The Prison as Market: How Penal Labor Systems Reproduce Inequality Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Gibson-Light, Michael Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction, presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 30/09/2021 20:33:03 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/633147 THE PRISON AS MARKET: HOW PENAL LABOR SYSTEMS REPRODUCE INEQUALITY by Michael Gibson-Light __________________________ Copyright © Michael Gibson-Light 2019 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the SCHOOL OF SOCIOLOGY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2019 THEUNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As membersof the DissertationC ommittee.we certifytha t we have read the dissertation preparedby Michael Gibson-Light,tit led The Prison as Market: How Prison Labor Systems ReproduceInequality a nd recommend thatit be acceptedas fulfillingthe dissertation requirementfo r theDe gree of Doctor of Philosophy. Date:4/5/2019 Date: 4/511019 Date:4/511019 Date: 4/512019 Date: 4/511019 Final approvaland acceptanceof this dissertation is contingent upon thecandidate's submission of thefinal copies of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I herebycertify that I have readthis dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend thatit be accepted asfulfilling the dissertation requirement Date: 4/S/2019 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Completing this project was at times physically and emotionally demanding. It was also enlightening in both a proverbial sense (as I witnessed the endurance of the human spirit amidst captivity) and a Lovecraftian sense (as I examined an institution of near- incomprehensible reach that remains obscured to many). As always, this was not a solo endeavor. Firstly, I’m grateful to the prisoners who let me into their lives and enthusiastically offered up their experiences and insights. I hope that they value the perspective of this outsider. Additionally, I am appreciative of the administrators and staffers of my anonymous prison fieldsite who allowed me the opportunity to conduct this research. I must also recognize the faculty committee that guided me. Jeff Sallaz let me take a risk on this project. He also taught me ethnography and helped me juggle theoretical lenses. Kathleen Schwartzman helped pull me out of the weeds when I got too entangled in ethnographic detail and risked losing sight of the macro. Ron Breiger encouraged me to be creative, schooled me in theory, and regularly made himself available for a chat and a coffee. Jenny Carlson pushed this project forward with tough questions and kept my reading list full. Phil Goodman shared unique and invaluable insights into the challenges of prison ethnography. He was also quick to respond to methodological, professional, and other inquiries from seemingly every corner of the globe. And, though she was not a 3 member of this committee, Jody Miller provided the spark that would become this project during my time at UMSL. I appreciate you all. Funding from NSF helped me to code interviews and made it possible for me to collect online and archival data post-fieldwork to contextualize my site in the broader Sunbelt penal field. It also enabled me to hire an undergraduate research assistant, Korina Lopez, who was an amazing help. Additionally, awards and press assistance from ASA and ASC helped me to more widely distribute findings that emerged from this research. A special acknowledgement is due to Karyn for not only helping me think through countless questions that emerged in this research (and raising important ones herself), but also for making sure I took a few breaks. I’m also indebted to her and to my family (Mom, Dad, Jordan, Alex, Tif!) for encouraging me when I decided to pursue this work and for rooting for me. And, for all kinds of support, cheers to the best cohort: “As I look around, they don’t do it like my clique.” In closing, I couldn’t possibly list all of the other friends, peers, mentors, and family at University of Arizona, in St. Louis, and everywhere else that helped me through this process or helped me get here in the years leading up to it. Please know that I am grateful. Thank you. 4 DEDICATION For the prisoner. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ……………………………………………………………………………….. 10 INTRODUCTION: Prison Labor & Stratification in the Era of Mass Incarceration …………………………. 11 The Prison & Inequality …………………………………………………………... 17 Bridging the Gap: Studying Prison (Work) Experiences ………………………….21 Penal Labor in the United States …………………………………………………..24 Methodological Approach: The Ethnography of Penal Labor ……………………. 