|
Dutch CCC activistsleafletting to share information about conditions at FFI/JKPL at G-Star's headquarters in Amsterdam, June 2007
Union-busting in Cambodia:
River Rich Workers Win Victory
Just days after C.CAWDU established an independent union in the River Rich factory on October 29, 2006, management laid off 117 workers, most of whom had participated in the union election. Two months later, C.CAWDU held a second election, in which over 500 workers took part. Once again, 30 union members, including the elected leaders, were terminated.
C.CAWDU called on the support of its Global Union Federation, the ITGLWF, and on February 3, 2007, they managed to get the company to agree to a number of demands, including the reinstatement of the 30 fired union leaders. Both parties later signed the agreement in front of the Cambodian Arbitration Council.
But River Rich Textile Ltd. failed to implement it, and refused any more negotiations. So C.CAWDU called for a strike, which began on May 9, 2007. Striking workers were attacked by police several times, using tear gas, electric batons and rifles to disperse the crowd. One worker was hospitalised. Three were charged with incitement to an illegal strike. 1500 workers turned up at the court to support them.
Pressure on the company continued to build through an international campaign, involving the CCC, and on June 7, 2007 an agreement was signed between the company's main buyer Inditex, River Rich management and C.CAWDU. Thirty of the dismissed workers were offered reinstatement on permanent contracts, all charges against C.CAWDU members were dropped, and River Rich managers made a commitment to ongoing negotiations with C.CAWDU.
Sued for Telling the Truth
The CCC and the India Committee of the Netherlands (ICN), and seven individual campaigners connected to the two organisations have been summoned to appear in court in Bangalore, India. The organisations and individuals are accused of "cyber crime", "acts of racist and xenophobic nature" and "criminal defamation" under the Indian penal code. What the CCC and ICN have actually been doing is speaking out against labour rights violations at an Indian garment producer. For this, the campaigners face two years' imprisonment.
The summons is part of the ongoing legal harassment of both local and international labour rights advocates by Bangalore jeans producer Fibre & Fabrics International (FFI) and its 100% subsidiary Jeans Knits Pvt. Ltd (JKPL). Labour rights organ-isations have been highlighting labour rights violations at FFI/JKPL since the end of 2005. But the company refused dialogue and instead filed complaints of slander in the local court. Local labour rights organisations have been under a gag order since July 2006.
In late June 2007, FFI/JKPL issued a statement in which they called upon "all organisations involved to stop with their false accusations and engage in a constructive dialogue with FFI/JKPL to jointly build on the social and sustainable development of the textile and garment industry in India".
The CCC and ICN welcomed the invitation but pointed out that the gag order would need to be lifted first; otherwise local groups reacting to the invitation could be accused of violating it. We also requested that should a dialogue begin that an independent observer be allowed to monitor the proceedings.
FFI replied that they have no faith in dialogue unless CCC and ICN first quit their "false and baseless campaign". They clearly had no intention of withdrawing the lawsuits they have filed. The case against CCC and ICN was postponed until September 24, 2007 when the court issued an arrest order against the seven individuals connected to the two organisations. CCC and ICN are appealing this judgement.
SAI also Threatened?
In 2006, five FFI/JKPL sites obtained SA8000 certification, despite CCC reports of labour rights violations. After a formal complaint was filed by the CCC with Social Accountability International (SAI), a further SAI investigation confirmed that SA8000 certification of FFI/JKPL was not justified. SAI has also confirmed that SA8000 certification must be suspended when a company obtains a legal injunction prohibiting discussion of its operations by stakeholders.
Various sources confirm that the SA8000 certification of the FFI/JKPL units has been suspended. However, the terms of suspension, including the timeframe, remain unclear. Despite multiple requests for additional information, SAI has not shared any information about the details of the suspension procedures with CCC and ICN, reportedly because FFI/JKPL has issued legal threats against SAI. The CCC believes that once SAI starts giving in to companies' threats, SAI makes its own position as an independent certification institution impossible.
Brands Ducking and Diving
After meeting with the CCC and ICN in June, FFI/JKPL's biggest buyer G-Star reported setting a September 2007 deadline for FFI/JKPL to comply with the right to freedom of association (FOA). However, FFI/JKPL managers seem to be choosing the unions they will allow into the factory and this is not compliance with FOA.
Gap has stated that given the impasse between FFI/JKPL and various national and international organisations, they feel obliged to review their sourcing relationship in order to uphold the freedom of association provisions in their code of conduct.
Mexx apparently will no longer place orders at FFI/JKPL, but have not said why. Nor have they said how they will ensure that FFI/JKPL workers will not lose their jobs as a result of their withdrawal, nor if they will reconsider doing business with FFI/JKPL once the labour issues are resolved.
As for Armani, RaRe and Guess, there have been no responses at all.
A CCC public campaign urging supporters to contact FFI/JKPL to urge them to withdraw the court cases against labour rights organisations and to start engaging with their local stakeholders including GATWU, NTUI, Cividep and the Women Garment Workers' Front "Munnade" is ongoing. The CCC is also urging the public to contact Armani, RaRe and Guess to protest their refusal to deal with the labour rights violations at their supplier.
To find out how you can support the struggle for labour rights and freedom of expression in connection with the FFI case, see www.cleanclothes.org/urgent/ffi.htm.
Union Victory at Bangladesh Garment Factory
In August 2007, management at a Bangladesh garment factory gave in to demands to reinstate illegally-dismissed union officials. Pressure from the factory's main buyer was a key factor in forcing the company to implement a December 2006 agreement between the union and management that pledged that the workers would be reinstated and that anti-union harassment would be stopped.
The union was formed in mid-August 2006 and registered with 110 members. However, factory managers soon dismissed all the union officers and five members.
At that time the dismissed unionists were told by a factory manager: "If I see you at the factory premises after today, you will be killed". The union general secretary was visited at home by hired thugs who was told that, "…he will be disabled; he will lose his life. If he does not leave Dhaka, we will kill him".
Other workers' rights violations at this factory consisted of unpaid overtime, verbal harassment of female workers (including referring to the women as prostitutes), and reassigning union members.
The factory's main buyer is the French brand Mim. Mim is owned by the company New Look, which is a member of the UK-based Ethical Trading Initiative and has a code of conduct which says that freedom of association should be respected at all its suppliers.
Mim put pressure on the factory's management to reinstate the illegally dismissed unionists. A memorandum of understanding was reached in December 2006, when the union, the factory and the BGMEA (Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association) met. However, it was not implemented, and the dismissed workers were never taken back.
After more pressure on Mim and the factory's management, a new agreement was reached in August 2007. This includes the reinstatement of the union officers and payment of compensation to the dismissed union members who have found other jobs. The CCC continues to monitor the implementation of this agreement.
|
