Prison Labor Enslaves. But Can it Restore?

The modern prison-industrial complex is fueled by profit-making enterprises like private prison management, prison services (JPay), and of course, “correctional industries” — the feel-good word for prison labor. While the United Nations condones obligating prisoners to reasonable work assignments, prison labor in America is situated within a complex context characterized by a capitalist economy and historic, systematized racism.

The passage of the 13th amendment brought an end to legal slavery “except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” Convicted criminals could legally be employed as slaves, and under the Black Codes, recently freed slaves were speedily imprisoned, soon constituting the
largest percentage of the hired-convict labor force. Between 1865 and 1879, the percentage of Nashville prisoners who were African American rose from 33% to 67%. By the turn of the century, the prison population across the South had increased by tenfold, and the racial makeup of inmates from Louisiana to North Carolina hovered around 70% Black, reflecting the racial disparities of the modern U.S. criminal justice system.

With the advent and subsequent abolishment of practices like convict leasing and chain gangs, the face of prison labor continued to morph throughout the twentieth century. Through it all, the profitability of a captive workforce has remained impossible to ignore. In recent decades, prison labor has been used widely by corporations including Boeing, Microsoft, McDonald’s, and Walmart, either by employing inmate workers or by subcontracting with suppliers who do. While current federal policies such as the Prison Industry Enhancement Certification Program are intended to govern the use of ethical prison labor, most inmates work outside of the confines of federal law — for less than $1 per day and without substantial benefit to their crime victims or their families. Reports from many facilities suggest health, safety, and human rights violations abound. Further, it is impossible to ignore that the prison labor force, employed largely in agricultural, industrial, and service-orientated tasks, is largely black and poor.

Lest I become an armchair critic nestled in my ivory tower of academia, I am forced to consider how to respond to this knowledge in a way that provides an actionable policy solution. Frankly, I don’t think that solution is to abolish prison labor schemes. Society wishes for prisoners to be usefully employed, and inmates themselves are at least occasionally grateful for beneficial employment that offers skill development and meaningful work.

Restorative justice provides a useful framework for considering how prison labor could be used to repair rather than exacerbate harm. From a restorative justice framework, meaningful prison enterprises offer the opportunity to return resources to victims as well as the communities depleted by crime and
incarceration, and restore accountable inmates to full citizenship. What if states and communities, instead of corporations, benefitted from the fruits of inmate labor? Innovative initiatives such as those in the Washington State and Colorado State Departments of Corrections offer inmates transferable skill development, provide a service to the community, and improve the institutional environment.

Here’s what I envision a restorative labor landscape might look like:

Principle 1. Inmates have the right to choose whether to work in “outside” employment, and when possible, to choose between available work assignments. In particular, work that benefits individuals and communities harmed by crime — as opposed to work related to the maintenance of the prison — should be voluntary.

Principle 2. Inmate labor assignments are subject to health and labor standards consistent with a human rights approach.

Principle 3. Inmate labor is paid at a prevailing minimum wage, with transparency in both wages and wage deductions. Low wages reduce
inmates’ ability to repay their victims or support their families. Wages should be redirected at a fair rate to provide financial reparations to those most harmed by the crime, including the direct survivors of the crime and the inmate’s dependent family members.

Principle 4. Inmate work assignments that benefit external agencies or corporations should develop workers’ skills and competencies and should support their access to employment upon release.

Principle 5. Inmate labor provides restorative relief for those harmed by crime in the following order: (1) immediate victims/survivors of the inmate’s crime, (2) the inmate’s dependent family, (3) the communities of the inmate and the crime survivors, and finally (4) society-at-large, who is affected by the cycles of crime and incarceration directly and indirectly. Inmate labor should not benefit private or for-profit corporations to the detriment of those
harmed by the crime.

Principle 6. Prison labor practices are governed by transparency. For any of these principles to take effect, the acquisition and use of inmate labor must be transparent. The public should have open access to information about prison labor contracts, inmate wages, and private profits.

Does restorative justice provide a path for inmate labor that restores instead of enslaves?