Nike
Labor Practices in Vietnam
by Vietnam Labor Watch
March 20, 1997
Thuyen Nguyen
An Open Letter to Concerned Americans, Nike Shareholders and Consumers
Enclosed you will find our report on Nike labor practices in Vietnam
and Nike's own corporate statements and promises. This report is
the result of several months of research as well as interviews with
35 Vietnamese workers from Nike factories in Vietnam. Please do
compare what Nike said to the reality of Nike workers in Vietnam.
We, then, urge you to send the enclosed letters. The first letter
is for President Clinton urging him to ask Nike to provide monetary
compensation to workers in Vietnam who are owed backpay. The second
letter is for Nike's CEO, Mr. Phil Knight, asking Nike to:
1. Accept proposals by non-governmental
organizations to form independent monitoring boards in each country
where Nike shoes are produced.
2. Adopt a fair living wage practice for
all workers, one that would enable workers to meet basic needs,
as well as save for the future. Nike can use independent studies
by academics and NGOs to determine living wage standards.
3. Promote conditions at Nike factories
conducive to the empowerment of workers. Stop Nike subcontractors
from using boot camp techniques in managing factory workers. Adopt
a corporate goal of having no tolerance for physical abuse, humiliation,
corporal punishment as well as sexual abuse in Nike factories.
4. If Nike agreed with our findings concerning
issues related to its violation of Vietnamese minimum wage law,
then Nike should provide some forms of backpay to its Vietnamese
factory workers to compensate for lost wages that Nike factory workers
have endured.
Nike should forced all its factories in Vietnam to comply to the
recommendations of the HCM City Health department and Bien Hoa Health
Department.
Nike is a consumer oriented company and will respond to public
pressure. Therefore, your letters to President Clinton and to Mr.
Knight will make a big difference in this effort to improve the
daily living conditions of Nike factory workers in Vietnam, China
and Indonesia. Thank you very much for your help.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4
LABOR LAW VIOLATIONS 5
WORKERS CANNOT LIVE ON NIKE FACTORY WAGES 7
BOOT CAMP ASSEMBLY LINES 9
HEALTH AND SAFETY PROBLEMS 12
SEXUAL ABUSE 13
OTHER SHOE FACTORIES IN VIETNAM 15
NIKE LABOR PRACTICES IN THE NEWS 15
RECOMMENDATIONS TO NIKE 16
EXHIBIT 1-22 18-30
Executive Summary
This report is the result of a six month effort by Vietnam Labor
Watch (VLW) to understand the working conditions of workers at factories
in Vietnam that make Nike products. The effort was started in October
1996, after the CBS News program 48 Hours ran a segment detailing
the abuse of Nike workers in Vietnam. A group of Vietnamese Americans,
deeply disturbed by the report, decided to contact labor groups
and journalists in Vietnam to verify the report, to meet with Nike
officials to discuss the problems and to organize a group called
Vietnam Labor Watch to monitor the issue on an ongoing basis.
From March 2-18, 1997, at the invitation of Nike, Vietnam Labor
Watch traveled to Vietnam to visit the factories. We met with workers,
shoe manufacturing executives, labor union officials, union representatives,
legal experts and foreign investment experts in Vietnam. In addition
to the official factory tour of the Sam Yang plant, we did surprise
visits to Sam Yang and three other plants that produce Nike shoes
_ Pouchen, Dona Victor and Tae Kwan Vina. We conducted in-depth
interviews with 35 Nike shoe factory workers outside their respective
factories.
This study covers the following issues: labor law violations, wage,
working conditions, health and safety practices, and sexual harassment.
The study also compares what Nike told the American consumers about
its labor practices versus what VLW has found in Vietnam.
We are glad that Nike is providing needed jobs in Vietnam, but
we are deeply concerned about the company's labor practices. Nike
contractors are exploiting the Vietnamese workers in many areas,
including wages, working conditions, health and safety practices.
Nike has a fine Code of Conduct but this Code of Conduct is being
violated consistently by Nike contractors in Vietnam. While Nike
claims it is trying to monitor and enforce its Code, its current
approach to monitoring and enforcement is simply not working.
A simple story illustrates this fundamental problem. On the day
we made an official visit with Nike representatives to the Sam Yang
plant in Ho Chi Minh City, we found that the doors to the six factories
of this facility were wide open, as stipulated in the fire codes.
However, on the day, we made a surprise visit to the same facility,
we found three factories had their doors closed, while workers were
still working inside. A small industrial fire in any of these factories
could easily lead to the loss of many lives.
Under the current system, Nike has no way to ensure that its contractors
abide by its Code of Conduct. There are not enough Nike expatriates
or employees in all of Nike's various departments in Vietnam to
ensure that Nike contractors are complying with the code of conduct
on a day-to-day, shift-to-shift basis. Auditing is also not adequate.
Any visit, audit or study to find out about working conditions through
worker interviews within the confines of the factory will simply
be inaccurate. The workers are under a constant threat of retaliation
and would not reveal their true feelings to anyone while they are
inside the factory. To be accurate, any study or audit must interview
workers outside the factory and must be done by a neutral party
who could guarantee the anonymity of the workers.
We found that Nike subcontractors violated many critical Vietnamese
labor regulations. We found violations of the laws covering overtime
wages, night shift wages, and Sunday wages. We were shown pay stubs
with such irregularities in compensation that they suggest a systematic
form of wage cheating. We found many workers who received below
minimum wage during the first three months of employment, which
is another violation of Vietnamese law. We also found that in 1996,
many workers worked over the legal maximum of 200 hours of overtime
per year. In 1997, we already found several workers working such
long hours of overtime that they were reaching the yearly limit
within the first two months of 1997!
