October 7, 2015
Should Whole Foods sell food made by inmates?
Whole Foods, finding itself at the center of a debate about the ethics of prison labor, has made the decision to stop selling foods that are produced by inmates.
Whole Foods has announced it will no longer sell goat cheese from Haystack Mountain Goat Dairy and tilapia from Quixotic Farming. The two companies work with Colorado Correctional Industries (CCI), a division of Colorado’s Department of Corrections.
The purpose of CCI is to help inmates develop working skills that may help them find jobs when their incarceration ends. Inmate recidivism is high across the country and the inability to find work is given by many returning convicts as a major fact in their failure to stay on the straight and narrow. CCI currently has about 1,600 inmates in its system, according to an audit by Colorado.
While many, including Whole Foods, support the goals of CCI, there are others who claim that the jobs given to inmates are a form of exploitation.
Source: Colorado Correctional Industries brochure
"People are incarcerated and then forced to work for pennies on the dollar — compare that to what the products are sold for," Michael Allen, founder of End Mass Incarceration Houston, told The Salt, an NPR blog.
According to a report on the Pacific Standard site, "Inmates are desperate for the work and the minuscule payment they get" from their CCI jobs. Two states not affiliated with CCI do not require that inmates be paid anything for their labor while they are in the corrections system.
Looking outside the U.S., it was alleged for years that Chinese companies used prisoners in labor camps to make products sold at prices much lower than similar items could be made here in the U.S. International pressure led the Chinese government to pledge it would discontinue the practice in 2013, although rumors persist that the practice continues to this day.
BrainTrust
Gene Detroyer
Professor, International Business, Guizhou University of Finance & Economics and University of Sanya, China.
Ian Percy
President, The Ian Percy Corporation
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Do you approve or disapprove of Whole Foods’ decision to stop selling products made by companies partnering with Colorado Correctional Industries (CCI)? Which side of the debate over use of prison labor do you think the consuming public is on?
Poll
The ability to create something and complete a job seems innate to me. The more opportunities someone has to do this, the better their self-esteem. I think this labor program is a far cry from the Brother Where Art Thou era prison gangs, though you wouldn’t know that from the “From Our Prison To Your Dinner Table” headline.
This is/was a pilot program that provided much more than cheap labor. We’ve seen such programs with prisoners working with horses and other livestock successfully rehab prisoners.
The alternative to not do anything but sit in a prison would be far more detrimental. My guess is this was PR problem more than a choice.
I think consumers don’t care, in the main, which means Whole Foods may be overreacting. Correctional theory is that doing something productive is conducive to the rehabilitation process. Helping defray the costs of incarceration by selling inmate-produced products can’t be a bad thing for the public. Whether you agree or disagree with the levels of incarceration we are experiencing is a different issue from whether selling products made by these companies is a good or bad idea.
So here is an idea.
Everyone agrees prisoners would more likely rather do something (and get paid for it) than do nothing. And rehabilitation — as opposed to mindless confinement — makes good sense, especially given the cost of maintaining what is the largest per capita prison population in the world and the current rates of recidivism. But prison labor is often hard to separate from slave labor, so what to do?
Why doesn’t Whole Foods support the program but augment the prisoner benefits? There are a number of viable approaches here. For example, Whole Foods could send additional monies to the prisoners’ accounts and/or set up outside bank accounts for participants so they would have something waiting for them when they got out.
Or they could underwrite educational programs — again — in or out of prison. And finally, they could offer participants jobs when they have served their sentences.
If steps like these were taken then I believe that not only could Whole Foods continue its support of programs such as CCI, they might actually create some long-lasting benefit for both the prisoners and society at large.
I don’t see any harm in the practice, and I don’t think the public would either, as long as there is adequate supervision of the inmates who are involved.
As for the pay, well, they are in prison after all … and I’d have a hard time arguing for “better pay for inmates.”
This strikes me as a good program for the inmates, as long as they are compensated properly. The focus of the program should not be to sell less expensive products but to teach skills and sell the products to the market competitively. However, anything short of realistic compensation starts approaching slave labor.
Forgive my cynicism, but the issue for the consuming public would not be the value of training or lack of compensation. I believe much of the consuming public would think that inmates should just “rot in their cells.”
