The controversy over abuses at the Agriprocessors kosher meat plant in Postville, Iowa, sparked an intensive bout of soul-searching and intra-communal debate among American Jews — and helped fuel our national discussion about immigration.
A May 2006 investigation into working conditions at the plant by the Forward roiled the Jewish world, and heightened scrutiny of Agriprocessors, the country’s leading producer of kosher meat, and of its owners, the Rubashkins, a Brooklyn-based Lubavitch Hasidic family. But it was the massive federal immigration raid on the plant on May 12, 2008, that put the company in the national spotlight.
To mark the first anniversary of the raid — and the approaching third anniversary of the Forward’s initial report — we asked a diverse group of contributors to reflect on what this episode has taught us about immigration, labor, kosher food and Jewish community and values.
To Sanctify? Or Desecrate?
By Shmuel Herzfeld
One of the lessons of the Agriprocessors fiasco is that the world around us does not have a narrow, legalistic definition of the word “kosher.” To most of the world, kosher means that a given item is produced in complete accordance with sacred Jewish values. This understanding might be flawed, but it is nevertheless a definite reality.
Consequently, kashrut organizations and the communities that support them have the responsibility of living up to those expectations. We might not want such a responsibility, but we have no choice. Any product that is called kosher by a rabbi must adhere to strict standards of both Jewish law and ethics.
If we fail in this area, we will desecrate God’s name. But if we succeed in this daunting task, His name will be sanctified by our actions.
Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld is spiritual leader of Ohev Sholom-The National Synagogue in Washington, D.C.
Help Workers Help Themselves
By Sybil Sanchez
Sadly, the Agriprocessors story is nothing new, although some of its lessons may have to be learned anew.
If the Forward reported similar abuses of workers in a kosher food plant 75 years ago, readers would have known immediately what was needed: U-N-I-O-N. The only way for workers to prevent horrific working conditions is for them to have a voice through their union so that they can defend their most basic rights.
“It is up to the working people to save themselves,” famed labor leader Rose Schneiderman said in the aftermath of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist fire. “The only way they can save themselves is by a strong working-class movement.”
But with Agriprocessors, we saw how a determined company can thwart workers’ efforts to organize. That’s why we must support the Employee Free Choice Act, to remove hurdles to workers trying to join a union and secure decent contracts — and to stop situations like this from happening again.
Sybil Sanchez is executive director of the Jewish Labor Committee.
The Rubashkin Rorschach Test
By Avi Shafran
‘Rubashkin,” to me, conjures blackness. No, not as in clothing. As in a Rorschach blot. As a screen onto which people have projected their feelings about Jews, especially Orthodox ones.
A prosecutor and a judge denied former Agriprocessors plant manager Sholom Rubashkin bail in part because, like all Jews, he qualifies for automatic citizenship in Israel. Yes, what you smell is a whiff of the old “dual loyalty” stench.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal, the Forward reporter who spearheaded the Postville story described the Agriprocessors plant as a place where “Bearded, Orthodox rabbis… buzzed around,” ensuring adherence only to ritual laws and not values. The Orthodox Jew is painted as narrow-minded.
Non-Orthodox rabbis, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and others all eagerly shared their own dark visions of Agriprocessors.
Accusations were accepted as facts, revealing more about the critics than about their target.
So the lessons are not new ones: Jews, to many, are invidious. And the Orthodox have become the Jews’ Jews.
Rabbi Avi Shafran is director of public affairs for Agudath Israel of America.
Immutable Laws, Changing Times
By Menachem Genack
Though the laws of kashrut are immutable, conditions do change. We at O.U. Kosher adapt to these changes regarding food technology, plant design and all of the technicalities governing the modern production of food.
We also have to be concerned about the legal and ethical environment of the companies we supervise — a reality that the Postville episode underscored. If our field kashrut supervisors observe actions in a plant that break legal or ethical standards, they must report these to senior management — and we will act.
Ultimately, however, kosher-certification agencies such as ours rely on the federal and state agencies that monitor the multitude of workplace issues. But in the case of Agriprocessors, we saw how government itself can perform poorly. The immigration raid, with its helicopters, wholesale arrests, violations of due process and destruction of the local economy was a gross overreaction. Government actions must be proportional and also “kosher.”
Rabbi Menachem Genack is rabbinic administrator and CEO of O.U. Kosher.
Kosher Questions Awaiting Answers
By Joan Nathan
As someone connected to the Jewish food world, I have followed the Agriprocessors story closely. Frankly, it has not only upset but also embarrassed me.
We’ve learned — and the world has learned — that kosher doesn’t always mean adhering to a higher standard. As a result, this episode has prompted some real soul-searching about the meaning of kashrut: If we eat kosher meat that has been slaughtered without compassion, can we really call it “kosher”? (Indeed, would it not be better to buy meat from a local farm that we know raises and slaughters animals in a humane manner, even if it lacks kosher certification?) And just as we must have compassion for the animals we eat, aren’t we also obligated to respect the dignity of the workers who make this meat available to us?
