Laserfiche WebLink
<br />P1annir'jcr <br />M t !HHHlO <br />By Max Eisenburger <br /> <br />"':t! n 0' =; n n. ~ n oF? fO r~ D a . ~ -=; h F; Ii'" r:, ni t. e r. c <br />CL i '_~ Lv - Ii I . ~ p . \! Ld u U I - F !. --) <br />Y" ' .I ~ '"='" 'b t! '*=>' <br /> <br />Over the last decade, worker centers serving day laborers have sprouted in communities <br />across the country. Because day laborers represent the most visible face of immigration, <br />worker centers frequently court controversy. <br /> <br />Yet at a local level, these centers offer hope <br />for planners attempting to balance day labor- <br />ers' need for employment against the wider <br />community's interest in maintaining orderly <br />appearances and traffic safety. <br />Day labor is defined byvery short <br />employment periods, often spanning several <br />hours or days. The terms of employment are <br />frequently subject only to verbal agreement, <br />and this, along with the precarious legal sta. <br />tus of many day laborers, le"ds to high levels <br />of employer abuse. Nonpayment of wages and <br /> <br />hazardou? working conditions are routine, and <br />day laborers who 5\peak up are often verbally <br />or even physically threatened. At the same <br />time, unregulated day labor comers often <br />present communiti,es with a host of negative <br />impacts. Employers may stop their vehicles in <br />the middle ofbusy arterials or stop across the <br />.street to pick up workers, causing congestion, <br />traffic conflicts, accidents, and pedestrian <br />crashes. With no \1\(aste receptacles or bath- <br />rooms nearby, day laborers may have few <br />alternatives to littering or urinating in public. <br /> <br />68 <br /> <br /> <br />The throngs of men (the vast majority of day <br />laborers are male) standing on street comers <br />can also create unease among passersby and <br />generate concerns among adjacent busi- <br />nesses about lost revenue. <br />In the face of these challenges, worker <br />centers offer the best hope of helping day labor- . <br />ers fight abusive work relations, while also <br />addressing the common safety and aeSthetic <br />concems that communities with infonnal day <br />labor comers often have. Worker centers pro- <br />vide a space off the street where day laborers <br />and employers can negotiate wages, and also <br />set rules and expectations of behavior that both <br />parties must follow in ex,change for the privilege <br />of using the center's facilities. But the opening <br />of new worker centers is often plagued by a lack <br />of accurate information and reliance on conjec- <br />ture. This is unfortunate because planning can <br />play an important role in ensuring a new cen- <br />ter's success, both in siting a centerto attract <br />the maximum number of workers and in lessen- <br />ing the impacts that worker centers are likely to <br />generate. <br />This issue of Zoning Practice draws on a <br />. wide array of literature on day labor and worker <br />centers, interviews with worker center staff and <br />local government personnel, and the author's <br />own experience as a volunteer and researcher <br />at both an infonnal day labor comer and a <br />worker center in Chicago. Its intent is to provide <br />communities with the basic infonnation and <br />tools necessary to establish a center that meets <br />u'le needs of both workers and the community, <br />while also anticipating and curbing some of the <br />impacts that a day labor center is likely to have <br />on its surrounding neighborhood. It does not <br />discuss the administration of worker centers, an <br />issue critical to the success of any center, but <br /> <br />ZONINGPRACTlCE 9.07 <br />AMERICAN PL~NNING ASSOCIATION I page 2 <br />