California voters to decide if forced prison work constitutes slave labor and should be prohibited

When Richmond resident Lejon “Fahim” Reese was transferred to Vacaville’s Solano State Prison in December 1993, he was just beginning to serve his time for a gang-related homicide. Then he was told how to spend that time. 

The Unit Classification Committee, the state body in charge of inmate work assignments, assigned him the role of prison porter, a janitor-like position cleaning floors, hallways, and stairs. Reese refused, hoping to receive specialized vocational training. The UCC did not oblige this request.

“I wanted something better,” said Reese, noting that his refusal led to a loss of privileges. 

After some time, Reese complied, working as a clerk filing forms and doing other office tasks. He did manage to get his vocational training as an iron worker, but that wasn’t until 2018.  

In this election, voters are being asked to discontinue the practice. Proposition 6 would amend the California Constitution and remove a provision that allows jails and prisons to use involuntary servitude to punish crime. Richmond City Council has endorsed the proposition, seeing it as a moral imperative and an opportunity to imagine a new approach to criminal justice reform. 

‘Bottom line is money’

If passed, Prop. 6 will have far-reaching effects on the people of Richmond, a city with the highest rate of incarceration in Contra Costa County, according to a Public Health Institute study. A third of those on parole in the county live in Richmond, the study shows. 

According to an analysis of the proposition by the California Senate Appropriations Committee, “incarcerated individuals cannot refuse a job assignment and may be disciplined for refusing or failing to show up to work.” This refusal of work can lead to “limitations on visits, phone calls, canteen purchases, and yard, entertainment, and recreation access.”

Reese said if an inmate refuses work for whatever reason, “that will follow you throughout your whole prison time.” Notably, the Senate Appropriations analysis stated that inmates can be assigned work in lieu of enrollment in a work program without the individual’s consent.

The proposal would explicitly add language to the California Constitution that says: “slavery and involuntary servitude are prohibited.” Proponents of the proposition say the current prison labor system amounts to slavery, with prisoners often forced or pressured to do tasks like manufacturing license plates, alfalfa farming, or even fighting wildfires. Apart from fighting fires, most prisoners often work for less than $1 an hour. 

“They need my body,” Reese said. “It’s all about a body count. The more bodies filling jobs, the more money the system will make. The bottom line is money. Education is not a priority.” 

Though Prop. 6 passed in the California Legislature with a resounding victory, and there is no major opposition campaign from the few organizations against it, like the Howard Jarvis Tax Association, there is no guarantee the measure will pass. In fact, polling from the Public Policy Institute of California shows many voters skeptical, with only 41% supporting Prop. 6 and 56 percent opposed.

A similar measure placed on the ballot in 2022 failed, after the California Finance Department estimated a $1.5 billion price tag for taxpayers. At that time, advocates wanted prisons to pay minimum wage for inmate labor. This year, Prop. 6 has steered clear of demanding a specific wage and left open voluntary work assignments with payments determined by the Department of Corrections. 

‘Unfair to taxpayers’

“We think it will have a negative impact on taxpayers by raising the cost of operating prisons,” said Susan Shelley, vice president of communications at the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association in Sacramento.

“State prison inmates work mostly at jobs that are involved with running the facility, such as cooking, and cleaning and laundry,” Shelly said. The association believes the constitutional change will lead to higher taxes because prisons will have to incentivize individuals with higher pay, or make up for lost labor by hiring outside workers to operate prison facilities “Either way, it’s going to be more expensive for taxpayers,” Shelley said. 

Reese disagrees. “They’ve been spending money on wars for years,” he said, describing the priorities of government budgets. “They got homelessness out here. They got blight out here. Put my money where it should be. Don’t put a dollar figure on wanting to get an education.” 

Proponents of Prop. 6 also argue that giving prisoners autonomy will give them the choice to spend more time on rehabilitation programs, like GED education or vocational training. Opponents see involuntary work assignments as prisoners paying their debt to society. 

“We view this work as part of a rehabilitation program,” said Shelley. The Tax Association also believes it’s a question of fairness. “To say to the taxpayers, you have to work and pay taxes and people who have been sentenced to crimes do not have to work, and you have to pay them more money if you want them to work, we think that’s perhaps a little bit unfair to taxpayers.” 

To Reese, who has spent most of his life in prison since the age of 17, forcing someone to do work that they don’t want to do is deeply traumatizing and an affront to their autonomy. 

“When the judge ruled my sentence at 25 to life, that’s my debt to society,” he said. “I was told to serve my time, not how to spend that time.” 

Reese has been on parole since 2018. After his release, he graduated from an apprenticeship program for metal workers and now works in Richmond, where his family still lives. Today he runs a nonprofit called Motivated2HelpOthers, which focuses on preventing at-risk youth from incarceration and early death, through mentorship, fitness, and educational activities.

“You’re forcing a person not to think for themselves,” Reese said, referring to forced prison labor. “You are telling me how to think. You’re telling me that education at this particular time is not good for me. How dare you?” 

---

Skinner’s exit means the East Bay will elect a new state senator. Here’s where the candidates stand on the issues