THE BRACERO PROGRAM AND ITS AFTERMATH

(Ed’s. Note: In the account below, the author recounts the experience of the Bracero Program from 1942 to 1964. As political correctness did not exist then, the authors of publications of the day openly used the term “wetback”. Despite our objection to the use of the term to refer to human beings, we use it sparingly in an effort remain accurate to the work. This second part deals with the effect of imported labor on local workers. This article first appeard in the Cameron Post.)

By Juan Montoya

PART II

Under the Bracero Program, more than four million workers came to work in the fields leaving their impoverished ranches and rural communities to chase the rumor of economic boon in the United States.

The program fueled a migration north that changed the social and altered the economic environments of border cities. From Brownsville to El Paso, Mexican workers – those with a bracero contract and those without – crowded these communities seeking a way across the Rio Grande.

Even with a contract, these workers had precious little protection from abuses by U.S. growers. Typical contracts were controlled by independent farmer associations and were written in English, and braceros signed them without realizing the rights they were giving away or the terms of employment. The workers were allowed to return to their native lands only in case of emergency, and required written permission from the employer.

In South Africa, these kind of restrictions were called "Pass Laws."

Additionally, when the contracts expired, the braceros were mandated to hand over their permits and return to Mexico. Whether it was thinning sugar beets, picking cucumbers or weeding and picking cotton, bracero labor turned the Southwest into a lush agricultural center. However, abuse of these workers and of non-bracero programs was rampant, as demonstrated by the report written by Idar and McLellan.

The men interviewed workers – both illegal and braceros – as well as Border Patrol and compliance officers with the United States employment Service (the precursor of the U.S. Dept. Of Labor). They reported that while some growers and farmers tried to live by the Bracero Program guidelines (especially in the El Paso and west Texas areas where compliance was more rigid), the growers downriver preferred to hire the “wetback” who was afforded no such protection.

In South Texas, especially from Eagle Pass to Brownsville, they found that growers were paying well below the 50-cent per hour bracero rate to illegal workers, prompting others upriver to stop using braceros and turn to "wetbacks" instead.

These workers were averaging between 20 and 30 cents per hour for 10- to 12-hour days of work in the fields.

“The Lower Valley (Hidalgo, Cameron, Willacy, and Starr counties) is the worst wetback area on the border,” they wrote. “Very few farmers bother to use the braceros, preferring to employ the more convenient and cheaper wetback. The general wage is about 25 cents per hour, with the worker, except for one or two camps, living in the brush. Most farmers show little interest in any labor other than wetbacks, and are indignant over any move to deprive them of this labor.”

The authors attributed this widespread use of illegal workers for the heavy migration out of the sate by local workers, most of them U.S. citizens.

“The records show that most of the 100,000 or more Texas citizens who migrate each year for agricultural work return year after year to the same jobs for the same employers,” they wrote. “They are searching for a form of temporary seasonal security, and the relatively higher wages to be found in the other areas justify their departure from the 25-cent wage area along the border."

As analysts and labor activists contemplate the various temporary worker or amnesty proposals, a quote by these writers underscores the concerns of U.S. workers who may be affected by these new arrivals on the U.S. labor force.

“The simple fact is that these migrant citizens of Mexican descent are in the fullest sense of the word ‘displaced persons’ – displaced by hordes of illegal aliens pouring across the Rio Grande to work at starvation wages.”

Will, as labor believes, granting temporary stays to low-wage workers depress wages for American citizens?

Or, as proponents say, will in help to legalize the status of these workers to “temporary” employees who will return once their permits expire? Or is it merely a ruse by politicians to curry favor with the all-important block of Hispanic voters whose votes might well decide the outcome of the presidential elections?

The past experience is not encouraging. Yet, only time – from now until the next round of November elections– will tell in the present situation.

(End of series)