feeds from sacw.net
print versionThe risks to worker safety in India are serious: Scott Nova, WRC
by Binoy Prabhakar, ET Bureau | 9 Jun, 2013, Economic Times (http://tinyurl.com/qblpfdh)
The Rana Plaza factory complex in Bangladesh collapsed on April 24, killing 1,100 garment workers who produced cheap clothes for global retail powerhouses. That very day, Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), a group that investigates working conditions in factories around the globe, named the retailers that produced garments in the collapsed factory. The list read like a who’s who of the retail industry such as Walmart, Dress Barn and Benetton, among others. Soon after, an alliance of NGOs, trade groups and former factory workers demanded that businesses join a binding accord on fire and building safety, even setting a deadline. Forty-one retailers that collect supplies from factories in Bangladesh gave in. The exceptions: Walmart and Gap. The WRC has also done extensive investigations in India, applying the economics of naming and shaming on Indian garment suppliers, to improve the lot of workers. Scott Nova, executive director, WRC, talks about the working conditions in garment clusters in India and how they compare with Bangladesh. Excerpts:
What are your impressions of the working conditions, wages as well as the rights of workers at garment clusters in India?
Wages are 23% of what the ’living’ wage should be. In fact, unions have come out with a minimum wage figure using the method set out in the 15th International Law Commission and also by incorporating the different Supreme Court rulings on minimum wages, including the Reptakos Bret judgment. The proposed wage figure is almost double the existing figures in all the garment clusters. The government is yet to constitute a minimum wage committee and the last minimum wage revision happened in 1994.
In Delhi NCR, there is an informal ban on union registration. We saw this in the efforts to create unions at Maruti Suzuki’s Manesar (Haryana) factory. No union at this point wants to file for registration because the government is clearly opposed to union formation. Overtime is forced in all clusters of production. Workers have the capacity to negotiate in some factories in the Bangalore region where they have a strong union presence.
Contract labour is rampantly used in the Delhi NCR region. It is now also featuring in Tirupur and Bangalore. The registration certificate that the government issues itself is contradictory and against the Contract Labour (Abolition And Prohibition) Act. The certificate states that no contract labour can be employed in the core activities of the factory and while listing the activities for which the license is being granted, it lists out cutting, sewing, ironing, packing etc.
Harassment as well as physical abuse in factories is common in all areas and has been significantly documented in our assessment reports of Celebrity Fashions, Chennai, Tamil Nadu; Shahi Exports and Arvind Warehouse, Bangalore, Karnataka; Orion Conmerx, Gurgaon, Haryana.
How critical is the situation in India compared with Bangladesh?
Wages are low in both countries, but somewhat higher in India. In India, there is a functioning legal system that deals with violations but the process is extremely lengthy for workers to sustain the process and hence heavily skewed against them.
The risks to worker safety in India are serious, but the situation is not as grave as in Bangladesh. In the case of freedom of association (the right to join or leave groups of a person’s own choice), India has not ratified the ILO convention. Moreover, the Trade Union Act got amended in 2002, making trade union registration more difficult. The sector in India has very little union presence; hence workers’ monitoring of implementation of laws is negligible.
Where is India placed with regard to western safety standards at its manufacturing clusters?
Safety standards are very low in India. Often, you find emergency exits and passages blocked. Workers have died in preventable fires. Workers are not provided ergonomic seats. Instead, in most factories, they are made to sit on seats that do not have backrests - which is injurious over time. Face masks are not provided on a regular basis.
In January 2011, a worker was electrocuted at Modelama Exports in Gurgaon because of ill-maintained electrical wiring in the factory. In this particular case the worker was also doing excessive work hours. The weakness of unions exacerbates the situation because it prevents workers from playing the proper role in defending their own safety.
Where do you think the problem lies in India: is it lack of awareness on the part of labourers, greed of manufacturers or government apathy?
It’s a combination of local and international factors. For example, in North India the workforce is largely migrant. These are first-generation industrial workers who have little knowledge about their rights as workers and hence accept whatever the factories offer.
The government definitely does not want to address many of the issues, including the issue of contract labour. There is also laxity in implementation as we see that the labour department, which is supposed to monitor violations and conduct inspections of factories, does not have the required infrastructure to fulfill what it is supposed to be doing.
The manufacturers’ greed in maximising their returns definitely also adds to the violations but then they are also constricted to operating within a small profit margin that is thrust on them by buyers. This latter point is the most important. The price pressure that brands and retailers place on local contractors makes labour rights’ abuses inevitable. The brands and retailers understand this, but continue to demand prices (and delivery schedules) that can only be met by violating workers’ rights.
One would think the labourers in India are organised and fight for their rights. What do you think?
Industry-wide collective bargaining only happens in Tirupur. In the other centres, there is very negligible unionising.
Your last report on India came out in 2010. How has the situation evolved since then?
We have seen a growing problem in terms of the abuse of contract labour and no noticeable improvements in areas such as excessive and uncompensated overtime and health and safety practices. The labour movement continues to struggle.
In your report, you said you are still working to address two outstanding issues: an ongoing legal dispute over a government decision to retroactively lower the minimum wage, removing about 30% of the original increase and efforts to encourage brands; and retailers to require their suppliers to take steps necessary to locate and compensate several thousand workers who left employment at affected factories prior to the WRC’s expose. What is the status of these two issues?
The Karnataka High Court on March 11, 2013 ruled that there was no clerical error in the 2009 minimum wage notification and that the government should after hearing all the parties concerned pass an order not later than three months from the date of the verdict. But till now the labour department of Karnataka has not called the union which was a petitioner in the case to hear its point.
The factories did put up notices outside their gates and a significant number of them had also sent letters to the addresses that were in the workers files to come and collect their back wages. The festival season, when bonus is paid, was also used to compensate the workers.
How do you think end consumers can make a difference to the lives of workers producing the clothes they buy?
The can do so by refusing to buy product from brands and retailers that have failed to demonstrate a commitment to ensure respect for the rights of workers, including the right to a safe and a decent By walking away from the most serious offenders, the consumer can send a powerful message to all brands and retailers.
How optimistic are you of the difference the coalition of retailers will make in Bangladesh? Any plans to launch such an initiative in India?
The Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh has the potential to transform the industry. We believe it will work where other initiatives have failed because of the following reasons: This is a legally enforceable contract between brands/retailers and unions. There is binding arbitration to resolve disputes. This is a major departure from the voluntary, unenforceable "corporate social responsibility" programmes that have been used by brands and retailers for years and that have failed to protect worker safety.
There will be thorough fire, electrical and building safety inspections carried out under the auspices of the program, through an independent Safety Inspector - not controlled by the individual brands. All supplier factories of the signatory brands and retailers, even those that may be only one-time or infrequent suppliers, will be subject to inspection. There will be full public reporting of the results of inspections and follow-up public reporting on whether identified hazards are, or are not, addressed. This is unprecedented.
Signatory companies are obligated to ensure factories have the money to pay for all needed repairs/renovations/retro-fitting, including, if needed, by raising prices or paying for renovations directly. This commitment to enable factories to operate unprecedented. retailers and brands are obligated require their suppliers to the inspections and to implement, in a timely fashion, any and all repairs/renovations/retro-fitting the inspectors deem necessary. Signatories are obligated to end business with any supplier that refuses to comply with renovation recommendations any other aspect of the agreement.
These commitments are unprecedented. Conversely, signatories are obligated to continue at compliant factories, for at least two years, no less than the pre-existing volume of orders. This is also unprecedented. Signatories are obligated to ensure that there are health and safety committees in all covered factories, with worker representatives comprising at least 50% of the membership.
