667
submitted 1 year ago by tree@lemmy.zip to c/politics@lemmy.world

Incarcerated people work for cents on the dollar or for free to make goods you use.


Brittany White, 37, was arrested for marijuana trafficking in Alabama in 2009. She went to trial to contest the charges — after all, just a year prior the United States president had admitted, cheekily, that inhaling was “the point.”

She was sentenced to 20 years. But her sentence was meted out in portions, based on good behavior, and she, posing no discernable public safety risk for selling a plant increasingly legal in states all across the U.S., was allowed to work on the outside.

She got a job at a Burger King.

But the state of Alabama took a significant portion of her paltry minimum wage. “They charged me $25 a week for transportation,” she tells Truthdig. “And they take away 40% of your check. It’s egregious to be making minimum wage, and then to have so much taken away by the state.”

Minimum wage in Alabama is $7.25.

Still, White considers herself lucky. Even her paltry earnings were better than nothing. She was able to purchase soap from the commissary. The prison-provided soap is full of lye, she says, which you definitely do not want near your private parts.

Many stuck behind bars are forced to work for cents per hour, or for nothing. While corporate culprits are commonly blamed for exploiting the labor of incarcerated people, it’s actually primarily states and the federal government who take advantage, and make the public unwittingly complicit.

Got a car? Your license plate was likely made by inmates. In New York, inmates make the trash cans. High school desks are often made on the inside; so are glasses for Medicare patients.

Many stuck behind bars are forced to work for cents per hour, or for nothing, for corporations, states and the federal government.

Companies like CorCraft in New York manage labor in the state’s prisons. They’re funded by the state’s budget, and boast they’re New York state’s preferred choice for “office chairs, desks, panel systems, classroom furniture, cleaning, vehicle, and personal care supplies, and more.”

“Summer Sizzles with Classroom Furniture from Corcraft,” their website declares.

They also claim to help in “the department’s overall mission to prepare incarcerated individuals for release through skill development, work ethic, respect and responsibility.”

The people behind the “sizzling” furniture beg to differ.

In the 12 years he was incarcerated in New York state, Dyjuan Tatro was forced to work a variety of jobs, from making desks to license plates. “At the end, I didn’t have a resume,” he tells Truthdig. “I didn’t get one thing to help me be successful on the outside from the prison. No resume, no job experience… Just $40 and a bus ticket — from 12 years of prison labor, I couldn’t use any of it to get a meaningfully paying job.”

Bianca Tylek, the executive director of Worth Rises, an organization devoted to eradicating unjust prison practices, goes further. “It’s slavery,” she tells Truthdig.

The 13th Amendment, which ended slavery, left an important exception: it’s still legal to garnish wages, or more commonly, refuse to pay incarcerated people for forced labor. “As a result, incarcerated people live in slavery-like conditions,” Tylek adds.

Of course, there are nuances. For example, trading community service, like, say, picking up trash, in exchange for not serving time, is one example of a noncarceral approach. But incarceration changes the equation. Tylek notes that it’s not just about the miniscule (or nonexistent) wages. It’s compelling people to work, with the alternative being a stint in solitary and other punishments, like refusing to let them see relatives, consequences that are meted out by guards. She also notes that they have to work in dangerous trades they may not be trained for, including industrial-sized laundries or ovens.

Despite what someone did or did not do, to end up behind bars, coercing them into performing free labor is wrong, Tylek notes. “I like to ask people the question, ‘Under what circumstances is slavery OK?” she tells Truthdig.

“If you can’t answer that question, the answer is, slavery is never OK.”


top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] fubo@lemmy.world 81 points 1 year ago

If we're gonna have prisons at all ...

It makes a great deal of sense to offer prisoners pay for doing things to maintain the prison: cleaning the floors, washing the uniforms, leading the singing circle or whatever. That sets them up as members of a self-supporting unit, where you can actually be rewarded for doing things that benefit the other people around you. Then when they get out, they're accustomed to being a person who makes things better for those around them.

But it doesn't make sense to put the prisoners out into the non-prison world as competition for free workers, and then claw back their wages. That sets prisoners up as underclass members of general society which is exactly the condition that leads to a lot of people becoming criminals in the first place. And then when they get out, they've already been "out" as slaves of McDonald's, so that's how they and the world are accustomed to relating to each other.

[-] Skiv@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

That sets prisoners up as underclass members of general society which is exactly the condition that leads to a lot of people becoming criminals in the first place

That's the unspoken point. The system is already so drunk on the exploitation of slave labor to the point that all involved actively seek to encourage recidivism. They want all of us for any reason they can shit out.

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Don't forget that the same prison companies that do this are publicly traded. Recidivism isn't just profitable, it's in the interest of shareholders.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Recidivism is a feature of the current system, not a bug. The prison system is not interested in reforming anyone into respectable members of society; they're only interested in making as much of a buck off of as many inmates as possible, preferably those of the right color. Society is rigged against anyone with a criminal record by design, on all kinds of different levels, to keep anyone previously convicted as an underclass member of society.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

But it doesn’t make sense to put the prisoners out into the non-prison world as competition for free workers

Makes a lot of sense if you're a piece of shit boss who wants to pay less than minimum wage.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Estiar@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

Just because it's legal, doesn't make it right.

