|
|
|
Newsletter #10
November-December 1997 Newsletter -- Web Edition
In this issue:
Nike Campaign:
Update And Analysis
On October 18 an international mobilization united the efforts of
human rights advocates around the world who support justice for Nike's
production workers.
The Numbers:
We know of protests in 13 countries: Australia (more than 10 cities),
Canada (at least 10 cities), England, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia,
The Netherlands, New Zealand (several cities), Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland
and the United States (more than 50 cities).
In the U.S., there were activities in at least 28 states: Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
Around the world, there were at least 84 communities and campuses which
had actions in support of the rights of Nike workers. This was truly a
global protest!
Media Coverage:
In the U.S., mainstream media coverage included repeated stories on
CNN, an Associated Press piece about the Portland demonstration, a story
on the front page of the New York Times sports section, a story in some
editions of USA Today and local print and electronic media coverage
in many communities.
But the coverage which reached the greatest number of people was Gary
Trudeau's week-long series on the October 18 protests in his syndicated
Doonesbury comic strip. Trudeau has taken on Nike several times in the
past year.
Getting Nike's Attention
In the weeks leading up to the mobilization, Nike public relations
teams raced back and forth across the United States. Nike held press
conferences, hosted a conference call with college newspaper editors
from all over the U.S., held another conference call with writers and
editors for municipal newspapers, took out full-page ads in college
newspapers, had representatives handing out "Informed Consumer
Updates" at football games and visited several campuses.
The company is especially concerned about the campuses where students
are protesting contracts between their universities' athletics departments
and Nike. Because of the contacts we built up through this mobilization,
Campaign for Labor Rights now is in touch with student activists at
a number of these schools, including: the University of Michigan (Ann
Arbor), Penn State, the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana,
Florida State University (Tallahassee), the University of North Carolina
(Chapel Hill), the University of Oregon (Eugene) and Colorado University
(Boulder).
The fact that Nike is putting much more energy into disseminating misinformation
is a positive sign. Nike clearly understands that it has a problem on
its hands. The company is testing whether PR maneuvers can solve its
problem. We believe that Nike management eventually will realize that
the only viable PR maneuver is to come to terms with the core demands
of the Nike human rights campaign:
· Pay a living wage based on an 8-hour day
· Stop requiring forced overtime
· Treat workers with respect
· Stop using child labor
· Allow workers to join a union and bargain collectively
· Cooperate with monitoring by local nonprofit human rights and
religious organizations
· Redress the claims of workers fired for seeking decent pay and
working conditions
Are We Winning?
Nike has taken some steps toward cleaning up its labor practices.
Each improvement has been a direct result of public pressure. These
modest steps demonstrate that the company is not immune to public opinion.
[Thanks to Global Exchange for help with this list.]
· The June, 1996 issue of Life Magazine exposed Nike's use of child
labor in Pakistan in the production of soccer balls. Public outrage
forced Nike to set up a stitching center to prevent the use of child
labor. However, the company refuses to allow independent monitors to
inspect its stitching center.
· In early 1997, all Nike factories in Indonesia asked the government
for permission not to pay the new minimum wage, which was scheduled
to rise by 20 cents to a total of $2.46 per day. Worker protests and
international condemnation forced Nike to make its contractors promise
to pay the new minimum. However, an Asian monetary crisis in recent
months has dropped the value of the Indonesian minimum wage to only
$1.57 per day. Nike still refuses to commit to paying its workers a
living wage.
· In May of 1997, Vietnam Labor Watch released a report on factory
conditions in Vietnam. Following widespread criticism after the release
of this report, a supervisor accused of beating workers was dismissed.
· In September of 1997, Nike announced that it is providing all
of its overseas workers with a wallet-size laminated card summarizing
the company's code of conduct. Although the terms of the code are vaguely
worded on the cards and although the company still refuses to permit
independent external monitoring of its factories, this program represents
a beginning step toward informing Nike's workers that they have rights
which ought to be respected.
