|
|
|
|
 |
Fashion
Victims: (part2)
Together we can clean up the clothes trade
The Asian garment industry and globalisation
Duncan Green
klik here for
(part 1)
- C. Just shopping: supporting garment workers
CAFOD believes that people should come before markets, not the
other way round. The workings of international trade and finance
should be regulated to give a fair deal to the poor.
How can wages and conditions be improved for garment workers?
The main force for change is local. CAFOD has been inspired by
the commitment of garment workers, trade unions, church workers
and NGOs all over the Third World. They are pressurising their
governments to give labour inspectors the training and authority
they need to make employers respect local labour laws; fighting
for a free trade union movement which can genuinely represent
workers' interests; demanding accountable and clean government
and educating workers about their rights. CAFOD supports many
of these local initiatives across Asia (see box above).
Taking action
Action from the First World can support these efforts.
This could be at international level, for example by pressing
governments to respect basic human rights, such as freedom from
discrimination or the right to form a trade union, enshrined in
the ILO conventions. Another option is to lobby for the introduction
of a social clause in the World Trade Organisation, making membership
conditional on governments respecting such rights. More broadly,
aid agencies such as CAFOD are demanding an easing of the debt
burden which crushes so many third world countries, and the reform
of global trade to give poor countries a better deal.
As consumers, we can choose brands and companies that support
a fair deal for the poor. The best known example is the Fairtrade
Mark, earned by a small range of products such as Cafédirect
and Clipper Tea. In recent years, however, a broader movement
has gathered force; the codes of conduct movement.
What are codes of conduct?
Codes of conduct aim lower, but wider, than the Fairtrade
Mark. They set out minimum labour standards for a company's suppliers.
If the largest retailers and manufacturers are persuaded to adopt
them, codes have the potential to influence the mainstream of
world trade. They aim to guarantee minimum standards for every
product on a supermarket or department store shelf, rather than
higher standards for a small number of fairly traded goods.
Codes apply to anyone producing goods for the company, whether
employed directly, or in a subcontracting company. Many of the
pioneers have been in the clothing and footwear industries. Codes
are voluntary guidelines, usually drawn up by the company itself,
with little or no consultation with trade unions or workers either
in the company's home country or its overseas suppliers. The key
underlying principle is that companies accept a degree of responsibility
for the working conditions in their supplier factories, even when
not owned by them. This is a breakthrough in the field of corporate
responsibility. As recently as the early 1990s, companies insisted
that conditions in supplier factories and subcontractors had nothing
to do with them.49
The codes of conduct movement took off in the 1990s largely in
response to a series of hard-hitting consumer campaigns. One of
the pioneers was the jeans company, Levi Strauss. In 1992, a public
scandal followed a report in the Washington Post about the production
of Levi jeans by Chinese prison labour on the island of Saipan.
Levi Strauss immediately reacted by drawing up a code on labour
standards for all its overseas suppliers.50
The sportswear company, Nike, was also an early entrant into the
field.
Companies are motivated both by fear of the impact of media scandals
on expensively established brand images, and by the desire of
individual executives to be decent employers. According to the
chief executive of Levi Strauss:
"Our company's experience demonstrates that a company cannot
sustain success unless it develops ways to anticipate and address
ethical issues as they arise. Doing the right thing from day one
helps avoid future setbacks and regrets. Addressing ethical dilemmas
when they arise may save your business from serious financial
or reputational harm."51
Luckily for him, doing good appears to be good for business. A
number of financial analysts have noted that enterprises that
apply codes of conduct perform better than average on the stock
exchange.52
In Britain, consumer awareness of the need for codes has been
growing fast. According to a MORI poll carried out for CAFOD in
1997, some 92 per cent of British consumers think British companies
should have a minimum standard for their third world suppliers.
Increasing numbers of companies have been adopting codes and entering
into discussions with CAFOD and other aid agencies, leading to
the establishment of the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) in 1998
(see below).
What's in a code?
The content of different codes of conduct varies greatly.
The most comprehensive are based on the core labour standards
enshrined in the various ILO conventions. Model codes have been
drawn up by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
(ICFTU) and other international bodies. In the garment industry,
the European Trade Union Centre of Textiles, Clothing and Leather
(ETUC/TCL) and EURATEX, the European employers' organisation in
this sector agreed a model Europe-wide code in 1997.
CAFOD's own model code is the "ETI base code", drawn
up by the Ethical Trading Initiative (see box below).
Ethical Trading Initiative
The Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) grew out of fair
trade campaigns by a number of British aid and fair trade organisations.
It describes itself as:
"An alliance of companies, non-governmental organisations
(NGOs), and trade unions committed to working together to promote
the implementation of labour codes of practice, based on internationally
agreed standards. Participants in the ETI have come together in
recognition that there is much to learn, and a need to work together
in this learning process, if the aspirations embodied in such
codes are to make a real and positive difference to the lives
of workers involved in global production and supply chains."
The ETI Board consists of three representatives each from companies,
NGOs, and the international trade union movement, plus a UK Government
observer. ETI membership is open to those who agree with its principles.
Together, the constituent parts of the ETI have considerable clout.
The companies already involved have a combined turnover of £50
billion and subcontract to upwards of five million factories,
farms and plantations in 50 countries; the NGOs involved have
over a million members or supporters in the United Kingdom; and
the international union delegates on the ETI board represent 127
million workers worldwide.53
The purpose of the ETI is to create a place where companies can
exchange experiences as they explore the practicalities of developing
a useful code of conduct and monitoring its implementation in
a cost-effective way. It does this by carrying out pilot projects,
exchanging information on best practice, and by training people
in the Third World to act as independent monitors. Despite the
obvious challenges of keeping companies, trade unions and NGOs
around the negotiating table, the ETI has successfully drawn up
its base code of conduct and underlying principles. It is now
actively recruiting members. It has held a number of seminars
for companies on the nuts and bolts of monitoring. It is setting
up three pilot studies of monitoring and verification techniques
involving clothing companies in China, horticulture in East Africa
and wine production in South Africa.
