Farm Workers and Pesticides

This page was last updated on

01.10.07

FARM WORKERS & PESTICIDES

BACKGROUND -- "Overexposure to such pesticides can be fatal. The common symptoms of overexposure include headaches, sweating, weakness, diarrhea, vomiting, increased salivation, respiratory distress, repetitive muscle contractions, blurred vision, cognitive difficulties, seizures, and loss of consciousness. Long-term effects may include a… dying back of the nerves in the body as a result of the toxicity of the pesticide."

So reports the Washington State Supreme Court in a 2002 ruling, Rios v L&I, that found the Department of Labor and Industries violated the WISHA statute by refusing to undertake mandatory medical monitoring rule making for farm workers who mix, load and apply pesticides. The Supreme Court ordered L&I to begin rulemaking.

While not much has been done to study the long-term effects of pesticides on farm workers the research that has been done is alarming. According to the American Journal of Industrial Medicine (2001), "California farm workers have elevated levels of leukemia and stomach, uterine and brain cancer." According to studies done in Washington State by the Fred Hutchinson Center and the University of Washington (2002; 2004) toxic pesticides are showing up in the bodies of farm workers who thin fruit (92% of those tested), as well as their children (88% of those tested). Pesticide residue is moving from field to home.

What is so disconcerting is the fact that an estimated 1.2 billion pounds of highly toxic pesticides are sprayed on our food annually in the U.S. and only four states collect data about which pesticides are used where, when and in what amounts. Farm workers are at grave risk.

LABOR’S POSITION -- The route to medical monitoring for farm worker pesticide handlers has been long and torturous. Labor supported requests that Labor and Industries implement rule making on medical monitoring in 1989, 1991 and again in 1997. We applaud the Washington State Supreme Court’s 2002 Rios decision and have worked to develop, help implement and evaluate the existing medical monitoring rule which first went into effect in 2004, 19 years after the first request was made of L&I.

Over this period of time it has also become clear to us that this rule is insufficient. Some other things need to be done to protect the health and safety of farm workers, the health of consumers, the economic viability of growers and the integrity of our environment.

The current medical monitoring rule needs to be extended to field workers who thin crops.
We need to adopt "closed systems" for mixing, loading and applying pesticides.
There needs to be changing, showering and laundering facilities at the workplace to prevent pesticide residues from migrating from farm to home.
There needs to be reasonable no spray buffer zones around farm worker housing and schools.
Personal Protective Equipment regulations need to be enforced.
Need to incentivize the phasing out of the most toxic organophosphate and carbamate pesticides and encourage the use of less toxic alternatives.

RECENT LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

1986 -- Farm workers request medical monitoring rule following the lead of California which adopted a mandatory rule in 1974; L&I refuses.

1989 -- Request made again in light of studies from California; L&I refuses.

1991 -- Centro Campesino requests L&I to adopt medical monitoring rules citing high rates of illness among farm workers using workers’ compensation data.

1993 -- L&I adopts a non-mandatory rule; farm workers threaten to seek judicial review; L&I forms a technical advisory committee to develop specific proposals.

1995 -- Technical advisory committee recommends mandatory monitoring; L&I ignores recommendation; program dies due to lack of interest by growers.

1997 -- Fourth request for a mandatory monitoring rule made by farm workers; L&I refuses; farm workers file suit.

1998 -- Superior Court upholds L&I’s position; farm workers appeal.

2000 -- Appeals Court rules in favor of farm workers; L&I appeals.

2002 -- Washington Supreme Court rules in favor of farm workers; rule making begins.

2003 -- SB 5890, spearheaded by the Farm Bureau, would have terminated L&I’s rulemaking on a mandatory rule and would have substituted for it pilot rulemaking on another non-mandatory rule. Agreement reached between labor and grower associations on a 16-point framework for medical monitoring rules and legislature unanimously passes the amended bill. Rule is developed.

2004 -- Medical monitoring rule begins in February; SB 6599, spearheaded by the Farm Bureau, attempts to derail the medical monitoring rule, once again questioning the need for monitoring; labor and business reach an agreement which significantly amends the bill and keeps the mandatory rule in place.

-- Washington State Farm Bureau, with knowledge of the grower representatives on the stakeholder advisory committee, secretly submits a number of "false" blood samples to be tested, violating the trust of the stakeholder committee and causing the unauthorized expenditure of thousands of state dollars. Administrative action is still pending on this egregious violation.

Return to the WSLC Legislative Issues Index