Nike Tries An 11th-Hour Surprise
Two days before the international mobilization, with great fanfare,
Nike released in summary form a wage-and-needs study of Nike workers
in Indonesia and Vietnam. According to the study, Nike workers are so
well paid that they are buying telephones, VCRs and motorbikes and still
have money left over to send home to family members. The study raises
more questions than it answers. [Thanks to Max White, Jeff Ballinger
and Medea Benjamin, all of whom contributed to an analysis of the report.]
· Nike released a summary of the study just two days before the
international mobilization but so far has refused to release the study
itself. There is no way to discuss its methodology without seeing the
actual study.
· The supervisors of the study (faculty at the Amos Tuck School
of Business at Dartmouth College) also conducted a similar study for
Disney, with similar findings exonerating the Disney company of underpaying
its Haitian workforce. Subsequent investigation found the Disney report
to be incompetent, if not deceptive.
· Nike hopes to buttress the credibility of this report through
the fact that it was done by academics at Dartmouth. However, publicizing
a summary in advance of releasing the complete research report violates
academic publishing standards.
· The authors' source of data on country income is the World Bank,
one of the prime agents for increasing poverty in the Third World.
· The study seems not to take into account the extent to which
forced overtime influences workers' yearly wages.
· The study considers money sent home to families to be discretionary
income even though an International Labor Organization (ILO) study demonstrated
that Indonesian workers literally will starve themselves to the point
of malnutrition in order to send money home to family members.
Nike Workers Issue A Rebuttal
Just prior to the October 16 Nike announcement of the Dartmouth findings,
on October 13-15 6,000 Nike workers went on strike in Indonesia to protest
a Nike contractor's attempt to cheat them out of legally-owed severance
pay. In April of this year, 10,000 Indonesian Nike workers and 1,300
Vietnamese Nike workers went on strike. The claims of some Dartmouth
MBA students and faculty (that Nike workers are comfortable and happy)
seem shaky when compared with the living testimony of more than 17,000
Nike workers.
Exciting Recent Developments:
On October 24, Representatives Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Marcy
Kaptur (D-Ohio) announced that they are circulating a sign-on letter
to Nike CEO Philip Knight among members of Congress. The letter asks
Knight to meet with members of Congress to discuss how his company can
move forward to treat its Third World workers with respect, pay decent
wages and start manufacturing some of its athletic shoes in the United
States.
An October 26 New York Times article announced that a coalition of women's
groups has cited Nike as hypocritical for its new television commercials
that feature female athletes, asserting that something is wrong when
the company calls for empowering American women but pays its largely
female overseas work force poorly. The commercials show women saying
they will be stronger, healthier and more independent if they are allowed
to play sports. In a letter to Philip Knight, the coalition -- which
includes the National Organization for Women, the Feminist Majority
and the Ms. Foundation for Women -- wrote, "While the women who
wear Nike shoes in the United States are encouraged to perform their
best, the Indonesian, Vietnamese and Chinese women making the shoes
often suffer from inadequate wages, corporal punishment, forced overtime
and/or sexual harassment."
Where Do We Go From Here?
Because of the success of the October 18 mobilization, Campaign
for Labor Rights is calling for another international Nike day of action
in April of 1998. We are much stronger now than when we started organizing
for October 18. We have contact information for a global network of
activists who are ready to show their support for the rights of Nike's
overseas workforce. We expect that network to grow between now and April.
Like the October event, the emphasis in April will be on local activities.
And, of course, Nike leafleting actions between now and April are most
welcome!
Campaign for Labor Rights is pulling together an alliance of activists
on the campuses where Nike has contracts. In many cases, these activists
already have been engaged in the Guess campaign and other anti-sweatshop
work through the outreach efforts of the UNITE textile workers union.
Campaign for Labor Rights urges Nike campaign activists to reach out
to other constituencies in your communities: to become more racially
diverse and to include the active participation of youth in the schools,
communities of faith and organized labor.
four pages on the newly-announced Hyundai boycott
This issue of the newsletter includes a special pull-out section. Supporters
of the Hyundai boycott are welcome to copy the centerfold for organizing
activities in your community. Local committees, please note that there
is a space for your group to add its contact information at the bottom
of the final page of that section.