Smells like political correctness to me. What a shame today that all of us in business have to worry what the fringe groups whine about. I for one am tired of it, and this program is helping the inmates become productive. What do the complainers want? Free five week vacations and overtime? Give me a break, and now Whole Foods caves in to this nonsense and the inmates lose a chance to become more adaptable to working when they get out of prison.
Didn’t I see a New York Times article the other day pointing out that one out of every 100 adults in the U.S. is in jail?
And so what exactly is the problem here? I don’t think it’s that we want prisoners to live out their lives in misery, especially since so many are in for very minor infractions. Heck 6,000 of them are being released shortly, and that’s just the first wave. That indicates someone is starting to think, in my opinion. The idea of learning marketable skills seems like a very good idea.
Is it that they do lousy work so it’s really a product quality issue? Doesn’t appear to be the case. Pride in one’s work is a huge motivator.
Then it gets down to “pay” which is really a misnomer; it’s barely a tip. So why doesn’t Whole Foods calculate at least a slightly higher pay level (e.g., 60 percent higher) and set that margin money aside, not to go directly into the inmate’s pocket, but to pay for other even more advanced development programs like manufacturing, technology, culinary arts, electrical engineering or whatever. Clearly this would increase possibilities for inmates, wouldn’t it? And that way Whole Foods is rewarded both economically and spiritually as well. Everyone wins.
I did not see a specific reference to any money going to the correctional system so I will ASSUME some of it does go to offset some of the cost. I also assume that the inmates are not forced but volunteer for the opportunity. As for compensation I think the inmates should get some for their immediate use and some set aside for their release. It is not Whole Foods’ responsibility to do so but rather the company benefiting from the labor and the correctional department. Throw in an education and/or job training program and it sounds like a good start on the recidivism problem.
If Whole Foods is looking for attaboys on this decision, they certainly don’t get one from me and they seem not to be getting many from the general public, either. Employing prison “labor,” when it apparently involves both helping inmates learn skills, and helping defray some of the financial costs to taxpayers of incarceration while giving the inmates something interesting to do while serving time, seems about as proactively progressive and logical and socially healthy as anything imaginable. This is a strange and disappointing move for Whole Foods.
Whole Foods seems to have knee jerked on this one. This is a great opportunity for the inmates on several levels. It keeps them busy, teaches them something, makes them responsible and earns them some income.
Come on now folks, when you subtract ALL of your living expenses like food, housing, utilities, clothes, no need for car, no need for insurance, what does the average person’s take-away look like? We’re talking money that goes straight to their bottom line. You can hardly call that pennies on the dollar now can you?
Whole Foods should rethink this decision, for my 2 cents.
Tricky public relations problem here. How to provide an opportunity to inmates without exploiting them unfairly? Also, the for-profit prison industry and its suppliers are not known for their high ethical stance.
I think Whole Foods (and others who participate) could set up a trust fund for employed prisoners that let them earn fair wages that may be applied toward fines, legal costs and court-ordered victim compensation. Access to these accounts could be made conditional upon good behavior and compliance with parole.
For now, I’m just sorry I’ll miss my chance to purchase a Whole Foods tofu cake with a file baked in.
The problem—which every one of the commenters seem to have missed—is that “free” (or at least drastically reduced cost) labor competes against normal labor, and tends to drive down the wages of the latter (the degree to which, of course, depends upon how much of it there is). It wasn’t for nothing that the traditional role of prison labor was in non-competitive industries like license-plate making. The solution would seem to be to raise the prisoners’ wages to market rate, with the bulk of it going back to the state to defer incarceration costs.
As usual, WF is in the panic over nothing mode. Training inmates to do a real task and run a real business is a great way to help make sure that they are less likely to end up back in prison.
Sitting in a cell is ZERO $$$. Working for a low wage is fine—especially when our taxes feed you, cloth you, etc. Their pay is irrelevant. The opportunity is the value.
Cut the over-reaction. Can WF type people act logical and normal for just a little while?
The quick view from the Left (End Mass Incarceration and National Public Radio), is to call out the “evil” of China, and point to exploitation of the prison population. Ridiculous thinking and logic on their part.
If companies work with an organization like Colorado Correctional Industries, and take the time to learn of the overall objectives of supporting the inmate populations’ interest and need to learn new skills, build their self-esteem, and prepare them for a more productive life once out on parole, and we thus lower the recidivism rate by meaningful percentages, businesses should be applauded and encouraged, as opposed to being embarrassed and subsequently ducking the “bad publicity.”