Over 90 percent of the Nike workers in Vietnam are women, and most
of them are between the ages of 15 and 28. A uniform complaint among
the women we interviewed was that they were not being paid a livable
wage. The daily wage is approximately $1.60 and the cost of three
simple meals is $2.10 per day. The women told us that they literally
have to make a daily choice between eating a balanced meal or paying
rent for the single rooms that most of them rent out. Ninety percent
of the workers we interviewed told us that they received extra help
in terms of finance, food, or housing from their families to make
ends meet. Most of the women are from the countryside, and all the
women we interviewed told us that they cannot afford to save money
to send back home to their families.
The treatment of workers by the factory managers is a constant
source of humiliation. We found that verbal abuse and sexual harassment
are frequent, and corporal punishment is often used. During our
two week visit, 56 women workers at a Nike factory were forced to
run around the factory's premise because they weren't wearing regulation
shoes. Twelve of them suffered shock symptoms, fainted during the
run and were taken to the hospital. This deplorable event occurred
on International Women's Day, an important holiday when Vietnam
honors its women. This abuse of workers reflects Nike's inability
to enforce its Code of Conduct. It took place during a period when
Nike knew that Vietnam Labor Watch was in Vietnam investigating
Nike labor practices. During this same two week period, the workers
at another Nike factory conducted two work stoppages, one of which
lasted for three days.
Several factory rules in place violate sensibilities and indeed,
human dignity. Workers cannot go to the bathroom more than once
per 8-hour shift and they cannot drink water more than twice per
shift. Forced and excessive overtime to meet high quotas is currently
the norm at Nike factories. During January 1997, we found workers
who worked over 80 hours of overtime, and in February, which was
a short month due to the national four-day holiday for Lunar New
Year, they were forced to work over 70 hours of overtime.
Many health and safety standards in Vietnam are ignored by Nike
factories. In March 1997, we found that a Nike factory had not even
implemented a single health and safety recommendation from a list
of many made in September 1996 by the Ho Chi Minh City Health Department.
It is a common occurrence to have several workers faint from exhaustion,
heat and poor nutrition during their shifts. We were told that several
workers even coughed up blood before fainting. The medical facilities
at the factories we visited were inadequate. The Sam Yang's medical
facility is only staffed with two nurses for approximately 6000
employees. There is only one doctor who works for two hours a day,
even though this factory operates 20 hours per day.
Given the distressing conditions, the relationship between factory
managers and worker is extremely tense. We believe if this antagonistic
relationship continued, there could well be very serious clashes.
VLW believes that Nike can only enforce its code of conducts for
its factories through the use of monetary fine and independent monitoring.
Nike needs to adopt a policy of zero-tolerance for corporal punishment
and physical abuse of its workers just as it has a policy of zero
tolerance for poor quality shoes. Nike can only improve the working
conditions at Nike factories in Vietnam by working with the Vietnam
General Confederation of Labor and the labor union representatives
at the factories. Nike also needs to consult with other shoe manufacturers
in Vietnam who have managed to produce high quality shoes for other
US shoe companies while providing higher wages and offering much
better working environment than Nike factories in Vietnam.
Labor Law Violations
Nike Claims:
1. In the Nike Production Primer,
Nike stated that workers in its factories in Vietnam "can earn
triple the wage offered in state-run factories" (p. 2.8)
2. The first rule of Nike's code of conduct
is that "(Subcontractor/supplier) certifies compliance with
all applicable local government regulations regarding minimum wage;
overtime; child labor laws%"
Reality:
Vietnam Labor Watch has obtained actual pay stubs from 1996
and 1997 that confirm CBS News' report that Nike violates Vietnamese
laws in regards to minimum wage and forced overtime. In addition,
we found that Nike has violated the training wage provision of Vietnamese
labor law.
CBS news program 48 Hours reported that workers at Nike shoe manufacturing
plants in Vietnam made an average of 20 cents per hour. Team leaders
were making $42 per month, which is less than the Vietnamese minimum
wage of $45 per month. Regular workers made even less. CBS documented
this through interviews with team leaders and even showed a copy
of a labor contract in its broadcast.
We also have obtained pay stubs (exhibit 1 & 2) in which a
full-time worker received less than $27 for March and April 1996;
the minimum wage in Vietnam at that time was $35. While Nike claims
that this practice has ended, we found pay stubs of other workers
who received less than $38 a month between November 1996 and February
97 (exhibit 3, 4, 5); the minimum wage in Vietnam since July 1996
is $45. All 35 workers from Nike factories in Vietnam that we interviewed
confirmed that they received a wage lower than the minimum wage
for a period of 90 days when they first started working at the factory.
All 35 are not aware that this was a violation of the minimum wage
law.
Nike might claim that new workers are paid a lower wage because
Vietnamese law allows for a training or probationary wage that is
less than the minimum wage. Vietnam's legal code, however, specifies
that the training wage can be paid only for a "probationary
period" of 30 days for jobs requiring high school education
and 6 days for jobs requiring less than high school education (under
Article 32 of the Labor Code of June 23 1994 and Article 5 (2) of
Decree 198-CP of Dec 31, 1994). Of the 35 workers that Vietnam Labor
Watch interviewed, only 8 of them finished high school. In terms
of training, the majority of shoe factory jobs other than stitching
and sewing require about one week of training, according to the
workers we interviewed. We also were informed by the Vietnamese
General Confederation of Labor as well as Ho Chi Minh City Confederation
of Labor that the legal definition of training and probationary
wage under the Vietnamese legal code is one and the same.
