Trade union freedom is still a long way off in fashion: "It's essential that brands sit down with employees"
loading...
2023 and 2024 were years of protests for Bangladeshi garment workers. Tens of thousands of workers took to the streets, demanding, among other things, payment arrears and the lack of structural improvements: a living wage, meal allowances, raises for night shifts, and more lenient work duties for pregnant women.
These protests were intended to be peaceful. According to agreements Bangladesh has had with the ILO since 1972, the workers were fully within their rights. However, employers and authorities silenced them with almost routine, degrading tactics such as violence, intimidation, and sometimes even imprisonment. Over one thousand trade unions have emerged in Bangladesh since the collapse of the Rana Plaza factory. However, in practice, employees who organise to defend their rights often find themselves powerless.
Union busting
Union busting, the systematic suppression of trade unions, is a social sustainability issue in Bangladesh, as well as in Myanmar, Cambodia, India, Egypt, Lesotho and other weakly regulated production countries. It violates two fundamental workers' rights: freedom of association (FoA) and the right to collective bargaining with employers.
Union busting manifests itself, for example, in the form of violence, intimidation, harassment, dismissal or the arrest of union members and leaders. Also common is the ‘separation’ tactic. This is where employees active in the union are isolated from their colleagues and friends as punishment. They may also be strategically transferred to another department to weaken important social ties crucial for an effective union.
These tactics are also used to deter non-members. For fear of reprisals, they are less likely to join an association. In this way, employers fuel a vicious cycle in which the union shrinks and loses its bargaining power.
Recent cases
The Business and Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC) reported on recent union-busting cases. In Sri Lanka, an employee was forced to withdraw from her association, The Women's Centre. When she persisted, she was transferred to other production lines (separation). When she refused the request to switch from her camp to her employer’s ‘works council’, she was dismissed.
In Cambodia, union leader Soy Sros was arrested after speaking out on social media about planned redundancies of union members, including a pregnant woman. Brands such as Michael Kors and Tory Burch have luxury accessories made in the factory.
Yellow unions
A driving factor in the persistence of union busting is the rise of ‘yellow’ unions, which do not act in the interests of garment workers. They are not independent, like a ‘red’ union. Christie Miedema of the Clean Clothes Campaign explains: “Yellow unions are usually set up by factory management or officials. Union leaders are often pressured to cooperate with management, in exchange for, for example, a promotion or pay rise.” At JAW Garment in Cambodia, for example, management tried to bribe union representatives with salaries of 600 dollars (three times the minimum wage) to quit their jobs, according to the BHRRC report. In some cases, management succeeds in this approach, and unions can change colour. They start out independent but become yellow through bribery.
Yellow unions follow the same registration process as red unions, but are approved more quickly because they have the support of management or the authorities. An example is Dekko Designs in Bangladesh, which produces for brands including Asos and Bestseller. At the end of 2021, one-third of the workers registered for a red union. During that process, 19 employees lost their jobs and more were harassed, intimidated and burdened with extra work. When the Ministry of Labour visited for an audit – as a standard part of the procedure – workers who wanted to sign up were threatened. As a result, the inspection did not find enough members to officially recognise the union. Meanwhile, a yellow union in the factory, supported by the employer and the government, was registered without any problems.
Worker committees
Sometimes factory management presents worker or participation committees as an alternative structure. Miedema emphasises that these are not trade unions and that they are very limited in their bargaining power and rights. Employers and brands often point to worker committees as proof that there is a representative body to represent the ‘worker voice’. In practice, this is often not the case.
Miedema also stresses that legally only employees are allowed to form a trade union. “Management is not allowed to interfere with this at all, and certainly not allowed to set up alternative employee representative bodies. They must ensure that employees have the space and freedom to organise and stand up for their interests. This is also laid down in the relevant international conventions, ILO 87 (on freedom of association) and 98 (on collective bargaining)."
Impact of fake unions
According to Human Rights Watch, both yellow unions and committees are increasingly used in major RMG producing countries such as Bangladesh. Independent trade unions, in turn, suffer from this, says Miedema. “When factories or brands are confronted with questions and public attention about violations of trade union rights, they put forward these alternatives as ‘legitimate’ representatives. Independent unions then have to refute this, which costs a lot of time and money. Moreover, it can lead to confusion in the media.” The fake unions also create confusion within the factory, Miedema says. This makes it difficult for independent unions to recruit enough members; without mass, a union has no recognition and no bargaining power.
