Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:49:24.792Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gender and job characteristics of slaughter industry personnel influence their attitudes to animal welfare

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

EE Wigham ,
A Grist ,
S Mullan ,
S Wotton  and
A Butterworth
EE Wigham*
Affiliation:
Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
A Grist
Affiliation:
Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
S Mullan
Affiliation:
Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
S Wotton
Affiliation:
Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
A Butterworth
Affiliation:
Bristol Veterinary School, University of Bristol, Langford, Bristol BS40 5DU, UK
*
* Contact for correspondence: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The aim of this study was to gain an understanding of the attitudes that those involved in the slaughter industry have towards animal welfare and animal welfare aspects of their work, and also to investigate if gender or characteristics of employment (eg previous training, role and experience) influence such views. A paper questionnaire consisting of 20 Likert items regarding either animal welfare or working in the slaughter industry and seven questions designed to gather information on participant gender and job characteristics was distributed to attendees at eleven Animal Welfare Officer (AWO) and Poultry Welfare Officer (PWO) courses run by the University of Bristol. Responses were received from 215 personnel involved in the slaughter industry. It was found that the views of the majority of the respondents towards animal welfare were positive. Being female, working routinely with mammals, having a longer period of time working in the industry, and having previous AWO/PWO training course experience were all associated with significantly more positive attitudes towards animals and working in the slaughter industry; while working with birds, and working in an enforcement or stockperson role had a significant negative influence on the response to some animal welfare- and employment-related statements. Although it should be considered that individuals attending an animal welfare course may already have an interest in animal welfare, the results suggest that gender and employment factors do influence attitudes to animal welfare in the slaughter industry, and that the origins and reasons for development of certain negative views warrant further investigation.