Holiday Season Of Conscience
Building on the October 4 Day of Conscience, a coalition is preparing
for a Holiday Season of Conscience, to begin the day after Thanksgiving.
On that date, the National Labor Committee will release information about
the labor practices of several companies, to help consumers make responsible
choices. The emphasis for the Season of Conscience will be on local events
exposing sweatshop practices of notorious companies and continuing the
collection of signatures on a petition urging the Apparel Industry Partnership
to strengthen the accord which it released in April. Human rights advocates
are concerned that the accord, as it now stands, does not commit participating
companies to pay a living wage and does not put non-profit local human
rights and religious organizations in charge of monitoring factories with
a history of sweatshop abuses. For information and materials-- including:
a Season of Conscience poster and the petition and accompanying brochure--
contact the National Labor Committee at natlabcom@aol.com or (212) 242-3002.
1998 Garment Workers Calendar
This calendar includes photographs from Sweatshop Watch's "Faces
behind the Labels" traveling photo exhibit about the people behind
the brand-name labels. Robert Gumpert and David Bacon photographed garment
workers across the United States at work, at home and on the picketline.
Twelve of their black and white photographs are included in the calendar.
The photo exhibit and calendar are dedicated to the garment workers who
stand up for themselves to improve their working and living conditions
while raising families on low pay with long hours. Proceeds from sales
of the calendar will benefit Sweatshop Watch and participating member
organizations. Sweatshop Watch is a coalition of labor and community groups,
attorneys and advocates committed to eliminating sweatshops in the garment
industry. Calendars are $13.50 each plus $2.00 for shipping and handling.
Make checks payable to Sweatshop Watch and send to 720 Market Street,
Fifth Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102; Tel. (415) 391-1655, ext. 36. Allow
4-6 weeks for delivery.
Responsible Shopping Guide
[from Global Exchange: gx-kimberly@globalexchange.org
or (415) 255-7296]
Fair Trade Criteria:
· A living wage in the local context
· Environmentally sustainable practices
· Open to public accountability
· Healthy and safe working conditions
Product Catalogs:
Associacion Maya (503) 334-0299
Bridgehead (800) 565-8563
Co-op America (202) 872-5307
Earth Care (800) 347-0070
Ganesh Himal Trading (509) 448-6561
Greenpeace (800) 916-1616
Inkanyezi Rainbow Project (207) 374-2405
Marketplace: Handwork of India (800) 726-8905
Native Treasures (616) 428-3464
Natural Bedroom (800) 365-6563
The Natural Choice (800) 621-2591
Nicaraguan Cultural Alliance (301) 699-0042
Northern Sun (800) 258-8579
Pueblo to People (800) 843-5257
Real Goods (800) 762-7325
Reflections Organics (800) 852-9273
Seeds of Change (800) 957-3337
SERRV International (800) 423-0071
Seventh Generation (800) 456-1177
Sounds True (800) 333-9185
Sundance (800) 422-2770
For those who would like to opt out of the holiday shopping routine, please
consider making a gift to Campaign for Labor Rights on behalf of a friend
or family member. We will send that person a card with a beautiful reproduction
of indigenous Nicaraguan art and a note acknowledging that you chose to
honor your relationship by contributing to the effort to rid the world
of sweatshop abuses and exploitative child labor. Make checks payable
to
"Campaign for Labor Rights"
1470 Irving Street, NW
Washington, DC 20010
and indicate the name and address of the person(s) to whom you would like
the card sent. All gifts are tax-deductible. See form at the bottom of
last page.
Hyundai Boycott Begins!!!
On the weekend beginning Friday, October 24 activists in more than 20
cities all across the United States handed out leaflets in front of Hyundai
Motors dealerships in support of workers' right to be represented by the
union of their choice.. As this newsletter goes to press, another national
action day of leafleting is scheduled for Saturday, November 1.