In March 1998, the ETI acquired a full-time manager. Its initial
three-year programme has been co-funded by the Department for
International Development, the companies and the aid agencies.
ETI base code
Based on the ILO conventions, the base code is a long
and complex document,emphasising the approach of the companies,
how they should work to improve conditions in supplier factories,
and how they should work together to establish a credible system
of independent monitoring. Its broad headings are:
- Employment is freely chosen: no forced or prison labour.
- Freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining
are respected. Where law restricts trade union rights, employers
should facilitate parallel means for independent and free
association and bargaining.
- Working conditions are safe and hygienic.
- Child labour shall not be used.
- Living wages are paid: wages should always be enough to
meet basic needs and to provide some discretionary income.
- Working hours are not excessive: maximum 48 hours basic
week; at least one day off for every seven-day period on average.
Overtime shall be voluntary and shall not exceed 12 hours
per week
- No discrimination is practised.
- Regular employment is provided.
- No harsh or inhumane treatment is allowed.
- Implementation of the code to be assessed through monitoring
and independent verification.
-
-
-
Codes: on paper and in practice
In practice there are often telling differences between
model codes and those adopted by companies. Model codes are more
clearly linked to ILO conventions. They include freedom of association
(the right to form a trade union) and the right to collective
bargaining, which are frequently omitted from company codes. Model
codes require the establishment of a proper employment relationship
to avoid the use of contract labour or bogus apprenticeship schemes,
an issue not addressed in most company codes. Model codes also
include clauses about implementation and monitoring. When suppliers
are found not to comply with the code, some form of positive engagement
is required by model codes, rather than the immediate termination
of the contract with consequent job losses often threatened in
existing company codes. Positive engagement should not, however,
be used as a smokescreen for companies to overlook violations
of their code.54
A study of 18 large UK companies commissioned by the Department
for International Development concluded, "there is evidence
of an evolution towards greater detail in codes and more explicit
reference to ILO conventions."55
Trade unions
Freedom of association is one of the most controversial
issues in codes of conduct. Most companies omit it, but aid agencies
and trade unions argue that its inclusion is an essential step.
In some ways it is obvious; if the aim is to improve wages and
conditions for garment workers, their involvement at the heart
of the process is clearly crucial. They know what their main problems
are, and usually have clear ideas about how to resolve them. Violations
are most likely to be discovered if the workforce knows about
the code's content and has a right to complain to someone other
than management. Only an effective, independent and representative
trade union movement is likely to defend the interests of garment
workers well into the next century.
Companies usually oppose the inclusion of freedom of association.
This is partly through self-interest, because the absence of free
trade unions is precisely why many relocate to countries such
as China and Indonesia. Often companies prefer to source from
free trade zones, where unions are banned. While a vigorous trade
union movement acts as a channel for workers' grievances and can
improve industrial relations, it is bound to increase employers'
labour costs. And, in countries such as Bangladesh, where trade
unions are not state controlled, they are sometimes used as vehicles
for political parties, or as a means to extort bribes from employers;
some of the companies' opposition is based on bitter experience.
CAFOD believes that even in these situations, workers should be
encouraged to find some way of organising and expressing themselves,
either through those trade unions which are free and independent,
or through other forms of association such as factory health and
safety committees and works councils. If this does not happen,
the danger is that codes will come to be seen as a substitute
for trade unionism, replacing a democratic system of collective
bargaining with a paternalistic arrangement in which companies
hand out benefits to their workers without consulting or empowering
them.
Ensuring compliance
However comprehensive, a code is merely a paper promise,
unless it is effectively monitored to ensure compliance by the
company's suppliers and subcontractors. One recent study of UK
companies concluded, "codes remain weak on systems of monitoring".56
Monitoring can be a complex and expensive task, especially in
the clothing industry, where a retailer may source its clothes
from tens of thousands of factories spread across dozens of countries.
Often, retailers work through a complicated network of buying
agents, suppliers and subcontractors, which adds to the confusion.
When the retailer C&A set up its monitoring system, it took four
years to establish which factories were making its clothes! 57
If the monitoring system is to be credible, it has to be both
transparent and independent. Consumers are unlikely to be convinced
by the spectacle of a company monitoring its own suppliers, then
informing the public that all is well, yet in the past this has
been the usual response of companies challenged over their labour
standards. One CAFOD partner, the Asia Monitor Resource Center,
concluded in early 1998:
"In our research into working conditions in several Chinese
factories over a period of a few years, before and after the 'implementation'
of the code, we have not seen significant improvement. Many of
the old problems still exist, even though they violate the companies'
code of practice. We are therefore quite sceptical of the current
methods of implementation and have been calling for the need for
truly independent monitoring."58
At the same time, retailers and manufacturers are genuinely concerned
about the dangers of publishing a list of their suppliers, wage
rates and other intelligence that could help their competitors;
some degree of confidentiality is essential.
Aid agencies such as CAFOD believe that codes can only make a
difference if they have the backing and trust of the workforce.
Unless workers believe in the impartiality of the monitors, they
are unlikely to take the risk of criticising their employers.
Therefore workers and their organisations must be centrally involved
in the monitoring process, with a complaints procedure and guaranteed
confidentiality.
One of the first experiments in independent monitoring was introduced
in 1995 by Gap clothing company at the Mandarin International
Apparel Factory in El Salvador, a Gap supplier. Following a campaign
highlighting widespread violations of Gap's code of conduct, the
company agreed to an independent monitoring process carried out
by a group made up of local NGOs and human rights organisations,
including CAFOD partners. Although major improvements resulted,
it should be stressed that Gap has failed to extend the process
to its hundreds of supplier factories elsewhere in Latin America
and Asia.
In the effort to increase the role of independent monitoring,
a number of different models are being tried:
1. Supplier
certification
Suppliers apply for certification from an independent body that
constitutes a seal of approval for their labour standards. Retailers
can then decide to source their products only from certified suppliers.
