Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Confessions of a Farm Boy

Anyone who knows me, knows I'm a farm kid.  Born and raised on the family farm north of Lethbridge, just outside the Village of Carmangay, it was a pretty modest upbringing.  We didn't have any animals (other than a few cats and the odd dog) but I spent more than a few hours in the tractor.

Truth be told, I had it pretty easy in terms of the amount of work I actually did.  My dad did the best he could to make sure I had the cushy jobs, like running swathers and combines, instead of doing the busier jobs like running truck.  I handled pre-seeding work for a couple of years, but he took control of the actual seeding (might have had something to do with a fertilizing accident I had early on, where I may have over-fertilized a field or two).  I ran a lot of errands, a lot of driving, became pretty good with a wrench.  I also learned a lot about the value of working hard, earning and saving money, and having (and sometimes changing) plans.

Naturally, I have more than a few questions about what the province has in mind with its Bill 6.  It's being dubbed the Enhanced Protection for Farm and Ranch Workers Act.  While some have called for Alberta to "get with the times" for a while now, there's also a pretty vocal group out there wanting to quash this thing before it even takes off.

Let me be the first to say, I'm all for farmers, their families and their workers to have some sort of protection.  One of my uncles lost his life in a farming accident.  I remember his funeral well, mainly because my sisters and I watched over his young son during the service.  Even to this day, I've never been 100% sure what kinds of programs and protection is out there for farmers and their workers, other than life insurance.  It's not like they're covered or pay into workers compensation or anything like that.

The thing is though, I don't know if the family farm would want to be under those kinds of programs.  It's not your typical work environment where you're working a typical 8-hour day.  You're not sitting behind a desk, 9-5.  There's a lot more to it than that, and I'm hoping that the government, as it goes through the consultations and drawing up of what will likely be some eye-opening legislation, realizes that.

Sometimes a calf is going to be born in the middle of the night, or maybe you need to put in that extra time to finish combining that field.  Does that mean the farmer or his hired hand gets to take a day off in lieu of that overtime?

Sometimes you're not working with the newest of equipment.  I worked in and on tractors, combines and other things that probably could have gone in a scrap heap years before I was born (I'm pretty sure my dad wanted a few of those contraptions to spontaneously combust once in a while).  But we fixed them all up and hobbled them along year-after-year.  Under the new legislation, will that equipment be deemed unfit to use?  And if it is, will that leave some farmers without equipment to use, and the prospects of closing down shop because they can't afford the newest and shiniest things?

Two recent incidents on farms in Alberta also have me wondering what would happen with similar cases in the future.

One involves three sisters who died in a tragic accident on a farm near Withrow last month.  It was at a family farm and had many people wondering how or why something like that could happen.  Under the new legislation, would you see the province step in to investigate?  Would we see a fatality inquiry of sorts, to determine if anything could be done to prevent similar deaths?  And would it be fair to make public the circumstances behind their deaths, potentially putting their upbringing and the parents' parenting abilities under the microscope (and not for a second am I questioning them in this case, but these are the tough questions that would need to be asked in the future if we go down this road).

The other incident involved a ten-year-old boy, who died running a forklift at a Hutterite colony near Killam last week.  Hutterite colonies are unique in their own way, as they're family farms to an extent, but also big enough to be considered a commercial operation.  Again, would Occupational Health and Safety walk onto the colony in a similar situation to determine who was at fault?  The question would likely be asked: why was a ten-year-old boy running a forklift?  Would the legislation allow for penalties to be levied against the colony?  Could they potentially be shutdown if certain rules and regulations aren't adhered to?

I would also be curious to know how the province would plan to police such legislation.  Would additional inspectors be hired to visit all farms (commercial, colony and family)?  What would they deem as acceptable work conditions?  Would you need to wear a hard hat every time you worked on machinery?  Would you need to be a certain age to do that work?  What kind of work would you be allowed to do? (For an example on this one: I was paid to cut the grass with both push-mowers and garden tractors, aka equipment.  That would make me a paid employee, subject to the same rules and regulations, I would assume, as someone who is paid to do other farm work.)

One other sidenote in all of this is the complexity of each farm.  No two farms are exactly alike.  Everyone's using different equipment.  Everyone has different crops in the ground.  They have different kinds of animals, with different numbers.  They also have different workforces (some have several hired hands, some have one, some are totally self-sufficient with family members only).  What about family or other friends who stop in each fall to help with harvest, and do the work for free?  Would they need to fill out paperwork in order just to run truck for a couple Saturdays in September?

I realize I've asked a lot of questions (and some are hypothetical) and given very few answers.  But that's the interesting thing in the province's announcement is that they don't even have a ton of answers.  So I'm hesitant to throw the province under the bus when we don't have the legislation in front of us.  But I do hope there's an understanding that this isn't going to be something that's easily fixed with a blanket bill that promises to make everyone safer.