This impressive turn-out on short notice marks the beginning of a boycott
of Hyundai Motors. Organizers of the boycott, the San Diego-based Support
Committee for Maquiladora Workers, expect this struggle to receive widespread
support from community-based groups and union members.
Background and Issues
The focus of this boycott is the Han Young factory in an outlying
section of Tijuana, Mexico, just across the border from San Diego. Han
Young is a feeder factory, producing chassis for a huge Hyundai tractor-trailer
plant on the opposite side of Tijuana. Other divisions of the Korean Hyundai
conglomerate produce items such as computer chips and low-end economy
cars. Hyundai Precision America, headquartered in San Diego, is the division
in charge of the Tijuana operation.
Hyundai accepts no responsibility for Han Young, claiming that the latter
is a distinct entity. Evidence suggests that Han Young may be owned by
Hyundai and was created by Hyundai in order to distance itself from labor
troubles-- a common scam along the border region. Whatever the financial
linkage between Han Young and Hyundai, the feeder plant produces only
for Hyundai. Under Mexican law, that makes Hyundai responsible for any
violations of the labor code by its contractor.
Troubles abound at Han Young. Health and safety concerns include inadequate
to nonexistent protective gear and lack of ventilation. Workers report
broken bones, damage to vision and lead poisoning. Pay is sub-minimal
at $36 to $48 for a 48-hour week in a country where grocery prices have
more than doubled in the last three years.
But the core issue at Han Young is whether workers will be represented
by the union of their choice. On October 6, workers voted for the STIMAHCS
(Union of Metal, Steel and Iron Workers), a division of the FAT (the Authentic
Labor Front). The FAT is an independent labor federation representing
50,000 Mexican workers and members of community organizations.
The FAT is challenging a corrupt system of pro-company unions controlled
by the ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which lately has
begun to lose its stranglehold on Mexican politics. The FAT also is challenging
the PRI union system elsewhere in Mexico. The FAT recently aided the formation
of a new independent umbrella labor organization, most of whose 130 affiliated
unions have begun to break away from the government machine.
At Han Young, the PRI union goes by the acronym CROC. Han Young workers
have never had an opportunity to elect CROC leadership, have never been
consulted by the CROC and usually see CROC representatives only when they
show up for their pay-off from factory management. The Han Young workers
operate under "protection contracts" negotiated in secret between
management and CROC operatives.
On October 6, Han Young workers voted overwhelmingly to be represented
by STIMAHCS. If the labor board certifies the STIMAHCS victory, a precedent
would be set which could provide an inspiration throughout the Mexican
maquiladora (assembly for export) sector.
Election
When the polls opened on October 6, workers are lined up, ready to
vote. Even before the casting of ballots, there was no doubting the workers'
preference, as pro-STIMAHCS t-shirts were the uniform of the day.
Staff of the Conciliation and Arbitration Board (the Mexican labor board)
carefully questioned voters one by one, to determine their right to vote.
The vote: STIMAHCS 54, CROC 1. The board declared the polls closed. Mexican
labor law stipulates that union certification voting must end when there
is a break in workers presenting themselves at the polling station.
After closure of the polls, a bus rolled up with 35 more "workers."
These included a variety of people legally ineligible to vote: management,
employees hired after the date that workers called for a union certification
election and some who had no employment history at the plant.
In a tense confrontation, pro-union workers blocked the fraudulent voters
from entering. Even though the polls had officially been declared closed,
board officials insisted that the latecomers be allowed to vote. Otherwise,
the board would nullify the election.
When the workers relented, board officials rushed the fraudulent voters
through the validation process in two's and three's. In line, some latecomers
were overheard asking, "Who did they tell us to vote for?" Some
could not identify the company where they supposedly work.
After the polls again were closed, the vote was STIMAHCS 54, CROC 36 still
a decisive majority for the independent union -- in spite of fraudulent
votes for the CROC.
