A new branch of Bishopston trading company has opened quite near to me in Malmesbury. They are a pioneer trade company and have been working with produce partners in a village in South India for 24 years. Bishopston sell a unique range of clothing for adults and children made from Fairtrade certified organic cotton.
On August 28, the Dusit Police Bureau in Bangkok issued arrest warrants against three union activists for their role in a peaceful demonstration against the dismissal of nearly 2000 workers at Body Fashion Thailand, a wholly owned subsidiary of Triumph International.
Here is a response from the luxury lingerie manufacturers Triumph when I wrote to them (through the Clean Clothes Campaign) to find out about job losses at their factories in the Philippines and Thailand.
Triumph is severely affected by the global recession and the general downturn in consumer demand and orders for its products. As a consequence, Triumph must reorganize its operations in the Philippines and Thailand. The company deeply regrets that job losses are necessary, but we can assure you that Triumph is making every possible effort to ensure that all affected employees are being treated fairly and with respect for their contributions to the company.
In the Philippines and in Thailand, all of the planned measures were done with proper consultation with the workers’ unions – and all other affected stakeholder groups. In both countries Triumph management began discussions with the unions on June 27, 2009, two months prior to the effective date of the layoffs and earlier than required by labour law in either country. In no sense was the letter or spirit of ILO Convention 158 which you quote breached.
Both the Thai Ministry of Labour and the Philippine Department of Labour and Employment have been fully informed of the company’s actions from the outset and officials of the ministries have confirmed that the company’s actions are entirely legal. It is simply not true that Triumph intends to reduce the workforce in unionized factories. Triumph is one of the largest textile manufacturers in the world and explicitly states in its Code of Conduct that unionization is the right of every employee. In fact, the vast majority of our production facilities are unionized. The criteria for determining which factories would now undergoing capacity reductions were of purely business relevant content like competitiveness, market proximity, logistics, etc. Union membership was in no way selection criteria for employees redundancies. To add to that, Triumph, like any employer, is not aware of which workers are union members as union membership is a confidential matter between the union and its members.
We must point out to you that Triumph plays no role in Worldwell´s closure or bears responsibility for the current behavior, including any alleged failures to pay severance or alleged illegal or dubious behavior. Worldwell Garment was a supplier to many companies in Thailand and Triumph was by no means Worldwell’s largest customer. Triumph played no role in that company’s decision to shut down and in fact ceased its business relationship with the company some months prior to Worldwell´s closure. Triumph has honoured all contracts and met every financial obligation to Worldwell on time and in full.
We would like to close by assuring you that we will continue to do our very best to support those employees who will be leaving the company – their severance arrangements will in all cases significantly exceed the requirements of the respective national employment law. This is true both for financial and non-financial contributions (longer health insurance, non-cash benefits such as sewing machines to start one’s own business, and support in finding new employment).
We do hope that we could answer some of your queries,
Kind regards,
Triumph International Spiesshofer & Braun KG Bad Zurzach, Switzerland
When we look back 200 years ago to the slave trade often we feel amazed that people could accept it as normal and allow it to continue. Are we the same now? Will our descendants look back on us and wonder how we could live such extravagant lives and yet allow poverty to continue in so many countries around the world. 1 billion people survive on less than $1.25 a day and yet most of us ignore them. It is the defining injustice, a crime no less, of our times.
In August 2008, workers at a small Indonesian factory that has been
producing underwear for Pierre Cardin for over a decade, reported
serious violations of their rights by the factory management. When they
protested against the unfair dismissal of their union leader, 413 of
them were sacked. Since then, they have been asking for their jobs
back, but the conflict has gone from bad to worse. Pierre refuses to
intervene.
Support PT Megariamas Sentosa workers today by sending a message to
Pierre Cardin insisting that his underwear is made in dignity and with
respect for basic human rights.
M&S also use the factory in Turkey (see previous post about Mulberry) and I e-mailed them too via the Labour behind the Label website. This was their response.
I would like to reassure you that we have a very robust Ethical Trading programme and we are committed to continually improving social compliance in our supply base. We work with factories that maintain our high quality and ethical standards which include ensuring that employers respect the rights of employees to join or form an association of their choosing – such as a workers committee or union – and must not discriminate against any employees.
Our local office in Turkey has continuously worked with Desa to ensure workers rights are upheld and our Global Sourcing Principles are implemented.
Even as a very small customer of Desa, since last May we have worked closely with Desa and have regularly communicated with the ITGLWF (with which Deri-Is is affiliated).
Very detailed investigations have been carried out and a lot of work has been done and there has, in fact, been much progress made as detailed below.
Three independent audits have been conducted, one commissioned by the ITGLWF and carried out by the local Labour Inspectorate. The most recent independent audit clearly stated that there were no issues relating to Freedom of Association or discrimination. It also showed that Desa management have communicated to their employees that they are free to join a union and that workers are represented through a freely-elected worker committee. The audit by Turkish Government Labour Inspectorate Officials also did not highlight any problems. In addition, our local compliance managers first met in Turkey with Deri Is last June and we have also recently met with Neil Kearney, of the ITGLWF, jointly with the other major brands.