Nike contractors might also claim that the workers, during the
first three months, are considered students receiving a technical
or vocational education and therefore can be paid below the minimum
wage. We firmly believe that this is just an excuse to squeeze further
profits out of these workers. Nike workers are not receiving a formal
technical education or vocational training. There are no classroom
facilities in the factory and no educational materials are provided
to the workers. The proof that Nike factory jobs require no formal
training is the fact that Nike factories currently employ workers
on the assembly lines who only have a 9th grade education, and new
workers are usually immediately placed on the assembly line after
only a few hours of training These "students" also work
many hours of overtime, just like regular workers. If a worker is
good enough to virtually immediately start producing shoes and to
work many hours of overtime, then they should get the wage of a
regular employee.
Article 69 of Vietnam's Labor Law stipulates that "The labor
user and the laborer may agree to work overtime, but not for more
than four hours a day, 200 hours a year". Several workers told
CBS News that they are forced to work overtime to meet a daily quota
that is set very high. We have found that on average Nike workers
are forced to work 500+ hours of overtime per year.
Our pay stub records (exhibits 6 to 12) show that one Nike factory
worker worked 238 hours of overtime from April 1996 to October 1996.
Exhibits 13 to 17 show that another worker worked 236 hours of overtime
from May 1996 to October 1996. Both of these women work on different
assembly lines, and said they were forced to work this much overtime.
Since each assembly line involved 50 workers, additionally there
must be at least 98 other workers who were forced to work over the
legal overtime limit. We found one pay stub indicated that a worker
has worked over 73 hours in February 1997 alone (exhibit 19), and
84 hours of overtime, including three Sundays, in January 1997 (exhibit
18).
The many irregularities we found in our analysis of pay stub records
suggests a deliberate form of wage cheating. We also received complaints
from workers about not getting the correct compensation for overtime
wages, night shift wages or Sunday wages. According to Vietnamese
labor law, the overtime wage is 1.5 times the regular wage, night
shift wages should be 1.3 times, and Sunday and holiday wages should
be twice the regular wage.
For example, we have two pay stubs for the month of February 1997
from two workers (exhibit 5 and exhibit 19). They told us that during
February, they worked many hours of overtime, including double shift
days, several Sundays, one worked over 100 hours of overtime and
the other worked over 60 hours of overtime. According to these pay
stubs, both workers worked 29 days in February, but there are only
28 days in February 1997. During the month of February, the workers
were supposed to have received 4 days off for the Lunar New Year.
Either they did not receive the holidays according to the law or
they did not receive the correct overtime compensation. Another
legal violation is that if they have worked the entire month of
February 1997, they must have worked four Sundays but the pay stubs
did not indicate any Sunday hours.
Over 60% of the workers we interviewed complained about not being
paid overtime even when they worked overtime. They told us that
in some parts of the factories, each assembly line is assigned a
specific daily quota, and if the workers do not meet this quota,
then they have to work extra hours until they meet the quota_without
getting overtime pay.
In conclusion, Nike factories violate many labor laws in Vietnam,
including the provisions regarding minimum wage (Article 3 of Decree
198-CP of December 31, 1994, Section II. (1.) of Circular 11/LDTBXH-TT
of May 03 1996), provisions regarding probationary period (Article
28 of the Labor Code and Article 5 (4.) of Decree 198-CP), in addition
to the above-cited provision regarding the overtime limit.
Workers cannot live on Nike factory wages
Nike Claims
1. Nike has agreed to "%only do business
with partners whose workers are all cases employed voluntarily,
not put at risk of physical harm, fairly compensated%, and not exploited
in any way." (Athletic Footwear Association's Statement
of Guidelines on Practices of Business Partners, signed by Nike,
3/93)
Reality
The 35 workers we interviewed told us that
they cannot live on the basic factory wage, which is the equivalent
of $47US per month. It is simple math, they said. A simple, basic
meal (like rice, vegetables and some tofu) costs 70 cents; three
meals a day costs $2.10. They are paid about $1.60 per day. So the
basic salary they receive from Nike factory jobs does not even cover
the cost of food. Then there are other expenses: renting a room
($6 per month), clothing, soap, toothpaste etc. They also do not
receive the full $47 wage, because there are deductions for health
insurance, social insurance and meals from their paycheck.
All 35 workers told us that they receive
some financial assistance to make ends meet from parents or relatives
in terms of housing, money and food. They were surprised that the
cost of living in Ho Chi Minh City is so much higher than in the
rural areas where they came from and they were not prepared for
city life.
All 35 workers we interviewed confirmed
that they do not send any money home to their parents in the rural
areas of Vietnam. They were quite surprised that we even asked such
a question. They all felt that there is no way any of them could
save enough money to send home unless they stopped eating for a
couple of days per week.
How do they currently manage with the salary
from Nike factory jobs? They skipped meals. When they eat, they
only eat rice and vegetables. And a couple of times a month, they
get help from their parents or relatives in terms of gifts such
as money, rice, chicken, eggs and fish.
Thirty-two out of 35 workers we interviewed
told us that they had lost weight since working at Nike factories.
All reported not feeling good generally since working at the factories.
They complained of frequent headaches as well as general fatigue.
The economic statistics released from the
World Bank confirmed the reality facing these workers. The GDP for
Ho Chi Minh City was $925 for 1995. Considering that Nike factory
workers only make about $564 per year, it is not surprising that
they are having trouble making ends meet.
6. Boot Camp
Assembly Lines
Nike Claims
1. Nike has agreed to "%only do business
with partners whose workers are all cases employed voluntarily,
not put at risk of physical harm, fairly compensated, allowed the
right of free association and not exploited in any way." (Athletic
Footwear Association's Statement of Guidelines on Practices of Business
Partners, signed by Nike, 3/93)
2. Nike claims that it has employees on
site daily at the factory and enforced the Memorandum of Understanding.
