San Francisco Bay Guardian June 10, 1998

A riveting announcement

LEVI STRAUSS and Co.'s announcement April 8 that it would resume production in China sent shock waves through the human- and labor-rights communities, raising serious concerns about the company's integrity. With great fanfare Levi's pulled out of China in 1993 because "it could not ensure that its employees, or those working on its behalf, would not be subjected to human rights violations." Now Levi's insists that the situation in China has changed so much that the company can operate there in a socially responsible manner. But let's weigh Levi's claims against the facts:

Levi's claims that China's human rights record has improved. In fact, human rights abuses in China are worse than ever, according to an Amnesty International report released last month. Despite the release of a few high-profile dissidents, the Chinese government continues to arbitrarily detain more than 2,000 protesters and suspected government opponents. Grossly unfair trials, torture, and brutality in prisons and labor camps remain widespread, and the government has increasingly used the death penalty to punish nonviolent offenses. Nearly 100 Tibetans were jailed last year for "crimes" such as peacefully protesting the ban on all images of the Dalai Lama.

Levi's says its presence in China will elevate workers' living standards. Unfortunately, the most recent report on the U.S. garment industry in China found just the opposite. The study, conducted by the National Labor Committee, cites widespread incidents of physical abuse, forced overtime, grueling 10- to 15-hour shifts, and wages as low as 13¢ an hour.

Levi's says it will monitor Chinese factories to ensure that they abide by the company's code of conduct. Levi's code states that workers have the right to organize. In China, however, independent unions and workers' rights groups are strictly forbidden. Workers who fight for their rights risk being fired, blacklisted, or shipped off to labor camps. It will be extremely difficult if not impossible for Levi's to guarantee freedom of association for its Chinese workers.

Fortunately, there is still a way for Levi's to redeem itself. If Levi's insists on setting up shop in China, it can do so and set a higher standard for the entire garment industry by taking the following steps:

1. Disclose which subcontractor factories it will work with and what the wages and human rights conditions are in those factories. Public disclosure is critical to lifting the veil of secrecy under which many U.S. companies operate in China.

2. Agree to allow independent human rights or workers' rights groups to verify that Levi's factories comply with the company's code of conduct. So far Levi's has resisted the idea, citing its internal monitoring system. If, as Levi's says, its factories in China will be up to par, then there should be no fear of independent verification.

3. Work with the human rights community to urge the Chinese government to release jailed labor activists and other political prisoners and to abide by internationally recognized labor standards.

4. Work with economic researchers to determine what constitutes a living wage for Chinese workers and pay accordingly. U.S. garment companies on average pay Chinese factory workers 13¢ to 28¢ an hour -- not enough to cover basic needs. Levi's can and must do better.

Last week a group of 50 prominent international human rights organizations wrote to CEO Robert Haas urging the company to take those steps. Students for a Free Tibet is planning to launch a massive Levi's campaign at the June 13 Tibet Freedom Concert. And the Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace, which previously sent 80,000 postcards to Levi's urging the company to allow human rights groups to monitor its factories, is poised to start an even broader-based consumer campaign.

At a time when Levi's is trying to recover its dwindling market share, it can ill afford to get into a protracted battle with the human rights community. It would make sense in terms of both Levi's bottom line and its image as a socially responsible company to work with the human rights and labor communities to improve workers' rights in China. If Levi's plays this leadership role, it will once again win the respect and support of the international human rights community.

Medea Benjamin is the codirector of Global Exchange, a San Francisco-based human rights group that focuses on corporate accountability.