The US-based Council on Economic Priorities (CEP) has launched
such a scheme, called SA8000.
2. Independent
foundation to oversee monitoring
In Holland, aid agencies, trade unions and retailers' associations
are negotiating to set up the Fair Trade Charter Foundation. This
would have representation from all three constituencies, to oversee
the implementation and monitoring of a uniform code for the garment
industry. In the United States a similar approach, the Apparel
Industry Partnership, was launched by President Clinton but appears
to have run out of steam during negotiations.
3. Companies
oversee monitoring
Retailers such as C&A and Nike have established their own codes,
then hired an outside company to monitor compliance. C&A allocated
£1.8m a year to a new body, SOCAM, set up to carry out unannounced
inspections of suppliers around the world. In 1997, SOCAM made
1,000 such inspections. As a result, C&A suspended 80 suppliers,
30 of whom were reinstated after providing a satisfactory corrective
plan to the company.59
Nike hired the accountancy firm Ernst and Young to do the job,
but its reports remain confidential. Nike is also experimenting
with other approaches, such as commissioning a local university
in Vietnam to hold regular focus groups with workers away from
the factories to establish their views and needs on wages and
conditions.60 Nike boss Phil Knight has
also committed the company to expanding NGO participation in its
monitoring and establishing a "global system of independent
certification".61
(See also Ethical Trading Initiative page 28)
Unanswered questions
Codes of conduct are not a panacea, but a tool, which,
if implemented properly, can complement existing efforts to improve
the lives of third world workers. In such a new field, it is hardly
surprising that there remains what one Asian NGO termed, "a
host of questions", including gaps and weaknesses in what
is covered by current codes, and fears of some negative side-effects
62. Questions include:
1. Living wage
v minimum wage
The majority of codes merely commit employers to paying the
legal minimum wage, or the prevailing wage rates for the industry
in the country concerned. However, an increasing number of NGOs
have pointed out that minimum wages fall far short of what is
required to feed, clothe and shelter a family. Furthermore, with
the pressures exerted by global competition, many governments
have refused to raise minimum wages in line with inflation, fearing
they will lose jobs. Both the ETI base code and the SA 8000 certification
scheme commit employers to paying a living wage.
2. Prices paid
to manufacturers
As retailers load conditions onto suppliers in the Third World,
there is little sign of them being willing to pay more to cover
increased wage bills and investment. Neil Kearney, General Secretary
of the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers' Federation,
believes, "There is growing concern that industrialised world
retailers and merchandisers are now publicly demanding adherence
to standards which they are unwilling to have reflected in the
prices they are willing to pay."63
The danger is that any country encouraging its manufacturers to
implement codes could see costs rise and orders move to cheaper
competitors.
3. What to do
about China?
China is the Goliath of world garment production. At the same
time it has no free trade union movement. This places those supporting
freedom of association in a quandary. If they insist on it, then
they end up asking companies to cease sourcing from China, which
few are willing to do. If they tolerate companies sourcing from
China and push for other forms of worker representation, they
risk undermining the commitment to trade unionism.
4. Trickle down
Although exploitative by first world standards, wages and
conditions in the third world export sector are often better than
those in the domestic market. Jobs in the EPZs and export factories
are often highly prized. If conditions for third world workers
in general are to be improved, then it is vital that any improvements
in the export sector trickle down to the rest of the economy,
for example by strengthening respect for local labour laws, or
building a stronger trade union movement. So far, there is little
evidence of this happening, although admittedly the codes movement
is in its infancy.
5. Informal
sector and homeworkers
Codes work best in large, easily monitored factories, but
many of the worst abuses take place further down the chain, in
small workshops and homes. Decent codes accept responsibility
for the entire subcontracting chain, but few make any reference
to homeworkers.64 In practice codes are
extremely hard to implement in the smaller production units. Some
companies have already started to curtail their use of homeworkers
and subcontracting. Although this may lead to overall improvements
in working conditions, it may have a negative impact on women.
In countries such as Pakistan women make up the vast majority
of homeworkers, whereas men are more likely to do factory jobs.
6. Too many
codes
A typical factory owner in Dhaka or Jakarta makes clothes
for dozens of different companies in the United States and Europe.
If each company has a different code, it makes it far less likely
that owners will make serious efforts to meet their requirements.
There is a clear case for standardising codes across both countries
and companies, a development that is still a long way off, although
the ETI and other initiatives are moving towards this aim.
7. Impact on
children
Concern over child labour has been one of the driving forces
behind the introduction of codes of conduct, especially in the
United States, but the resulting impact on children's lives has
been mixed. The best-known case is Bangladesh, where an unknown
number of children, mainly girls, were sacked from garment factories
in 1994, in the face of the threat of a US boycott. Many were
reported to have taken worse jobs as brick-breakers, domestic
servants or even sex workers. Although a programme of education
for child garment workers was subsequently launched, it only reached
a relatively small proportion of the children who had been sacked.65
Since then, more attention has been given to compensatory programmes
for child workers. There has also been widespread criticism of
the use of boycotts as a means of improving working conditions
in the South.
Third world views and voices
Though the aim of codes of conduct is to improve conditions
in the Third World, they have been devised and implemented by
concerned individuals in aid agencies, trade unions and company
head offices in the First World. This has given rise to a number
of concerns. Several surveys have revealed overwhelming ignorance
of codes among those workers who are supposed to benefit, and
scepticism among those who do know about them.66
Moreover, the lack of ownership of the whole process in the Third
World has prompted allegations from manufacturers and some trade
unions that the underlying motive is protectionist. They suggest
that first world manufacturers, trade unions and politicians are
using codes to undermine the Third World's competitive edge, and
save their own jobs at the expense of poor countries' future development.
Here are a range of views on codes from the people who matter;
workers, trade unions and manufacturers in the Third World:
Amirul Haque Amin, National Garment Workers Federation, Bangladesh
You have to introduce them in all the Asian countries at once.
