Katelyn Wilburn, Campus Carrier opinions editor
What would you do if you were told that you were inadvertently giving money to an organization that you do not support? Companies often do business with other organizations, and it can be difficult to keep up with what they fund. Nonetheless, it is extremely important to pay attention to what you are supporting so you can place your money into causes you approve of.
Unfortunately, this is more than a hypothetical at Berry. Aramark, the company we contract our dining hall work out to, is a company that provides food for Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities, as well as for prisons in the U.S., taking advantage of prison labor for lower wages. An investigation by the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) found that Aramark provides food services for detainees and workers in 450 U.S. prisons and jails, including some immigration jails.
This contract is unacceptable. Moving forward, Berry needs to only support businesses that do not profit from prisons and deportations. By partnering with a corporation that is deeply embedded in these systems, the college is aligning itself with practices many students find troubling.
Aramark uses prison labor to prepare and package food in some of the prisons in which it works. Their “IN2WORK” program employs over 6,000 incarcerated people in Aramark prison kitchens, many of them over full-time hours. The company, however, classifies incarcerated workers as ‘students’ instead of ‘employees,’ so they can pay less.
Using the prison system for cheap or free labor is unethical. It transforms incarceration into a business opportunity and uses people as cost savings. Work performed under the threat of punishment, without proper compensation or labor protections, raises serious concerns.
Not only does Aramark use unfair labor practices, but their food is also often inedible and dangerous. Michigan terminated a three-year, $145 million contract with the company because of misconduct. Michigan says that 16 former Kent County jail inmates filed a federal lawsuit in 2015 because they suffered food poisoning from rotten foods.
Beyond prison labor concerns, it is important to identify Aramark’s involvement with ICE. Their detention centers have faced widespread criticism over their treatment of detainees, and these centers often rely on private companies’ assistance. The agency is sustained through contracts with private corporations that provide food, transportation, medical care, surveillance systems and facility management. The system depends on companies that profit from the continued expansion of detention centers.
The most astounding aspect of this is that Aramark often hides the fact that they are providing services to ICE facilities. According to the AFSC report, in many cases, Aramark contracts with the companies and local authorities that operate the facilities where immigration detainees are kept. This loophole is a sneaky way for Aramark to cover their tracks and for companies using their services to avoid accountability. Berry needs to acknowledge the ethical implications of using Aramark’s services and take meaningful action.
There are some practical solutions. First, Berry needs to explore alternative dining providers who align with the Berry community’s morals. Find a company that provides ethical sourcing, fair labor standards and accountability. Maybe consider bringing dining services more directly under our institutional oversight, allowing Berry to maintain greater control over the working conditions, food sourcing and pricing structures.
Also, we must hold space for the workers already present in our dining hall. The best thing for Berry to do would be to offer jobs after breaking the contract with Aramark, that way we aren’t taking jobs away from the individuals who work hard to provide our food.
This issue simply comes down to integrity. Berry challenges students to examine societal issues and act with courage to resist. Ending the Aramark contract would not solve every problem in our prison or immigration systems, but it would ensure that Berry is not endorsing the cruel acts of correctional systems. If we expect students to think critically about where their money goes, then the institution must do the same.