I live in an affluent community, Naples, Florida, in which a charitable organization which I support hires paroled convicts for a period of several months. This organization collects the community’s contributions of clothing, furniture, cars, and household goods. The parolees work for minimum wage during that period, sorting and organizing the warehouse goods, picking up larger contributions, and then placing the items in a retail showroom (an automobile dealer contributed the showroom that is near the center of town).
Would the NPR call this exploitation? Or would they rather that the parolees go out and find work on their own, if they could, without solid supervision?
People make mistakes in their lives. If you get the calling, lend them a hand. But don’t let anyone tell you that you are exploiting their labor. The CCI program is a sound one. It’s a shame that Whole Foods has been embarrassed to back away from it.
Absolutely sell products made by inmates. It gives them a purpose. Often people complain about their low wages, but after all, they do get free housing, food, and health care. So in reality, they are doing quite well.
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
The ability to create something and complete a job seems innate to me. The more opportunities someone has to do this, the better their self-esteem. I think this labor program is a far cry from the Brother Where Art Thou era prison gangs, though you wouldn’t know that from the “From Our Prison To Your Dinner Table” headline.
This is/was a pilot program that provided much more than cheap labor. We’ve seen such programs with prisoners working with horses and other livestock successfully rehab prisoners.
The alternative to not do anything but sit in a prison would be far more detrimental. My guess is this was PR problem more than a choice.
I think consumers don’t care, in the main, which means Whole Foods may be overreacting. Correctional theory is that doing something productive is conducive to the rehabilitation process. Helping defray the costs of incarceration by selling inmate-produced products can’t be a bad thing for the public. Whether you agree or disagree with the levels of incarceration we are experiencing is a different issue from whether selling products made by these companies is a good or bad idea.
So here is an idea.
Everyone agrees prisoners would more likely rather do something (and get paid for it) than do nothing. And rehabilitation — as opposed to mindless confinement — makes good sense, especially given the cost of maintaining what is the largest per capita prison population in the world and the current rates of recidivism. But prison labor is often hard to separate from slave labor, so what to do?
Why doesn’t Whole Foods support the program but augment the prisoner benefits? There are a number of viable approaches here. For example, Whole Foods could send additional monies to the prisoners’ accounts and/or set up outside bank accounts for participants so they would have something waiting for them when they got out.
Or they could underwrite educational programs — again — in or out of prison. And finally, they could offer participants jobs when they have served their sentences.
If steps like these were taken then I believe that not only could Whole Foods continue its support of programs such as CCI, they might actually create some long-lasting benefit for both the prisoners and society at large.
I don’t see any harm in the practice, and I don’t think the public would either, as long as there is adequate supervision of the inmates who are involved.
As for the pay, well, they are in prison after all … and I’d have a hard time arguing for “better pay for inmates.”
This strikes me as a good program for the inmates, as long as they are compensated properly. The focus of the program should not be to sell less expensive products but to teach skills and sell the products to the market competitively. However, anything short of realistic compensation starts approaching slave labor.
Forgive my cynicism, but the issue for the consuming public would not be the value of training or lack of compensation. I believe much of the consuming public would think that inmates should just “rot in their cells.”
Smells like political correctness to me. What a shame today that all of us in business have to worry what the fringe groups whine about. I for one am tired of it, and this program is helping the inmates become productive. What do the complainers want? Free five week vacations and overtime? Give me a break, and now Whole Foods caves in to this nonsense and the inmates lose a chance to become more adaptable to working when they get out of prison.
Didn’t I see a New York Times article the other day pointing out that one out of every 100 adults in the U.S. is in jail?
And so what exactly is the problem here? I don’t think it’s that we want prisoners to live out their lives in misery, especially since so many are in for very minor infractions. Heck 6,000 of them are being released shortly, and that’s just the first wave. That indicates someone is starting to think, in my opinion. The idea of learning marketable skills seems like a very good idea.
Is it that they do lousy work so it’s really a product quality issue? Doesn’t appear to be the case. Pride in one’s work is a huge motivator.
