LITTLE ROCK — Since the writer of this article never contacted Tyson Foods, or apparently any other poultry company, her story gives an unsurprisingly inaccurate view of poultry farming. The truth is that our company depends on all of our contract poultry growers and we want to see them succeed.
If the writer had called us, here are some of the points we would have made:
Tyson’s relationship with the overwhelming majority of our contract poultry growers is positive. Growing chickens under contract with companies like Tyson provides an opportunity for many small, family farmers to stay on the land and receive a more stable income than is offered by many other forms of agriculture.
Since the poultry company owns the chickens and provides the feed, contract growers are actually protected from market risks such as fluctuating grain prices and drops in wholesale chicken prices. Growers do supply utilities on their farms. In many areas Tyson helps offset some of the expense by providing energy allowances and also by encouraging growers to use energy-efficient housing and good management practices.
We receive many inquiries from people interested in becoming poultry farmers. In fact, most of our existing contracts were the result of someone approaching Tyson about growing chickens for the company. Our recruitment advertising for growers is limited and, to our recollection, has never targeted any particular ethnic group.
Our poultry growers are independent contractors and are not treated like employees. They are responsible for the day-to-day management of their farms. For example, they buy their own equipment, set their own hours, pay their own taxes and make their own decisions whether to hire labor. A breeder grower like Mr. Tawr probably sees a Tyson representative for about an hour once a week.
We work openly with prospective growers to learn about the financial aspects of poultry farming, including the expenses. We want them to fully understand the business so they will be successful. We also give copies of our contract to prospective growers all the time, well before they commit to anything.
Contract terminations are rare. In fact, broiler growers experiencing performance problems are typically asked to participate in a program that gives them as many as six flocks to improve their operation. A similar program exists for breeder growers.
Contrary to the impression left in the story, Tyson does not demand upgrades of a grower with an existing contract. When we have asked for upgrades before renewal of a contract, we have given notice far in advance of the contract expiration that the change was coming. The company also typically provides payment incentives to help pay for the cost of improvements.
It is also important to note the proposed GIPSA rule faces substantial opposition, not only from meat and poultry producers but also from members of Congress. Major producer groups such as the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Pork Producers Council and the National Chicken Council are opposed to the rule. In addition, 147 members of the House of Representatives last month urged the Secretary of Agriculture to withdraw and revise the proposed rule. This week the House adopted legislation that funds the USDA for fiscal 2012, but instructs USDA that no money can be used to implement the proposed GIPSA rule. According to a study by Informa Economics the GIPSA rule would result in job losses of nearly 23,000, with an annual drop in gross domestic product by as much as $1.56 billion dollars and yearly loss in tax revenues of $359 million.
Gary Mickelson is the spokesman for Tyson Foods, Inc.
Perspective, Pages 78 on 06/19/2011