If not, if you start in Bangladesh and not in India, the garment
factories will relocate to India and I will be seen as working
against the national interest.
Lutfor Rahman, Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers & Exporters
Association
In principle we agree with codes, but at the same time we
should consider, if we do it, we could destroy the industry. Where's
the benefit to the workers in that? All these conditions mean
money and energy, but international prices are going down and
owners are being squeezed. We are ready to do these things, but
it is a two-way game. We need time to make the changes and more
business at the end of it, then the owners will make the necessary
investments.
Saidur Rahman, garment manufacturer, Bangladesh
You can't force people to change by preaching at them. All
those rules about minimum wages and working hours are already
in Bangladeshi law! But the labour inspector takes money from
every factory he goes to. He came here today and demanded £25
and I had to pay, or he wouldn't sign the licence we need to get
our raw materials out of the Chittagong port. The key issue is
educating the owners. They have to be motivated and know it is
in their own interests. How long can they suppress the workers
through muscle men, before the muscle men turn on them too? It's
already happening!
Lucy Roxas, union leader, Golden Thimble garment factory, Philippines
In many factories, the bosses say to the workers, "do
not form unions because if you do, the buyers won't give us any
more orders." If all employees knew about and understood
these codes, we could argue with that, but it depends on the bosses
telling us about it. It's good, but the management won't want
us to know!
Key points
-
-
-
Efforts by local workers, NGOs and trade unions are the
most important factor in trying to improve wages and working
conditions in Asia.
-
In Britain, consumers can support these efforts by pressing
retailers and manufacturers to adopt codes of conduct for
their third world suppliers.
-
This pressure works: clothing retailers are rapidly adopting
and improving such codes, but more needs to be done.
-
If they are only paper promises, codes will make no real
difference. Companies must set up credible systems of independent
monitoring to ensure compliance with their codes.
-
CAFOD is urging companies to join the Ethical Trading Initiative
(ETI), which has been established to help them develop such
systems.
Analysis of UK Garment Retailer Codes 67
Company Name: Arcadia Group plc
Subsidiaries and chains: Dorothy Perkins, Top Shop/Top Man,
Burton Menswear, Evans, Principles, Racing Green, Hawkshead
Scope of Code: 'the 'supplier' means the supplier,
the manufacturer or any other person involved in supplying
goods to our companies.'
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining: ' Suppliers
must not prevent workers from joining legal associations
(ILO Conventions 87 and 98).'
Equality of Treatment: 'Suppliers must treat everyone
fairly and without discrimination (ILO Convention 111 and
Recommendation 111). Suppliers must treat everyone fairly,
regardless of their race, religion, sex or disability.'
Wages: 'Suppliers must meet the local laws
on conditions such as minimum wages, hours of work, overtime
and deductions. (ILO conventions 1, 26, 95, 141 and Recommendation
85)'.
Working Hours: 'Overtime must be voluntary.'
Health and Safety: 'Under ILO Convention 155
and Recommendation 164, suppliers must provide a safe place
of work and must meet all local laws relating to health,
safety and welfare in the workplace. This also applies to
any accommodation provided for workers'. Plus more detailed
specification on lighting, ventilation etc.
Security of Employment: Compliance with local
laws.
Social Security: Compliance with local laws.
Employment of Children: 'Suppliers must not
employ children, other than under ILO Convention number
138 and Recommendation number 146 which define a child as
a person younger than 15 years old.' Plus details on
apprenticeship schemes and how to determine a child's age.
Forced Labour: 'People must not be forced
to work by threatening them with a penalty (ILO Conventions
29 and 105). Suppliers must not use forced labour, prison
labour or bonded labour.'
Informing Workforce: 'Suppliers are responsible
for making sure that everyone in the supply chain knows
about and complies with this code of conduct.'
Monitoring Procedures: 'The code is backed
up by a process of self-evaluation and independent inspections.
Suppliers must keep records to show that they are carrying
out regular reviews and checks. Arcadia Group staff or representatives
may visit factories without warning to carry out inspections.
Suppliers must provide all information we ask for to check
that the code is being followed.'
What happens of a supplier does not comply?: No
reference.
CAFOD comment: A good code and a big improvement
on its predecessor, the Burtons Sourcing Policy. The only
code to make specific reference to the main ILO conventions
on labour standards. More detail is needed on the 'independent
inspections'. Is Arcadia planning an independent monitoring
system, and if so, who will be doing it?
__________
Company Name: Storehouse plc
Subsidiaries and chains: Bhs; Mothercare
Scope of code: 'This code sets out the standards
which the company, its employees and suppliers must practice.'
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining: No
reference.
Equality of Treatment: 'Each company will apply
and communicate equal opportunity policies promoting and
recruiting employees on the basis of suitability for the
job and not discriminating on the grounds of sex, marital
status, race, colour, creed, nationality, ethnic or national
origin… the company will not tolerate any sexual, physical
or mental harassment'
Wages: No reference.
Working Hours: No reference.
Health and Safety: 'Each company will promote
the health, safety and welfare of all employees whilst at
work.'
Security of Employment: No reference.
Social Security: No reference.
Employment of Children: 'We will not condone
and will not knowingly utilise a factory which exploits
its workforce or employs child labour.'
Forced Labour: No reference.
Informing Workforce: 'Each company will, through
policy statements and other methods of communication, advise
employees of arrangements to achieve policy aims.'
Monitoring Procedures: 'This code will be
incorporated in the Conditions of Employment for all those
employed in Group companies… any breach could lead
to disciplinary action.' No reference to monitoring
of suppliers and subcontractors.
