Among work crews in the Santa Maria Valley we find mestizo campesinos, Mixtec and Zapotec Indians, and Mexican urbanites from, for example, Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Monterrey. We have, to be sure, identified school teachers and university graduates laboring in the fields. An examination of the valley’s agricultural labor force from the perspective of crops, as we did above, provides vital information regarding the number and flow of workers, but it reveals little about the labor force itself. To capture meaningful information on farm workers that will enable the observer to recognize behavioral regularities, educe patterns, and formulate typologies, it is necessary to observe and query the farm worker directly. We propose to accomplish this here by focusing attention on three fundamental circumstances regarding the farm worker’s life: where does s/he keep a permanent home; what is the nature of the family that inhabits that home; and what role does s/he play in the household. Answers to these three queries elicited from farm workers observed and interviewed in the valley’s fruit and vegetable fields during the 1993 campaign, allow us to distinguish five distinct types of farm workers and farm worker families from the vast and increasingly diverse universe of farm workers that people the Santa Maria Valley: the immigrant worker who has settled permanently in the valley and severed most economic ties and responsibilities with the home community in Mexico; the binational worker who maintains two functional homes, one on each side of the border, and who constantly moves back and forth between them; the Mexico-based migrant who periodically leaves home and family in search of employment and wages; the border migrantócommuterówho, using a home base in the United States-Mexico border area, collection pot accesses an assortment of job opportunities in both countries; and the seemingly single, unattached, “homeless” migrant who spontaneously and unsolicited appears in the valley looking for work.
A review of the circumstances that govern the lives of these farm workers, aside from providing interesting insights and improved understanding, allows us to identify and highlight some of the challenges and impediments that exist to correctly detect and enumerate them by, among other interested parties, the Census Bureau. Before undertaking the description and examination of the five categories of farm workers enumerated above, it is necessary to make two clarifications regarding limitations of the proposed typology. First, although the five types may suggest the logical stages of a migrationimmigration continuum, they are most definitely not. Each, in fact, represents an outcome in itself; an arrangement arrived at by design on the part of the farm worker and not a step in a process leading to settlement. Second, the described outcomes are at best temporary, passing adjustments to an ever-changing and highly unpredictable environment, one which is not only the product of agriculture’s inherent uncertainties but which is also encumbered by recent, momentous developments. Among those developments responsible for propelling change to a state of almost perpetual, unrelenting flux, to mention only the most obvious, are the rapid transformation of California agriculture and its employment practices, the never-ending changes to immigration laws and vacillating if not contradictory enforcement measures, and the changing conditions in Mexico and in the farm workers’ home communities which can either inhibit or foster migratory practices. It would be venturesome and inappropriate, therefore, to claim that the proposed characterizations represent more than current adaptations to current conditions which may change inadvertently and, once again, force farm workers and farm employers to hastily rethink and readjust their current modi operandi. As noted above, over 10,000 immigrant farm workers have settled in the Santa Maria Valley.
Many have done it permanently, which means they have relinquished their place and position in the home community, severed economic ties and responsibilities with the home-based family, and transplanted dependents to the valley. Immigrant farm workers often travel to Mexico to visit family and friends, sometimes on a regular annual schedule, but their roots are now fixed in Santa Maria. One way of ascertaining that permanent settlement has in effect taken place is when the producer and consumer components of a given domestic group are living together in the valley on the basis of locally derived income and wages. The vast majority of Santa Maria’s immigrant families come from just three states located in the central part of Mexico: Michoacan, Jalisco, and Guanajuato. The others are from northern border states such as Durango and Chihuahua , Mexico City , and the southern state of Oaxaca . Starting in 1964, a succession of at least three immigration waves populated the valley with its current mass of settled farm workers. Although prior to 1964 some farm workers had already settled in the valley forming small, marginal colonias or barrios within the towns of Guadalupe and Santa Maria, it was the elimination of the program that actually precipitated the first important movement of ex-braceros towards settlement. This action was enthusiastically urged and even abetted by local growers who feared they would otherwise lose access to their labor supply and, especially, their most skilled, trusted, and reliable workers. A second wave in 1975-1985 accompanied the expansion of high-value, labor-intensive, specialty crops which, as already discussed, created a bounty of new farm jobs with longer employment seasons. Growers once again encouraged and helped migrant employees to settle in order to ensure the presence and availability of a stable, reliable labor supply to tend valuable and highly perishable farm commodities. The third and most recent wave was prompted by IRCA and its special provisions for farm workers which were designed specifically to accommodate the interests and needs of the agricultural industry.
