In September 2000 Oxfam Community Aid Abroad released a report
assessing conditions in three sport shoe factories in Indonesia,
two of which produced for Nike Inc. and one of which produced
for both Nike and Adidas-Salomon (hereafter referred to as "Adidas").
The report, Like
Cutting Bamboo, Nike and Indonesian Workers' Right to Freedom
of Association, found evidence of extreme abuses of workers'
human rights. These included threats of violence against workers
who took part in industrial action and the use of pretexts to
dismiss members of independent unions. In one of the factories
workers were often subjected to verbal abuse by factory supervisors
using epithets such as "you dog", "you monkey" and "you pig".
In two of the factories women workers were required to submit
themselves to intrusive physical examinations by factory doctors
before they could claim legally mandated menstrual leave. Workers
were often required to work more than sixty hours per week and
were either humiliated in front of other workers or threatened
with dismissal if they refused. Most importantly for the workers
interviewed, in all three factories wages for a standard working
week were well below what they needed to meet their basic needs.
When they worked extensive overtime then the additional overtime
pay brought the income of childless workers up to a point where
they were able to feed, clothe and house themselves and save a
small amount. Those workers with children were in a dire financial
position even with overtime pay.
On the day the report was released, Nike promised that it would
investigate, but has never published the results of any such investigation.
This report aims to assess whether any progress has been made
in improving working conditions in sport shoe factories producing
for Nike and Adidas in Indonesia in the eighteen months since
that report was released.
A great deal is at stake. Whether the current approach to the
globalisation of world trade is enhancing or undermining the well-being
of the world's poor is one of the most fiercely contested questions
of our time and the international sportswear industry has been
in the spotlight like no other. It has been the subject of a sustained
ten-year anti-sweatshop campaign by activists, unions and civil
society organisations. Concerns about labour abuses in sportswear
factories have received extensive coverage in the world's press.
As two of the companies with the largest market share (between
them they control 49% of the lucrative US athletic footwear market),
Nike and Adidas can more easily afford to put in place programs
to protect the rights of workers who make their product. Both
companies have adopted codes of conduct and have introduced monitoring
systems, which they claim make them leaders in the field of sustainable
business practice. Both, along with competitor Reebok, are members
of the Fair Labor Association, a multi-stakeholder factory monitoring
organisation. In addition Nike has signed on to the United Nation's
Global Compact with business, committing itself to promote a range
of human rights issues, including workers' right to freedom of
association.
The extent to which these initiatives have enhanced respect
for the human rights and basic dignity of workers in developing
countries is of vital interest to consumers, workers and the international
business community. If their reforms have been effective and are
sustainable then it is time for human rights groups and activists
to switch their emphasis and start to pressure other companies
to follow their lead. If, on the other hand, there has been little
improvement in factory conditions then the challenge for the human
rights community is to maintain pressure on these companies in
order to create impetus for genuine reform.
Methodology
This report is based on original interview and focus group research
conducted by the author in July 2001 and January 2002 with a total
of thirty-five workers from four factories producing for Nike
and/or Adidas in West Java.
In July 2001 there were in-depth audio-taped interviews of between
one and three hours each with six workers who were then employed
in factories producing for Nike and/or Adidas. Another interview
was conducted with a seventh worker who had been forced to leave
a factory producing for both companies because of his involvement
in industrial action. There were also five two-hour focus group
discussions with a total of 28 workers from four factories producing
for Nike and/or Adidas, the first in July 2001 and the four others
in January 2002. These interviews and focus groups were held as
part of research for a PhD thesis being supervised by the school
of Geosciences at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
In arranging interviews and focus groups the author worked with
local non-government organisations that had an established relationship
with the workers involved. In order to protect workers' confidentiality,
interviews and focus groups were held away from the factory in
locations arranged by the local contact group. Working with local
non-government organisations which already have an established
relationship of trust with workers is an approach to factory monitoring
which is advocated by, amongst others, the Fair Labor Association,
of which Nike and Adidas are members.
The interpreters who assisted with the interviews and focus
groups were independent of the organisations that arranged the
meetings with workers.
The photographs which illustrate this report were taken by Ashley
Gilbertson in November 2001.Gilbertson is a professional photographer
based in Melbourne, Australia. The photographs are of workers
from four sport shoe factories producing for Nike and/or Adidas.
Two of these factories were not represented in the author's interviews
or focus groups. Before taking the photographs Gilbertson interviewed
the workers involved and the information they provided is included
in the captions which accompany the photos.
The report also contains a case study that is translated from
a report prepared by Julianto on the basis of an interview he
conducted with a Nike worker in November 2001. Julianto worked
in a Nike contract factory until April 2000 when he was forced
to resign because of his involvement in organising a worker demonstration
for better pay. He now works as a labour organiser in Serang,
West Java. Like many Indonesians he only has one name.
Next: Afraid to Speak
Out