What happens of a supplier does not comply?: No
reference
CAFOD comment: A poor code designed for company
employees in the UK, rather than overseas suppliers. Large
gaps e.g. on freedom of association, wages, hours or any
form of monitoring of suppliers. Storehouse has written
to CAFOD, explaining that they are currently 'reviewing
and strengthening our policy and procedure in this area,
including the introduction of a more formal verification
arrangement.' However, it prefers to finalise this revision
before showing it to outside bodies. CAFOD replied offering
to help with the redrafting but at the time of writing had
not received a reply.
__________
Company Name: C&A
Scope of code: All suppliers and subcontractors. 'All
C&A suppliers are obliged to make their sub-contractors
aware of, and comply with, the C&A Code of Conduct.'
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining: 'C&A
recognises and respects the freedom of employees to choose
whether or not to associate with any group of their own
choosing, as long as such groups are legal in their own
country. Suppliers must not prevent or obstruct such legitimate
activities.' No reference to collective bargaining.
Equality of Treatment: 'under no circumstances
will the exploitation of any vulnerable individual or group
be tolerated…. We will not tolerate labour which involves
physical or mental abuse or any form of corporal punishment.'
Wages: 'Wages and benefits must be fully comparable
with local norms, must comply with all local laws and must
conform with the general principle of fair and honest dealings.'
Working Hours: No reference.
Health and Safety: 'Suppliers must ensure
that all manufacturing processes are carried out under conditions
which have proper and adequate regard for the health and
safety of those involved.'
Security of Employment: No reference.
Social Security: 'Wages and benefits must
be fully comparable with local norms, must comply with all
local laws and must conform with the general principle of
fair and honest dealings.'
Employment of Children: 'The use of child
labour is absolutely unacceptable. Workers must not be younger
than the legal minimum age for working in any specific country
and not less than 14 years, whichever is the greater.'
Forced Labour: 'We will not tolerate forced
labour or labour which involves physical or mental abuse
or any form of corporal punishment.'
Informing Workforce: No reference.
Monitoring Procedures: 'Our suppliers are
required to authorise SOCAM, the auditing company appointed
by C&A, to make unannounced inspections of any manufacturing
facility at any time…. We will ensure that standards
of compliance are actively audited and monitored.'
What happens of a supplier does not comply?: 'Where
we believe that a supplier has breached the requirements…
we will not hesitate to end our business relationship…
Where business has been suspended, the business relationship
may only be re-established after a convincing Corrective
Plan has been submitted by the supplier and approved by
C&A.'
CAFOD comment: A mixed bag. While the code itself
has some disturbing weaknesses, for example over working
hours or informing the workforce, the strength of C&A's
approach lies in the effort it has put into monitoring through
SOCAM (see page 32)
__________
Company Name: Next plc
Scope of code: 'Next will seek to work with suppliers
who do not use sub-contractors or outworkers except as agreed
and approved by Next. It is the suppliers' responsibility
to ensure and provide evidence that any subcontractors and
outworkers used conform to the criteria outlined in this
code.'
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining: 'They
will afford the rights of lawful free association and collective
bargaining to all employees…This code should be seen
as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, collective
bargaining or official regulation, and the implementation
should be sensitive to the rights and livelihoods of the
workers it is aiming to protect.'
Equality of Treatment: Guarantees 'the right to
a workplace free of harassment, abuse, degrading treatment
or corporal punishment. They will respect their employee's
right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion….
We will seek and identify suppliers who employ individuals
based on their ability to do the job, irrespective of their
gender, racial characteristics, colour, nationality, cultural
or religious beliefs, age or marital status.' Goes into
considerable further detail on non-discrimination.
Wages: 'Should meet or exceed the local industry
average and be at least sufficient to meet basic needs and
provide some discretionary income.'
Working Hours: Compliance with national
laws, plus 'It is recommended that the maximum compulsory
working week should be 48 hours. Where the employee freely
gives their consent to work overtime, the working week may
be extended. Every employee should be entitled to at least
one day off a week.'
Health and Safety: ' Next will only work with
suppliers who provide their employees with a safe and healthy
work environment. Suppliers must conform fully to the labour,
health and safety laws of the country of manufacture as
a minimum.' Considerable further detail provided.
Security of Employment: 'Employees must have
a written statement detailing all terms and conditions of
employment… Wherever practicable, workers should enjoy
security and stability of employment and regularity of income.'
Seasonal work should be minimised, disciplinary procedures
must include hearings and the right to appeal.
Social Security: 'Suppliers must conform fully
to the labour, health and safety laws of the country of
manufacture as a minimum.'
Employment of Children: 'Next will not work
with companies who continue to use child labour.. A 'child
worker' is regarded as someone who is below the legal minimum
school leaving age for their country….' Next will
support existing suppliers who provide education for existing
child workers and gradually replace them with adult members
of their family. Other provisions for 'young workers' old
enough to leave school but still under 16 years old.
Forced Labour: 'They will not use slave, prison
or forced labour.'
Informing Workforce: No reference.
Monitoring Procedures: 'It is the supplier's
responsibility to ensure and provide evidence that any subcontractors
and outworkers used conform to the criteria outlined in
this code.
What happens of a supplier does not comply?: 'Next
will make every effort to enter into a strategy of positive
engagement with its suppliers and to work together with
them to reach the standards set out in this code.' No
reference to what happens if positive engagement
fails to achieve compliance.
CAFOD comment: Very impressive. Next updated
its 'Code of Practice' in May 1998. This version is extremely
comprehensive, incorporating many of CAFOD and other agencies'
criticisms of previous codes of conduct. Its only obvious
weakness is its monitoring procedures, which amount to little
more than self-certification by suppliers, with no independent
system of checking.
__________
Company Name: River Island
Scope of code: 'All suppliers shall ensure that all
subcontractors or other third parties engaged conform to
the River Island Worldwide Supplier Policy.'
Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining:
No specific reference. However, River Island has written
to CAFOD (7/9/98) saying that, "Our code's requirement
that suppliers accord all workers the principles of fairness,
dignity and justice embraces the above heading."
Equality of Treatment: 'All suppliers shall ensure
that wages, benefits and employment practices are fully
comparable with local standards and conform to all local
laws and regulations.'