How we answer these questions will determine how kashrut is perceived both by Jews and by our neighbors.
Joan Nathan, the James Beard Award-winning author of “The New American Cooking” (Knopf, 2005) and host of the PBS series “Jewish Cooking in America,” is currently working on a book about the food of the Jews of France.
Becoming More Observant Jews
By Jill Jacobs
The revelation that religious Jews were paying poverty wages and endangering workers’ safety in order to produce kosher meat has sparked widespread outrage. But our communal response — in the form of the Conservative movement’s Hekhsher Tzedek initiative and other similar efforts — showed that many Jews are unwilling to limit their religious observance to ritual practices such as Shabbat and kashrut.
Judaism demands consciousness in every aspect of life, from what we eat to the way we do business. Jewish law mandates standards for relationships between employers and employees, treatment of criminals, care for the poor and other civil matters.
It is easy to condemn Agriprocessors for their violations of both federal and Jewish law. But rather than limit our outrage to the most egregious cases, we should also look inward and ask whether our own institutions treat workers with dignity and pay them enough to support their families.
Rabbi Jill Jacobs is the rabbi-in-residence at Jewish Funds for Justice and the author of “There Shall Be No Needy: Pursuing Social Justice Through Jewish Law and Tradition” (Jewish Lights, 2009).
Twice Abused
By Jane Ramsey
In Postville, the Jewish community learned firsthand about a broken immigration system that does not reflect our values.
Workers who had already suffered injustices at the hands of Agriprocessors’ Jewish owners were further abused by federal authorities. They were arrested and convicted on criminal charges without due process. Families were torn apart; men and women were taken away in shackles. Many of those remaining in Postville, including children, were left without means to meet their basic human needs, including food and shelter.
Ensuing Jewish protests and an outpouring of support sprang from our deep wellspring of prophetic and Talmudic values, which demand: “Whoever is able to protest against the transgressions of the entire world and does not do so is punished for the transgressions of the entire world.” Today, as a result of Postville, Jewish communities feel the urgency of the need to prevent further human rights abuses and are mobilizing with allies to achieve comprehensive immigration reform.
Jane Ramsey is executive director of the Chicago-based Jewish Council on Urban Affairs.
Our House Divided
By Stephen G. Bloom
Jewish reaction to the Postville raids showed something most Jews already knew: There is a vast, irreconcilable divide within Judaism. Postville was a crucible. It demonstrated how greatly in opposition competing Jewish groups are today.
Ultra-Orthodox Jews rushed to the defense of the Postville Lubavitchers. More liberal Jews, recognizing the atrocious actions of some of the Lubavitchers in Postville, sought to undo the wrongdoing committed in that bucolic Iowa town.
Despite overwhelming evidence of misconduct in Postville, the Jewish community as a whole is still skittish about challenging the we-are-right, everyone-else-is-wrong mindset that prevails within ultra-Orthodoxy. In fact, if you disagree with certain elements of the ultra-Orthodox community, you’re dismissed as an antisemite or a self-loathing Jew. But that shouldn’t stop people of good will in our community from speaking up. Jews need to condemn all forms of injustice, exploitation and bias — particularly when the wrongdoers are fellow Jews.
Stephen G. Bloom is a professor of journalism at the University of Iowa and the author of “Postville: A Clash of Cultures in Heartland America” (Harcourt, 2000).
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Reconsider Decision on Rabbis and Intermarriage
Is Steven Hawking’s Decision To Boycott Israel a Boon to BDS?
Alas, Poor GOP: 3 D.C. Scandals That Weren't
Forced Out by Nazis, Grandmother Returns With Family to German Hometown 
Mother of Jewish Teen Killed on Brooklyn Bridge Speaks Out About Arrest
You've successfully signed up!
As Jews we are under the obligation to comply with the law of the land where we live. I find it abhorent that the Rubashakins do not feel themselves obligated to obey the law.
