Sign inSubmit
ArticleMetrics
Research Article · Open access · Published 28 May 2019

Evaluation of the Texas Feed Yard Workforce: Survey of Stockperson Attitudes and Perceptions towards Euthanasia, Animal Care and Employee Value

Emily E. Ridge1, Ron Gill2 & Courtney L. Daigle1

American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp. 139–150 · doi.org/10.3844/ajavsp.2019.139.150

7,745 accesses5,176 downloads2 citations (Crossref)Metrics
Cite Check for updates

Abstract

A survey was administered to Texas cattle feedyard employees (n =111) from 31 different operations measuring stockperson perception, job satisfaction and socioeconomic status using Likert statements and multiple-choice questions. Differences among employment roles (manager, pen rider, processor (those who vaccinate and implant incoming calves), doctor (non-veterinarians)) were evaluated using a Kruskal-Wallis test followed by a Multiple Comparison procedure. Managers strongly agreed with the statement “beef cattle are not dirty” more than doctors (P = 0.03) and that “cattle behavior is affected by the way we treat them” than pen riders (P = 0.002) or processors (P = 0.01). Managers were less likely than doctors, pen riders and processors to believe they have too many cattle to look after (P = 0.05, P = 0.006 and P = 0.01, respectively). Pen riders reported less confidence in performing euthanasia than doctors (P = 0.02) and managers (P = 0.02) and, along with processors, agreed that cattle were not always euthanized in a timely manner (P = 0.02 and P = 0.02, respectively). While all roles viewed Holstein cattle unfavorably (P < 0.001), processors viewed them more positively than pen riders (P = 0.05) and managers (P = 0.001). Socioeconomic results showed that Texas feedyards have a dedicated, passionate work force, with 43% of participants having worked in the industry for 9+ years and 49% of participants working at cattle feedyards because they enjoy working with animals. Unfortunately, it was evident that stock people are underpaid (57% of participants making between $10-15/hr) and overworked (76% of participants working 50+ hrs/week). Survey responses identified critical role-dependent knowledge gaps and biases. A disconnect was observed among compensation, workload and the duration of time stock people spend interacting with cattle. Increasing industry investment in feedyard employees and providing breed-specific and employee role-specific education may promote an encouraging workplace that ensures feedlot cattle experience good welfare.

Licence and reuse

Open access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence (CC BY 3.0), as printed on the article, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original authors and the source. No permission is needed.

How to reuse this article

Responses (0)

Have a comment on this research? Sign in to respond. Responses are moderated and published with your name and affiliation; the authors are invited to reply. How we use your dataWrite a response

About this article

Cite this article

Ridge, E. E., Gill, R. & Daigle, C. L. (2019). Evaluation of the Texas Feed Yard Workforce: Survey of Stockperson Attitudes and Perceptions towards Euthanasia, Animal Care and Employee Value. American Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 14(2), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajavsp.2019.139.150

Licence
CC BY 3.0
Issue
Volume 14, Issue 2
Policies
Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
Version
Version of record
Evaluation of the Texas Feed Yard Workforce: Survey of Stockperson Attitudes and Perceptions towards Euthanasia, Animal Care and Employee ValueAmerican Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences · Volume 14, Issue 2 · pp. 139–150 · CC BY 3.0Download