Wages: 'All suppliers shall ensure that wages,
benefits and employment practices are fully comparable with
local standards and conform to all local laws and regulations.'
Working Hours: 'All suppliers shall ensure
that wages, benefits and employment practices are fully
comparable with local standards and conform to all local
laws and regulations.'
Health and Safety: 'All suppliers shall ensure
that all manufacturing processes are carried out with adequate
and proper regard for health and safety of all involved
and in conformity with all local standards and conform to
all local laws and regulations.'
Security of Employment: 'All suppliers shall
ensure that wages, benefits and employment practices are
fully comparable with local standards and conform to all
local laws and regulations.'
Social Security: 'All suppliers shall ensure
that wages, benefits and employment practices are fully
comparable with local standards and conform to all local
laws and regulations.'
Employment of Children: 'All suppliers shall
not engage any person under 15 years of age.'
Forced Labour: No reference.
Informing Workforce: No reference.
Monitoring Procedures: 'All suppliers shall
by appointment and without prior announcement, permit at
all reasonable times access to all production facilities
by River Island employees or appointed agents, for the purpose
of ensuring compliance with this Policy.' Suppliers
shall also disclose all information concerning the use of
subcontractors and ensure they conform to the policy. River
Island's letter to CAFOD of 7 September 1998 explained that
the reference to appointed agents is a provision for independent
monitoring. This policy is a fundamental term of all
contracts placed by River Island and any departure from
it by a supplier will jeopardise any future relationship
and entitle River Island to terminate current contracts.
What happens of a supplier does not comply?: No
reference
CAFOD comment: A poor code; vaguely phrased and
largely confined to urging compliance with national laws.
River Island has written to CAFOD and said it will be embarking
on a revision 'in the near future'.
Note: Marks and Spencer
and Sears Group were unable to provide CAFOD with any written
code of conduct at this stage. Statements in italics are
direct quotations from company codes.
British retailer codes: the good, the bad and the inadequate
Pages 36-41 contain an analysis of retailer codes which
shows just how fast the issue of codes of conduct is moving.
Arcadia Group, Next and C&A have all issued new, improved
codes in 1998. Storehouse, Sears Group and River Island
have told CAFOD that they are currently (1998) reviewing
their codes. Adams Childrenswear wrote to CAFOD in answer
to a request for a copy of Sears' code to say, "We
do have a code which we are currently upgrading. As soon
as this work is completed we will propose it to the ETI
and begin the consultation process."68
It hopes the code will be adopted by other Sears' companies.
So far, so good, but the major gaps in codes identified
in CAFOD's report on the shoe trade in 199769
remain. Marks and Spencer, Storehouse and River Island have
yet to acknowledge the right to freedom of association.
So far, only C&A has anything approaching an established
system of independent monitoring. Arcadia mentions it in
its code, and River Island has told CAFOD that the reference
in its code to appointed agents is a provision for independent
monitoring.
Marks and Spencer had, at the time of writing, not published
a written code of conduct for its suppliers, though it has
told CAFOD it is reviewing both this position and its previous
reluctance to join the Ethical Trading Initiative. CAFOD's
view is that Marks and Spencer's strong links with a limited
number of suppliers put it in an ideal position to introduce
and independently monitor a code of conduct, which would
also send a powerful signal to other British retailers.
Every code reviewed by CAFOD could easily be improved, as
indicated in the analysis.
Work on codes of conduct has moved at a dizzying pace in
1998. Retailers are now much more willing to adopt or revise
codes, and consult and involve aid agencies. All too often,
campaigning and lobbying for a fair deal for the poor can
be uphill work. A combination of vested interests and the
indifference of the powerful can seem almost insuperable.
Codes of conduct and corporate responsibility are areas
where the ground is moving, in the right direction - and
almost entirely due to consumer pressure.
Conclusion
During the 1990s, large first world clothing companies have
taken significant steps towards recognising that taking
part in the global production chain brings responsibilities
as well as profits. At the beginning of the decade, the
majority of companies denied any responsibility for wages
and working conditions in the factories that produced the
clothes on sale in the high street. Today, partly due to
the work of aid agencies like CAFOD and other pressure groups,
most companies express a desire to guarantee basic labour
standards in their suppliers. Many have codes of conduct,
whose content is improving as companies gain experience.
The challenge now is for companies to ensure that codes
of conduct have a real impact on the ground. That involves
developing effective training and monitoring systems and,
in CAFOD's view, introducing a system of independent checks
of supplier compliance. The prize is huge - giving dignity
to millions of garment workers around the world. Moreover,
it need not mean a significant increase in prices for consumers.
Looking back on the lives of the people featured in this
report, if companies enforced the CAFOD model code:
-
Hasina in Bangladesh would be able to say no to her supervisors'
endless demands for overtime, and have a day a week at home
with her daughter. She would be able to claim her legal
right to maternity pay, should she decide to have another
child.
-
Dani in Indonesia would receive a living wage, enabling
him to go back to feeding his baby with milk, rather than
sweetened tea.
-
In the Philippines, Ester's co-operative would not be forced
constantly to cut wages and increase its hours to compete
with other, equally exploited, subcontractors.
-
Wimala in Sri Lanka would be able to take sick leave without
fear of the sack.
-
In Bangladesh, Minara's colleagues would be able to form
their trade union without fearing for their lives.
-
Marilou in the Philippines would have a right to a permanent
contract, meaning she would not be on the scrapheap at the
age of 35.
By carrying through what we have already started, companies
and consumers together can clean up the clothes trade.
