Clucking Out: Australian Chicken Farmers Decry Exploitative Practices by Processing Giants
As Australians grapple with the soaring cost of living, chicken stands as a beacon of affordability in the nation's meat market. Yet, behind this facade of accessibility lies a tale of hardship for poultry growers, besieged by what they label as "unscrupulous" maneuvers orchestrated by dominant processors within one of Australia's most tightly controlled sectors.
With the average Australian consuming approximately 50kg of chicken annually—an amount that has doubled in the last thirty years—the Australian Chicken Growers Council (ACGC) contends that this surge in demand has come at a grave expense to the farmers. "Out of the $14/kg paid by consumers for breast or thigh meat, growers receive a mere $1," asserts Joanne Sillince, CEO of ACGC.
In a market where two major processors, Ingham's and Baiada Poultry, command a staggering 70% share, growers find themselves ensnared in contracts described as "unconscionable" and "inequitable" by Dr. Sillince. For Gary Ekert, a former chicken grower from New South Wales, the struggle against processor dominance was a two-decade-long battle that ultimately led to his exit from the industry. "The power wielded by processors allows them to dictate prices and squeeze growers," laments Ekert.
Despite legal victories in contract disputes, such as the case involving Ekert and several other growers, the toll exacted on those involved remains profound. "At the contract's end, we were told our farms were no longer needed," recalls Ekert, echoing the sentiments of many disillusioned farmers.
As a parliamentary committee delves into the complexities of supermarket pricing, farmer groups implore their peers to share their ordeals. However, the veil of fear shrouds many growers, preventing them from speaking out publicly. Tales of unjust negotiations, punitive measures, and paltry returns are recounted anonymously, revealing the omnipotent influence wielded by processing giants.
The looming specter of the dominant processors hangs over us like a guillotine," confides one grower, encapsulating the prevailing sentiment among the farming community. "We require fair compensation to sustain our livelihoods," asserts another, echoing the plea for equity in an industry teetering on the brink of collapse.
For those departing the sector, the experience is akin to residing in a "dictatorship," lamented by one farmer—a stark reminder of the dire straits faced by Australian chicken growers in their battle against entrenched powers.
Straining Under the Weight: Poultry Farmers Voice Concerns Beyond the Financial Realm
Amidst the mounting financial strain, poultry farmers across Australia grapple with the unseen toll exacted upon their emotional and psychological well-being. "It's like being at their mercy," they lament, highlighting a vulnerability inherent in their contractual relationship with powerful processors.
Unlike their counterparts in Australia's other meat industries, poultry farmers find themselves in a unique predicament—they do not possess ownership of the very chickens they tend. Instead, it is the processors who wield control over the birds, their genetics, hatcheries, plants, and distribution networks, leaving farmers with ownership of physical assets like land, sheds, and equipment.
In 2022, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) sounded the alarm, decrying the excessive power held by companies and warning of the potential "significant financial harm" posed to growers by their contracts. Despite calls for fairness, little change has materialized, leaving farmers disheartened.
The National Farmers Federation (NFF) asserts that a mandatory code of conduct is imperative for the industry's survival. After an exhaustive 18-month investigation, the NFF's final report, released on Wednesday, underscored the widespread lack of market transparency, misuse of power, and ensuing economic damage.
Proposed within the report is a code aimed at providing a regulatory framework ensuring confidence and fair trading for all participants in the poultry meat supply chain. Federal Agriculture Minister Murray Watt acknowledges the concerns regarding price and market transparency, affirming that "farmers deserve a fair price for their hard work," yet refrains from a commitment to a mandatory code, opting for careful consideration instead.
The Australian Poultry Meat Association (APMA) emphasizes the industry's national significance and underscores ongoing collaboration among stakeholders to sustain its growth. However, with at least 25 poultry farms currently on the market nationwide, fears for the industry's future intensify.
Despite attempts to solicit their perspective, major processors Ingham's and Baiada remain silent on the matter. As uncertainty looms over the industry's trajectory, the call for action resonates louder than ever, echoing the collective apprehension surrounding the fate of Australia's poultry farming sector.
In conclusion, the plight of Australian poultry farmers underscores not only financial struggles but also the emotional and psychological toll of their precarious position within the industry. Despite calls for fairness and transparency, little progress has been made in alleviating the burdens placed upon growers by powerful processors. The National Farmers Federation's proposed mandatory code of conduct offers hope for a more equitable future, yet the industry's fate remains uncertain. As stakeholders continue to grapple with these challenges, the need for decisive action to safeguard the livelihoods of poultry farmers and ensure the long-term viability of the industry has never been more urgent. It is imperative that policymakers, processors, and farmers alike come together to forge a path forward that prioritizes fairness, sustainability, and the well-being of all participants in the poultry meat supply chain.