There's a 1 in 12 Chance Your V-Day Flowers Were Cut by Child Laborers

More

Most flowers come from Colombia and Ecuador, two countries with records of poor labor rights. But it doesn't have to be that way.

mf feb14 p.jpg

Workers in Cayambe, Ecuador prepare roses for export just before Valentine's Day / Reuters

More than one in three American adults will buy flowers today, spending $1.7 billion dollars on this Valentine's Day tradition. The majority of those flowers will come from Colombia and Ecuador, two of the world's leading producers. But these countries, and their flowers industries specifically, have troubled records of abusing workers or hiring children, and your well-intentioned roses might go toward supporting some of these practices.

Because the flower industry is driven by human labor, when demand skyrockets around Valentine's Day, Colombian and Ecuadorian growers can't just open a valve to increase production. They have to get more labor out of their existing employees, sometimes having them work up to 20 hours a day, and they have to hire on new workers. Often, that means children.

At least 8.3% of flowers in the U.S. were cut by child laborers in Ecuador, or about one in 12 stems, according to the most recent data. During the school year, 80% of the workers in Ecuador's enormous flower industry are children, according to a 2000 report by the International Labour Organization. That's the most recent data specific to the flower industry, but it may not have changed much; international pressure led Ecuador, in 2005, to launch reforms to reduce child labor, but as of 2010, 13% of the country's children are sill working, often in agriculture.

Far more of our flowers come from Colombia, where, according to the International Labor Rights Forum, "child labor has been successfully eradicated in Colombian flower plantations." Only a decade ago, an alarming State Department report on Colombia found that "children as young as 11 years of age work full time in almost every aspect of the cut flower industry." Though child labor is still a significant problem in coffee and sugarcane, getting children off of Colombia's flower plantations was a real success. What happened?

Believe it or not, a significant share of the credit goes to George W. Bush. In 2006, his administration started working with Colombia on a free trade deal, but he made it about more than just trade. The deal would require that Colombia meet and enforce certain worker's rights standards, including on child labor. Colombia, which for years had resisted pressure to improve worker's conditions, happily agreed. And why not? A free trade would be so great for Colombia's economy that ending child labor, allowing stronger unions, and improving basic services were well worth the trade-off. Congress finally approved the deal last year, and it is expected to go into effect by the end of 2012.

Still, even if the U.S. can push to end child labor on Ecuadorian flower plantations the way it did in Colombia, that won't make the industry much friendlier to its workers. Two-thirds of flower workers in both countries suffer from work-related health problems: mostly things like nausea or impaired vision, but sometimes asthma, birth defects, or even miscarriages. Labor rights organizations cite the industry's use of dangerous pesticides. The U.S. Labor Education in the Americas Project says that 20% of the pesticides are so toxic that they're either restricted or outright banned in the U.S. and Europe.

Women in Ecuador, who make up half of the country's flower work force, often face abusive conditions at plantations. Of the women interviewed by the International Labor Rights Forum in 2005, 55% said they'd been subject to sexual harassment at work and 19% that they'd been forced to have sex with a supervisor or coworker. This means that 5.7% of flowers you see for sale today were cut by women who'd been sexually harassed, and 2.0% cut by women who were forced to sleep with someone at work.

Jump to comments
Presented by

Max Fisher is a former writer and editor at The Atlantic.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Why Are Americans So Bad at Saving Money?

The US is particularly miserable at putting aside money for the future. Should we blame our paychecks or our psychology?


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

The Death of Film

You'll never hear the whirring sound of a projector again.

Video

How to Hunt With Poison Darts

A Borneo hunter explains one of his tribe's oldest customs: the art of the blowpipe

Video

A Delightful, Pixar-Inspired Cartoon

An action figure and his reluctant sidekick trek across a kitchen in search of treasure.

Video

I Am an Undocumented Immigrant

"I look like a typical young American."

Video

Why Did I Study Physics?

Using hand-drawn cartoons to explain an academic passion

Writers

Up
Down

More in Global

Just In