How Women Work JIMS - Volume 5, number 1, 2011 How Women Work: The Symbolic and Material Reproduction of Migrant Labor Camps in United States Agribusiness Robert CARLEY, Hilario MOLINA II Abstract. This article analyzes gender exploitation in Mexican and Central American migrant farm worker camps in the U.S through small group interactions. We describe how gender exploitation and oppression is transmitted through the social fabric of the camp. We argue that the camp produces an endogenous system of social interaction, which maintains uneven gender relationships. Our data is based on observations of twenty-five women and girls in three labor camps in North Carolina. Research was conducted over a period of six weeks. We found that women who served as the primary bearers of patrimonial authority best maintained the camp community. We conclude that women who successfully reproduce the authority structure gain social status in the camps and are more likely to stay. Keywords: labor, immigration, capitalism, agriculture, women, exploitation, gender theory, significant symbols Introduction A good part of the cultural and social norms of the United States were founded, in no large part, through the cultivation and the expansion of agriculture. For example, the Civil War was a conflict over the issue of cheap labor between the plantation states in the southern part of the United States and emerging industries in the north (Silberman, 2003). Generations of African Americans enslaved in the southern United States experienced exploitation and cruel working and living conditions well after the end of the Civil War. Given the racial ideology in America during this time, their maltreatment simply didn’t register at the level of either general worker’s concerns or a larger public moral sentiment. However, during the Great Depression and mass migration of “Okies” and “Arkies” to California’s agricultural sector resulted in general public outrage. The mistreatment of White 37 Robert CARLEY, Hilario MOLINA II JIMS - Volume 5, number 1, 2011 workers by foreman and farmers along with the sub-standard living and working conditions of these White Americans was popularly portrayed in John Steinbeck’s novel Grapes of Wrath published in 1940. When the United States was young, Mexican labor was also responsible for a good deal of agricultural production in what now comprises the southwestern United States; now, the migration of Whites and African Americans into the farm- work sector has been replaced by Mexican and Mexican American labor (Gonzalez, 2000). These migrant farm workers find themselves in working and living conditions similar to their predecessors. Farmers have a vested interest in the maintenance of a mass-migrant system of labor because it permits them to exploit farm workers while maintaining high profits and without the additional need to regularly invest in new technology. Given the history of labor exploitation within this industry, why has there not been mass sustained labor unrest? The most likely explanation is that the agricultural industry encourages patrimonial authority to flourish within the migrant farm worker communities—labor camps. Differences from Migration and Labor Literature Previous studies on migrant labor focus on economic relations even where gender is a salient variable (Donato et al., 2006; Hondagneu-Sotelo, 1994, 2001, 2003a, 2003b; Mahler and Pessar, 2001b; Pessar and Mahler, 2003) or they focus on the migrant experiences of specific ethnic-national groups (Castellanos and Boehm 2008; Boehm 2008; Karjanen 2008; Castellanos 2008; Seif 2008). Our analysis looks at migrant labor, in the context of a single labor camp (where ethnic- nationalities are multiple but linguistic communities are shared) from a cultural, communal, symbolic perspective. We also consider the role of economics as the primary context that comprises the social formation of the camp. Our theoretical focus is oriented around: 1. Gender formation: In our work women are seen as agents of the social structure and not as ancillary to it. We view the role of women as central to maintaining the authority structure in the camp. 2. Theory of power/authority: Our analysis expands the definition of power beyond the social and economic structure to encompass culture and cultural meaning through symbolic interaction. In doing so, we explain how power works within the context of the camp and to the advantage of the farmer/owner who 38 How Women Work JIMS - Volume 5, number 1, 2011 employs the camp as an aggregate labor force. 