Ending Discrimination in Industrial Agriculture
- David Bell
- 4 days ago
- 14 min read
Industrial agriculture relies heavily on minority and migrant workers, yet systemic discrimination leaves these groups vulnerable to exploitation, unsafe working conditions, and limited protections. Key issues include:
Migrant workers face employer-tied visas, low wages, and unsafe environments. In 2024, nearly 700 complaints of mistreatment were filed by foreign seasonal workers in the UK.
Black and Indigenous farmers struggle with access to land, credit, and resources due to historical and institutional racism.
Refugees and asylum seekers are trapped in exploitative jobs due to restrictive visa conditions and lack of state support.
These challenges stem from historical injustices like colonial land dispossession and modern systems that prioritise immigration enforcement over worker rights. Solutions include stronger labour protections, fair wages, and policies allowing workers to change employers without penalty. Additionally, cultivated meat production could reduce reliance on exploitative labour while creating safer job opportunities.
Addressing these issues requires collective action from governments, employers, and advocacy groups to ensure equal treatment and protections for all workers.
Historical Origins of Discrimination in Industrial Agriculture
The roots of today's industrial agriculture lie in centuries-old policies designed to disenfranchise indigenous communities and create a labour force ripe for exploitation. Examining this history helps explain why discrimination remains entrenched and why surface-level reforms often fail to address deeper systemic issues. As explored earlier, these historical practices continue to shape labour rights challenges today.
Colonialism and Land Dispossession
Colonial powers built their empires on the foundation of the "Right of Discovery" doctrine. This principle allowed European nations to claim dominion over lands already inhabited by indigenous peoples, reducing their legal rights to mere "occupancy" rather than full ownership. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall reinforced this by asserting that indigenous nations held only a "tenant-like" status, while the government retained ultimate control. This legal framework stripped indigenous communities of protections afforded to white settlers and justified the seizure of their lands for white agricultural expansion [10].
The U.S. General Allotment Act of 1887 turned these legal theories into devastating reality. The Act divided indigenous lands into individual parcels, labelling Native people as "incompetent" to manage their own affairs. The federal government retained legal title to these parcels for 25 years, preventing Native owners from selling or leasing their land - restrictions never applied to white settlers. Between 1887 and 1934, over 90 million acres of indigenous land were taken by the U.S. government. Native landholdings plummeted from 138 million acres in 1887 to just 48 million acres by 1934. For instance, the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe now controls only 4% of their original reservation land [9].
"The federal government's previous policies aimed to separate Native people from white society... policymakers concluded that if they moved Native people from what they saw as 'backward' collective land use to individual land ownership, Native people would be more likely to... discard their culture and values in favor of those of white colonizers." – Native Governance Center [9]
This was not just about taking land - it was about dismantling indigenous agricultural systems and enforcing cultural assimilation. Indigenous peoples were often left with poor-quality land, such as floodplains, and denied access to essential resources like capital, seeds, and livestock for farming. The effects of these policies persist today in the form of "fractionated ownership", where land titles become divided among so many heirs over generations that effective agricultural use becomes nearly impossible [9].
Migrant Labour Systems and Their Legacy
After the abolition of chattel slavery in the 19th century, colonial powers turned to indentured labour systems as a new form of exploitation. Between 1849 and the 1920s, approximately 500,000 indentured workers from the Indian subcontinent were sent to Mauritius to work on sugar plantations. The Indian indenture system, overseen by British colonial administrators, operated from the 1830s until 1917 [12].
These systems used debt as a tool of control. Workers were charged for transport, housing, and tools, binding them to specific employers under contracts that created a cycle of dependency resembling slavery. In early-20th-century South Africa, for example, Chinese indentured labourers were brought in to suppress wage demands from Black workers [12].