Keywords

animal welfareattitudesgenderquestionnaireslaughter industrywelfare training
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , August 2020 , pp. 313 - 322
Copyright
© 2020 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Ajzen, I 1985 From intentions to actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior. In: Kuhl J and Beckman J (eds) Action Control pp 11–39. Springer: Heidelberg, Germany. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ajzen, I 1991 The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-TCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ajzen, I and Fishbein, M 1980 Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, USAGoogle Scholar
Baran, BE, Rogelberg, SG and Clausen, T 2016 Routinized killing of animals: Going beyond dirty work and prestige to under-stand the well-being of slaughterhouse workers. Organization 23(3): 351–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508416629456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beveridge, LM 1996 Studies on the influence of human characteris-tics and training on stockperson work performance and farm animal behaviour. PhD Thesis, University of Aberdeen, UKGoogle Scholar
Bock, BB, Van Huik, M, Prutzer, M, Eveillard, FK and Dockes, A 2007 Farmers’ relationship with different animals: the importance of getting close to the animals. Case studies of French, Swedish and Dutch cattle, pig and poultry farmers. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 15(3): 108–125Google Scholar
Carless, SA, Fewings-Hall, S, Hall, M, Hay, M, Hemsworth, PH and Coleman, GJ 2007 Selecting unskilled and semi-skilled blue-collar workers: The criterion-related validity of the PDI-employment inventory 1. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 15(3): 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00392.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockram, MS and Dulal, KJ 2018 Injury and mortality in broilers during handling and transport to slaughter. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 98(3): 416–432. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjas-2017-0076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, GJ 2004 Personnel management in agricultural sys-tems. In: Rollin BE and Benson J (eds) Maximizing Well-being and Minimizing Suffering in Farm Animals pp 167–181. Iowa State University Press: Ames, USA. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470344859.ch9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, GJ and Hemsworth, PH 2014 Training to improve stockperson beliefs and behaviour towards livestock enhances welfare and productivity. Revue Scientifique et Technique 33(1): 131–137. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.33.1.2257CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coleman, GJ, Hemsworth, PH and Hay, M 1998 Predicting stockperson behaviour towards pigs from attitudinal and job-related variables and empathy. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58(1-2): 63–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(96)01168-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, GJ, Hemsworth, PH, Hay, M and Cox, M 2000 Modifying stockperson attitudes and behaviour towards pigs at a large commercial farm. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 66(1-2): 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00073-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, GJ, McGregor, M, Hemsworth, PH, Boyce, J and Dowling, S 2003 The relationship between beliefs, attitudes and observed behaviours of abattoir personnel in the pig industry. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 82: 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(03)00057-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, GJ, Rice, M and Hemsworth, PH 2012 Human-ani-mal relationships at sheep and cattle abattoirs. Animal Welfare 21: 15–21. https://doi.org/10.7120/096272812X13353700593329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillard, J 2008 A slaughterhouse nightmare: Psychological harm suffered by slaughterhouse employees and the possibility of redress through legal reform. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy 15: 391Google Scholar
Donaldson, MJT 1993 What is hegemonic masculinity? Theory and Society 22: 643–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00993540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EC 2009 Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:sa0002Google Scholar
EFSA 2013 Scientific Opinion on monitoring procedures at slaughterhouses for poultry. The EFSA Journal 11: 3521. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3521Google Scholar
English, P, Burgess, G, Segundo, R and Dunne, J 1992 Stockmanship. Improving the Care of the Pig and other Livestock. Farming Press Books: Ipswich, UKGoogle Scholar
Eurostat 2019 Data on slaughtering in slaughterhouses. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.doGoogle Scholar
Fishbein, M and Ajzen, I 1975 Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley: Reading, USAGoogle Scholar
Fitzgerald, AJ 2010 A social history of the slaughterhouse: From inception to contemporary implications. Human Ecology Review 17: 58–69Google Scholar
Gallo, CB and Huertas, SM 2016 Main animal welfare problems in ruminant livestock during pre-slaughter operations: a South American view. Animal 10: 357–364. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731115001597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1988 Behavior of slaughter plant and auction employ-ees toward the animals. Anthrozoös 1: 205–213. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279388787058335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 1998 The feasibility of using vocalization scoring as an indicator of poor welfare during cattle slaughter. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 56: 121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(97)00102-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 2003 Transferring results of behavioral research to industry to improve animal welfare on the farm, ranch and the slaughter plant. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 81: 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00282-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grandin, T 2005 Maintenance of good animal welfare standards in beef slaughter plants by use of auditing programs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 226: 370–373. https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.2005.226.370CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grandin, T 2018 Welfare problems in cattle, pigs, and sheep that persist even though scientific research clearly shows how to pre-vent them. Animals 8: 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8070124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, L and McCabe, D 2016 ‘It’s just a job’: Understanding emotion work, de-animalization and the compart-mentalization of organized animal slaughter. Organization 23: 330–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508416629448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartnack, S, Springer, S, Pittavino, M and Grimm, H 2016 Attitudes of Austrian veterinarians towards euthanasia in small animal practice: impacts of age and gender on views on euthana-sia. BMC Veterinary Research 12: 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-016-0649-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, P, Coleman, G and Barnett, J 1994 Improving the attitude and behaviour of stockpersons towards pigs and the consequences on the behaviour and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 39: 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)90168-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH, Barnett, JL and Coleman, GJ 1993 The human-animal relationship in agriculture and its consequences for the animal. Animal Welfare 2: 33–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH and Coleman, GJ 2011 Human-Livestock Interactions: The Stockperson and the Productivity and Welfare of Intensively Farmed Animals, Second Edition. CAB International: Oxford UK. https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845936730.0000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH, Coleman, GJ, Barnett, JL, Borg, S and Dowling, S 2002 The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stockpersons and the behavior and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 80: 68–78. https://doi.org/10.2527/2002.80168xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hemsworth, PH, Rice, M, Karlen, MG, Calleja, L, Barnett, JL, Nash, J and Coleman, GJ 2011 Human-animal interactions at abattoirs: Relationships between handling and animal stress in sheep and cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 135: 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.09.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendrix, JA and Dollar, CB 2017 American slaughterhouses and the need for speed: An examination of the meatpacking-methamphetamine hypothesis. Organization & Environment 31: 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026617697038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herzog, HA, Betchart, NS and Pittman, RB 1991 Gender, sex role orientation, and attitudes toward animals. Anthrozoös 4: 184–191. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279391787057170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huertas, S, van Eerdenburg, F, Gil, A and Piaggio, J 2015 Prevalence of carcass bruises as an indicator of welfare in beef cattle and the relation to the economic impact. Veterinary Medicine and Science 1: 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hultgren, J, Wiberg, S, Berg, C, Cvek, K and Kolstrup, CL 2014 Cattle behaviours and stockperson actions related to impaired animal welfare at Swedish slaughter plants. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 152: 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2013.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellert, SR and Berry, JK 1987 Attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors toward wildlife as affected by gender. Wildlife Society Bulletin 15: 363–371Google Scholar
Lensink, J, Boissy, A and Veissier, I 2000 The Relationship Between Farmers’ Attitude and Behaviour Towards Calves, and Productivity of Veal Units pp 313–327. Annales de Zootechnie: Paris, France. https://doi.org/10.1051/animres:2000122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLoughlin, E 2019 Knowing cows: Transformative mobilizations of human and non-human bodies in an emotionography of the slaughterhouse. Gender, Work & Organization 26: 322–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwao.12247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porcher, J 2008 Ouvrière en production porcine industrielle: le prix de la reconnaissance. http://www.ethnographiques.org/2008/Porcher. [Title translation: Women workers in the pig industry: The cost of reconnaissance]Google Scholar
Porcher, J 2011 The relationship between workers and animals in the pork industry: A shared suffering. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24: 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-010-9232-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porcher, J, Cousson-Gélie, F and Dantzer, R 2004 Affective components of the human-animal relationship in animal hus-bandry: development and validation of a questionnaire. Psychological Reports 95: 275–290. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.95.1.275-290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, E, Signal, T and Taylor, N 2013 A different cut? Comparing attitudes toward animals and propensity for aggression within two primary industry cohorts — farmers and meat-workers. Society & Animals 21: 395–413. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seabrook, M 2001 The effect of the operational environment and operating protocols on the attitudes and behaviour of employed stockpersons. Human-animal relationship: stockmanship and housing in organic livestock systems. Proceedings of the 3rd NAHWOA Workshop pp 21–24. Clermont-Ferrand, FranceGoogle Scholar
Serpell, JA 2004 Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare 13: 145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Boivin, X, Pedersen, V, Tosi, M-V, Janczak, AM, Visser, EK and Jones, RB 2006 Assessing the human-animal relationship in farmed species: A critical review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101: 185–242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wambui, J, Lamuka, P, Karuri, E and Matofari, J 2018 Animal wel-fare knowledge, attitudes, and practices of stockpersons in Kenya. Anthrozoös 31: 397–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2018.1482111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warriss, P, Knowles, T, Brown, S, Edwards, J, Kettlewell, P, Mitchell, M and Baxter, C 1999 Effects of lairage time on body temperature and glycogen reserves of broiler chickens held in transport modules. The Veterinary Record 145: 218. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.145.8.218CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Wigham et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 49.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Wigham et al. supplementary material
Download undefined(File)
File 128.7 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Download undefined(PDF)
PDF 49.5 KB
Supplementary material: PDF

Download undefined(PDF)
PDF 128.7 KB