 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Labor Alerts: a service of Campaign for Labor RightsKukdong-Independent Union Leader Beaten by CROC supportersPosted May 17, 2001 In this alert:
{Information in this alert provided by United Students Against Sweatshops, US/LEAP, the Worker Rights Consortium, and SITEKIM}
1. Independent Union Leader Beaten by Croc Supporters, then Punished by KukdongOn May 15th, SITEKIM (the independent union in the Kukdong factory which has recently filed for legal registration) leader Ivan Diaz Xolo was assaulted outside the factory's new cafeteria by three CROC supporters. The CROC, which is a union tied to the conservative Mexican political party, the PRI, is sometimes referred to as the "company-dominated" union. Workers who support the SITEKIM union do so mainly because they wish to be represented by a union independent of the CROC. [For more background on the campaign, check the "background" section at the bottom of this Labor Alert.] According to Ivan Diaz, "Julio [Garcia Gil] walked to me and hit me in the face with a water bottle. I took a step back and I realized that two other individuals, Israel AKA "El Veneno" [Israel Espinoza Corona] and Adalberto AKA "El Puebla" [Alberto Alarcon Velez] were hitting me on the back, so I ducked and covered my face and chest with my arms and did not answer back because I knew I could be fired for this, so I did not do anything else." Diaz suffered no injuries other than scratches and bruises. Other workers present have corroborated Diaz's version of this attack. According to Kukdong workers, Julio Garcia had previously been fired for misconduct in the factory and was readmitted after the work stoppage. Israel Espinoza is a CROC steward in the cutting department. Also according to the testimony of several workers, both Israel Espinoza and Alberto Alarcon have received money from CROC representative Jose Luis Ruiz. The negligence and complicity of company officials in this incident is evident in that security chose not to intervene during the incident (even though Hugo de la Peņa, head of human resources, subsequently told Ivan Diaz that one person from security had witnessed the incident). When Diaz and other witnesses attempted to enter the management offices to denounce the attack, they were denied access to the by security personnel. Later on that morning, Diaz was called into the offices and Hugo de la Peņa, human resources chief at Kukdong, alleged that Ivan had provoked Israel Espinoza, and that the incident had been a fight between both individuals. According to De la Peņa, this version was given to him by two witnesses, whose names he never mentioned. The attack occurred in front of a crowd of workers, yet none of the base workers present during the incident were called to give their versions of the incident. Subsequently, Hugo de la Peņa, allegedly acting on orders from above, suspended both Ivan and Israel Espinoza for a week. The precedent of Kukdong allowing the CROC to beat up workers on premises and then punish the individuals beaten is a threat to the physical integrity of all workers at Kukdong who have opposed the CROC, as well as another attack on the ability of workers to freely choose their union representation. While it is not clear that higher management was involved in handling this situation, it is clear that management must take strong measures to prevent this kind of incident from occurring again. If the incident is left unpunished, it will be an encouragement for the CROC to assault independent union supporters. Already, many workers have expressed fear of being attacked for supporting SITEKIM.
2. Croc Offers Money to Workers to Resign SITEKIMAccording to several workers who have approached Centro de Apoyo al Trabajador, the CROC union representative at Kukdong has been offering money to SITEKIM members and others to oppose the independent union. Martin Perez Casquera, a Kukdong worker affiliated to SITEKIM, denounces that on May 2nd, Jose Luis Ruiz, the CROC representative at Kukdong, offered him 500 pesos ($50 US) for every person in SITEKIM that he brought to him who was willing to sign a document disowning SITEKIM. Perez was also offered 100 pesos every week, which he accepted because of need and because he felt that the money could replace the union dues that he has been paying the CROC from his paycheck against his will. "I am conscious that by receiving this money he [CROC representative Jose Luis Ruiz] may force me to do something I should not do, like beat up my co-workers or other actions that may occur to him. Through this document I make Jose Luis Ruiz, representative of the CROC at Kukdong responsible for anything that happens to me or my family," Perez wrote. The testimony that Centro de Apoyo al Trabajador obtained from Perez may place him under considerable risk, especially in light of the beating of Ivan Diaz. Perez also confirmed the version of workers that others in the factory have been accepting this money, including the assailants of Ivan Diaz. While Mexican Federal Labor Law does not contemplate sanctions against bribes in a union election, this situation clearly impedes a fair and free election from happening in Kukdong. Kukdong is under no legal or contractual obligation to facilitate office space for the CROC to carry out its operations within the factory, and it is becoming apparent that the presence of CROC representative Jose Luis Ruiz in the facility may seriously jeopardize the safety of workers and their right to freedom of association. This is especially true in light of the preferential treatment granted to the CROC, since it is allowed to have office space within the facility and call meetings with workers.