The echoes of these practices can be seen in modern agricultural visa schemes. In 2022, the UK Home Office issued 423,000 work visas - nearly triple the number issued in 2016. Many of these were Seasonal Work and Care visas, which have been linked to exploitation. These visas tie workers to specific employers, leaving them vulnerable to mistreatment. Researchers describe this as a state of "hyper‐precarity", with migrant workers now making up 75% of referrals to the UK's National Referral Mechanism for potential victims of modern slavery [11].
"When your employer is your visa sponsor, speaking up is hard, labour enforcement is slow, and migrant workers are often left with no means for redress." – Work Rights Centre [11]
These historical and modern systems of labour exploitation highlight the enduring barriers faced by Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour (BIPOC) in accessing land, resources, and fair opportunities. Confronting these legacies is essential for building equitable agricultural systems and addressing the systemic inequities that persist today [2] [3].
Current Challenges for Indigenous and Minority Workers
The exploitation of migrant and minority workers remains a pressing issue, with many facing unfair treatment in various industries. Seasonal labourers, particularly in agriculture, often endure harsh conditions and systemic inequality.
Labour Rights Violations
The UK's Seasonal Worker Visa scheme, introduced to address labour shortages post-Brexit, has created what experts describe as "hyper-precarity" for agricultural workers. These visas tie workers to specific employers, making it nearly impossible to report abuse without risking deportation. Dr Inga Thiemann, from the Modern Slavery and Human Rights Policy and Evidence Centre, highlights the issue:
"The conditions attached to visa routes... worsen the precarious position of migrant agriculture and care workers, heightening their vulnerability."
The scale of the problem is evident. In 2024, nearly 700 foreign seasonal agricultural workers lodged complaints with the Worker Support Centre (WSC) about unfair treatment - a sharp rise from approximately 400 complaints in 2023. During the summer of 2024 alone, WSC caseworkers assisted 158 farm labourers, with 19 cases involving 101 individuals being referred to enforcement agencies [13]. Meanwhile, the UK government issued 45,000 visas for the seasonal worker scheme in 2025 [13].
One high-profile case involved Bolivian worker Julia Quecano Casimiro, who took a Herefordshire farm to an employment tribunal in February 2025, accusing it of unfair dismissal, discrimination, and wage underpayment after just 11 days of work. The Home Office found reasonable grounds to believe she was a victim of modern slavery. Quecano Casimiro remarked:
"Many seasonal workers continue to have their rights violated at this very moment... If the UK government does not take action to stop what is happening there will continue to be more victims of modern slavery."
Common violations include underpayment of wages, delayed payments, and inappropriate deductions for travel, training, or accommodation. In one alarming instance, 20 Indonesian workers reported being charged illegal recruitment fees by agencies in their home country to secure work on UK farms. These fees left workers trapped in debt bondage, forcing them to accept exploitative conditions. This prompted a nationwide investigation by the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority into the recruitment practices of the involved companies [13][14].
The UK's "Hostile Environment" policy further complicates matters. Data sharing between labour inspectors and immigration enforcement discourages workers from reporting mistreatment. The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants stated:
"In the UK, immigration enforcement is prioritised above workers' safety and wellbeing. Data is routinely shared between workplace inspectorates / the police and Immigration Enforcement, making it impossible for migrant workers to cooperate with inspectors."
These conditions not only destabilise workers' employment but also harm their overall health and economic security.
Health and Economic Disparities
Beyond workplace abuses, migrant and minority workers often endure severe health risks and economic exclusion. The "No Recourse to Public Funds" (NRPF) condition excludes many from state support, leaving them vulnerable during periods of illness or low work availability. Without access to healthcare or social safety nets, workers are forced to choose between their health and their livelihood [8].
Language barriers exacerbate these challenges. Many Indigenous workers speak native languages such as Mixteco, Zapoteco, or Triqui rather than Spanish or English. In California, for example, an estimated 165,000 Indigenous Mexican farmworkers - over 80% from Oaxaca - struggle to access health and safety information due to linguistic isolation. Arcenio López, Executive Director of the Mixteco/Indigena Community Organising Project (MICOP), explains:
"If you look more brown or speak an Indigenous language, you are treated as less. That's how it is."