Endnotes
1 Alan West (ed), Handbook of Retailing, 1988
2 UK Retail Report (London, December 1996)
3 British Apparel and Textile Confederation, Industry Overview
1996 ( London, June 1997)
4 Key Note Clothing Retailing 1997 Market Report (London, 1997),
p. 8
5 News of the World, 15 March, 1998
6 Sources: Marks and Spencer Annual Report (1998), Clean Clothes
Campaign, Of Rags and Riches ( Amsterdam, 1997), Finacial Times
21 May 1998
7 Figures for market share may not match turnover figures, which
include non clothes sales
8 Financial Times, 8 April 1998
9 British Apparel and Textile Confederation, Industry Overview,
op. cit.
10 Financial Times, 3 October 1996
11 International Labour Organisation, Globalization of the footwear,
textiles and clothing industries (Geneva, 1996), p. 6
12 International Labour Organisation, op. cit., p. 37
13 Taken from Angela Hale, Phasing Out the Multi Fibre Arrangement
- What does it mean for developing countries garment industries?
(Manchester, Women Working Worldwide, 1996)
14 See Arvind Panagariya, M.G. Quibria, and Narhari Rao, The
Emerging Global Trading Environment and Developing Asia (Manila,
Asian Development Bank, 1996)
15 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 53
16 Andrew Ross (ed.), No Sweat: Fashion, free trade and the
rights of garment workers (London, 1997), p. 251
17 Andrew Ross (ed.), op.cit., p. 203
18 Financial Times, 23 May 1997
19 Andrew Ross (ed.), No Sweat, op.cit., p. 237
20 Business News, 21 August 1996
21 Adeli de la Paz-Kraft, The Philippines Textile and Garment
Industries: Structure, Competitiveness and Adjustments (October
1996, mimeo)
22 Maria Fe B. Durano, Garment Industry of the Philippines:
Responding to Global Change (Manila, Philippine Center for Policy
Studies, 1996), p. 2
23 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 6
24 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 22
25 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 83
26 Neil Kearney, International Textile, Garment and Leather
Workers Federation, talk at CAFOD, 13 June 1998
27 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone: Women Workers
in AsiaÕs Export Processing Zones (Hong Kong, 1998),
p. 181
28 Author Interview, Dhaka, July 1998
29 Drawn from Achintha Kodikara, Gamini Akmeemana, Sarath Fernando
and Saranath Dissanayake, Garment Factory Women Workers (Colombo,
PEFDA/Centre for Society and Religion, commissioned by CAFOD,
April 1998)
30 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op. cit., p.
177
31 Quoted in Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op.
cit., p. 3
32 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op. cit., p.
167
33 The material for this section is taken from research by Urban
Missionaries, a CAFOD partner in Manila. See Urban Missionaries,
A Research on Contractualisation and its Effects on Garment
Workers, (Manila, 1997, mimeo)
34 Rene E. Ofreneo, The Economic and Legal Dimensions of Labor
Only Contracting, (Manila, PCPS, July 1995)
35 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 86
36 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 21
37 Author Interview, Dhaka, July 1998
38 Author Interview, Bangkok, December 1997
39 Charles Kernaghan, Made in China: Behind the Label (New York,
National Labor Committee, 1998), p. 45
40 International Labour Organisation, Globalization, op.cit.,
p. 23
41 This section is based on Asia Monitor Resource Center, We
in the Zone, op. cit., and Charles Kernaghan, Made in China,
op. cit.
42 HM Customs and Excise
43 Author Interview, Dhaka, July 1998
44 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op. cit., p.
188
45 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op. cit., p.
142
46 Asia Monitor Resource Center, We in the Zone, op. cit., p.
189
47 Drawn from Achintha Kodikara, Gamini Akmeemana, Sarath Fernando
and Saranath Dissanayake, Garment Factory Women Workers, (Colombo,
PEFDA/Centre for Society and Religion, commissioned by CAFOD,
April 1998)
48 Andrew Ross (ed.), No Sweat, op.cit., p. 151
49 Philip Rosenzweig, How should multinationals set global workplace
standards?, (Financial Times, 27.3.98)
50 Angela Hale, Company Codes of Conduct: What do they mean
for Workers in the garment and sportswear industries? (Manchester,
Labour Behind the Label, undated)