Powerful Allies, Fortunate Timing
The election took place against a backdrop of debate over fast track.
Clinton and his "free trade" allies desperately want this legislation
to go through. Fast track is more than a way to move new trade bills swiftly
through Congress. It is a strategy for keeping provisions for labor and
environmental protection out of trade treaties.
U.S. labor, which opposed NAFTA, has now lined up against fast track.
Labor and Congressional foes of fast track both see the Han Young case
as a focal point of the trade debate.
The Han Young situation spotlights the weaknesses of the workers' rights
provisions of NAFTA. Even the paltry labor side agreement of NAFTA would
be forbidden under the version of fast track now before Congress. Han
Young could prove a major embarrassment for fast track proponents.
No Quick Victories
The labor board has 30 days in which to announce the results of the
Oct. 6 voting. Given the board's willingness to allow clearly fraudulent
voters to participate in the polling -- in full view of a New York Times
correspondent and other members of the media -- there is little reason
to hope that the board will deliver justice.
When the fast track debate is over, international solidarity will be crucial
to this campaign. The workers are strong and united. But they face powerful
adversaries. We should be prepared to take up the Hyundai boycott for
several months at a minimum.
Meanwhile, the Han Young workers face a future of uncertainty and hardship.
Prior to the election, 8 workers were fired for their union activities.
Since the election, management has fired four more. Management have brought
in 50 replacement workers and they warn that they will close the factory
should their efforts to block unionization fail.
Labor Gets Involved
The coincidence of the fast track debate with the Han Young union
certification election has brought some of the biggest players in U.S.
labor into the Han Young struggle in way that is unprecedented in a sweatshop
campaign. Also, long before fast track came up, the Support Committee
for Maquiladora Workers had done an impressive job of consciousness-raising
with both labor representatives and Congresspeople. Mary Tong, director
of the Support Committee, has led numerous delegations to the region.
Delegates included Representatives Gephardt and Bonior and leadership
of major U.S. unions.
Before calling for a Hyundai boycott, the Support Committee was careful
to build bridges with the AFL-CIO, the United Auto Workers, the Korean
Confederation of Trade Unions and the Canadian Labour Congress.
This preparatory work has paid off. On the weekend the boycott began,
AFL-CIO leaders arranged a meeting in Juarez, Mexico between progressive
leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives and four welders who came
from the Han Young factory to give testimony.
Community-based activists should not let this opening for alliance slip
away. With such an example being set by national union leadership, this
is a chance to forge and strengthen partnerships with organized labor.
In the brave new world of "free trade," corporations have
more rights than citizens. Trade treaties already signed and those in
the offing all stipulate the right of money to move through the world
without impediment. Humans are less fortunate.
At the southern border of the United States, Immigration and Naturalization
agents try to keep impoverished Mexicans from fleeing an economic disaster
which might be labeled "Made in the U.S.A." Another, less well-known,
form of division by borders has come to light because of the Han Young
struggle.
When the Mexican labor board reopened the polls to allow a busload of
fraudulent workers to vote, the whole proceeding was witnessed by an international
delegation assembled by the Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers.
For this act of "interference," the Support Committee and their
friends could be permanently barred from Mexico.
Foreign corporations are free to move into Mexico, grossly pollute the
environment, violate the basic human rights of workers and then ship all
the profits back home. But the promoters of "free trade" never
bat an eyelash when people who share a common cause are divided by borders.
Consider that the next time a booster claims that trade promotes human
rights.
Secondary Boycotts: Q & A
Has the AFL-CIO endorsed the Hyundai boycott?
U.S. law places many constraints on union activity and specifically forbids
secondary boycotts. The AFL-CIO is completely supportive of the Han Young
workers' struggle and is playing an important role in getting Congressional
support for the workers' cause. While there are unlikely to be any official
statements from the DC offices and there may not be any memos passed down
through AFL-CIO structures, no one should have any doubts about organized
labor's support for the efforts to win justice for these workers.
(The Oregon farm workers union has organized a primary boycott against
FLAV-R-PAC and a secondary boycott against Gardenburger. While farm workers
fall outside some protections afforded other segments of U.S. labor, they
also are free tp engage in secondary boycotts.)
Can union members leaflet at Hyundai dealerships?
Yes! The Supreme Court has ruled that union members can take part in peaceful
informational leafleting in a secondary boycott as long as there are no
picket signs present (case: Debartelo 108 Supreme Court 1392). We therefore
urge all local coalitions not to carry picket signs, in order to avoid
problems for participating union members.
Anyone, union member or not, who takes part in informational leafleting
could potentially face legal action in the form of nuisance suits. While
there can be no guarantee that anyone exercising First Amendment rights
on public property will be immune to legal difficulties, it is unlikely
that such suits would hold up to a court challenge.
[Thanks to Robin Alexander of the United Electrical, Radio & Machine
Workers of America (UE) for researching this question.]
Clinton and friends have tried to package NAFTA and other such treaties
as good for consumers, good for workers and good for the economy. They
also claim that free trade brings political freedoms. The statistics since
NAFTA's passage suggest otherwise.
According to Rep. Peter DeFazio (D.-OR), "a $1.7 billion U.S. trade
surplus with Mexico in 1993 (the year NAFTA passed) turned into a $17
billion trade deficit in 1996. The numbers are even worse than they look.
Nearly two-thirds of U.S. exports to Mexico are 'revolving door' exports
-- parts that are assembled in Mexican plants and shipped right back to
the United States for final sale."
DeFazio: "The Department of Labor has reluctantly certified that
more than 140,000 U.S. workers have lost their jobs as a result of NAFTA,
but that's only the tip of the iceberg. Using standard employment multipliers,
the huge and growing trade deficits with Mexico and Canada translate into
the loss of 420,000 U.S. manufacturing jobs since 1993."
As for "free trade" being a boon to political freedoms, consider
the following from "Mexico: Human rights crisis," a report released
by Amnesty International on September 24: "There is a human rights
crisis in Mexico... Today the citizens of Mexico have no effective recourse
before the law to seek redress and compensation when their rights are
violated. The pattern of grave impunity for egregious crimes has progressively
eroded the institutions responsible for protecting citizens' rights and
security. Amnesty International has been monitoring the human rights situation
in Mexico for more than two decades, and is deeply concerned about the
serious deterioration that has taken place over the last three years."
Nor has NAFTA proved an economic boon to the workers of Mexico: "There
is a belief in some quarters that U.S. losses (under NAFTA) have been
Mexico's gains and that there will be gains for Chile, too" if the
latter is admitted to the trade pact, says Carlos Heredia, newly-elected
Mexican Congressman with the opposition Revolutionary Democratic Party
(PRD). "That's not the case." The economist and former finance
ministry official challenges the notion "that NAFTA (is) a tool for
the United States to help other countries, that promoting trade is a way
of improving the standard of living in those countries. On the contrary,"
says Heredia, "the polarization of our country and of our economy
has worsened," as have environmental conditions. He blames the malaise
on structural adjustment policies (SAPs) put in place in the early 1980s
at the behest of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, IMF,
adding that "NAFTA has accelerated that deterioration." The
trade pact, like the SAPs, "has benefited only a small circle of
people, mainly in the political and economic elites (who belong to the
dollar-denominated export and financial sectors) to the detriment of the
domestic market," where most workers and consumers live. [from an
article authored by Abid Aslam and posted on the Internet on October 2]
Smithsonian Exhibit Under Fire
Segments of the clothing industry are trying to block a planned exhibit
on the history of sweatshops, according to the Washington Post and Los
Angeles Times. The exhibit is part of a long-term Museum of American History
project on "work and worth." " Scheduled to open on April
15th, the exhibit will include a re-creation of the El Monte sweatshop
where Thai immigrants worked for years in virtual slavery.
Curators offered apparel industry representatives a chance to tell their
side of the story. Pamela Rucker of the National Retail Federation declined,
complaining that "there is no way we could counter the powerful impact
of those horrific pictures from El Monte." The California Fashion
Association said it is writing to members of Congress urging them to raise
questions about the exhibit.
According to the Washington Post, manufacturers, fashion and apparel industries
hope that the controversy will become as heated as the one surrounding
the National Air and Space Museum's Enola Gay exhibit. That exhibit was
canceled after protests from veterans groups which complained that that
it was too sympathetic to the suffering of the Japanese from the atomic
bombs.
If the exhibit is to survive and tell its story, then supporters must
mobilize as well. Write or fax the Smithsonian Museum expressing your
support for this exhibit and tell the curators that you believe that the
American public has a right to know its own history. Consumers have a
right to learn about the conditions under which our clothing and our children's
clothing is being produced. This controversy is not just about history.
It's about whether sweatshops are to be our future:
Smithsonian Museum
Office of Public Affairs
National Museum of American History, Room 5104 - MRC623
Washington, DC 20560
Fax: (202) 633-8053
Send a copy to your Senators and Representative to help counter industry
criticism in Congress. Addresses: United States Senate, Washington, DC
20510 and United States House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515
Several organizations are putting out information on this issue. They
include: Corporate Watch, web site: http://www.corpwatch.org/home.html
and the Stop Sweatshops Partnership for Responsibility, web site: http://www.uniteunion.org
and Campaign for Labor Rights, web site: www.clrlabor.org
House Passes Act To Protect State And U.S. Laws From
WTO
The U.S. House of Representatives has passed an amendment by Rep.
Bernie Sanders (I-VT) intended to protect U.S., state and local laws from
adverse action by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The amendment to
the Commerce-State-Justice Appropriations bill was passed by a vote of
356 to 64 with bi-partisan support.
In recent years, under the WTO, Venezuela has challenged provisions in
the Clean Air Act, Mexico has objected to U.S. laws protecting dolphins
and Malaysia and Indonesia have complained about U.S. environmental restrictions
on shrimp imports.
Currently, a Massachusetts human rights law that prohibits companies which
are doing business in Burma from bidding on Massachusetts state contracts,
is being challenged in the WTO.
Sanders said he is deeply concerned about the trend to use trade agreements
to weaken health and environmental standards, especially given the fact
that there are several Vermont laws, enacted and proposed, which could
be at risk of WTO challenges. These include: the Northeast Dairy Compact,
the Household Hazardous Waste Labeling Law, the Vermont Bottle Bill, the
Market Vermont Program and a proposal by Vermont State Representative
Mary Sullivan prohibiting those companies doing business with Burma from
bidding on Vermont state contracts.
Sanders said, "I am delighted that a strong bi-partisan effort in
Congress has begun the process of protecting American democracy against
the intrusion of the World Trade Organization.... Our current trade policy
is a disaster, and we are in agreement that the people of the United States
have the right to enact legislation without the intrusion of a secret,
unelected bureaucracy."
Sanders continued, "At a time when more and more Americans do not
vote and feel increasingly alienated from the political process, we must
try to make our local state and federal processes more democratic and
responsive, not less. The people of this country have the right to maintain
the level of environmental and food safety standards that they feel are
appropriate, and these standards should not be subject to challenge through
the WTO by other countries with weaker standards. The people of this country
have the right to use economic sanctions to fight for democracy around
the world as we did in South Africa and as many would like to do in Burma,
without being challenged by corporations who believe that "free-trade"
is more important than human rights."
Please contact your US Senators and Representative (toll-free phone number
to Congress: 1-888-723-5246). Ask them to write U.S. Trade Representative
Charlene Barshefsky urging her to strongly defend the Massachusetts Burma
law from the European Commission.
Newark Catholic School Uniforms To Be Sweatshop Free
Archbishop Theodore McCarrick of Newark, NJ, announced a program
to ensure that all school uniforms in the archdiocese are made under decent
conditions. The Archdiocese will identify manufacturers of school uniforms
and determine the treatment of their employees.