Economic marginalisation extends beyond the workplace. Undocumented workers contribute to the economy through deductions for Social Security and Medicare from their wages, yet they are barred from accessing these benefits upon retirement [15]. This creates a permanent underclass of workers who support systems they can never benefit from.
The fear of deportation compounds these issues. Under aggressive enforcement policies, deportations have surged. For example, in the first month of the Trump administration in 2025, over 37,000 people were deported, compared to a monthly average of 57,000 during the Biden presidency [15]. López describes the constant anxiety:
"Being undocumented means always living in fear. We've normalised fear, but it escalates when someone like Donald Trump gets into this position of power."
Advocacy groups now assist undocumented workers in preparing "family plans", which include legal custody documents for children in case parents are detained [15].
Housing conditions for workers are often dire, with many forced to live in unsafe or unsanitary accommodation provided by their employers. A 17-month study in the UK revealed that migrant seasonal workers frequently fall into cycles of debt due to recruitment costs and a lack of guaranteed work [14]. Combined with their inability to change employers and exclusion from public support, these factors entrench a system of exploitation that disproportionately harms Indigenous and minority workers, leaving them with few alternatives.
Policy and Systemic Reforms for Equity
Addressing discrimination demands policies that tackle both direct issues, like refusing interviews based on nationality, and indirect barriers, such as requiring five years of UK residency - a rule that disproportionately affects new migrants [18][20].
Strengthening Labour Protections
To enforce fair treatment, all agricultural labour providers should be licensed. The Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority (GLAA) needs broader powers to oversee high-risk industries and to ensure only licensed operators supply workers [16][19]. Standardising right-to-work checks for everyone is crucial to avoid discriminatory practices during verification [18]. Additionally, incorporating the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) into UK law would provide workers with stronger legal protections [17].
Scotland’s statistics highlight the urgency of these reforms: 38% of children in racialised minority families live in relative poverty, compared to 24% of all children. Furthermore, individuals from Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic backgrounds are over twice as likely to experience poverty as White British individuals [17].
Fair Wages and Benefits
Stronger labour protections must go hand-in-hand with fair pay. Expanding ethnicity pay gap reporting to include both ethnicity and disability, alongside existing gender pay gap duties, would help uncover and address wage inequalities in public and private sectors. Minority ethnic workers are disproportionately represented in low-paid industries - for instance, they make up 5.3% of the retail workforce, compared to their 4.3% share of the national population [17].
Contracts should be available in workers’ native languages, with oral explanations provided for those with limited literacy skills [5][21]. Abolishing piece-rate pay in favour of hourly living wages, adjusted regionally, would ensure fair compensation [5]. Additionally, clear policies enabling workers to switch employers must be implemented to reduce dependency on single-sponsor visas. As the Work Rights Centre explains:
"When your employer is your visa sponsor, speaking up is hard, labour enforcement is slow, and migrant workers are often left with no means for redress."
Representation and Advocacy
Worker representation is just as important as contractual reforms. Collective bargaining and union recognition allow minority workers to have a say in decisions and address disputes effectively [5]. The rise in visa dependency has worsened exploitation, making these measures even more critical [11]. Establishing worker committees to elect representatives can provide a structured way to handle workplace grievances and decisions [5]. As the Agricultural Justice Project asserts:
"All workers have the rights to freedom of association, to organise, and to bargain collectively, free from retaliation of any kind by the employer/farmer or his/her agents."
Advocacy groups must ensure legal rights are communicated in workers’ native languages to overcome literacy and digital access challenges [5]. This is essential, especially since migrant workers account for 75% of cases referred to the UK’s National Referral Mechanism for potential victims of modern slavery [11]. Farms should prominently display contact information for regional worker advocacy groups and legal services in communal areas, ensuring workers know where to turn for help.