51 Quoted in US Department of Labor, Bureau of International
Labor Affairs, The Apparel Industry and Codes of Conduct: A
Solution to the International Child Labor Problem? (Washington,
1996), p. 14
52 Jean-Paul Sajhau, Business Ethics in the Textile, Clothing
and Footwear Industries: Codes of Conduct (Geneva, ILO, 1997),
p. 6
53 ETI Information Pack, December 1997
54 Angela Hale, Company Codes of Conduct, op. cit.
55 Clare Ferguson, A Review of UK Company Codes of Conduct (London,
August 1998), p. 4
56 Clare Ferguson, A Review, op. cit., p. 6
57 Chris Williams, C&A Head of Corporate Communications, speech,
Manchester, 6 May 1998
58 Asia Monitor Resource Center, Asian Labour Update, op. cit.,
p. 4
59 SOCAM Annual Report, 1997
60 Dusty Kidd, meeting at CAFOD, May 1998
61 Phil Knight, speech, Washington, 12 May 1998
62 Asia Monitor Resource Center, Asian Labour Update, op. cit.
63 Letter to CAFOD, 15 April 1998
64 Clare Ferguson, A Review, op. cit., p. 6
65 US Department of Labor, Bureau of International Labor Affairs,
The Apparel Industry and Codes of Conduct: A Solution to the
International Child Labor Problem? (Washington, 1996), p. 7
66 See for example, Women Working Worldwide, Women Workers and
Codes of Conduct: Report of Preliminary Research and Consultation
Exercise (Manchester, 1998)
67 This table does not include garment manufacturers such as
William Baird and Coats Viyella who supply high street retailers
such as Marks & Spencer
68 Letter to CAFOD 27/8/98
69 Duncan Green, Just How Clean Are Your Shoes (London, CAFOD,
1997)
Appendix A
Imports to Britain
Apparel Imports Top 25 Suppliers
| |
|
|
|
1996 |
1997 |
% |
| |
|
|
|
(£m) |
(£m) |
change |
| |
1 |
Hong Kong |
1,078.5 |
1,124.6 |
4.3 |
| |
2 |
Italy |
422.4 |
456.8 |
8.1 |
| |
3 |
China |
34.4 |
408.9 |
9.8 |
| |
4 |
Germany |
300.9 |
319.6 |
6.2 |
| |
5 |
Turkey |
242.6 |
291.6 |
20.2 |
| |
6 |
Netherland |
175.7 |
284.01 |
61.6 |
| |
7 |
India |
314.4 |
272.2 |
-13.4 |
| |
8 |
Portugal |
270.9 |
257.5 |
-4.9 |
| |
9 |
Indonesia |
193.5 |
230.3 |
19.0 |
| |
10 |
France |
188.4 |
222.3 |
18.0 |
| |
11 |
Morocco |
157.6 |
207.4 |
31.6 |
| |
12 |
Bangladesh |
219.4 |
198.2 |
-9.7 |
| |
13 |
Sri Lanka |
166.5 |
196.8 |
18.2 |
| |
14 |
Belgium/Lux |
163.7 |
196.1 |
19.8 |
| |
15 |
Ireland |
197.1 |
176.6 |
-10.4 |
| |
16 |
Malaysia |
142.3 |
137.7 |
-3.2 |
| |
17 |
Mauritius |
104.5 |
131.3 |
25.6 |
| |
18 |
USA |
113.8 |
129.9 |
14.1 |
| |
19 |
Romania |
92.1 |
114.1 |
23.9 |
| |
20 |
Taiwan |
73.5 |
113.3 |
54.1 |
| |
21 |
Pakistan |
129.1 |
110.7 |
-14.3 |
| |
22 |
Israel |
101.8 |
110.5 |
8.5 |
| |
23 |
Thailand |
87.8 |
90.2 |
2.7 |
| |
24 |
South Korea |
62.8 |
74.7 |
18.9 |
| |
25 |
Austria |
62.8 |
61.4 |
-2.2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total Top
25 |
|
|
5,403.5 |
5,917 |
9.5 |
| Total Imports |
|
|
6,208.0 |
|
-100.0 |
Source: HM Customs & Excise.
Appendix B
Organisations active on codes of conduct and the garment industry
CAFOD is a member of Labour Behind the Label and the Ethical
Trading Initiative, two important coalitions working to improve
conditions for garment workers worldwide.
Labour Behind the Label
C/o NEAD
38 Exchange St
Norwich NR2 1AX
Tel: 01603 610 993
Fax: 01603 625 004
Email: nead@gn.apc.org
Ethical Trading Initiative
Suite 204
16 Baldwin's Gardens
London EC1N 7RJ
Tel: 0171 831 8677
Fax: 0171 405 5943
Email: eti@gn.apc.org
Council on Economic Priorities
138 Buckingham Palace Road
London SW1W 9SA
Tel: 0171 730 2646
Fax: 0171 730 2664
Email: leipzig123@aol.com
Homenet
24 Harlech Terrace
Leeds LS11 7DX
Tel: 0113 270 1119
Fax: 0113 277 3269
Email: homenet@gn.apc.org
Women Working Worldwide
CER, Rm 126 Humanities Building
Rosamond St West
Manchester M15 6LL
Tel: 0161 247 1760
Email: women-ww@MCR1.poptel.org.uk
Trade Union International Research and Education Group (TUIREG)
Ruskin College
Walton Street
Oxford OX1 2HE
Tel: 01865 554 599/ 556 564
Fax: 01865 511 313
Email: tuireg@ruskin.ac.uk
World Development Movement
25 Beehive Place
London SW9 7QR
Tel: 0171 274 7630
Fax: 0171 274 8232
Email: wdm@gn.apc.org
Non-UK
Clean Clothes Campaign
PO Box 11584
1001 GN Amsterdam
Tel: 00 3120 412 2785
Fax: 00 3120 412 2786
Email: info@cleanclothes.org
National Labor Committee
2757H Ave
15th floor, New York, NY 10001
Tel: 001 212 242-3002
Email: natlabcom@aol.com
Asia Monitor Resource Center
444-446 Nathan Road, 8-B
Kowloon
Hong Kong
Tel: (852) 2332 1346
Fax: (852) 2385 5319
Email: amrc@hk.super.net
SOMO (Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations)
Keizersgracht 132
1013 HG Amsterdam
Tel: (3120) 639 1291
Fax: (3120) 639 1321
Email: somo@xs4all.nl
International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers Federation
(ITGLWF)
Rue Joseph Stevens 8,
8-1000 Brussels
Belgium
Tel: (322) 512 2606
Fax: (322) 511 0904
Email: 101320.3046@compuserve.com
Some useful websites on the garment industry :
www.UNITEunion.org
site of the US garment workers' trade union
www.nlcnet.org
site of the US National Labor Committee
www.cleanclothes.org
site of the European-wide Clean Clothes Campaign
www.ilo.org
site of the International Labour Organisation
www.gn.apc.org/homenet
site of homeworkersÕ organisation
www.poptel.org.uk/women-ww/
site of Women Working Worldwide
Appendix C
Further Resources from CAFOD
q FASHION
VICTIMS sticker set
(including poster and instructions) free
Summary of FASHION VICTIMS
-
q Fair
Deal for the Poor
q Fair
Deal for the Poor
| worship resource book |
|
£2.50 |
| q |
Meeting notes on work |
|
free |
| q |
Advice sheet, writing to
retailers |
free |
Fair
Deal T-shirts, fairly traded
| |
q |
30-32" chest |
| |
q |
36-38" chest |
| |
q |
44-46" chest |
| |
q |
46-48" chest |
|
|
£7.95 |
q Celebrating
One World
| worship resource book |
|
£7.99 |
To order, send cheque (payable to CAFOD),
including post and package @ 20% (35% overseas orders) to:
CAFOD Supporter Services, Romero Close, Stockwell Road, London
SW9 9TY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