I never understood why prisoners get paid so little. They are usually there because they don't have financial stability in the first place. Wouldn't a bit of savings help put them on better footing so not to turn back to crime?

[-] A7thStone@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Recidivism is the point, also known as it's not a bug it's a feature.

[-] torpak@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago

But who would make cheap license plates then. Who would pay for the profits of the private prison owners or all the predatory companies providing "services" for the prisons and prisoners. I would bet, that most people in Alabama prisons are not white, so you really think Alabama law makers give a rats ass about their prospecs after prison?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Dirk@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

They're there because they commit crimes. Jail isn't a hotel.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Could it possibly be, just possibly, that there is a step between paying prisoners far less than minimum wage and making prison like a hotel?

load more comments (27 replies)
[-] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

Sweet summer child....

[-] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Many of them are there because they've committed crimes of poverty (stealing necessities, passing bad checks for necessities, "trespassing" due to homelessness). Or because they did something that everyone does (like smoke weed) but only poor and/or people of color are incarcerated for. Poor people are much more likely to be arrested and being arrested makes people more likely to be poor:

People who enter the criminal justice system are overwhelmingly poor. Two-thirds detained in jails report annual incomes under $12,000 prior to arrest. Incarceration contributes to poverty by creating employment barriers; reducing earnings and decreasing economic security through criminal debt, fees and fines; making access to public benefits difficult or impossible; and disrupting communities where formerly incarcerated people reside.

https://www.masslegalservices.org/system/files/library/The_Relationship_between_Poverty_and_Mass_Incarceration.pdf

[-] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

the choice always comes down to "do you want less crime?" or "do you want the same amount of crime but to punish people who aren't white by continuing slavery?"

because the solution to the first is to stop doing the second

and you can argue about it, but unfortunately all scientific studies support that conclusion. So the question actually is "do you want less crime, as borne out by reality or do you want the same amount of crime but fantasize it is helping society somehow to punish people who are overwhelmingly not white with slavery?"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Chozo@kbin.social 25 points 1 year ago

Just FYI, don't post the full article in the post body when sharing on Lemmy. That's how you get C&D letters sent to your instance admins for copyright infringement. Just post a snippet of the relevant text to stay within fair use.

[-] tree@lemmy.zip 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If an admin tells me to do so I will, but you don't need to backseat my posting, I will not make people open the article to read it if they don't want to, I'm gonna assume you're not a lawyer or an admin for that matter, just a fan of cooooooooopyright, like oh no, I totally believe in intellectual property, such a cool concept and I'm sure the people at TruthDig are big mad their work is reaching a wider audience

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's one thing to freeboot an article in a world where journalism is already dying due to lack of funding.

It's another thing to have a shit attitude on top of it.

I will not make people open the article to read it if they don’t want to

Then don't post it in the first place?

I’m sure the people at TruthDig are big mad their work is reaching a wider audience

Literally the opposite effect is happening when you do this. Fewer people will click the link, resulting in less traffic to the site.

[-] neanderthal@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

I can't believe people are up voting that I'm not a fan of some aspects of IP law, but it has its place and isn't all bad. It protects GPL software projects, for one.

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

He's probably 15 and thinks he's really doing something by stealing other people's content.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] neanderthal@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

You are opening up the instance to legal trouble.

I bet you like buying X brand of something knowing what to expect. Guess what, trademark law makes that possible. Not all IP law is bad.

[-] tree@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Then an admin or mod will tell me to stop doing it, you are just a fan of IP not an admin or a mod, if it becomes a problem I'm sure I'll hear about it from them directly

[-] neanderthal@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

You don't seem to get it. It isn't the admin or mods I'd worry about. It is getting sued by one of the many media outlets whose articles you have posted in the entirety. Remember when Napster was a thing and teenagers were getting sued by RIAA?

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

And you're a fan of content theft. What's your point?

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Copyright infringement is not theft. It is copyright infringement.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] gregorum@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All things considered, since prisoners almost always get some form of compensation (albeit very little) it’s technically indentured servitude which is tantamount to slavery. My only quibble is that, however, and I find it just as reprehensible.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] SCB@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Of course, there are nuances. For example, trading community service, like, say, picking up trash, in exchange for not serving time, is one example of a noncarceral approach.

This is the way, and the reason the amendment shouldnt be changed.

The vast majority of prisoners should be out of prison, because prison is a barbaric relic of the Middle ages, and should do compulsory work for the state for minimum wage while living at home.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 10 points 1 year ago

This is why the Constitution also allows for itself to be amended. So bullshit like this can be changed. It's just pretty fucking hard.

[-] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

13th amendment

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

It’s still better than what the weegers went through. /s

[-] Estiar@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

This has nothing to do with them. Go back to lemmygrad.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. Recognize the hypocrisy.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago

Well yeah. It's right there in the 13th. Add a 28th.

Although you should be aware that the 27th says "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." Just in case you were in any doubt as to what kind of day-to-day "running a country" things they actually care about.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
667 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19089 readers
3477 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS