Posts

, , ,

5 Ways the Garment Industry Can Help Asia’s Poor

garment industryThe garment industry in Asia, particularly South and East Asia, is one of the largest industries in the region. For example, in 2017, the textile industry was India’s second-largest industry, valued at about $108 billion and accounting for 5% of India’s total GDP. Since the 1960s, Asia has sent $670 billion’s worth of clothes, shoes and bags annually to Europe, the United States and wealthier Asian countries.

The novel coronavirus, however, has brought the global economy to a halt. As demand for clothing has fallen, many retailers have canceled orders from factories, forcing many to shut down. For example, in Cambodia, more than 250 garment factories have suspended operations, putting more than 130,000 workers out of work. Myanmar has seen around 150 of its roughly 600 factories shut down. Despite COVID-19’s effect on the global economy and apparel market, the garment industry could be critical in restarting South and East Asian economies. Here are five reasons why the garment industry will help Asia’s poor recover economically from the COVID-19 pandemic.

5 Reasons Why the Garment Industry Will Help Asia’s Poor

  1. Asia is the West’s biggest supplier of apparel. The West and other advanced, wealthier Asian economies account for 60% of the Asian garment market. From January to May 2020, more than 80% of U.S. apparel imports, measured by value and quantity, came from Asia. With no other major alternative suppliers, Asia can continue to be the main source of garments for these nations.
  2. Asian garments are competitive in the global market. The low cost of labor in Asia makes prices competitive, and Asian garment manufacturers are viewed as reliable, flexible and fast to market, all of which are benefits that many other textile producers cannot consistently offer. Additionally, thanks to a highly integrated regional supply chain, garment factories can produce goods using automated technologies from advanced Asian nations, making Asian garments technologically competitive.
  3. Asia itself is one of the largest garment consumption markets in the world. China is the largest consumer of apparel, with around 40 billion units of apparel sold annually, above India (6 billion) and Japan (3.3 billion). As these economies continue to expand and advance, consumers will experience a rise in purchasing power, which could further increase the demand for garments. The rising trend of products “Made in Asia for Asia,” then, could significantly benefit garment manufacturers.
  4. Garment-making is a low-skill job. Low-skill jobs create work opportunities for those in poverty, who may not have had access to an education. Many countries in South and Southeast Asia suffer from high poverty rates: from 1990 to 2013, South Asia’s share of the global poor increased from 27.3% to 33.4%, despite the number of impoverished people in South Asia decreasing by 248.8 million. This means that South Asia is falling behind the global pace of eliminating poverty. The garment industry could be a solution to this problem, presenting a unique opportunity for the poor as a low-skill industry with quickly rising demand worldwide.
  5. The garment industry has lifted Asian citizens out of poverty in the past. For example, in 2016, the Cambodian garment industry provided jobs for 930,000 workers, nearly 79% of whom were female. Prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, the garment industry was the fastest growing industry in Myanmar, accounting for 10% of its exports and providing jobs for hundreds of thousands of workers, many of whom were migrants from rural villages. In 2018, the garment industry employed 1.6 million people in Vietnam, accounting for more than 12% of the country’s workforce. The garment industry is particularly noteworthy for providing jobs to female workers: women’s share of apparel employment is much higher than women’s share in most other industries in nearly every country in South and East Asia.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought the Asian garment industry to a standstill, with thousands of factories shut down and millions of workers kept from work and a source of income. However, the world’s largest markets still depend on Asia for apparel, and demand will surely increase as the global market recovers. The garment industry could provide jobs to millions in Asia who were pushed into poverty by the COVID-19 pandemic and potentially help to lift them out.

– Harry Yeung
Photo: Flickr

, , ,

Labor Rights Violations in the Cambodian Garment Industry

Cambodian garment industryThe Cambodian economy is heavily reliant on the garment industry, and the global garment industry is heavily reliant on Cambodia. The nation accounts for 45% of employed garment manufacturers worldwide. As of 2011, the industry was responsible for 80% of Cambodia’s total exports. However, Cambodia is also infamous for its poor treatment of factory workers, particularly in the garment industry. Here are six facts to understand labor rights violations in the Cambodian garment industry. 