(Nike Production Primer, Nike Consumer Affair, 1996)
3. At the shareholder meeting on Sept 16,
1996, Nike CEO Phil Knight said about reports of physical abuse
from Vietnam Nike factories (from transcript of Nike shareholders
meeting),
We had a situation that got some publicity more in Asia maybe
than in the United States, where we had a -- a stitching room floor
lady, a Korean floor lady in -- in one of the Vietnamese factories,
you know, hit a Vietnamese stitcher on the -- on the arm with an
upper. And an incident was made out of that.
The -- The Korean floor lady was sent back to Korea and doesn't
work in that factory anymore. It's basically an enforcement of our
(quote) "conduct."
Reality:
We believe that the incidents of worker abuse found at Nike factories
in Vietnam are not isolated incidents but are caused by the "boot
camp assembly line" system in which workers are subjected to
various forms of corporal punishment. Corporal punishment, including
humiliation, is employed as a form of worker control by Nike contractors
in Vietnam. This tactic is current employed in other Nike factories
in Indonesia and Southern China. The "boot camp assembly line"
is a method of controlling workers similar to those used in boot
camps of military institutions to train new recruits. The only difference
is that these young women have no idea that they were signing up
for boot camp when they agreed to work for a Nike factory. Coming
mostly from rural areas of Vietnam, they are not educated and are
not familiar with their labor rights.
Fifteen Vietnamese women told CBS News and other Vietnamese newspapers
that they were hit over the head by their supervisor for poor sewing
at Nike Sam Yang's facility; two were later sent to the hospital.
At Nike's Tae Kwan Vina facility, women were forced by their supervisors
to kneel down with their hands up in the air for 25 minutes . A
supervisor also taped the mouth of several workers for talking during
work. Throughout 1996, we found many incidents of corporal punishment
at Nike factories reported by Vietnamese newspapers, i.e. forcing
workers to stand in the sun (sun-drying), writing down their mistakes
over and over again like parochial school children, cleaning the
toilet and sweeping factory floors.
Despite the many employees that Nike claims are at the factory
sites in Vietnam, Mr. Knight did not present the correct information
about these incidents to shareholders at the Nike shareholders meeting.
If Mr. Knight had just consulted the Vietnamese newspapers, he would
have had a more accurate picture. For example, the headline story
in The Worker newspaper on March 31, 1996 proclaimed, "Foreign
Technician Strikes 15 Vietnamese Workers." The same newspaper,
on April 1, 1996, proclaimed: At Sam Yang Company, Cu Chi District,
Ho Chi Minh City , Korean Technical Employee Strikes Many Vietnamese
Female Workers. It went on to say that immediately after the incident
took place, 970 workers on strike to protest the mistreatment of
their fellow workers.
On Nov. 26, 1996, 100 workers at the Pouchen factory, a Nike facility
in Dong Nai, were forced to stand in the sun for an hour over lunch
because one worker had spilled a tray of fruit on an altar. After
18 minutes, one employee (Nguyen Minh Tri) refused to remain in
the sun and walked away; he was then formally fired. Mr. Nguyen
Minh Tri was reinstated after intervention by Nike management and
the local labor federation officials. The three supervisors who
abused the workers are still working at this factory. These supervisors
must be severely reprimanded or fired (exhibit 20).
The use of corporal punishment continued even during our Vietnam
visit. On March 8, 1997, International Women Day, a supervisor at
the Nike Pouchen's facility in Dong Nai forced 56 women workers
to run around the factory in the hot sun (exhibit 21). Eleven of
them suffered shock symptoms and fainted, one became unconscious.
All 12 were taken to the hospital by other factory workers. The
People's Committee of Dong Nai has asked the police to hold the
supervisor, Hsu Jui Yun, and to investigate the matter further.
Vietnamese all over the country were outraged that on the International
Women's Day, when most companies in Vietnam give women workers flowers
and other gifts, 12 Vietnamese women were so abused that they have
to spend the day in the emergency room.
Even with all the publicity about abuse of women workers at Nike
factories, Nike has not put an end to the use of corporal punishment
in its boot camp assembly lines. Therefore, we have no choice but
to conclude that the current monitoring system is woefully inadequate.
Just from examining the Nike departments in Vietnam, we could see
that no matter how well intentioned these expatriates were, they
could not be in all five factory facilities, which have eight to
nine factories in each facility. These factories also run night
shifts, a time when Nike expatriates are rarely present.
This method of boot camp assembly line creates an extremely tense
atmosphere at the Nike factories. Strikes, work stoppages and work
slowdown occur frequently. During a one week period, when Vietnam
Labor Watch representatives were in Vietnam, one work stoppage occurred
on 03/06/97 and another on 03/10/97. There were also several work
slowdowns in February 1997 (exhibit 22). The reasons for these strikes
or work stoppages are disputes about overtime pay, arbitrary firing
of workers, and abusive treatment.
Verbal abuse is common. One worker recalled a story when a supervisor
told the entire line how his dog in Korea could be trained better
in one year than all the Vietnamese workers on the line. One worker,
when asked how they were treated in Nike factories, said, "They
treat us like animals."
Basic principles of human dignity are being violated at Nike factories.
The workers we interviewed all complained about not being allowed
to drink water more than twice per 8 hour shift or go to the bathroom
more than once per shift. If they violate this rule, they are given
a warning and after three warnings, they can be dismissed. Drinking
water and using the toilet facility is controlled by a card or hat
system. In order to use the facility, the supervisor must first
assign a card or a hat to a worker. Wearing the hat or carrying
the card, the worker is allowed to go. However, the number of cards
or hats are limited per assembly line to 3 cards for 78-person line,
4 cards for a 300-person line.
Based on interviews with workers, Nike
factory workers have no choice but to work overtime. If they refuse,
they will be punished (using the various forms of corporal punishment
that we have discussed earlier) or received a warning. After three
warnings, they'll be fired. Only in a family emergency (major illness
or death) are workers be allowed to skip the mandatory overtime.
The workers we interviewed are afraid of retaliation from Nike
contractors if they are known to make complaints about the factory
management. The workers told us that people are being fired without
any reason and without the presence of their union representative.
During the last strike at Sam Yang factory in October 1996, all
mechanics were fired. Several workers were also fired and under
pressure, were later hired back. During a work slowdown between
March 10-12, 1997, the whole line was fired and then rehired.
The workers also told us that the factory management prepared the
factory and warned the workers when there were visitors from the
United States or Europe. Workers are too afraid of retaliation to
express their true feelings to these visitors. During such a factory
visit, workers are allowed to work slower and verbal abuse or other
forms of corporal punishment do not occur. But when the visitors
leave, things go back to the normal, miserable conditions. When
VLW made a visit to a Nike facility in Ho Chi Minh City with a Nike
representative, we found that the doors to all the factories were
open, as stipulated by law. But on our subsequent, surprise visit
to the same facility, several factories have their doors closed
with workers inside, constituting a serious fire hazard.
Based on our experiences, we believe that any visit, study or audit
using interviews of workers within the confines of the factory will
not be accurate. To be valid, the worker interviews must be done
outside the factory by people who can guarantee workers their anonymity.
Health and Safety Problems
Nike Claims
1. Nike has agreed to "%only do business
with partners whose workers are all cases employed voluntarily,
not put at risk of physical harm, fairly compensated, allowed the
right of free association and not exploited in any way." (Athletic
Footwear Association's Statement of Guidelines on Practices of Business
Partners, signed by Nike, 3/93)
Reality:
Working in an environment with the threats
of corporal punishment, fear of retaliation and excessive overtime
is debilitating to the workers. Workers we interviewed complained
about weight loss and general fatigue. In general, they are in poor
health. We can easily see the reasons. Working on a Nike assembly
line is a stressful job: workers must keep up an inhuman pace and
on top of that they have to worry about potential corporal punishment
or verbal abuse when they slow down. The hours are long: many factory
workers work 11 hours a day, six days a week, and sometimes have
to work on Sundays as well. Pay stub records reflect that it is
common for workers to put in 40 to 50 hours of overtime per month.
During February 1997 the month of the Lunar New Year, a major holiday
in Vietnam when workers get 4 days off, we found pay stubs in which
a worker worked over 70 hours of overtime (exhibit 19).
Workers fainted often while working in
Nike factories in Vietnam. About three incidents of fainting occur
per day. The union representative told us that he witnessed one
worker cough up blood and faint while working on the assembly line.
All 35 workers we interviewed confirmed that at least once a week
they saw or heard about someone who fainted while working in the
factory. As to the reasons, they attributed them to stress, exhaustion,
heat, the smell of chemical (glue, paint) in the factory as well
as people not eating to save extra money.
We obtained a report dated September 9,
1996 from the Ho Chi Minh City Health Department which describes
problems at Sam Yang, a Nike facility. The major problem is that
many areas of the factory have a high concentration of toluene,
reaching a level of 180 mg per sq. meter when the legal limit is
100 mg per sq. meter. The noise level in several area were found
to be much higher than the legal limit. The report also provided
many recommendations to ameliorate these problems. As of March 12,
1997, the Sam Yang factory management did not implement any of the
recommendations in this report. We also found that the factory management
ignore recommendations made by Nike's labor practice department,
such as the recommendation that they leave factory doors open in
case of fire.
The medical facility at the factories we
visited were inadequate. The Sam Yang medical facility is only staffed
with two nurses for about 6000 employees. There is only one doctor,
who is available for only two hours a day, while this factory operates
20 hours a day. We were told that the factory management did not
want to spend the money to hire a full-time doctor. Workers during
the night shift complain about having to go to the hospital about
30 minutes away for medical emergencies such as electric shocks,
loss of finger nails, or severe cuts in their hand and fingers.
4. Sexual Abuse
Nike Claims:
1. "Nike expatriates aggressively work
to ensure our subcontractors follow our Memorandum of Understanding..."
(Nike Manufacturing: Perception vs Reality. Nike Consumer
Affair, 1996)
2. At the shareholder meeting on Sept 16,
1996, Nike CEO Phil Knight also commented on a report of sexual
abuse at Nike factories in Vietnam. This is what Mr. Knight said
(from transcript of Nike shareholders meeting),
Fairly recently in Vietnam, that basically there was a situation
on the night shift where four of the woman th-- who were in the
stitching fell asleep. And -- and the night watchman who again was
Korean in coming through the room, two of them woke up and fled
the room. And he shock the other two. And in the shaking of one
of 'em, there was perhaps some misappropriate behavior. And then
he touched a part that he should not have.
That basically she protested. And -- and basically, it comes
about as close as you can get to sexual harassment in U.S. terms,
as you can get. The night watchman was sent back to Korea. And -
essentially, trying to rectify the situation. However, it was reported
in one of the Vietnam -- at least one of the Vietnamese newspaper
as a rape.
Reality:
A Nike plant supervisor fled Vietnam after
he was accused of sexually molesting several women workers. The
Nike expatriates who were at the factory daily did not try to make
the supervisor stay in Vietnam to face criminal charges. The government
of Vietnam later instigated extradition procedures against the supervisor.
Once again Nike CEO still did not have
or did not present the correct information about these incidents
to Nike shareholders. From The Worker newspaper, Nguoi
Lao Dong, August 23, 1996.
At 4:40 am on the morning of August 18, 1996, Kim Sung Rat went
to inspect passing an area where there were four Vietnamese female
workers working in the computer embroidery room. Kim Sung Rat let
two of the workers take a break and called the other two female
workers, NTH and NTVP, to come to the storage area at the farthest
end of the factory where there was no one working, about 50 meters
away from the computer room. Here Kim Sung Rat called NTVP into
the storage area and made a gesture that she should take off her
shirt. After that, Rat tore the shirt of P and felt her up. P ferociously
resisted, and was able to run and escape.
At that moment Rat grabbed a hand and pulled H into the room. Again
with a very obscene action, he rubbed her chest, pulls the pants
zipper of H, and rubbed her private parts. After that, Rat made
a sign by his finger in a very obscene manner indicating sexual
intercourse. Although weaker than P, and being unable to escape
nevertheless, H ferociously resisted. Being able to guess the activity
or Rat in the storage room, as he had done with her, Miss P had
run to call the guards, and R was caught in the act.
There are many problems with Nike using
its own expatriates to try to clean up problems in the factories.
Besides not having the correct information, the on-site expatriates
at the factories in Vietnam have not prevented the contractors from
engaging in unethical and probably illegal behavior. Nike subcontractor,
Taekwang Vina, has offered bribes to the two female workers, asking
them to keep quiet. From The Worker newspaper, Nguoi Lao
Dong - August 25, 1996 (excerpts of an interview with the
victims)
Questioner: (to NTH) Can you tell us, after this took place,
on the side of the company, what was their manner?
NTH. After this took place, the leadership of the company
put forth their "separate condition" with me and P. The
company agreed to compensate us in order to smooth over this matter.
Two times they gave to me and to P, each of us, an envelope full
of money in order to buy us off and smooth over the action of this
expert Kim. But we refused. I answered them, we will not for money
sell our dignity or our honor.
Nike factory workers in Vietnam we interviewed
all complained about frequent sexual harassment from foreign supervisors
while working on the assembly line. In broad daylight, in front
of other workers, these supervisors would try to touch, rub or grab
the buttocks or chest areas of these women. Those women who are
considered particularly good looking are frequent targets of sexual
harassment. One supervisor even told a female factory worker that
it is a common custom for Korean men to greet women they like by
grabbing their behinds.
4. Other Shoe
Factories In Vietnam
For comparative purpose, we also interviewed 25 workers at two
other shoe manufacturing companies in Vietnam: Thai Binh and Hiep
Hung. Thai Binh is privately owned and Hiep Hung is a state enterprise.
Both of these companies are currently producing shoes for Reebok,
as well as other European shoe companies. Both are employing from
4000 to 6000 workers each. We found that the working conditions
and even the wages are better than those found in Nike factories.
The Thai Binh factory is in Song Be province, which has a lower
minimum wage than Ho Chi Minh City. Yet the factory workers there
receive a higher wage than those in Nike factories.
Just from a few visits, it is easy to see the difference in treatment
of workers as soon as one walks into these factories. The workers
smile at the guests; they are working but they are relaxed, while
workers in Nike factories are tense, sheepishly looking at the guests.
At Thai Binh and Hiep Hung factories, several workers started conversations
with us when we walked through the factory floor. At Nike factories,
the workers did not even want to sit next to us during lunch.
During lunch at Thai Binh, workers and managers all share the same
table, talking and eating. At Nike factories, the managers have
a separate dining room. At the end of the shift, one can also see
another major difference in treatment of workers. At Thai Binh,
the workers simply walked their bikes and packages out of the factory.
At Nike's factory Sam Yang, the workers are searched if they carry
any bags because the factory management does not trust its own employees
.
In terms of wages, both of these Vietnamese shoe factories offered
higher pay than Nike factories. Thai Binh, in Song Be district (a
lower minimum wage than Ho Chi Minh), offered $52 US per month.
At Hiep Hung, the entry level wage is $65 US per month.
Nike Labor Practices in the News
In the June '96 issue of Life Magazine,
Sydney Schanberg (author of The Killing Fields) documented child
labor being used in Pakistan in the production of Nike soccer balls
-- for 60 cents a day.
The March 16 edition of the New York Times
carried a story on union busting by Nike shoe contractors in Indonesia.
One worker was "locked in a room at the plant and interrogated
for seven days by the military, which demanded to know more about
his labor activities."
The October 17 edition of the CBS program
48 Hours had a segment on Nike's labor rights abuses in Vietnam,
including: beatings, sexual harassment and forcing workers to kneel
for extended periods with their arms held in the air.
On November 3, an article by Australian
labor scholar Anita Chan was published in the Washington Post. She
described Chinese shoe factories -- producing for Nike and other
companies -- where supervisors submit workers to a military boot
camp style of control.
On March 14 1997, Reuters had a report
on a Nike factory, Pouchen in Dong Nai, forced 56 Vietnamese women
workers to run around the factory's premise, 12 fainted and were
taken to the hospital emergency room.
% Recommendations
to Nike
Vietnam Labor Watch firmly believes that a modern, high-tech shoe
factory can_and must_be managed without practices that are exploitative
and abusive to factory workers. Corporal punishment and severe disciplinary
measures should not be necessary to produce high-quality shoes.
Labor practices of the 19th century should no longer be tolerated
at the end of the 20th century, especially by a U.S. corporation
that claims the moral high ground, projects a progressive image,
and is extremely wealthy.
We believe that Nike is willing to change its practices, and we
also believe that Nike has the power to make its contractors rectify
their labor practices. In a spirit of cooperation, so that we can
improve the daily lives of the workers, we recommend that Nike take
the following steps in Vietnam:
Nike should abandon the practice of using training/probationary
wages or paying the workers below minimum wage under the guise of
providing technical/vocational training. Many Nike factory jobs
do not qualify as technical vocations and the current Nike factories
cannot be considered vocational schools. Using this approach to
underpay Nike workers is illegal and unethical. Wages in Vietnam
are already at rock bottom. There is no need for Nike to pay workers
any lower than the $45 monthly minimum wage.
Nike should make the implementation of its Code of Conduct a top
priority, putting it above even quality and cost. Once the situation
improves, then Nike can shift this priority. Nike should demand
that all managers who use corporal punishment or are guilty of sexual
harassment be dismissed. Nike should make it the responsibility
of the general manager of the factory to run a factory that respects
its workers. After three violations of Nike's Code, the general
manger should be dismissed. The current approach of having no specific
punishment for violating the Code of Conduct generates the impression
that the Code has no teeth.
Nike should levy a stiff monetary penalty on the contracting company
whenever it violates the Code of Conduct. The current practice of
not making the subcontracting company responsible for its managers'
treatment of workers will only encourage further violations. Companies
tend to respond well to severe monetary fines. With so many repeated
violations after only 18 months of operation in Vietnam, this is
the only course of action left to demonstrate to outsiders that
Nike is serious about enforcing its Code of Conduct.
Nike should immediately enforce the 60 hour work week specified
in the Code. The current practice of excessive, forced overtime
(sometimes over 70 hours per month) would be considered abusive
by any standards.
Nike should be a good corporate citizen in Vietnam. Nike cannot
assume that creating low paying jobs is good enough. Vietnamese
workers_and their supporters around the world_will not simply be
grateful for the jobs and ignore the deplorable labor practices
in the factories. Moreover, it is unjust that Nike shareholders
profit handsomely from the low wages paid these Vietnamese workers.
Nike should take some of the profits it makes from Vietnamese workers
and invest them in projects that help improve the lives of poor
Vietnamese.
Nike should work directly with the Vietnam General Confederation
of Labor to hear the complaints from workers and to talk with workers
outside the factory environment. We found that as long as the workers
remain within the confines of the factory, they are very fearful
and are not willing to talk about their conditions to anyone. The
Vietnam General Confederation of Labor at both the local and district
levels were very helpful to us in arranging meetings with factory
workers outside factories. We believe that the Confederation could
be an important addition to Nike's efforts to improve its labor
practices.
Nike should consult with several Vietnamese who are experts in
shoe factories and on how to establish better labor practices. Beside
Nike factories, we had an opportunity to visit two other shoe factories
in Vietnam: Thai Binh and Hiep Hung. Both are Vietnamese companies
and both are producing high-quality shoes for Western shoe companies
such as Reebok and Fila. The presidents of both of these companies
have expressed their willingness to consult with Nike on how to
treat its Vietnamese workers. Even though they consider Nike a competitor,
both of these managers are willing to help because they want to
improve the working conditions of the workers at the Nike factories.
Their desire to help is sincere and generous, and we believe that
Nike should take them up on their offer.
Nike should form an independent monitoring board in Vietnam consisting
of representatives from neutral parties, including government labor
officials, NGOs, and labor unions There are many excellent organizations,
as well as respected individuals, who would be willing to serve
on such a board.
Nike should immediately implement all of the recommendations made
by Vietnam's Health Department to improve the health and safety
conditions at Nike factories.
Nike should implement all of the recommendations made by Ho Chi
Minh City's General Confederation of Labor, which include: classes
on labor rights for workers, regular medical examination for workers,
and establishing a pay scale that is fair and abides by Vietnamese
labor law.
Exhibits (not shown)
Exhibits 1 & 2 combines together demonstrate that Nike's subcontractor,
Samyang Vietnam Co., Ltd violated the minimum wage law of Vietnam.
The minimum wage in Vietnam for the period of March and April 1996
is $35 USD or 387,000 dong (VND). These two exhibits demonstrate
that this worker, employee no. 6032, received a wage 271,000 VND
for 32 days. According to Vietnamese law, Nike subcontractor can
pay a wage that is less than the minimum wage for a trial period
of 6 days. Therefore, Nike factory definitely owed at least 26 days
of backpay to this worker.
Additionally, Exhibit 1 shows that employee 6032 worked 4 hours
of overtime for March 1996 and Exhibit 2 shows that the same employee
worked 20 hours of overtime for April 1996.
Exhibit 3, 4 & 5 also demonstrate that Nike's subcontractor,
Sam Yang Vietnam Co, Ltd. violated the minimum wage law of Vietnam
for the month of November, December 1996 and February 1997. These
three exhibits show that employee no 6111 received a wage of 387,000
VND for 3 months. VLW could not obtain a paystub for Jan 1997.,
nevertheless we can easily assume that this worker received the
same wage as December 1996. The minimum wage in Vietnam since July
1996 is $45 USD.
Exhibit 3 demonstrates that in Nov. 1996, employee 6111 received
a basic salary of 387,000 VND which is below the minimum wage of
Vietnam ($45).
Exhibit 4 demonstrates that in Dec. 1996, employee 6111 received
a basic salary of 387,000 VND which is below the minimum wage of
Vietnam ($45 USD).
Exhibit 5 demonstrates that in Feb 1997, employee 6111 received
a salary of 387,000 VND for 16 days of work which is below the minimum
wage of Vietnam ($45 USD). There are other irregularities with this
paystub. Please refer to exhibit 19 for explanation.
Exhibit 6 shows that employee 6032 worked 40 hours of overtime
in May 1996.