31 Linking Prison Structures & Social Reproduction ……………………………….. 41 Linking the Prison Labor Market & Carceral Experiences ………………………. 44 Summary Remarks ………………………………………………………………... 47 CHAPTER 1: A ‘City within the City’: The Prison as Employment System ………………………………49 The Conventional View: Prisoner Labor as Monolithic ………………………….. 49 A Trip Through Sunbelt State Penitentiary: Prisoner Labor as Diverse …………..53 Evaluating Prison Jobs: Prisoner Labor as Stratified …………………………….. 58 Folk Rankings of Prison Jobs …………………………………………………….. 73 Four Prison (Field)Work Sites ……………………………………………………. 78 Discussion: Structure, Stratification, & Sorting ………………………………….. 112 CHAPTER 2: Capitals & Punishment: The Sorting of Working Prisoners ……………………………… 115 Taking Bourdieu to Prison ………………………………………………………... 118 Prison, Labor, & Ethnoracial Order ………………………………………………. 120 6 Access to Prison Programming …………………………………………………… 123 Capital & Skill in Prison Job Allocation …………………………………………. 129 Race, Ethnicity, & Nationality in Prison Job Allocation …………………………. 145 Discussion: Teaching Rocks to Sink ……………………………………………... 156 CHAPTER 3: The Dignity of Working Inmates: Prisoner Strategies and Workplace Games …………… 160 Work Games & the Pursuit of Dignity …………………………………………… 163 Indignity at Sunbelt State Penitentiary …………………………………………… 168 Coping Games …………………………………………………………………….. 177 Resistance Games ………………………………………………………………… 186 Professionalism Game ……………………………………………………………. 193 Discussion: Games, Dignity, & Consent …………………………………………. 205 CHAPTER 4: I Owe My Soul to the Commissary Store: Labor Stratification Outcomes on the Inside …. 212 Another Day, Another Dollar: Prisoner Pay ……………………………………… 215 The Formal Prison Economy ……………………………………………………... 218 The Informal Prison Economy ……………………………………………………. 229 Discussion: The Risks of Informal Market Participation ………………………… 245 CONCLUSION: Punishment & Labor Under Neoliberal Penology ………………………………………... 249 Prison Labor On-The-Ground …………………………………………………….. 251 Penology: Old, New, & Beyond ………………………………………………….. 255 Concluding Remarks ……………………………………………………………… 264 7 APPENDIX A: Interview Schedule ………………………………………………………………………… 267 APPENDIX B: Thoughts On Policy ……………………………………………………………………….. 270 ENDNOTES ………………………………………………………………………………. 277 REFERENCES ……………………………………………………………………………. 281 8 LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES 1. The Rise of Prisoner Labor in State Prisons ……………………………………………. 28 2. Bird’s Eye View of the Food Factory …………………………………………………... 81 3. Bird’s Eye View of the Auto Garage …………………………………………………… 92 4. Bird’s Eye View of the Call Center …………………………………………………….. 99 5. Marshall’s Mirror Design ………………………………………………………………. 101 6. Bird’s Eye View of the Sign Shop ……………………………………………………… 109 7. A State-Provided “Bag Nasty” …………………………………………………………..221 TABLES 1. Racial/Ethnic Composition of SSP Work Programs ……………………………………. 39 2. Folk Rankings of Prisoner Work Programs …………………………………………….. 77 3. Prison Work Program Fieldsites ………………………………………………………... 79 4. Prison Work Games …………………………………………………………………….. 206 5. Prices in the SSP Prison Ramen Black Market …………………………………………. 232 6. Evolving U.S. Corrections Strategies …………………………………………………... 262 9 ABSTRACT Scholars examining the relationship between the prison and social inequality demonstrate that race, ethnicity, and class disproportionately impact imprisonment rates as well as imbalances in how different groups fare upon release. Yet, the prison itself remains a black box: inequality goes in, and inequality comes out, but little is known about the structures or practices contributing to inequity between those milestones. This dissertation addresses this gap by investigating the reproduction of inequality within prison. In particular, it investigates disparities resulting from systems of penal labor. To do so, it draws on 18 months of ethnographic fieldwork spent working alongside incarcerated laborers at a men’s state prison and 82 in-depth interviews with prisoners and facility staff. The prison is here analyzed as a competitive employment system. Adopting this lens, this dissertation makes sense of the mechanisms and pathways through which prisoners of the same custody level and housed in the same facility are nevertheless differentially classified based on the skills and resources they possess. It uncovers meso-level structures through which the imprisoned are sorted into different labor tracts, as well as the micro-level strategies that they employ to navigate and cope with this system. And it examines how labor stratification behind bars impacts prisoners’ material wellbeing and understandings of self-worth. This has direct consequences for