How Cultivated Meat Can Reduce Inequality
Reducing Reliance on Exploitative Labour
Agriculture has long been associated with exploitative practices, making it one of the most hazardous sectors globally. According to the FAO, agricultural workers often endure dangerous conditions "without appropriate occupational health and safety policies or legislation" [22]. Cultivated meat offers a way to shift food production into safer, regulated environments, reducing dependence on exploitative labour. By moving production into controlled facilities, workers gain access to consistent safety standards and legal protections that traditional farming often lacks. This transition not only reduces workplace risks but also lays the groundwork for fairer labour practices, breaking cycles of exploitation that disproportionately affect minority workers.
Rural poverty remains a pressing issue, with four out of five people living below the international poverty line relying on agriculture for their livelihoods [22]. Cultivated meat introduces opportunities in areas like quality assurance, cell cultivation, and distribution - offering safer jobs with fair wages [22][23]. As the FAO highlights, "automation can contribute to ensuring decent job opportunities that eliminate labour‐related hazards and break the link between poverty, malnutrition and disabilities" [22]. This shift could provide a much-needed lifeline for vulnerable communities.
The Cultivarian Society's Mission
The Cultivarian Society is dedicated to using cultivated meat to address systemic inequalities in agriculture. One of its key strategies is ensuring production facilities are located in both rural and urban areas, spreading economic benefits to historically excluded communities rather than concentrating them in wealthier regions.
The Society prioritises community engagement built on mutual respect and shared leadership. Their goal is to develop cultivated meat in a way that avoids repeating the exclusionary practices of traditional food systems. With production costs for cultivated meat dropping dramatically - from around £265,000 per burger patty in 2013 to under £8 by 2025 [24] - the organisation advocates for government subsidies and research grants to help achieve price parity with conventional meat. These efforts aim to make ethical food production more accessible to all. As food justice advocate Sarah Duignan points out:
"If lab‐grown meat is truly supposed to be the next frontier in ethical eating, it's important to consider what ethical values are prioritised in its creation - and who is most at risk of being left behind in the race to develop it."
Steps for Advocacy and Change
Support Ethical Farming Practices
One way to make a difference is by choosing products certified by the Agricultural Justice Project (AJP). This certification guarantees fair treatment, living wages, and protections against discrimination for workers [4][5]. As the AJP puts it:
"All workers have the right to safe working conditions, just treatment, and fair compensation" [5]
Another impactful step is supporting local food systems and short supply chains. These actions help empower producers while reducing the risk of exploitation [7]. In the UK, it's also important to ensure that any temporary farm labour is sourced through providers licensed by the Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA) [16]. These measures not only protect workers but also pave the way for meaningful education and collaboration, which are critical for long-term change.
Education and Awareness Campaigns
Education plays a key role in driving change. For example, a recent ETI project underscores the importance of worker-driven grievance systems. These systems should include native language support and multiple ways for workers to report issues [1]. Effective programmes also involve training in workers' native languages and solutions co-designed with both workers and trade unions [1]. As the ETI highlights:
"Grievance systems are most effective when co-designed and led by workers, including the most vulnerable groups" [1]
To ensure full participation, rights-based education should take place during paid working hours, allowing even the most vulnerable workers to take part [5].
Collaborate with Advocacy Groups
Collaboration with advocacy groups can amplify efforts for systemic reform. For instance, the Cultivarian Society focuses on cultivated meat production, aiming to eliminate the exclusionary practices tied to traditional systems. They promote change through public awareness campaigns, policy advocacy, and partnerships with scientific researchers, all working towards a fairer and more sustainable food system.
Another organisation making strides is the Landworkers' Alliance (LWA), which seeks to create a food and land-use system accessible to everyone, regardless of income or background [7]. As the LWA explains:
"We have a vision for a food and land-use system where everybody, regardless of income, status or background has access to local, healthy, affordable food... from producers they can trust" [7]
Additionally, participating in campaigns like the Migrant Worker Welfare Strategy can push governments to enforce stronger labour rights and provide better protections against exploitation [11]. These collective efforts help dismantle discriminatory practices and promote a more equitable future for food systems.