In September we insisted that Desa employed an independent ethical expert to advise them on a weekly basis which they did. Desa has also strengthened its communication with its employees to ensure they are fully aware of their right to join a union and are working closely with their worker’s committee.
We are aware that some workers, whose contracts were terminated last year, have taken their cases to the Courts and this legal process is ongoing. We have already insisted that Desa act in accordance with the Courts ruling and Turkish law and our Global Sourcing Principles.
I recently sent e-mails, via the Labour Behind the Label website, to several global fashion brands that use a factory in Turkey where workers have not been treated fairly. This is the response from Mulberry:
Dear E mailer;
In addition to our major manufacturing facility in the UK, Mulberry works with a very small number of carefully selected suppliers across the world, sourcing from around seven factories. The suppliers that operate these factories are chosen due to their high quality and ethical standards, which reflect Mulberry’s own strict standards. We regularly visit all the factories and work closely with the factory management and employees on a wide range of issues, from product development to employee welfare.
We are saddened to see the verdict of the recent appeal court hearing in Turkey which has ruled that in April/May 2008, eighteen employees at Desa were dismissed unfairly. This situation is clearly in breach of our strict code of conduct and Mulberry has insisted that Desa act in accordance with the Appeal Court’s ruling which Desa has now formally confirmed they will do. In addition we have insisted that Desa meet again with ITGLWF and the local Deri Is union to try to come to a mutually satisfactory solution. This meeting is now being arranged by Desa.
Since the case came to light last May 2008 Mulberry has worked closely with other brands to fully investigate and encourage Desa to put in place new systems to ensure that employees feel comfortable to be represented by any association of their choosing. This included the appointment of an independent SA8000 consultant, who worked with Desa and their employees to ensure all employees understood their rights.
Public statements were made by Desa management to re affirm that they are very happy for people to join a union, and the in house employee committee was re elected, at the brands request, to ensure that workers were satisfied with their representatives. In March 09 interviews were held with the workforce by an independent audit company, on behalf of the brands, which confirmed that workers were receiving their rights and were happy to work in the factory in good conditions and happy with their management.
I would like to make it clear that we would not work with a factory that did not maintain our high quality or ethical standards, which include respecting the rights of employees to join or form an association of their choosing – such as a workers council or union – and not discriminating against any employees.
If we were to uncover any problems at all, either through our regular visits or independent audits, we would maintain our policy of not ‘cutting and running’, and would work closely with the supplier and independent experts to put the best possible improvements in place for the workers.
I have not written my own letter to Primark yet, but I have sent several e-mails generated by other organisations (such as Labour behind the Label) to them and signed petitions. I recently received a lenthy response from Primark which is available on the ‘Primark’ page listed on the left – I would no doubt receive a similar response were I to send my own letter.
In the statement they announce plans to double the number of audits they carry out on suppliers and to increase the amount of training suppliers receive. They also express a desire to work with other brands and retailers to overcome shared problems.
Having read their statements about improving and increasing their ethical trade, I have to admit that Primark certainly seem to understand the issues facing them and have a plan to change them. My only hope is that this is not just a response produced by their PR department and is in fact a genuine commitment from senior management to make their workers lives better. I hope they can live up to their own hype.
Today I have written to H&M to ask them about how they treat their workers in developing countries that make the fashion we buy.
H&M was not featured in the Lets Clean up Fashion report by Labour behind the Label in 2008, however they were included in the 2007 report where they were labelled as ‘disappointingly slow’. Lets hope they have improved their act over the last couple of years – especially as they now have influential people such as Matthew Williamson and Madonna designing for them.
They are not members of the Ethical Trading Initiatve (ETI) but they do have an ethical policy on their website.
These are the questions I asked them:
In which countries do you have factories that produce your clothes?
What percentage of the retail price of a garment goes to the worker who made it?
How do you determine how much to pay workers?
Do your workers have a contract with you and know that they can rely on a steady level of income?
Do you pay your workers in cash or through a bank; do they have the opportunity to save money in a bank account that earns interest?
About cotton: Are you able to determine the conditions and pay that workers in the cotton factories are given? How about the cotton pickers?
Does H&M have its own factories and how often do you visit them and that of your sub-contractors?
Once I receive their reply I will course post it on this website – please come back!
It seems Gap have declined to respond to my letter sent several months ago to them.
These are the questions that I asked them, and which they did not want to answer:
What percentage of the retail price of a garment goes to the worker who made it?
How do you determine how much to pay workers?
Do your workers have a contract with you and know that they can rely on a steady level of income?
Do you pay your workers in cash or through a bank; do they have the opportunity to save money in a bank account that earns interest?
About cotton: Are you able to determine the conditions and pay that workers in the cotton factories are given? How about the cotton pickers?
Does Gap have its own factories and how often does it visit them and that of its sub-contractors?
So, will I still buy products from Gap? I’m not sure, but I certainly won’t go out of my way to shop there as I do with other fashion retailers that I know to be more ethical. Gap do have an ethical policy and the Labour behind the Label report says they are making an effort to safeguard their workers’ rights – they’re just not responding to letters sent by their customers!
