We often think of our food starting at the farm and ending on our forks. But, there’s a massive middle ground that keeps the entire system running: the processing stage. What happens when food processors are disrupted, particularly with labor strikes?
UW-Madison Assistant Professor Jeff Hadachek with the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics and the Division of Extension joins Mid-West Farm Report. He explains why strikes happen, how they get resolved, and what happens in the supply chain and to your food bill when there’s a stalemate.
The sheer volume of food passing through these facilities makes processing a focal point for labor disputes. Because food is perishable, the pressure to maintain a constant flow is immense. However, the industry has developed methods to mitigate these disruptions.
“Historical precedent kind of tells us that in the short term, we do have this ability for these processors to kind of absorb some of those costs elsewhere by increasing Saturday slaughter and whatnot,” Hadacheck explains.
This flexibility means that a strike, while disruptive, does not always result in a one-for-one loss of product for the consumer. Companies often shift shifts or utilize other plants within their multinational networks to maintain supply.
Despite these logistical workarounds, the human element remains the most volatile variable. Beyond wages, modern negotiations are increasingly focused on the physical environment of the plants or immigration policy.
“COVID revealed a lot about the working conditions in food processing sectors generally,” he says. “There’s a lot of tight conditions, potentially sometimes working with sharp tools, sharp machinery, where there’s a lot of potential for worker safety concerns.”
Ultimately, Hadachek suggests that while the right to strike is a fundamental mechanism for bargaining, the nature of the modern food chain ensures that any disruption is felt at the dinner table.
