Picture the Homeless

PTH position-paper on the Bigger Better Bottle Bill!
as of February 17th, 2005

Putting the Bigger Better Bottle Bill (A2517) to work with canners!
- Drop "anti-canner"-provision Section 27-1007.3


The "Canners' Committee" at Picture The Homeless fights for the benefit of over a thousand workers throughout New York City who redeem recyclable bottles and cans for the deposit. We endorse the campaign for a Bigger Better Bottle Bill because it seeks an environmentally and economically sustainable solution to waste production in our state. We say economically sustainable also because we - "the canners" - would profit from the increased range of beverage containers that could be redeemed and the hopeful establishment of more redemption centers.
We applaud the introduction of bill A2517 for addressing these issues.

However, we are deeply concerned about one provision that would have a detrimental effect on the canning community. Section 27-1007.3 reduces the limit of beverage containers that a dealer would have to accept from 240 to 72, which equals to amount of $12 to $3.60 respectively (given the deposit of 5 cents per container). What is at stake for the overwhelming majority of canners, is the very feasibility of canning as a means of survival! Why is this the case?

To give an example: In order to redeem empty beverage containers worth of $36, with the new Section 27-1007.3 in effect, canners would have to go to ten different supermarkets (given that at each supermarket $3.60 could actually be redeemed.) Considering that - as an average - canners have to wait about an hour outside of supermarkets until their redemption is handled, cashing in containers worth of $36 would entail a total waiting time (at ten different supermarket) of about ten hours! Since this does not include the walking time in between the supermarkets or the pick up time, even a small amount like $36 becomes virtually impossible to earn during a hard-working day.

Clearly, we can't endure a reduction of the 240 limit! Rather, from a bottle bill that is truly "bigger" and "better" for us, we would expect a provision to put a cap on the waiting time. And we really need an enforcement provision that gives teeth to the law!

We understand that supermarkets have a concern about the storing space for the recycables, but if the current law was enforced, supermarkets wouldn't generally accept more containers than they actually sell.

Today if every store complied with current law (especially with regard to the 240 provision), redemption would be more evenly distributed and canners wouldn't have to travel long distances to find a "friendly" store. Out of the many complaints that canners have made with the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), not one has been reported to lead to an investigation and subsequent fining. (* We are currently working with fellow-canners throughout NYC on a list of complaints of supermarkets and their specific violations that we will send to both DEC and NYS Attorney General's Environmental Protection Bureau)

Let's be honest: In New York City, who other than canners - and maybe a few building supers that collect the cans and bottles from the garbage - actually redeems more than 72 cans? Practically, no one. Really, section 27-1007.3 should be understood as an "anti-canner" provision! But what would happen, if canners' are discouraged from canning?

If there would be decent living-wage jobs available, many of us, would not do this hard-but-poorly-paying-labor. But there ain't none! If this provision would come into effect, most of us would be cut from our only source of income: the last means to pay for a rent or a cheap hotel room for overnight, or to provide for other life-sustaining activities.

And think about this: It is reasonable to believe that canners (and a few building supers) account for at least 10% of the total amount of empty beverage containers in New York State. (A survey of the Public Policy Associates (2004) found that in New York State 57.5% of New Yorkers redeem their cans and bottles for refund. The redempion rate in NYS, however, is at 70.2% as DEC claims (2001/2). Thus there is a gap of 12,7%, which is for the most part to be explained by the work of canners.) Observing the supermarkets and redemption centers in New York City, one could be even led to believe that canners actually redeem the biggest share of empty beverage containers.

It should be clear from this that canners contribute significantly to the success of the redemption system, thereby providing an important service to society. The canning work saves the taxpayers money by diverting large amounts from the landfills and helps recycle valuable material resources and energy.

We would love to avoid the constant hassles with the supermarkets and rather go to a redemption center! The 240 limit is already bad enough! But the reality in New York City is a striking absence of redemption centers. Manhattan, e.g., with the highest canners density of all five boroughs has only a single redemption center! The large majority of canners in New York City depend on supermarkets. (The provision of a two hour window to redeem 240 containers if there is no redemption center nearby, is no real consolation for canners that work all hours, day and night. The lack of enforcement and the discriminatory attitude of so many supermarkets don't rouse confidence that the window-provision will be even complied with.)

From a Bigger Better Bottle Bill we expect that it will lead to the establishment of many more redemption centers in New York City. Unfortunately the bill A2517 does not provide specifics about how, where and when redemption centers shall be founded. In New York City, many redemption centers have faced massive pressure from community and landowner and even the last one in Manhattan is threatened to be shut down. The presence of canners is considered as a real-estate deficit.

Still, we believe A2517 points in the right direction. We – the canners - will be able to walk that way, if you simply drop the "anti-canners"-provision (Section 27-1007.3)!