3. Level of analysis/empirical focus: We focus our analysis at the level of the camp and not “labor force” and are able, then, to understand labor at a cultural and communal level not, exclusively, as a capital-labor relation. Our theoretical focus is on ethnic identity, custom/tradition, language and symbols and interaction. The un-evenness of capital labor relations provide a descriptive context and are discussed in detail in the theoretical overview section Our theoretical perspective (discussed in the section subsequent to the “theoretical overview” and entitled “theoretical orientation”) is, in many ways, unique to this literature. It relies, primarily, on symbolic-interactionism, but also includes other feminist-based theoretical approaches that discuss symbols and power. The total theoretical framework links culture, tradition and symbols to gender and power, specifically gender and the analysis of micro-power (Mead 1932/1962; Douglas 1966; Dalla Costa 1973; Irigaray 1977; Weber 1978; Hartman 1981; Kristeva 1982; Butler 1990; Rubin 1997). In the following two sections we discuss or theoretical framework in detail. Theoretical Overview In Economy and Society (1978) Max Weber describes the traditional authority of patrimonial system as having the capacity to preserve legitimate degrees of authority within a given community. Through traditional authority migrant farm workers are kept in a subordinate position; they “freely” subsume themselves under the total authority of the farmer and the institution. As a result, the farmer’s pursuit for profit in the United States enables him to have a “hands- off” approach with regard to the management of migrant farm worker communities. Contained within the patrimonial system, families exercise authority though a patriarchal structure, in this case ironically, within a larger society that advocates gender equality. The socio-economic structure of small farms depends upon the capital- labor relation and, hence, the exploitation of labor and extraction of surplus value can be understood as a legitimate and automatic form of systemic authority. This authority structure is not visible but, rather, a given aspect of the social structure that limits choice within its own terms (Przworski 1985). Labor exploitation has a pervasive structural presence that is legal and economic; it resides within the very foundation of modern civil society. The extraction of surplus value from labor is a 39 Robert CARLEY, Hilario MOLINA II JIMS - Volume 5, number 1, 2011 right to those who employ labor power and that surplus is converted into profit. Profit represents the difference between costs, including labor, and earnings. According to Karl Marx, capitalist institutions profit from the economy at a greater degree by investing in variable over fixed or constant capital at the beginning of a production cycle. This changes with investment, capital concentration and centralization however, in the context of this study, investment is largely represented in investment in labor power alone. As a result, when variable capital is higher than fixed capital, more value is produced and, by extension, a greater potentiality for profit (Marx, 1970: 209). Over time, this process becomes more complex. The question remains, why would capitalists seek to introduce new technologies into the production process if it would, ultimately, result in—on the one hand—greater input expenditures and—on the other hand—a lower rate of profit on capital invested? Marx discusses this issue further in Chapters 8 and 25 of Capital. In short, producers revolutionize their means of production, within a given branch of production, in the interest of competing for ever-greater shares of a particular market. Producers often gain the lion-share of profit by introducing a new product onto the market. However, over time, when the use of this new innovation in production becomes available to other producers, the average rate of profit declines. Furthermore, and most importantly, the introduction of this new product and the concomitant productive technologies forces innovation on the part of other producers with the compounded threat of overall success to an individual producers business. And, finally, Marx points out that while the average rate of profit on capital invested at the beginning of production cycles within a given branch of production may decline, the volume of profit in the economy will increase since it is the case that more output can be produced and sold in a given period, using new technology. However, in the context of this study, the camps were either subsidiary producers for larger agribusiness or small-scale “petite- bourgeoisie” farming enterprises that relied upon a large-scale, cheap, and compliant labor force. In other words, agribusiness allows for certain sectors of production to innovate while others may be profitable, in a “primitive” sense, by exploiting cheap labor through certain tasks: e.g. picking and packing. Hence, in this case, labor power represents the primary means of investment, on the one hand, but also it is the primary function of people in the camps and, hence, it is also the primary social factor in this study. 40 How Women Work JIMS - Volume 5, number 1, 2011 Since the majority of the migrant farm workers are first generation immigrants, a patrimonial authority structure does not seem as unfamiliar as the language or customs of the host society. Therefore, a patrimonial system permits migrant farm worker men to govern the affairs of the family in the camp. Through patrimonial authority the traditional norms govern the affairs of the community.