The Orthodox Union’s (OU) behavior seems to be more driven by a preoccupation with how it and its hecksher are perceived than by righteousness. In my view, this is due to OU’s mis-focused perception of the problem – as a threat to its authority when its behavior is publicly exposed; falling short of what Jews and others expect of it. Further, OU’s concern escalated when a path of vulnerability was opened to a new competitor’s hecksher. It seems to me that the spiritual context was ignored by OU, and by that failure, its stature was properly diminished. I offer my thoughts with the hope of doing some good. Seemingly to me, OU’s corrective actions were to push for new window dressing (recommending Agri should hire new officers and functional mangers) and to complain about the uneven application of the Federal Government’s secular authority. It did so instead of admitting what it might about its own role and actions, and then correcting its own behavior to conform with its own view of spiritual requirements; which give rise to spiritual meaning for Jews and for all humanity. OU must clearly express and should be held to its own standards. We fall into a trap of fallacious thinking if instead we compare OU with others’ behavior, whether the Federal Government’s or Reform Judaism’s. Compare OU’s behavior to its standards, and the latter to the entire context of Torah, which is the basis of OU's purpose -- the context, not the stovepipe. The article didn’t state precisely what the OU standard is, and excused conformance with it by mashgichim whom they claim didn’t know that minors were employed at Agri. Well, if they inspect lungs and the slaughtering process, shouldn’t they inspect for conformance with whatever the OU standard is for suitability of the employees? How old did those kids appear to be, and why was there no report about what OU’s expressed duties and actions when aware of this matter? Can food be suitable for consumption, in a spiritual sense, if human slavery (employing minors who cannot legally work or even to decide to work, whose circumstances are driven by the economic and other oppressions of their society that then corrupt ours) is involved in its production? Can any attempt to act in ways that might be seen as permitting even a question of God’s honor be allowed by those who attest to possess spiritual authority? Nadab and Abihu present the demonstration project concerning misplaced spiritual authority in Leviticus 10:1 to 10:3; and (please understand the need for a verbosity here) the overarching duty -- for those who would be permitted -- to be near to Him -- to prove His holiness -- before all People and -- to accord honor to God – which means no stovepipes. OU’s spokeman states: "Our focus is on what we know - the Shulchan Aruch, the halachos of kashrus." Is that all they know? Can OU kashrut practice imply that OU limits God’s Law to a ritual slaughtering stovepipe, thereby ignoring human oppression and permiting the corrupting of our own religious and secular society? Obviously, this is now the problem. I’d welcome a response from OU, and from other religious authorities. Again, I'm hopeful that some good would come from it.
1) i have only tasted "rubashkin" products once, and i will pay good money never to have to taste them again. it was vile and had little or no resemblance to meat.
2) the torah contains many laws in addition to kashruth. for example, it commands us to treat our servants ethically and not to oppress the stranger in our midst. it also says that "dina di malkhuta dina". it would seem that the postville plant broke several of these commandments. some organizations will withdraw their hekhsher if the owners aren't shomrei shabbat, so why not for buying forged documents?
3) i find the comments by Rabbi Avi Shafran, the director of public affairs for Agudath Israel of America, completely reprehensible. i am not a jewish anti-semite, and i do not hate hassidim for any reason - i have my customs as they have theirs. but i will also not cover up for a criminal just because his mother was jewish, or because he makes occasional generous donations to my favourite charity (from the profits of his crimes). his insinuations do not absolve agriprocessors of the charges, or of the rabbinic commandment to obey civil laws - they apply equally to jews, even if they have long beards and black hats. i am left to wonder if agudath israel of america staunchly defends every jew charged with a criminal offence, or only those who donate generously?
Stephen G. Bloom says: "if you disagree with certain elements of the ultra-Orthodox community, you’re dismissed as an antisemite or a self-loathing Jew.
This is not true applied to Stephen G. Bloom. As he sat in his car, chewing on his cheeseburger, just before presenting himself to the Lubavitch community as a "Lost Jew" and knowing that he would be welcomed with open arms, he was already planning all the crude lashon hara and pre-conceived nasty accusations that he would use against the community that HE KNEW was going to welcome him with open arms. He never brought up his "disagreements" while he was enjoying their hospitality, sleeping in their beds, gobbling their shabbos meals.
He owes the families that he deceived with an apology.
Stephen G. Bloom should also take a visit to the website http://www.judicial-inc.biz/ to "shep nachas" from the research he accomplished, which is proudly displayed on this Jew-hating, neo-Nazi website. Thank you Stephen G. Bloom! Wow you are so famous!
Babushka, here’s a really, really wild idea, one that has undoubtedly never crossed your mind before, but one you might want to consider if you’d like to be taken seriously by anyone on the planet Earth other than cult members, missionaries, and religious fanatics.
To wit: how about offering a single factual example – I mean A SINGLE ONE – of “the crude lashon hara and pre-conceived nasty accusations” you claim Stephen Bloom has perpetrated against the Lubavitch community. Now, I understand – pursuant to your description – that Mr. Bloom “gobbled” his meals, while others merely ate them, as well as the fact that – God, please say it isn’t so – he was “chewing on his cheeseburger” while sitting in his car plotting his calumny against the poor, humble, pious Rubashkins. Moreover, I certainly don’t mean to suggest the assorted acts of theft, fraud, and other Rubashkin felonies are nearly as serious as eating a cheeseburger, or that the essence of Judaism consists of “tikkun olam” or other such narashkeit, rather than calculating the number of dust mites on a head of lettuce. Still, I suspect you could make your case even stronger if you decided cite a single . . . you know, FACT . . . in support of these claims.
Why is anyone surprised at how the Orthodox conducted themselves at Postville? The trick to surviving psychologically in America is to insert oneself into the pecking order so that one has someone to peck on and not only be pecked on. Isn't it nice that the Orthodox have found someone to peck on - workers and lowly illegal immigrants - and thus risen from the bottom of the pecking order? It stands as proof of the Americanization of the Orthodox who seem thoroughly assimilated, at least in the economic sense.
(The background music is provided by Avi Shafran, whose plaintive wails of victimhood rend the air.)