The Conveyor Belt Dilemma

One of the most common themes of this blog is the difficult trade-off between efficiency and social inclusion in the cooperatives, and how this relates to society in general. I want to briefly touch on one case that I believe exemplifies this dilemma: conveyor belts for sorting.

Since Henry Ford popularized them in factories in the early 20^th century, conveyor belts (and the ensuing doctrine of “Fordism”) have become the symbol of modern, capitalist manufacturing. They are the epitome of efficiency and control: automatic pace-setters that reduce tasks to dull monotony and turn the production line into one, smooth-running machine. To any casual observer, the beauties and evils of the conveyor belt are readily apparent.

In the recycling industry, conveyor belts for sorting materials have become a “best practice” among the large private companies. As this video shows, conveyor belts (especially state-of-the-art ones with automatic sorting features) are able to process large amounts of recyclables at a very rapid pace, relying on a team of workers to pick out specific materials that come past their station. This is much faster than the manual sorting (either on the ground or workbenches) commonly done by catadores. As the example of ITAURB shows, private companies in Brazil prefer conveyor belts to other alternatives for this very reason.

The best example of the supremacy of the conveyor belt is COOPERT, a CATAUNIDOS cooperative based in Itauna. The only organization in the network to employ a conveyor belt, COOPERT is able to process significantly more recyclables than any other group, thus giving its associates the highest average salary despite having some of the worst-quality materials. (According to a study by Dr. Lima’s team, the selective collection program in the municipality produces an 80% rejection rate, meaning that the grand majority of the material passing through COOPERT is, in fact, trash.)

A picture of the COOPERT conveyor belt:

If the conveyor belt is such an obvious boon to production, then how come it isn’t employed on a wider scale in the cooperatives? The answer is simple: many catadores cannot handle the rigors of this form of work. Many have physical disabilities or other issues that make work on a production line incredibly difficult. Others simply do not like the stress and monotony, or prefer to work at their own pace. Conveyor belts separate catadores into able and non-able individuals, replicating broader societal divisions caused by the labor market.

Conveyor belt technology represents a fundamental dilemma for the cooperatives. On the one hand, they allow the groups to increase their productivity, improving living standards and protecting the environment by processing more materials. On the other hand, they limit the ability of everyone to participate, as only the most able are fit to work on the production line, thus undermining the cooperative nature of the enterprise. Using the conveyor belt undermines the social mission of the group. Not using the conveyor belt undermines the economic and environmental mission of the group. Employing a mix (conveyor belt for some, hand-sorting for others), creates a two-tiered production system in the group, reinforcing inequalities.

I have a hard time solving the conveyor belt dilemma when I think about improving the situation at the cooperatives. A choice to use or to not use the technology must be made, but it seems nearly impossible to do so while still reconciling the economic, social, and environmental goals of the organizations. When even such a simple question as employing an industry-wide best practice becomes difficult, how is it possible to move forward?