3. Security Chief Responsible for Continuing Harassment of Workers in KukdongOn Tuesday, May 8, Elytania Baez Gonzalez, a sewing line supervisor at Kukdong lost 400 pesos of her own property. After reporting to company officials that she lost the money, she and others were called into the security booth at the main entrance. There, Alberto Cedano, head of security at Kukdong, accused Baez of "self-robbery." Security personnel under orders from Cedano frisked the workers and then had a female security employee to strip-search them. While the reason for this attack is not clear, Baez and at least one other person were actively involved in the work stoppage and have strongly opposed the CROC union. Alberto Cedano has been previously involved in several other incidents of violence and harassment against workers. Josefina Morastitla, a worker at Kukdong, reported that Cedano roughly grabbed her by the arms and shoved her out of the way the on January 9th, during the work stoppage. State television broadcast footage of her displaying the bruises caused by Cedano later that day. Workers returning to the factory on the week of January 15th reported Cedano intimidating workers involved in the stoppage by telling them that they better be careful because he was going to be watching them. Workers also reported that Cedano and Jose Luis Ruiz, the CROC union representative would exchange lists and consult with each other to decide which workers could come back to work and which could not. Dolores Diaz, a former worker at Kukdong, also reports being assaulted by Cedano on Wednesday, January 31st. As Diaz was trying to return to work in the factory, Cedano called Jose Luis Ruiz, the CROC union representative, and they consulted a list in a notebook. They then decided for her that she had "come in to resign", without giving her a chance to speak to management. Cedano then pushed Diaz, grabbed her by the arm, and physically removed her from the factory. Diaz expressed that she will not return to the factory becasue she feels that Cedano is a threat to her physical integrity, especially since Diaz is pregnant. Cedano and Hugo de la Peņa were also involved in fabricating a written warning issued on March 29 against SITEKIM Secretary General Marcela Muņoz for an alleged incident in which she discussed the independent union with other workers during work hours. Cedano, who was not even near the site where the incident allegedly occurred, listed himself as a witness to this incident. On another occasion, Hugo de la Peņa threatened Marcela Muņoz with dismissal of her "and the others behind her" if SITEKIM literature continued to be distributed within the factory. Cedano's and De la Peņa's continued presence in the factiry, given his history of violence, harassment and arbitrary treatment, constitutes a threat to the physical and mental integrity of the workers at Kukdong. In addition, his collaboration with the CROC union creates a climate that unfairly favors the CROC union.
4. Call to ActionThe following call to action has been suggested by a number of workers, organizers, and human rights advocates in Mexico including the Centro de Apoyo al Trabajador. This strategy has been developed also in coordination with U.S. labor rights organizations. We must take action now to support SITEKIM organizers and members to ensure that this incident is not repeated, and to ensure that the independent union has a chance to have a free and fair election through a secret ballot process. This can only happen if a fair environment in created inside the Kukdong factory. ***Contact Nike, Reebok, and Kukdong and demand the following: 1. That Jose Luis Ruiz be expelled from the factory. Ruiz is not an employee of Kukdong, and has not been designated by Collective Bargaining Contract or the workers as a representative. Furthermore, the company is under no legal or contract obligation to allow Ruiz to have an office at Kukdong or access to the facility. If a fair environment is to be created at Kukdong, and further violence prevented, it is essential that his access to the facility be denied. 2. That CROC supporters involved in the violence against Ivan Diaz be severely and publicly reprimanded by the company in order to prevent further outbursts of violence. 3. That Alberto Cedano and Hugo de la Peņa be immediately dismissed for their continuing misconduct and that remedial measures be taken to further prevent this type of conduct by other employees. ~ Contact: Dusty Kidd, Global Director for Labor Practices, Nike Corp., One Bowerman Drive, Beaverton, OR 97003. Phone: (503) 671-6453; Fax: (503) 532-0440; Email: Dusty.Kidd@nike.com. ~Contact: Doug Cahn, Vice President, Reebok Human Right Programs, Reebok Corp., Email: doug.cahn@reebok.com ~ Contact: Hoon Park, General Manager, Kukdong International Mexico, S.A. de C.V. Retorno de los Continentes No. 38, Col. Rancho los Soles C.P. 74210, Atlixco, Puebla, Mexico. Phone: 011-52-2 446-1020-3; Fax: 011-52-2-446-1024; Email: kukdong@avante.net.mx