Conclusion: A Path Towards Justice and Equity
Tackling discrimination in industrial agriculture calls for collective effort. Employers have a responsibility to provide living wages that meet basic needs and allow workers to save, while governments must implement targeted strategies, such as a Migrant Worker Welfare Strategy, to address the high number of modern slavery cases involving migrant workers [11].
Achieving fairness requires a shift in perspective. Legal standards alone aren’t enough to ensure dignified working conditions [4]. True progress lies in going beyond minimum requirements by introducing measures like accessible communication channels for workers and ensuring employment contracts are written in their native languages [5]. Such steps build upon past advocacy efforts to dismantle systemic exploitation and pave the way for a fairer agricultural sector.
Empowering workers is a cornerstone of reforming our food systems. The concept of food sovereignty offers a compelling vision for change. As defined by La Via Campesina, it is "the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems" [7]. This approach rebalances power, shifting it from large corporations to producers and communities, fostering democratic control over food production. When paired with labour rights reforms, it creates a system that values both workers and sustainable practices.
Building trust is key to meaningful progress. The Ethical Trading Initiative highlights this, stating: "Trust takes time – building relationships with growers, workers, and local partners is essential for sustainable change" [1]. Whether it’s employers adopting multi-step conflict resolution processes, individuals supporting ethical farming, or organisations advocating for policy changes, every effort matters in dismantling discriminatory practices.
The urgency to transform industrial agriculture into a fairer system cannot be overstated. With visa numbers rising significantly in recent years, the need for strong protections has never been more pressing. By uniting across sectors and communities, we can create an agricultural system that upholds the dignity and rights of every worker.
FAQs
How could cultivated meat help tackle discrimination in industrial agriculture?
Cultivated meat offers a chance to reshape food systems, addressing inequalities deeply embedded in traditional agriculture. Conventional livestock farming has often relied on the exploitation of indigenous and minority workers, perpetuating systemic injustices. In contrast, the production of cultivated meat has the potential to decentralise operations, creating fresh economic opportunities for small-scale farmers and underrepresented communities. By diversifying income sources and reducing reliance on conventional livestock, it could empower those historically left behind.
Moreover, cultivated meat production might make use of agricultural by-products or waste, which could lower its environmental impact while providing sustainable livelihood options for disadvantaged groups. Moving away from the exploitative practices tied to traditional meat production, this approach paves the way for a more ethical and transparent agricultural system - one that promotes fairness and resilience across all communities.
What challenges do migrant workers face in industrial agriculture?
Migrant workers in industrial agriculture often encounter tough realities, including exploitation, unsafe working conditions, and minimal access to support networks. Many are trapped in cycles of low wages, delayed payments, or even debt, leaving them vulnerable to unfair treatment. On top of this, strict visa rules frequently tie them to specific employers, making it difficult to leave abusive situations or seek assistance.
Language barriers and a lack of knowledge about local labour rights and safety standards add to their struggles. Many face hazardous workplaces and find it challenging to access healthcare or report mistreatment due to systemic hurdles. These challenges underscore the pressing need for stronger protections, fair migration policies, and accessible systems that allow workers to voice their concerns and secure their rights.
What historical factors have led to discrimination in industrial agriculture?
Discrimination in industrial agriculture is deeply tied to historical injustices and entrenched inequalities. Over time, racist policies and practices have systematically excluded marginalised groups - such as Black, Indigenous, and other ethnic minorities - from accessing essential resources like land, funding, and support. These barriers have significantly hindered their ability to succeed and grow within the agricultural sector.
In the UK and across Europe, the exploitation of migrant workers reflects a troubling legacy shaped by historical migration patterns and policies that often placed these communities at a disadvantage. Many migrant workers continue to endure unfair treatment, meagre wages, and harsh working conditions, reinforcing cycles of inequality that remain pervasive in the industry.
Addressing these deep-rooted challenges is essential to building an agricultural system that values fairness and inclusivity for all workers.
Comments