Facts About Labor Rights Violations in the Cambodian Garment Industry

  1. Fixed duration contracts lead to worker insecurity. Employers in the Cambodian garment industry have largely shifted from undetermined duration, or long-term, contracts to fixed-duration, or short-term, contracts. The employers said the shift was in the interest of competitive, flexible business. In reality, fixed-duration contracts have resulted in increased job insecurity, reduced enforcement of international labor laws, industrial relation breakdowns and massive strikes. 
  2. Production targets create high-pressure work environments. To meet quotas, workers are often either forced to work overtime or enticed to do so with a small bonus that is usually never paid. In addition, some workers are often too intimidated to take breaks, even to use the bathroom or drink water.   
  3. Gender discrimination is common. More than 90% of workers in the Cambodian garment industry are women, mostly from rural areas with only a primary school education. One example of gender discrimination is pregnancy-based discrimination, which is abundant in the industry. Employers are known to refuse employment to pregnant women, refuse to renew the contracts of women who become pregnant or even fire pregnant women as their due dates approach. Even if pregnant women remain employed, they receive no workplace accommodations and often have to quit due to fatigue.
  4. Factories frequently violate child labor laws. Though the minimum age requirement for employment in Cambodia is 15, many factories employ children between the ages of 12 and 14. Employers often require children to work long past their eight-hour workday maximum and pay them below minimum wage. To hide this violation, some employers tell the children to hide when visitors come to the factory.
  5. The government often busts unions. There were concentrated efforts to bust unions in at least 35 factories from 2012 to 2015. In December 2013, the Cambodian Minister of Labor introduced obstacles to union formation. The challenges included delaying union certification and giving factory management time to retaliate against union members. Similarly, poor government inspection of factories and labor law enforcement makes it nearly impossible for small unions to assert their rights. 
  6. The Cambodian Ministry of Labor is making significant changes. In January of 2019, the Ministry of Labor introduced several labor law reforms. Among these was the introduction of bimonthly salary payments and seniority payments: compulsory, periodic payments made to employees with long term contracts. The government also introduced severance payments, which require employers to pay fixed-term contract employees at the end of a contract. 

Many people in the Cambodian garment industry face labor rights violations due to a lack of enforcement of labor laws. However, the Cambodian government and international fashion retailers are taking measures to improve working conditions. These measures are the first step to creating better environments and living wages for Cambodian garment workers.

– Caroline Warrick-Schkolnik
Photo: Wikimedia Commons

, , , ,

Labour Behind the Label Advocates for Clothing Workers’ Rights

Labour Behind the Label
The Clean Clothes Campaign’s United Kingdom-based nonprofit, Labour Behind the Label, is taking action to improve the deplorable work conditions found in factories across the world and provide support to workers in the garment industry. The organization promotes ethical clothing and collaborates with brands and trade unions to push for the reform of systemic problems found in the clothing business.

Change Your Shoes and Labor Rights

Recently, Labour Behind the Label held campaigns to uphold worker rights, such as the “Change Your Shoes” campaign, a project that called for shoe brands to provide greater transparency in their production process. Through its tireless efforts, Labour Behind the Label is working to amend the garment industry, combatting low wages, unsafe working conditions and abusive treatment, thereby holding brands accountable.

According to the organization, Labour Behind the Label is the United Kingdom’s only campaign group dedicated solely to labor rights in the worldwide garment industry. Past activity has included urging retailers to sign the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, pushing for living wages for Cambodian garment workers, and bringing victims of the Rana Plaza factory disaster compensation.

Clean Clothes and Living Wages

The nonprofit was founded in 2001 as part of the Clean Clothes Campaign, the garment industry’s most prominent alliance of labor unions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Labour Behind the Label’s endeavors include raising awareness and putting pressure on companies to support workers’ rights, as well as lobbying governments and policymakers.

The group is currently advancing programs such as the “Living Wage” campaign, working with the Asia Floor Wage Alliance to demand a living wage in Asian garment producing countries. The campaign would help provide garment workers, 80 percent of whom are women, with living wages to cover their basic needs.

Worker Safety and the Shoe Industry

The organization is also holding a “Worker Safety” campaign,” providing compensation for victims of Pakistan’s 2012 Ali Enterprises factory fire. In addition, it has led actions such as a weeklong initiative to lobby brands to ban dangerous practices such as the sandblasting of jeans.

Labour Behind the Label launched the “Change Your Shoes” campaign to look specifically at the operations of the shoe industry. Twenty-four billion pairs of shoes were produced in the year 2013, with 87 percent of them manufactured in Asia. The program has called upon leading shoe brands in the United Kingdom, as well as brands such as Prada, Birkenstock and Camper, to provide information pertaining to their production processes.

The program also asks members of the shoe industry to publish the names and addresses of suppliers, report on steps taken to move away from dangerous chemicals and demonstrate that the companies are providing fair wages and safe working conditions. The campaign has led research and investigations into the manufacturing processes of major shoe brands, observing that the system involves high-intensity labor, short deadlines and worsening living conditions of exploited workers.

Ending Fear and Silence

In many countries, there is a climate of fear and silence in the production chains. The project acknowledges that some companies, such as Nike and Adidas, have already begun to publish information about its processes and will hand its petition to brands to promote change.

Through projects such as the “Change Your Shoes” campaign, Labour Behind the Label is taking action to bring about fairer conditions in the garment industry worldwide. The organization is working to hold companies more accountable and create transparency in the industry, demanding living wages and calling for safer work environments in the clothing manufacturing business.

Ongoing Positive Change and Accountability

Labour Behind the Label’s activism has led to the creation of “codes of conduct” for companies, as well as “ethical trading” initiatives, which have promoted the annual inspection of factories. Labour Behind the Label acknowledges that sweatshop abuses are an elusive and deeply ingrained problem, as there are no easy solutions. But through its advocacy, campaigning, and research, Labour Behind the Label is taking steps to galvanize change in the clothing business on an international scale.

– Shira Laucharoen
Photo: Flickr

, , ,

People Tree Sets a Precedent for the Garment Industry

Garment IndustryThe fashion tastes of consumers in advanced nations can have serious impacts on the well-being of workers that manufacture clothing products in developing nations.

Not only are these workers often paid unfair wages, but they also often suffer from extremely unsafe working conditions. In 2013, for instance, the collapse of a poorly-built factory in Bangladesh killed over 1,000 people, according to The Guardian.

Garment Industry in Bangladesh

Bangladesh, like many other developing countries, is highly dependent on the garment industry. This means that companies who fail to treat workers respectfully can defend themselves against critics by claiming they provide jobs to people who would not otherwise be able to work.

There is some sense to such a claim. According to The Guardian, 80 percent of Bangladesh’s GDP relies on the ready-made garment industry.

Nevertheless, it is certainly possible for garment companies to do more, both to protect workers as well as to support support development of the economies and societies in which those workers live.

People Tree: A Company Making Changes

One company that has proven to be true is People Tree, a London and Tokyo-based brand that aims to be 100 percent Fair Trade throughout its supply chain.

People Tree has attracted the attention of The Guardian, The Telegraph and other prominent publications for its commitment to Fair Trade policy.

In 2013, it became the first clothing company in the world to receive the product mark of the World Fair Trade Organization.

On its website, People Tree states that “people and the planet are central to everything we do.”

Central to its business model is what the People Tree calls “Slow Fashion,” which is a philosophy that rebels against the high-speed mode of trade that is standard in the fashion industry. It is that rushed mentality that leads to socially and environmentally hazardous practices.

As People Tree’s website defines it, “Slow Fashion means standing up against exploitation, family separation, slum cities and pollution—all the things that make fast fashion so successful.”

With regard to the environment, People Tree engages in a number of sustainable practices ranging from the use of certified organic cotton to dyeing with safe and azo-free chemicals. Products are sourced locally and from recycled material when possible. Once the products are made, People Tree prioritizes shipping by sea over shipping by air, thereby reducing the company’s impact on global warming.

Perhaps most importantly, People Tree’s fabric is woven by hand. Specifically, by the hands of real people whom the company strives to pay well and treat with dignity.

Indeed, one of the reasons People Tree cares so much about environmental friendliness is that it understands the effect pollution has on the environments in which their workers live. Environmentally conscious practices lead to sustainable development and happier workers, which in turn lead to higher productivity and more business, according to the company.

People Tree makes 50 percent advance payments on orders so that farmers and producers can more easily finance Fair Trade. And it manages its Collections so that workers will have enough time to produce garments by hand without being crunched, which the company says “is rare in the fashion industry.”

Setting the Stage for Sustainable Fashion

People Tree goes beyond paying fair wages and maintaining safe conditions, however. In some communities, it provides clean water and offers free education to poor families. In many cases, People Tree partners with organizations that empower disadvantaged workers, such as women and the physically disabled.

A new precedent has been established for the garment industry, as social business and corporate responsibility become increasingly popular in other industries. People Tree’s success demonstrates the potential for companies to think beyond profit and consider the wider impact business can have on impoverished communities in developing countries.

– Joe D’Amore

Sources: Telegraph 1, Telegraph 2, People Tree, The Guardian 1, The Guardian 2
Photo: Flickr

, , , ,

Industrial Revolution II: Employee Welfare

Industrial_Revolution_II
Although it goes against the conventional wisdom of globalized business, a new business model looks to spend more money, not less, on its employees. Fostered by celebrity activist Matt Damon and led by Rob Broggi, a hedge fund analyst, Industrial Revolution II (IRII) sets its sights on evolving the clothing world into an industry with a conscience.

Previously working for Raptor Capital and Tudor Investment Corporation (one of the top hedge funds in the world), Broggi vaulted himself into an industry that combines garment manufacturing with humanitarian mindfulness.

Creating its first garment factory in Haiti, Industrial Revolution II plans to improve workers’ standard of living in a variety of ways. First, IRII pledges to invest 50% of its profits into health and education programs within the local community. On top of that, IRII will treat its workers humanely and provide safe work conditions.

Opposed to the current model of manufacturers focused on the cheapest labor possible to increase production at the most profitable rate, IRII sees both a niche and room for improvement.

What makes Broggi’s endeavor revolutionary in comparison to clothing competitors is his attention to his employees’ wellness.

IRII believes this improvement in health and working conditions will increase workers’ capabilities and production. When it’s all said and done, IRII anticipates its sales to be as competitive, in both price and quality, with other major brands.

What makes Broggi and Damon confident in IRII’s model is their focus on social purpose. With humane conditions, they believe that if they attain competitiveness their benevolent work will tip them over the edge in shoppers’ eyes. “If you can offer the same quality product at the same price you are going to win a tie-breaker nine out of 10 times” IRII’s CEO said.

That’s assuming it can compete with the businesses now dependent on child workers, cheap labor, and terrible conditions to continue their cost effectiveness.

According to Broggi, increased quality of life and improvements to health and education programs will enhance his workers’ productivity and lower turnover rates. With lower turnover rates, IRII can invest more in training its workforce, which promotes greater quality clothing.

Damon and Broggi believe that  healthy and better trained workers with an incentive in the company’s profits will jump-start productivity and increase the quality of products, giving the major labels, quite literally, a run for their money.

With history and ethics on their side, Damon, Broggi, and their new founded workers hope to lead the garment industry as a new model to reduce poverty and increase profits. If successful, they may pull millions out of severe poverty.

– Michael Carney

Sources: Boston Common, Industrial Revolution II
Photo: Heritage Daily

,

Tragedy at Bangladesh Garment Factory

Tragedy at Bangladesh Garment Factory

Until now, more than 1000 people are estimated to have been killed in the collapse of the Bangladesh garment factory. Statistics make this accident one of the worst garment factory disasters in modern history. As governments, organizations, and conscientious consumers look for solutions and ways to prevent another catastrophic loss of life, some are considering the role a company or consumer boycott of clothing made in Bangladesh would have. But how should consumers respond? Is pushing for a boycott of Bangladeshi products really the solution? Experts differ on the possible effects of such a move.

Professor Linda Scott at Oxford University says no:

The most obvious thing to do is to take away shopping dollars, and I do appreciate that stopping power, but I am just afraid that moves the problem someplace else. There is always another country that is happy to take on garment manufacturing. That is why it moves around so much. If the factories move elsewhere, it does not really solve the problem. It just moves misery somewhere else. And it takes away work from the people in Bangladesh.

Paul Collins of the British Anti-poverty Group War on Want also hesitates to endorse such a move:

We take our lead from our partner, the National Garment Workers’ Federation in Bangladesh, and they take their lead from the trade union members they support – mainly women – who say that these jobs should be decent jobs that are safe, pay a living wage and do not force them to work excessive hours. But they fear that a boycott campaign would mean they would lose their jobs. They come from rural areas and abject poverty, so they have not asked us to mount a boycott campaign.

Jamie Terzi, Bangladesh Country Director for CARE International, offered the following perspective:

I think for an incident of this magnitude to occur, we are talking about a systemic failure, where there are multiple responsibilities and, more strongly, culpabilities. It is not particularly helpful to pick one person or group, the problem is simply too large and too complex. It is absolutely the government; it is absolutely the people of Bangladesh calling on their government to be more accountable; it is up to the factory owners; it is up to the buyers and it absolutely is up to the consumers in Western countries.

Elizabeth L. Cline, author of Over-Dressed: The Shockingly High Cost of Cheap Fashion emphasizes the same point made by Terzi:

Bangladesh is a very poor country so even if they wanted to implement changes there is not a lot of money to do so. We’re talking about a $500,000 (£320,000) investment per factory to get some of these changes implemented and the brands can afford it. The factories can’t. Consumers are ready for ethical fashion. They want to see fair labor standards implemented and abided by, and they would support it if the brands made headway on that.

For consumers, particularly those in the west, who decide to respond to the tragedy, all of these experts agree that there are a number of complex and interlocking issues to be considered here. Everyone, from governments to multi-nationals, to consumers will have a role to play in developing a solution to save lives in the future.

– Délice Williams

Source: BBC, CBS
Photo: CNN