Promoting the Occupational Health of Indigenous Farmworkers
- 402 Downloads
In the United States, approximately 78% of agricultural farmworkers are immigrants. In Oregon, a growing number of these farmworkers are indigenous and speak an indigenous language as their primary language. This group of farmworkers suffers from linguistic, cultural and geographic isolation and faces a unique set of challenges yet little has been done to identify their health needs. Using data from focus groups, partners from this community-based participatory research project examined indigenous farmworkers’ concerns regarding occupational injury and illness, experiences of discrimination and disrespect, and language and cultural barriers. The data revealed examples of disrespect and discrimination based on the languages and cultures of indigenous farmworkers, and a lack of basic occupational health and safety information and equipment. For example, participants mentioned that occupational safety information was inaccessible because it was rarely provided in indigenous languages, and participants felt there were no legal means to protect farmworkers from occupational hazards. Community-based strategies designed to address the occupational health status of farmworkers must consider the unique circumstances of those farmworkers who do not speak Spanish or English.
KeywordsIndigenous farmworkers Pesticides Community-based participatory research Occupational health Agricultural work Discrimination
This research was supported by a grant from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Grant #R25-OH008334-01). Special thanks to Sue Plaster and Maria Cortes del Rojas with Salud Medical Center in Woodburn, Oregon for their feedback on earlier drafts of this manuscript.
- 1.U.S. Department of Labor: Findings from the National Agricultural Workers Survey (NAWS) 2001–2002: a demographic and employment profile of United States farm workers. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office of Programmatic Policy; 2005.Google Scholar
- 2.U.S. Commission on Agricultural Workers: Report of the commission of agricultural workers. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1992.Google Scholar
- 3.Stephen L. Globalization, the state, and the creation of flexible indigenous workers: Mixtec farmworkers in Oregon. Urban Anthropol Stud Cult Syst World Econ Dev 2001;30:189–214.Google Scholar
- 4.Larson A. Migrant and seasonal farmworker enumeration profiles study: Oregon. Portland (OR): Department of Human Services Migrant Health Office; 2002.Google Scholar
- 7.Stephen L. Mixtec farmworkers in Oregon: linking labor and ethnicity through farmworker unions and hometown associations. In: Fox J, Rivera-Salgado G, editors. Indigenous Mexican Migrants in the United States. Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. San Diego: University of California; 2004. p. 179–202.Google Scholar
- 8.Oregon State Department of Consumer and Business Services (DCBS) Report Catalog [database on the Internet]. Salem (OR): Oregon State DCBS. C2006—[cited 2006 Feb 14]. Available from: http://www.4.cbs.state.or.us/ex/imd/reports/rpt/index.cfm.
- 9.National Safety Council: Injury Facts (2005–2006 Edition). Itasca, IL: NSC Press; 2006.Google Scholar
- 10.Bureau of Labor Statistics. National census of fatal occupational injuries in 2001. Accessed June 19th, 1006 at http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cfnr0008.pdf.
- 13.Arcury TA, Quandt SA. Occupational and environmental health risks in farm labor. Hum Organ 1998;57:331–4.Google Scholar
- 14.Reigart R, Robert J. Recognition, management of pesticide poisonings. 5th ed. Washington DC.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1999.Google Scholar
- 17.Thompson B, Coronado GD, Grossman JE, Puschel K, Solomon CC, Islas I, Curl CL, Shirai JH, Kissel JC, Fenske RA. Pesticide take-home pathway among children of agricultural workers. Stud Design Method Baseline Find 2003;45:42–53.Google Scholar
- 24.Krieger N. Discrimination and health. In: Berkman L, Kawachi I, editors. Social epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2000. p. 36–75.Google Scholar
- 27.Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures, techniques. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications; 1990.Google Scholar
- 28.Dye JF, Schatz IM, Rosenberg BA, Coleman ST: Constant comparison method: a kaleidoscope of data. The Qualitative Report [On-line serial] 2000; 4(1/2). (Accessed at http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4–1/dye.html).
- 29.Northwest Federation of Community Organizations. In our Own Words: Immigrants’ Experiences in the Northwest; 2006.Google Scholar
- 35.Yin R. Case-study research: design and methods. 2nd ed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications; 1994.Google Scholar
- 36.Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1998.Google Scholar