In her article, “The Prison Industrial Complex: A Growth Industry in a Shrinking Economy,” Heather Thompson explains the harmful irony behind the paper’s title. The contrast between the expanding PIC and its consequential harsh effects on the U.S.’ economy reveals a disappointing disparity that Thompson desires the American labor movement to acknowledge. She begins with striking statistics that indicate how out-of-control our unemployment rates have become, particularly for the African American population. Thompson then gives a brief history of how we got to this point, highlighting that the issue was “created by several decades of tough-on-crime policies that ultimately ensnared more than 7.1 million Americans in the nation’s criminal justice system and led to the actual imprisonment of a staggering 2.3 million of them for record lengths of time” (39).
The main culprits that Thompson blames in this situation are corporate enterprises who work alongside politicians to create and manipulate laws that “link work and imprisonment in newly productive ways” (40). This concept of productive is subjective in this statement since it does not encourage work in an equal distribution across the board. Namely, she points to “Lyndon Johnson launching the country’s ‘war on crime’ with his Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA),” as well as “job training programs” whose purpose was “to modernize prison industries by encouraging them to adopt free world business practices” (40). Thompson explains the far-reaching impacts of these decisions and practices, strongly correlating them to the rise of unemployment, poverty, and poor living conditions of following generations.
Thompson goes on to describe the specific details of these unethical practices utilized to profit in the PIC. She mentions an example of collaboration occurring between corporations and the government: “In 1979, with the passage of the Justice System Improvement Act, they were once again able to tap into a seemingly limitless supply of prison labor and the profits it promised” (40). Another huge player mentioned here was “the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC),” which Thompson describes as “a powerful new political lobby committed to beating back unions, locking people up, and accessing cheap labor in ways that businesses had not been able to do for nearly a century” (41). The companies that work with this council in order to push the agenda of “harsher sentencing for nonviolent offenses including three-strike laws, mandatory sentencing, and truth-in-sentencing” (41). A big factor contributing to this process has to do with the ability to move money around within punitive institutions. Instead of contributing to prisoner wages, money is shifted “toward other incentives making prisons far more lucrative places than free-world factories” (41). It is not difficult to understand why this source of labor is attractive to many companies: prisoners offer a low-cost and consistent output option — hence Thompson’s desire to eliminate policies in place allowing for such drastic economic injustices.
Even just the ridiculously substantial difference in minimum wage between workers in and out of prison should give us pause when discussing the PIC. Thompson outlines the embarrassingly low cost of utilizing prison labor, providing the reader a clear understanding of why companies are tempted to take advantage of it; “the fact that federal prisoner wages range from $0.12 to $1.15 per hour makes it illogical for savvy businesspeople to imagine manufacturing goods in—or state agencies to imagine buying goods from—free-world factories” (41). It simply does not compare. As a result, this takes away “real jobs from real people in manufacturing, farm work, and even in day labor” (42). Unemployment is a daily concern and topic of conversation for all U.S. government workers – regardless of ideological parties – and, considering the thousands and thousands of Americans looking for jobs, this knowledge should incite immediate action. Using incentives like earlier release of prison sentences not only makes public sector unions have to work harder, but it also leads to less concern for health regulations among prisoners and staff members alike. However, as one would assume, “work-release inmates who would rather protect their health than participate in the non-stop toxic cleanup run the risk of staying in prison longer” (43).
Thompson takes the time to de-bunk many myths in support of optimizing prison labor. She begins with the fact that, “Formerly incarcerated have significantly higher lifetime unemployment rates than other workers do— even when they have been used as a cheap labor force” (43). Additionally, she writes, “Although guard unions are right to speak out against the fact that closing prisons too often leads to more severe overcrowding in the prisons that remain (and, thus, even more dangerous working conditions), they should not imagine that prison jobs in any way solve our nation’s social and economic problems” (44). With this in mind, the arguments for prison labor and incorporating companies into the profit scheme lose merit. In fact, there is data suggesting the opposite of these myths is true. Building more prisons does not immediately equate to more jobs, just like the growth of the carceral state does not benefit unions. To conclude, Thompson implores the labor movement to “demand an end to practices such as stop-and-frisk…[to] repeal draconian drug laws… [to enforce] sentencing reform” and just mobilize progress towards unity among all working-class Americans.
Some questions for thought or discussion:
- What are the current consequences of diverting resources meant for inmate wages towards work facilities within penal institutions? How do you believe these resources could be allocated instead?
- How can the labor movement play a role in advocating for comprehensive prison reform, beyond issues related to labor exploitation? In an effort to answer Thompson’s call to action, what strategies can be employed to create meaningful change in the overall structure of the PIC?