IRCA accomplished two things in the Santa Maria Valley: On one hand, it created a unique opportunity for many settled yet undocumented/unauthorized immigrants from earlier waves to legalize; and, on the other, it encouraged a new cohort of migrant farm workers to emulate the experience of preceding generations by also settling down. Surveys conducted in 1991 and 1993 among fruit and vegetable workers in the valley reveal that immigrants enjoy the best farm jobs, either as skilled full-time employees or in vegetable harvest crews which offer nearly year-round intermittent jobs. In fact, 74 percent of all immigrant farm workers are employed by the vegetable industry. Typically, for example, a broccoli cutter earns $1,000 to $1,200 monthly during at least nine to ten months of the year; while, in contrast, a strawberry picker earns $500 to $800 monthly during, at best, five to six months of the year. Vegetable employment and wages, in short, allow workers to minimally provide for a family living in the valley, while strawberry employment and wages do not. Immigrant families, moreover, are typically large and contain multiple wage earners who can assemble a sizable annual income by sharing resources. A preferred arrangement is to place the household head in year-round employment while the spouse and other family members find occasional part-time jobs weeding and thinning vegetable crops and perhaps harvesting strawberries in the spring and summer. An immigrant family who cannot place one or more workers in year-round or near year-round jobs, in contrast, 10 plastic plant pots must deploy all its available workers, including children, during the short but intense strawberry harvest to amass sufficient income to carry them over into the next employment season. Valley immigrants only rarely leave the area to seek employment elsewhere during both expected and unexpected periods of high unemployment and underemployment but rely on unemployment insurance and occasional odd jobs to tie them over. Immigrant families are not only large, but nearly 45 percent of them are extended; that is, they are made up of one nuclear family and at least one arrimado -usually a live-in relative. Many extended groups include two or more nuclear families with arrimados who share income, expenses, and household responsibilities. About one-third of the settled families, particularly those who arrived with the first waves, own their homes, while one-half of the families who rent have lived at the same address for at least three years. It is, therefore, a relatively stable population. Newcomers, those who arrived with the last wave, experience a more precarious existence and, as a result, frequently change domicile. There is, for instance, an observable annual concentration-dispersion cycle which corresponds with periods of high and low employment; that is, in bad times several families will converge, actually crowd, into a shared apartment, dispersing into separate homes as soon as better times return. Immigrant homes, finally, contain a considerable number of “visitors” who are either family and friends from the home community in Mexico or paying boarders. Settled families, in fact, represent a sort of haven for seasonal migrants, especially kin, who receive shelter and assistance while they remain in the valley during their annual trek from Mexico. On the other hand, by letting rooms, converted garages and other home facilities to non-kin during the farm employment peaks, immigrant families earn additional revenue with which to supplement an always insufficient farm income.
Settled immigrant families, in contrast with all other farm workers, lead relatively stable existences in the valley. They, in fact, enjoy a greater degree of employment security and many have set up permanent residences. As such, it would appear that settled families should not pose serious difficulties or obstacles to enumeration efforts. To accept this as a sound conclusion, however, would be a grave mistake. Settled families, to begin, harbor a significant number of unauthorized/undocumented immigrants who need to be protected from detection. Although IRCA amnesty provisions allowed many long-term undocumented immigrants to legalize, it forced many others who did not qualify for any of the programs, who were unable to assemble the required documents, or who just simply did not understand the new law to remain undocumented. IRCA also enticed many regular sojourners who already spent a great part of the year in the Santa Maria Valley to settle there permanently and to subsequently transplant their families from Mexico. Although these recent settlers received authorization to remain in the United States thanks to the Special Agricultural Workers program, the imported dependents have not been authorized. Finally, as indicated above, settled families habitually provide kin with sanctuary during their seasonal sojourn from Mexico to the valley and, hence, add to the growing number of undocumented aliens to be found in their midst. Because many of the undocumented are close kin, immigrant families will not readily or voluntarily reveal their presence to anyone; they are, rather, quite determined to shield them from detection and possible deportation. It is necessary to note that immigrants’ dogged determination to conceal undocumented relatives, even from innocuous surveyors, increases exponentially as the anti-immigrant sentiment we have witnessed in recent times swells. Local, state, and federal “get tough with immigrants” measures which, among other results, propose to bar children from school, deprive workers from access to basic health services, and rescind citizenship from the children of undocumented parents born in the United States are all unmistakable signs that the risk factor of detection is greater than ever. Cautious suspicion, as a result, is heightened to near paranoia when it is rumored that, among others, teachers, doctors, social workers, and “good” citizens at large will be asked, if not required, to report the presence of undocumented aliens to proper government authorities. Finally, because many immigrant families lease parts of their dwellings to non-kin sojourners, violating in the process local housing ordinances and rental agreements, they are not inclined to reveal or report their presence to anyone. Moreover, they can become particularly apprehensive about this matter because boarders provide an income that probably goes unreported to the Internal Revenue Service.Easy to confuse with the growing ranks of settled immigrant families described above are some 3,000 workers who, although they appear to have settled permanently in the Santa Maria Valley, really have not. That is, though they display evidence of settlement by having both consumers and producers living in stable and well-organized domiciles in the valley, they also continue to maintain a principal place of residence in the Mexican home community. Some actually own and maintain two homes, one in Mexico and the other in the Santa Maria Valley. Members of these families move back and forth between the two homes incessantly, some at regular intervals following, for example, farm employment cycles and school schedules, and others seemingly at random.