The Oregon Department of Corrections Amid Covid-19 (Part Three)
Incarcerated workers do laundry for the medical industry—and are exposed to whatever is on it.
BY MICHAEL D. KELL
PART ONE (3/26)
PART TWO (4/15)
PART THREE (4/23)
PART FOUR (5/13)
PART FIVE (5/14)
PART SIX (5/26)
PART SEVEN (8/14)
PART EIGHT (9/29)
MY PREVIOUS PIECES have been primarily focused upon the current state of affairs of the department and a logical analysis thereof. This piece is geared more to the analysis of both past and present practices as well as the possible future of corrections in Oregon.
In the original article I mentioned the fact that the OCE Laundry at the penitentiary in Salem has been processing Covid-19 infected laundry. This matter presents a number of potential issues of concern: there is the government’s legal liability involved in utilizing prison labor in a potentially life-threatening environment, the safety issues involved in doing such a thing in the first place, and, perhaps most importantly, there is the matter of anti-trust law as it applies to said labor.
To begin with, we must understand that the Oregon State Legislature only gave the Department of Corrections leave to promulgate the Oregon Corrections Enterprises upon the agreement that it would hold its private sector partners to the strictest operating standards. The federal anti-trust laws are very clear that companies may not take advantage of disenfranchised laborers.
Commercial laundries typically offer special training programs re: the handling of biohazardous materials, as well as higher compensation schedules for such labor. The OCE laundry at the penitentiary in Salem has yet to provide any specific formal training to its prison labor workforce for the handling of Covid-19 infected material. Although it is true that OHSU sent staffers to the prison with PPE for the laundry workers, this equipment was depleted long ago and has not been replenished. In fact, only the workers on the intake segment of the facility are utilizing PPE, and even then, they lack proper respiration barriers. The facility has historically allowed unacceptable cross-contamination between its intake (dirty) and output (clean) segments by allowing contaminated equipment and personnel to freely travel between these segments without any decontamination procedures at all. In the face of this particular pathogen, such practice is potentially life threatening and therefore entirely unacceptable.
Following the testicular radiation experiments of the 1970s on Oregon’s prison population, and the class-action lawsuits that they brought, Oregon legislature enacted laws protecting inmates from such exploitation. During the early days of this pandemic, the intake segment of the laundry observed that packages being delivered were plainly marked “Biohazard COVID-19.” Closely held sources have indicated that conversations were overheard between OCE staffers and medical contractors in which instructions were given to discontinue marking packages “COVID-19.” These instructions not only create an even greater risk to prison laborers by presenting a situation where the laborer does not know when a package may contain this highly infectious pathogen, but they also display an unconscionable level of unethical conduct by the corrections staff. Due to age and/or medical conditions, many of the laborers working in the laundry at the penitentiary are at high risk of dying from Covid-19. Given the state’s liability and this heightened level of risk, it is irresponsible and ultimately untenable to continue utilizing prison labor for this duty.
That said, it is inarguable that hospitals and frontline healthcare workers will continue to depend on the support of the OCE laundry, which happens to be one of the region’s largest commercial laundries. However, considering the state’s current unemployment rate, and the increased liability involved with depending on the prison population to operate the laundry, it is this writer’s opinion that it should be private sector’s unincarcerated labor force doing the work and taking the risks.
Realizing the scope of the issues presented in this piece, it should be obvious to any knowledgeable reader that the policies, procedures, and ethics of the operation of the Oregon Corrections Enterprises be revisited and drastically reshaped.
Michael D. Kell is an inmate at Oregon State Penitentiary.