Then it gets down to “pay” which is really a misnomer; it’s barely a tip. So why doesn’t Whole Foods calculate at least a slightly higher pay level (e.g., 60 percent higher) and set that margin money aside, not to go directly into the inmate’s pocket, but to pay for other even more advanced development programs like manufacturing, technology, culinary arts, electrical engineering or whatever. Clearly this would increase possibilities for inmates, wouldn’t it? And that way Whole Foods is rewarded both economically and spiritually as well. Everyone wins.
I did not see a specific reference to any money going to the correctional system so I will ASSUME some of it does go to offset some of the cost. I also assume that the inmates are not forced but volunteer for the opportunity. As for compensation I think the inmates should get some for their immediate use and some set aside for their release. It is not Whole Foods’ responsibility to do so but rather the company benefiting from the labor and the correctional department. Throw in an education and/or job training program and it sounds like a good start on the recidivism problem.
If Whole Foods is looking for attaboys on this decision, they certainly don’t get one from me and they seem not to be getting many from the general public, either. Employing prison “labor,” when it apparently involves both helping inmates learn skills, and helping defray some of the financial costs to taxpayers of incarceration while giving the inmates something interesting to do while serving time, seems about as proactively progressive and logical and socially healthy as anything imaginable. This is a strange and disappointing move for Whole Foods.
Whole Foods seems to have knee jerked on this one. This is a great opportunity for the inmates on several levels. It keeps them busy, teaches them something, makes them responsible and earns them some income.
Come on now folks, when you subtract ALL of your living expenses like food, housing, utilities, clothes, no need for car, no need for insurance, what does the average person’s take-away look like? We’re talking money that goes straight to their bottom line. You can hardly call that pennies on the dollar now can you?
Whole Foods should rethink this decision, for my 2 cents.
Tricky public relations problem here. How to provide an opportunity to inmates without exploiting them unfairly? Also, the for-profit prison industry and its suppliers are not known for their high ethical stance.
I think Whole Foods (and others who participate) could set up a trust fund for employed prisoners that let them earn fair wages that may be applied toward fines, legal costs and court-ordered victim compensation. Access to these accounts could be made conditional upon good behavior and compliance with parole.
For now, I’m just sorry I’ll miss my chance to purchase a Whole Foods tofu cake with a file baked in.
The problem—which every one of the commenters seem to have missed—is that “free” (or at least drastically reduced cost) labor competes against normal labor, and tends to drive down the wages of the latter (the degree to which, of course, depends upon how much of it there is). It wasn’t for nothing that the traditional role of prison labor was in non-competitive industries like license-plate making. The solution would seem to be to raise the prisoners’ wages to market rate, with the bulk of it going back to the state to defer incarceration costs.
As usual, WF is in the panic over nothing mode. Training inmates to do a real task and run a real business is a great way to help make sure that they are less likely to end up back in prison.
Sitting in a cell is ZERO $$$. Working for a low wage is fine—especially when our taxes feed you, cloth you, etc. Their pay is irrelevant. The opportunity is the value.
Cut the over-reaction. Can WF type people act logical and normal for just a little while?
The quick view from the Left (End Mass Incarceration and National Public Radio), is to call out the “evil” of China, and point to exploitation of the prison population. Ridiculous thinking and logic on their part.
If companies work with an organization like Colorado Correctional Industries, and take the time to learn of the overall objectives of supporting the inmate populations’ interest and need to learn new skills, build their self-esteem, and prepare them for a more productive life once out on parole, and we thus lower the recidivism rate by meaningful percentages, businesses should be applauded and encouraged, as opposed to being embarrassed and subsequently ducking the “bad publicity.”
I live in an affluent community, Naples, Florida, in which a charitable organization which I support hires paroled convicts for a period of several months. This organization collects the community’s contributions of clothing, furniture, cars, and household goods. The parolees work for minimum wage during that period, sorting and organizing the warehouse goods, picking up larger contributions, and then placing the items in a retail showroom (an automobile dealer contributed the showroom that is near the center of town).
Would the NPR call this exploitation? Or would they rather that the parolees go out and find work on their own, if they could, without solid supervision?
People make mistakes in their lives. If you get the calling, lend them a hand. But don’t let anyone tell you that you are exploiting their labor. The CCI program is a sound one. It’s a shame that Whole Foods has been embarrassed to back away from it.
Absolutely sell products made by inmates. It gives them a purpose. Often people complain about their low wages, but after all, they do get free housing, food, and health care. So in reality, they are doing quite well.