- What would unemployment look like in the U.S. if businesses/corporations were no longer allowed to exploit incarcerated individuals for labor? How might the economy change? And how could we create policies to bridge this gap and satisfy all parties?
Victoria, I agreed with your point about Thompson naming the main culprit of our carceral crises in the United States as being corporations/corporate enterprises. During my reading, I also highlighted the points about the 1979 Justice System Improvement Act and how it allowed companies to exploit prison labor by avoiding paying prisoners the minimum wage. This hurts both prisoners and those in the “free world” by taking away jobs and exploiting labor for little to no payment. Hearing that federal prisoner wages ranged from $0.12 to $1.15 an hour was completely outrageous. To couple this with the increased prices of goods from the commissaries, prisoners barely have enough to survive behind bars without being exploited by these major corporations. I liked your point that stated “considering the thousands and thousands of Americans looking for jobs, this knowledge should incite immediate action”. Because the prison system isn’t transparent in its operations and the corporations complicit in the PIC, the average American is ignorant to this problem. Furthermore, I too was appalled when I read about the lack of health and safety standards when it comes to prisoners. Prison guards were also among those affected by the unsafe working conditions, exposed to cadmium and lead dust. This has a lasting health impact. Upon release, if prisoners experience long-term health effects from these unsafe conditions, they could rack up further hospital and medical debt which could land them back into prison. Additionally she stated that the BP Oil Corporation chose to hire prisoners for unsafe clean-up operations and failing to provide basic health and safety gear because of the appeal of cheap labor and the lack of accountability the prison system allows them to fall back on. In terms of your third question, I think that unemployment rates would fall if corporations were no longer allowed to exploit incarcerated individuals for labor. If they were allowed to earn and save a liveable wage while serving their sentence out, they would be better prepared to deal with living expenses upon release. It would also help those with families who put money in the commissary accounts or have to travel far to visit them. Furthermore, big companies wouldn’t rely so heavily on this source of cheap labor and would instead hire free-world individuals who could work to avoid being in poverty and in term avoid having to break the laws just to afford basic necessities. Thompson states that “if corporations continue to have their way, there will eventually be even more Americans living behind bars, an even greater loss of free-world jobs to prison jobs, and – with new technological advances- even less need for security staff to monitor the nation’s captive workforce”. It all starts with corporate accountability, worker unity, and transparency in the PIC with the citizens of the United States of America.
I found this article to be of particular interest because of its call for the labor movement to take part in the abolition movement. Historically speaking, the labor movement and the civil rights movement were deeply entwined. The 1968 Sanitation strike was an example of how the labor movement and the civil rights movement combined to be one movement. In Memphis, Tennessee, the civil rights movement was able to champion desegregation and protect voting rights. But the movement did not address the racial division of labor that relied on Black subordination. In 1968, sanitation workers alongside the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) went on strike to demand better wages, conditions, and representation in their local government.
As Brewer and Heitzeg mentioned in their article, we cannot rely on civil rights anymore to achieve true justice. And this Is the critique that Thompson also indirectly shares. The labor movement needs to work alongside the abolition movement to recognize the egregious usage of prison labor. One question I had when reading this article was whether the federal government’s interest in preventing full employment had anything to do with the continuing use of prison labor. The federal government never wants a full employed body of people as they believe it will drive inflation up. Perhaps there is deliberate intentions on part of the government to allow prison labor to be used.
Victoria, I find your third question regarding the economy to be very thought provoking and interesting. As Thompson points out in her piece, nearly 600,000 to 1,000,000 prisoners work full time jobs which could be outsourced to Americans who are unemployed, but companies prefer the extremely cheap forms of labor offered by prisons. In my opinion, the economy would not change very much if this form of labor was to be outlawed. Corporations will inherently act with self interest, and it will never be most profitable to bring industrial jobs back to the US. Because of free trade and globalization, it is far cheaper and thus profitable for companies to pay for factory jobs overseas. Unfortunately this means there would not be much of an effect on our economy. Despite this, I do believe that reform can be made so that fair labor can be achieved within prisons. While prison is meant to be punishment and designed to separate an individual who has broken the social contract from society, I don’t know that prisoners should have the right to make the exact same amount of money as a standard minimum wage worker. That being said, it is concerning that they are paid as low as cents per hour in a country like the United States. An agreement where prisoners work part time jobs and get paid half of standard minimum wage might be a fair middle ground, and would also force corporations to partake in the global economy rather than achieve nearly free labor on the backs of the incarcerated. However, the real underlying issue is the size of the US prison population, and the fact that many non violent drug offenders are in prison and subjected to this type of treatment.