15 Future-proofing the feedyard workforce: Survey of Texas beef cattle stockpeople indicates positive attitudes towards animals and the workplace while highlighting opportunities for improvement

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, doctor) were evaluated using a Kruskal-Wallis test followed by a Multiple Comparison procedure. Managers more strongly agreed that “beef cattle are not dirty” 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 stockpeople are underpaid (57% of participants making between $10–15/hr) and overworked (76% of participants working 50+ hrs/wk). Survey responses identified critical role-dependent knowledge gaps and biases. A disconnect was observed among compensation, workload, and the duration of time stockpeople 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 cattle experience good welfare.

The welfare of ill and injured feedlot cattle: a review of the literature and implications for managing feedlot hospital and chronic pens

“…For example, dairy caretakers that underwent case-study based training for treatment decisions such as euthanasia stated that while they felt confident in making euthanasia decisions before the case study discussion, the training experience was still beneficial in improving their euthanasia decision-making skills (42). A 2019 survey of pen riders from 31 Texas feedlots indicated that feedlot pen riders are less confident in performing euthanasia than managers and veterinarians and were more likely to indicate that cattle are not always euthanized in a timely manner (43). Primary research focusing on clarifying ambiguity in euthanasia guidelines and increasing confidence in euthanasia decision-making by providing clear animalbased outcomes and defined endpoints are needed to ensure timely euthanasia of ill and injured feedlot cattle.…”