, no?)
Sorry, your writings are too much for me, in this Sonoma County without "*".

[Tars]

most are paid too much, or so you find, is that it?

Personally, I want that everyone should be paid as much as they want, so they'll be happy. Unfortunately, what I, or any other person wants, doesn't really matter. There are larger factors at work in this situation; factors that are more powerful than wage or immigration laws. It seems to be all about supply and demand. Keynesian Econ 101 says that as the price goes up, demand goes down. If there are people who are willing to do work for $10/hour, they will be in higher demand than people who will only do that work for twice that amount.

There are not the good old days, or are you being facetious?

Perhaps I was being too glib for you, sorry. By saying, "These are the good ol' days" I meant to infer that the the future of the labor/payment situation for American workers, whatever their skill level or pay rate, will get worse in the future. Supply and demand. American workers are used to an environment where they don't have to compete against the rest of the world for their jobs/pay rate. This is changing rapidly, and in the future it will most likely be more competitive than it is now.

what you practiced is not true and complete capitalism. You just practiced greed, the worst part of all the economic systems.

I'm not sure what the difference is between Greed and capitalism. Where one is, almost always the other is as well. Seems to be an immutable relationship, no matter what anyone wants.

You could raise the wage to what is equitable and still hire Mexicans or citizens and pass the cost on to your boss; or absorb the hit yourself if it is you, since you are, presumably, better off than the labor you hired, or do it yourself, as a rugged American individualist (also associated with capitalism, no?)

I don't understand what you are trying to get at here. But I think I'm like most American consumers of services, in this case manual labor. If I need some labor performed to get a project done, I have to decide whether or not I can afford to have it done. If I want to pay an American worker a $1000 to do the work, because that is what they want to be paid, I may have to wait to have the work done, or not have it done at all, because I don't have the $1000 to pay them. But I may only have $500 or $750 available to get the project done. If someone is willing to do the work for the $750 I have available, then I can get the work done. Supply and demand.

I should mention that I am ruled by supply and demand as well. I am losing customers to other businesses who are charging less for the same services as I am. I don't go out and gripe about it because griping is pointless. It's all about supply and demand, not about what I want. And these are the good ol' days too. I'm just like everyone else in the American economy. I'm hanging on, hoping that demand for my services will rise, so I can charge what I think my services are worth.

[lynn]

Our country needs to find ways to enable "guest workers" to come here, get jobs, pay taxes on their work here, then return home. After which they can repeat the process if they desire.

I would be for 'guest workers'...since we are already overpopulated in CA. and the whole southwest - if one cares about biodiversity, and the water problems that is....

I've hired, fired, supervised, and "coordinated" a fairly large variety of workers. My experience is that any native-born people who are willing to seriously work their asses off all day long, six days a week, for $10 an hour consistently, just like the "Mexicans", will be able to find work, They aren't "taking the jobs away from Americans", they're just doing it better for a lower price; our free competition and capitalist system at work.

They get the jobs for lower wages, or slave wages as it might as well be put - that's it...I don't think they do a better job - accept maybe in the fields...
As we know...all the jobs they do have been done by citizens before - including in the fields, and citizens still will do most of them - just not for slave wages...Yeah, it's the capitalist system at work...It's always needed slavery in one form or anther...
I do get tired of people saying how citizens won't do such jobs...That's a load of s**t - it's just a way for people to excuse themselves...Heck, I've done some of the jobs people say Americans won't do...and I know people who put themselves through college, and made livings, or pt. work doing such things...

The few times I needed yardwork done I always hired a citizen - I refused to hire an illegal...There's plenty of good workers out there for certain jobs...When people decide they are only going to pay the lowest wage possible, or slave wages - then they'll just hire an illegal...