Bruce Raynor of UNITE! (Union of Needletrades, Industrial & Textile
Employees) lauded the archdioce's program. "Suppose the mother of
an archdiocesan student is a garment worker who makes school uniforms.
Should she have health insurance, so that she can take her child to the
doctor? I believe she should," he said.
For more information, contact Ginny Coughlin at UNITE at 212 265-7000
x 821.
Congressional Letter To Disney
Twenty-eight U.S. Representatives signed a letter to Michael Eisner,
Chief Executive Officer of the Disney Company, asking him to insist that
one of Disney's primary contractors in Haiti, H.H. Cutler, not relocate
its operations from Haiti to China in search of lower-paid workers and
that the company respect the rights of its Haitian workers.
John Conyers (D-MI) authored the "Dear Colleague" letter which
said in part: "Last year we were all shocked to learn about the horrible
conditions that workers endured in Haitian factories subcontracted to
make products for American companies. This year the tables took an unfortunate
twist as some of these companies announced that they would rather move
production elsewhere than provide a minimal standard of decency for their
employees. I believe we need to send a strong message that workers everywhere
are entitled to decent conditions, and that this reflects a new international
consensus both in the political sphere and increasingly among businesses."
The letter also stated: "[H.H. Cutler] has argued that it must move
to remain competitive with the global economy, but Haiti already has cheap
wages--sometimes as cheap as 28 cents an hour. Decent working conditions
are not just a moral obligation, they are necessary if the global economy
is to work for everyone and not amount to a race to the bottom. We also
want to make clear that H.H. Cutler will receive the same level of scrutiny
operating in China than they would receive in Haiti or anywhere else."
In closing, the letter urges the Disney Company to join the President's
Apparel Industry Partnership which is working to write a code of conduct
for the apparel industry in an effort to end sweatshop abuses.
Michael Eisner has not yet responded to the letter. The H.H. Cutler Company
did move its Haitian production to China and other Asian sites. For more
information, contact Witness for Peace at witness@w4peace.org or 202/544-0781.
U.S. Bans Imports Of Goods Made By Child Slave Labor
Included in a Treasury Department appropriations bill signed by the
President in October is a provision prohibiting the U.S. Customs Service
from allowing the importation of any product that is made by "forced
or indentured child laborers." This refers to children who are sold
into bondage by impoverished parents and who must often work a decade
or more to buy their freedom. This measure for the first time provides
a level of protection for child workers in the global economy.
According to the International Labor Organization, more than 250 million
children are working in the world today. Through the leadership of Representative
Bernie Sanders and Senator Tom Harkin, this legislation will seek to ensure
that those who practice the most exploitative forms of child labor do
not have access to the U.S. market. The law also provides activists with
a powerful tool in negotiating with industries that use child labor to
develop programs that shift children from factories to schools.
The next essential step is to ensure that the child workers are released
and that there are education and rehabilitation programs available to
give the children a future. The International Labor Rights Fund will focus
on working cooperatively with other international organizations to highlight
this priority and to develop new programs so that children do benefit
from the legislation.
For more information, contact the International Labor Rights Rights Fund
at laborrights@igc.org or (202)
347-4100.
The Stop Sweatshops Act of 1997 (which makes apparel industry companies
responsible for the labor practices of their producers) now has 78 co-sponsors
in the U.S. House of Representatives. Please contact your representative
to find out whether s/he has co-sponsored the bill and, if not, ask that
s/he do so now.
For more information, contact UNITE! at (202) 347-7417.
This packet has information on the major sweatshop and child labor campaigns
and includes a multitude of resource materials, classroom exercises and
an extensive question-and-answer section written in classroom-tested language.
To receive a copy, please send a check for $12.50 with a note explaining
that you are requesting the curriculum packet to:
Campaign for Labor Rights,
1470 Irving Street, NW
Washington, DC 20010.
* return to
top
|
|
|
|
