Prison industries
Prison industries are programs that provide work opportunities for inmates within the prison system, aiming to equip them with employable skills and reduce recidivism rates. Established in the United States, notably through federal initiatives like Federal Prison Industries (FPI), these programs produce a variety of goods and services, ranging from furniture to clothing, and are often marketed to government agencies. Proponents argue that prison work helps foster a constructive environment, allowing inmates to gain valuable experience and skills that can aid their reintegration into society. However, criticism arises regarding the compensation for prisoners, with many earning less than $1 per hour, which some view as exploitative. Additionally, concerns have been raised about the quality of products produced and the potential negative impact on private-sector businesses. While some studies suggest that participation in these programs correlates with lower recidivism rates, critics also highlight issues such as inadequate working conditions and bureaucratic inefficiencies. Overall, prison industries remain a contentious topic, reflecting diverse perspectives on rehabilitation, justice, and economic fairness.
Subject Terms
Prison industries
SIGNIFICANCE: Proponents of prison industries cite reduced rates of recidivism among participants; critics, however, say the programs do not adequately compensate prisoners for their labor.
Prison industries provide work opportunities, directly or indirectly, for inmates in the prison system. Some observers view these as helpful for prisoners, while others believe that they either exploit prisoners or harm private-sector businesses.
The federal government and most states operate government-owned corporations that provide goods and services to consumers, although there are generally limitations on who can purchase those goods and services.
The government established the Federal Prison Industries (FPI) in 1934, by an act of Congress. Prisoners had previously provided goods and services through the auspices of the US Treasury Department. The new law permitted the FPI, using a trade name of Unicor, to keep surplus revenue as operating capital.
The aims of FPI are to teach employable skills to as many inmates as possible, to promote better environments at federal prisons by providing constructive opportunities for prisoners, and to produce and market high-quality goods for use by federal agencies while having minimal effects on the private sector.
The state prison industries organizations usually restrict purchases of their products to their state government or to qualified nonprofit organizations within their state. In most states, prison industries compete with private-sector business, although California requires that government organizations purchase needed materials from its Prison Industry Authority.
Prison Industries Products
Prison industries produce a wide range of products and services—not just license plates, as is popularly thought. Prison goods and services range from furniture, such as desks and other office equipment, to agricultural products to clothing. In Oregon, prisoners produce “Prison Blues” blue jeans, which have proved to be very popular. The California prison industries had sales of more than $150 million in 1998, according to a University of California at Berkeley study.
The FPI markets more than one hundred goods and services to federal agencies. Products include furniture, textiles, and electronic components. Services include data entry, engine repair, furniture refinishing, recycling, bulk mailing, and laundry services. In 2003, the FPI’s revenues exceeded $700 million and peaked in 2008 at $813.2 million. In 2023, FPI reported net sales of $389 million, while net income was $37.7 million.
Studies have suggested a lower rate of recidivism among participants in these programs, compared with inmates who have not been thus employed. Proponents of prison industries argue that prison industries are not just about earning money; rather, they are a means of promoting public safety. Supporters assert that participants in prison industries are not just the prisoners deemed most likely to do well outside prison; the participants are a broad cross section of the prison population. Prisoners who participate in this programs are also said to gain skills and work experience.
Criticisms of Prison Industries
Some observers argue that the goods produced are of limited quality and thus that prison industries furnish inferior goods to government agencies. A Government Accounting Office report in 1998 described some problems with the goods produced and the inability of the FPI to meet its published deadlines. The study clearly indicated problems but stated that some improvements had already been made.
Other critics argue that prison industries interfere with the business activities of law-abiding citizens. Some in Congress have sought to require government agencies to use competitive bidding rather than purchasing from the FPI. A measure that would have enacted this change was passed by the House of Representatives in 2004, but it did not pass in the Senate.
Prisoners’ net wages are typically less than $1 per hour because money is taken from their gross earnings to pay for administration of the prison industry program and for some of the expenses that the prisoners incur in confinement. Some critics of prison industries argue that this is tantamount to exploitation of prisoners, who do not have many of the legal rights and protections that non-prison employees have. Others assert that working conditions in prisons are usually inadequate or dangerous. For these and other reasons, consumers have protested against retailers who sell the products of prison labor programs. In 2016, Whole Foods announced it would stop selling goat cheese, tilapia, and other goods made by companies who had partnered with Colorado Correctional Industries, an inmate labor program in operation since 2011. Still others argue that such government corporations are inefficient because of their bureaucratic structures. For example, after its creation in 1983, the California Prison Industry Authority lost money in five of its first thirteen years of operation. Despite these criticisms, it is unlikely the politicians will change the system of prison industries because they are viewed by many as cost effective and fair to prisoners.
Bibliography
Burton-Rose, Daniel, Dan Pen, and Paul Wright, eds. The Celling of America: An Inside Look at the U.S. Prison Industry. Monroe: Common Courage, 1998. Print.
Cardwell, Diane. "Private Businesses Fight Federal Prisons for Contracts." New York Times, 14 Mar. 2012, www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/business/private-businesses-fight-federal-prisons-for-contracts.html. Accessed 9 July 2024.
Christie, Nils. Crime Control as Industry: Towards Gulags, Western Style. New York: Routledge, 2000. Print.
Fink, Eric M. “Union Organizing & Collective Bargaining for Incarcerated Workers.” Idaho Law Review, vol. 52, no. 3, Sept. 2016, p. 952. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=116881827&site=eds-live. Accessed 30 Jan. 2018.
"FY 2025 Performance Budget." United States Department of Justice, 2024, www.justice.gov/d9/2024-03/bop‗fpi‗fy‗2025‗pb‗narrative‗3.7.24‗omb‗cleared‗final‗1.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2024.
Goldman, George. The Economic Impact of Production in California’s Prison Industries. Berkeley: Dept. of Agriculture and Resource Economics, U of California at Berkeley, 1998. Print.
Richmond, Kerry M. "The Impact of Federal Prison Industries Employment on the Recidivism Outcomes of Female Inmates." JQ: Justice Quarterly Aug. 2014: 719–45. Print.
UNICOR Federal Prison Industries, Inc. 2020 Annual Report. Unicor, 13 Nov. 2020, www.unicor.gov/publications/reports/FY2020‗AnnualMgmtReport.pdf. Accessed 9 July 2024.