Many farmers and their families choose to do what they do because of the lifestyle.  They don't have to adhere to the usual "rules of the world."  They work at their own pace, setting their own hours and their own rules.  The good farmers and ranchers have good hired hands, who work to make it a safe environment together.  They don't need government intervention to make it work.

Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't be held to high standards and I'm not saying safety shouldn't be taken into consideration.  But I do believe there should be an understanding that there's a difference between commercial operations where the top consideration is making money, and a family operation, where the primary focus is to make and create a living for you and your family.  Does anyone really think a family would put their loved ones (including children) at risk, just to make an extra buck?

Yes, mistakes do happen though.  You never thought about what would happen if a high-velocity chain snapped off and smashed into a back window of a truck you're driving (happened).  You never thought about what would happen if you climbed onto the top of the combine and stepped on some ice, slipping and falling a few metres down onto the rocker-bar (happened to someone I know who shall remain anonymous).  You never thought about trying to sneak between a pickup truck and the grain truck, in hopes of getting the combine auger over top of the grain truck, only to realize you've hit the pickup with your combine pickup (guilty as charged).  Mistakes happen.  It's an assumed possibility when you take the job.  Are we running the risk of creating more red tape for an industry that, for the most part, wasn't looking for protection in the first place?

I'm proud of my upbringing.  Like I said, it taught me everything I know about the value of hard work and dedication.  It made me who I am today and I wish more people had and would get that opportunity.  To the provincial government, I hope the time is taken to craft this legislation properly, and not rush only to make good on a campaign promise.

I leave you with this:

"I believe a person's greatest possession is their dignity and that no calling bestows this more abundantly than farming.  
I believe hard work and honest sweat are the building blocks of a person's character.
I believe that farming, despite its hardships and disappointments, is the most honest and honorable way a person can spend their days on this earth.
I believe farming provides education for life and that no other occupation teaches so much about birth, growth, and maturity in such a variety of ways.
I believe many of the best things in life are free: the splendor of a sunrise; the rapture of wide-open spaces; the exhilarating sight of your land greening each spring.
I believe true happiness comes from watching your crops ripen in the field and your children grow tall in the sun.
I believe my life will be measured ultimately by what I have done for my fellow man.
I believe in farming because it makes all this possible."

Author unknown, "The Farmer's Creed"

5 comments:

  1. Good write up Joe! Great points.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Excellent points in this article. I agree there are lots of unanswered questions. Two points... This legislation addresses a lot more than children working on family farms. It looks at fall protection, confined space entry, equipment maintenance, audits, training and much more. Your dad watched out for you and gave you the 'cushy jobs'. Not always the case with all families! Family run businesses, from restaurants to hotels, could argue the same as farmers but they have made it work. Passionate about Occupational Safety and saddened by every workplace incident.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the comments Sheila. And I totally agree, not everyone was as lucky as me, as much as you'd hope they would, given your kids are your blood, your family. I do believe a lot of the focus is/should be on the commercial operations, who are in it for the money and less in it for the lifestyle. We got a little more clarity from the premier on this front, which I think was a positive, as there should be some more discussion about how much they really want to crack down and how they plan to go about it. I guess you could say restaurants and hotels are a little different because you have a paying customer, sitting right there, so it would be pretty obvious to have your kids kicking around what's supposed to be a workplace, and the dangers in those places are pretty apparent. I will say farms are a little different in that you could perceive a lot of different tasks as having inherent risks. I do believe that we should all be striving to make farms safer, and I guess I'd like to think that most family farms/ranches are trying to do that every day. But as you said, not everyone's like that. That's why I think these discussions are good, as long as there is a discussion.

      Delete
  3. There is a management maxim out there that's pretty useful. "You can't manage what you can't measure." If reducing farming deaths and injuries is an honest goal the province of Alberta has (and I think it should) this type of legislation is how you do it. While we count the number of deaths on family farms until now we haven't been able to investigate and find out if this type of accident was preventable. Also serious injuries are not recorded either. By measuring and investigating serious incidents we can reduce the amount of death and serious injuries in the future. Tradition doesn't hold up to common sense on this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great points Duncan. And truthfully, I can see the positives to being able to investigate deaths and injuries. Especially in situations where you might be able to find something "actionable" in terms of being able to crackdown on something that isn't safe, it would actually serve the industry rather well. I guess my only question on that front would be hinge on whether the government felt the need to make changes or recommendations on every single situation. If an injury or death can be blamed on "stupidity" or "human error", then say so and move on. Don't try to add in new quirks to the legislation in hopes of avoiding similar incidents from happening again (which you see sometimes when recommendations are made in reports). One of the interesting debates I got into with a friend was about helmet use when you're dealing with cattle. Should everyone wear a helmet if they're in the barns (for example) as a safety mechanism in case you get a stampeding cow? It sounds like a really simple fix to stop head injuries, but how do you police it? Do you penalize those who are caught not wearing them? Suddenly I start questioning whether it's creating rules for the sake of creating rules (in a sense). I do agree that tradition shouldn't trump common sense, but there is a full debate to be had on this.

      Delete