July 7, 2008
Have you ever wondered how large retail chain stores are able to sell name brand clothes for so cheap? The price may not be as cheap as it seems. Usually, the first thing that comes to mind is to question the quality of the merchandise. However, raw material is not the only resource big companies have skimped on in the name of high profits.
After a BBC Panorama documentary, Primark: On the Rack (aired June 23, 2008), consumers and retailers in the United Kingdom are now concerned about the sweatshop conditions in Bangalore, India. The documentary exposes the child labor practices, union busting, low wages, unpaid overtime, and hazardous work conditions of unauthorized subcontracted factories. Factories under contract with large corporations are selling their workload to smaller factories who are abusive of basic human and workers’ rights, expecting workers to “complete hourly targets of 100-120 pieces per hour, when under normal circumstances one can do just 60 pieces” and to get by on half a living wage to support their large families (War on Want).
The harsh working conditions of garment workers in Bangalore have not been a secret or the use of subcontractors by major retail companies. Consider this article by The Guardian written September of last year, revealing the brutality experienced by the workers in these factories and citing various incidents of human rights abuses by companies such as Texport Overseas, Gokaldas Exports, and others, who are suppliers to Gap, Primark, Tesco, Mothercare, Matalan, Asda, Marks & Spencer, and H&M. The article brought to light many of the atrocities experienced by the workers. For example, pregnant female workers were not allowed medical leave to have their babies, resulting in deliveries on the shop floor and the deaths of the infants. Security guards were posted by the bathrooms, shouting for the workers to get back to work and to meet their production quotas. Workers were dismissed for missing days due to illness. Female workers were often harassed and verbally abused by their male production managers. Also, workers were not paid a living wage or for forced overtime. Even more tragic, the pressurized environment produced a hazardous workplace, generating suicidal behavior and physical ailment among the workers.
An organization on the frontlines of organizing the workers and “campaigning for workers’ rights and corporate accountability” in these garment factories in Bangalore is Cividep. Cividep describes the situation of the workers in the following statement:
When we speak to the workers, they tell us all they want is to be treated like human beings. They need a living wage to live in dignity, to get running water, to get a better education for their children (The Guardian).
Cividep researcher, Suhasini Singh has found clear evidence of both adult and child labor in “slum workshops and refugee camps” (BBC), where workers are forced to meet production targets, denied sick leave, and deprived of a living wage.
After the exposé by The Guardian, companies cited in the article pledged to take the allegations seriously and to audit their contracted companies. It was not until the recent documentary has the fallout for these big retail chains led to the reexamination of their production and purchasing practices. Primark, the main target of the documentary, released a press statement, stating “Under our Code of Conduct, children are expressly forbidden to work on clothes produced for us and none of our suppliers has our permission to sub-contract production.” Primark has pulled all merchandise and cancelled new orders made by three subcontracted suppliers in India.
However, withdrawing from these factories is not the answer. Primark would not enforce or stand by their code of ethnical trading and corporate responsibility by withdrawing from the contracts with these factories (Labour Behind the Label). Pulling out of these companies would destroy the factories and the workers would lose their jobs. For the company to claim corporate accountability, Primark must work with the factories to ensure that workers’ right will no longer be infringed upon in Bangalore, India. Primark has already recognized the problem as industry-wide (Primark), now it is the responsibility of the company to help fix the problem and to convince the subcontracted companies to provide a living wage. Otherwise, the message to the workers who have spoken out would be negative. It would give the impression that speaking out against exploitation would result in job loss. This would mean the lie used by management to instill fear in the employees would become true, discouraging workers in the future from speaking out against these cruel and hazardous working conditions. The living wage in Bangalore is only £52 a month or $103, according to the Bangalore Garment and Textile Workers’ Union (War on Want). And medical leave, paid overtime, and respectful and safe work environment should not be too much to ask of these subcontracted companies.
Retail giants like Primark and Tesco are often described as the “Wal-Mart of the United Kingdom,” advertising their competitively low prices or “valued clothing” to their customers (Primark). However, now customers will have to rethink their spending habits. Are consumers willing to uphold the bad and hazardous labor practices for a lower price? Primark may have strengthened their oversight on the production process, but what about other companies? Consumers are another critical component of corporate responsibility. While it is the role of the big corporations to oversee manufacturing practices, it is the role of the consumer to oversee the big corporations as these companies respond the best to the profits made off of the consumer.
In addition, a new Tesco company and grocer, Fresh & Easy is currently moving in to the United States. According to the United Food and Commercial Workers’ Union, Fresh & Easy does not recognize unions. The UFCW has also launched a campaign against the new company. To read more, see “Two Faces of Tesco” report and www.freshandeasyfacts.com.