Ongoing problem
The obstacles to freedom of association and bargaining vary greatly from country to country, says Kate Jelly, labour rights researcher at BHRRC. “In Cambodia, a factory can have dozens of unions, but few are independent due to employer tactics (union busting). China has no legal framework for establishing independent trade unions at all. In Myanmar, one emerged after the economic and political liberalisation of the early 2010s, but after the 2021 coup, its enforcement was halted and a harsh crackdown on unions and their leaders began. This resulted in an increase in labour and human rights violations.”
Jelly notes that these problems are not new, but that the dominant fast-fashion model has triggered their presence – and restrictions on freedom of association in general. “When independent unions achieve results for workers – in the form of higher wages and better working conditions – it costs employers money. Fundamental to the fast-fashion model is that buyers at the top of the supply chain constantly pressure their suppliers to produce as cheaply as possible. Independent unions pose a threat to that system.” Add to that the fact that the apparel industry is in dire straits, and it becomes more understandable why brands are not very active in pursuing improvement.
Meanwhile, human rights organisations continue to document abuses through so-called trackers, in which the brands involved are also named and can respond with an official statement or compensation. Often, their response is lacking. One example: after the murder of union leader Shahidul Islam in Bangladesh in June 2023, the Clean Clothes Campaign set up a compensation fund and called on brands such as New Yorker and InWear to contribute. The counter stands at two percent.
Success stories
Recent success stories show what unions can achieve when they are well organised. Take the case won by the Turkish union BİRTEK-SEN against manufacturer Baykan Denim. After employees lost their homes in the severe earthquakes of February 2023, they were dismissed without compensation. Affiliated brands such as s.Oliver, Next, Gina Tricot and Urban Outfitters acknowledged the violation but went no further than advising the workers to pursue a costly lawsuit against Baykan Denim themselves. Under pressure from the Clean Clothes Campaign and one brand, Inditex, the factory relented and paid out 32,000 dollars in compensation almost three years after the disaster.
At the Serbian sock factory Valy d.o.o., which supplies Primark, among others, the Sloga union achieved success in a case concerning underpaid overtime. After attempts at union busting, including a lawsuit against union leader Željko Veselinović, 98 workers were finally paid their back wages.
Even greater is the impact of the global PayYourWorkers campaign, which has been endorsed by 285 trade unions and human rights organisations. The campaign asks brands to contribute half a percent of their order costs to a permanent fund for affected garment workers. Through joint pressure, 40 million dollars has already been raised for wage arrears and severance pay.
The road to freedom of association
What does the road to freedom of association for garment workers look like? Miedema: “Clothing brands can ensure that all their suppliers publicly support the right to freedom of association and communicate this to their employees. They can indicate to suppliers how important they consider free trade unions and reliable audits. They can actively address reports and complaints about violations of this right at their suppliers. They can sit down with the unions to further elaborate on this, and they can publicly express their support for due diligence legislation in the Netherlands and at the European level.”
The European CS3D, or ‘anti-blind-eye law’, after years of lobbying, creates opportunities for social sustainability in the textile supply chain, particularly with the option of suing a company in, for example, Bangladesh, in a country like the Netherlands. Earlier this year, the law was undermined by a new Omnibus proposal, which would exempt many large companies from their social sustainability obligations – a setback for human rights organisations. And yet, says Jelly, it offers prospects for the unions. “Even with a weakened CSDDD, due diligence can initiate necessary conversations with workers and trade unions – they themselves are experts on human rights violation risks in the most vulnerable links of the textile supply chain.”
Source list:
This article was translated to English using an AI tool.
FashionUnited uses AI language tools to speed up translating (news) articles and proofread the translations to improve the end result. This saves our human journalists time they can spend doing research and writing original articles. Articles translated with the help of AI are checked and edited by a human desk editor prior to going online. If you have questions or comments about this process email us at info@fashionunited.com