5. Background: The Kuk Dong Story: A Strike, A Police Attack, An Agreement, and Mass FiringsThe strike of 800 of the some 900 workers at the Kuk Dong factory in southern Mexico that produces for Nike and many U.S. universities began on January 9, 2001 after the company fired or forced the resignation of 25 workers who had complained about low wages and rotten food in the cafeteria. The workers claim that the union at the factory, the FROC-CROC, which is tied to the conservative Mexican political party, the PRI, is not representing their interests. For this reason, they want to create a new independent union in its place. Workers complain of forced overtime (including 14 to 16 year old workers who are legally required to work no more than 6 hours a day and are instead working 10), verbal abuse, and failure to give legally mandated benefits. On January 11, as strikers picketed the factory gates, known "enforcers" of the FROC-CROC union attempted to provoke a confrontation with the 300 or so workers at the factory gates. These attempts were unsuccessful, but soon after, approximately 200 riot police surrounded the workers in front of the plant and announced they had been ordered by the Governor to remove the workers from the area. The strikers put up no resistance. Nevertheless, the police used violence to disperse them--many workers were severely beaten. In fact, fifteen workers were sent to the hospital and two people had injuries severe enough to require hospitalization. There are even reports that the police were being directed by a leader of the FROC-CROC union, implying cooperation between the police and the company. Two days later, an agreement was reached to allow the strikers to return to work without reprisals. The company agreed to distribute copies of this agreement to all the workers. However, when the workers tried to go back to work with copies of the agreement in hand, the guards at the factory gates would not let many of them return unless they signed a loyalty oath to the FROC-CROC. Then hundreds of returning workers were either fired or forced to resign. Kuk Dong then came to a second agreement at the end of January to rehire all the workers fired or forced to resign for supporting an independent union and to outreach to these workers to let them know it is safe to come back to the factory. As of the beginning of February, sources estimated the return of only 200 of the 800 workers who went on strike to protest the forced resignation and the illegal firing of 25 workers. Mexican-based sources report that workers are intimidated to return to work due to the 30-40 armed riot police who are [were? Are armed guards still in the plant?] consistently in the factory, the fact that returning workers were being forced to sign a loyalty oath to the FROC-CROC and their earned seniority status and pay was disregarded because they are being treated as new workers. In their public statements, Nike promised the support of the right to freedom of association and to assist workers back to work. However, the facts indicated that whatever Nike was doing to promote an intimidation-free environment in Kuk Dong was not effective. Nike, whether intentionally or not, even implicitly backed FROC-CROC anti-independent union tactics when they noted in a statement issued Jan 30th that all workers are required by Mexican labor law to recognize the FROC-CROC as their representative - a requirement only for new workers, not workers returning from a strike (and one that was in opposition to the FROC-CROC itself!). The international campaign saw some success in persuading Nike to intervene in a strong manner when on February 9th the Corporate Responsibility Vice President of Nike, Dusty Kidd, sent a letter to the President of Kuk Dong Mexico asking for some very specific demands: 1) Nike asked that the company reinstate workers as they returned to the factory, rather than taking the returning workers through an interview process and notifying them of employment by telegram, 2) that the original five fired workers be specifically asked to return to assuage any fear of retaliation against them, 3) that the dropping of the charges against a former Kuk Dong workers be publicly announced, 4) that the deadline for workers to return to the factory to be reinstated be extended to one week past a public announcement of the dropped charges and the invitation to the original five fired workers is made public, 5) that Kuk Dong reconsider reinstating workers without their previous seniority, that the company supply an International Labor Organization - led worker rights training, and 6) that union elections not take place until all the workers are back to work and are given time to prepare. However, reports indicate that while gains have been made, the FROC CROC has still been creating an atmosphere hostile to the independent union. The incident of violence against Ivan Diaz, reported on above in this Labor Alert, is a testament to the hostility that remains in the factory. Kuk Dong International is a Korean-based Nike producer with large factories in Indonesia, Brazil and Mexico. Reports indicate that there have been repeated labor disputes at Kuk Dong's Indonesian factory, most recently over the failure to pay a minimum wage. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