Exhibit 7 shows that employee 6032 worked 36 hours of overtime
in June 1996.
Exhibit 8 shows that employee 6032 worked 31 hours of overtime
in July 1996.
Exhibit 9 shows that employee 6032 worked 53 hours of overtime
in August 1996.
Exhibit 10 shows that employee 6032 worked 29 hours of overtime
in September 1996.
Exhibit 11 shows that employee 6032 worked 21 hours of overtime
in October 1996.
Exhibit 12-17 shows that employee 5101 worked 236.5 hours of overtime
from May 1996 to October 1996. The Vietnamese legal limit of overtime
is 200 hours per year.
Exhibit 13 shows that employee 5101 worked 36 hours of overtime
in June 1996.
Exhibit 14 shows that employee 5101 worked 31 hours of overtime
in July 1996.
Exhibit 15 shows that employee 5101 worked 55 hours of overtime
in August 1996.
Exhibit 16 shows that employee 5101 worked 31 hours of overtime
in September 1996.
Exhibit 17 shows that employee 5101 worked 39.5 hours of overtime
in October 1996.
Exhibit 18 shows that employee 5101 worked 84 hours of overtime
including 21 Sunday hours in Jan 1997
Exhibit 19 and exhibit 5 have many irregularities suggesting a
systematic form of wage cheating. Both paystubs indicate that both
employees worked 29 days in February 1997 but there were only 28
days in February 1997. If the workers have worked for the entire
month of February, then they must have worked 4 Sundays, yet the
paystubs indicate that they did not receive any Sunday pay (2 times
the basic salary). If the workers have worked two shifts on some
days, then the second shift should be compensated as overtime pay
and not as night-shift pay. Overtime pay is higher, 1.5 times the
basic salary, than night shift pay, 1.3 times the basic salary.
In February, there is a 4 day national holiday for the Lunar New
Year. If the workers have worked during the holidays, they did not
receive holiday pay which is 2 times the basic salary. The worker
in exhibit 19 insisted that she got 4 days off for the Lunar New
Year, and she worked at least 100 hours of overtime including several
Sundays, and several days of double shifts. Exhibit 19 indicates
that she only worked 73 hours of overtime.
Exhibit 18 and 19 together demonstrates that this one worker has
already worked over 157 hours of overtime during the first two months
of 1997. The maximum overtime limit for Vietnam is 200 hours per
year. After two months in February 1997, this worker is reaching
the legal maximum limit.
April 1, 1997
President Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington D.C 20500
Dear President Clinton:
We, the undersigned, welcome your Fair Labor Coalition. We agree
with you that there is a desperate need to develop strategies to
assure American consumers that the products they purchase are produced
under acceptable labor conditions abroad. The coalition's work is
important both to American businesses and consumers, as well as
to foreign workers of US corporations. The integrity of your Fair
Labor Coalition is crucial and therefore members of this coalition
should not include companies that have knowingly violated their
own business codes of conduct and the local laws of other countries.
We have enclosed documentation which shows that Nike did not pay
its Vietnamese workers the country's legal minimum wage. Pay stubs
also reveal other labor law violations. These illegal practices
were discovered and publicized by CBS News. CBS News also has documented
that Nike factory supervisors have abused factory workers. Nike
factory workers were also found by other organizations to be working
under military-style, boot camp conditions where they are frequently
humiliated and corporal punishment is often employed.
We have provided the same information to Nike and have asked the
company to address these specific labor problems. So far Nike has
not taken steps to remedy its practices in Vietnam. Nike has not
provided backpay to its Vietnamese factory workers to compensate
for prior underpayment. The company also has not addressed the abusive
behavior of Nike subcontractors; more incidents of corporal punishment
have occurred since CBS News highlighted these problems. Even more
disturbing, workers who refused to accept the abuse have been fired.
In light of Nike's labor law violations in Vietnam, we seek for
your help in asking Nike to address these labor issues in Vietnam
as well as to provide some forms of compensation to workers who
have suffered many months of wage cheating.
Sincerely
yours,
April 1, 1997
Mr. Phil Knight, CEO
Nike Corporation
Nike World Headquarters
One Bowerman Dr
Beaverton OR 97005
Dear Mr. Knight:
The 48th Hours on CBS, October 17, 1996, was watched closely by
many. The program dealt with the inhumane treatment of fifteen (15)
Vietnamese lead workers by their supervisor, wages below the legal
minimum wage and sexual abuse of several women workers. Reuters
on March 14th, 1997, reported that 56 women were forced
to run around another Nike factory and 12 suffered shock symptoms,
fainted and were taken to the emergency room.
It is commendable that Nike, through its subcontractor, has decided
to make available job opportunities to Vietnamese workers. Thus,
the above issues should be resolved in the spirit of human dignity
and human decency. In this spirit, we believe that Nike should agree
to the following recommendations:
1. Accept proposals by non-governmental
organizations to form independent monitoring boards in each country
where Nike shoes are produced.
2. Adopt a fair living wage practice for
all workers, one that would enable workers to meet basic needs,
as well as save for the future. Nike can use independent studies
by academics and NGOs to determine living wage standards.
3. Promote conditions at Nike factories
conducive to the empowerment of workers. Stop Nike subcontractors
from using boot camp techniques in managing factory workers. Adopt
a corporate goal of having no tolerance for physical abuse, humiliation,
corporal punishment as well as sexual abuse in Nike factories.
If Nike agreed with CBS News and VLW findings concerning issues
related to its violation of Vietnamese minimum wage law, then Nike
should provide some forms of backpay to its Vietnamese factory workers
to compensate for lost wages that Nike factory workers have endured.
Respectfully,
|