If I said Rana Plaza to you, would many of you know what I was talking about?
It's home to Primark amongst other high streets stores and is the building that collapsed
on April 24th last year in Savar, Bangladesh where 1,129 people lost their lives.
This tragic accident, considered to be the deadliest garment-factory and deadliest accidental
structural failure incident in history, merely scrapes the surface of the conditions that
workers face in the third world.
We're hearing about Primark again after this image was posted on Twitter saying,
"This message was attached to my newly purchased top from Primark in 2013 Swansea."
Primark responded with a statement adding: "Primark knows its responsibilities to the
workers in its supply chain and has already started detailed investigations. Primark's
Code of Conduct sets out the core principles that suppliers must follow to ensure products
are made in good working conditions and that the people making them are treated decently
and are paid a fair wage." But sweatshops are known for their poor working
conditions, long working hours and unjust pay packets. For example, the National Labour
Committee said, women making NBA jerseys that will be sold for $140 will receive just 24
cents. In one Mexican sweatshop workers have a quota
of 1,000 items a day and to meet this, they would need to produce one item a minute.
In other sweatshops, workers can be fined for not arriving to work on time, going to
the toilet for too long or making mistakes. And the punishment...Two months pay docked
and if they quit they will be enslaved. Anwar Ansari, a trade union leader who made
clothes for Marks and Spencer's in India was kidnapped and beaten in 2010 for fighting
for better working conditions. Both men and women receive verbal, physical
and sexual abuse from management being forced to work overnight and undergo several consecutive
shifts. Employers even force 85-90% of women to take
the contraceptive pill and pregnancy tests so they're not liable for maternity leave
or health benefits. The International Labour Organisation estimates
that 250 million children from ages 5 to 14 are forced to work in sweatshops in developing
countries, with 120 million of these working full time.
Almost every retailer buys material and houses their production companies in developing countries.
If these workers refused to work anymore the industry would collapse.
Safeguards need to be put in place but sometimes closing down sweatshops can do more harm than
good, as employees wouldn't be able to provide for their family, find alternative work and
end up starving or losing what little possessions they do have.
A quick look on the Walmart website showed that entire school uniforms can be bought
for $5 and that includes everything from materials, to transport, labour and storage. It's been
reported Walmart workers have been forced to work 19 hour shifts for as little as $20
a month. While these clothes are cheap for consumers
it's at a cost of other human beings to produce them and the abuse these men and women get
is paid for by the low price that we pay. Walmart pointed out that "there were at least
five other brands and/or retailers using the same factory...and said it offered to partner
with Sweatfree Communities in addressing Bangladeshi issues."
In 2014, Bangladesh for example is now the world's second largest clothing exporter turning
over $25.1 billion. Not surprisingly China is the world's biggest clothing exporter with
over $160billion made in 2013. One worker who made shoes in China said, "I
am exhausted to death now.... None of us have time to go to toilet or drink water. We are
tired and dirty. We work without stop and we are still reproached by the supervisors."
Exposure to these conditions have left long term physical and physiological effects including
eye damage, lung disease, arthritis and stunted growth.
Further research says that doubling the wages of a sweatshop worker would only cost the
consumer as little as 1.8% more per item and a study showed that shoppers would pay 15%
more if the product wasn't from a sweatshop. It's not just your low cost companies like
Primark and Walmart that are guilty of such treatment.
In 2010, it was reported that a fire swept through an H&M sweatshop factory in Bangladesh
where 21 people lost their lives because the fire exits were blocked and fire extinguishers
were defunct. H&M said afterwards, "When it comes to general
working conditions in Bangladesh, we believe that being present in the country is the way
we can make a change long-term." Abercrombie & Fitch reportedly misled workers
in Saipan, a US territory promising prosperous employment only to impose those men and women
to work 12 hours, seven days a week to pay back their $7,000 visa and sign contracts
banning them from asking for a raise, believing in their religion or from getting married.
Abercrombie & Fitch added their policies "included prohibition of any form of indentured labour...and
have an absolute zero tolerance for noncompliance with our policies."
Almost half of the world's population or 3.5 billion people live on less than $2.50 per
day. This is in contrast to the richest 85 people on earth, who between them have well
in excess of $1 trillion. Or in simpler terms, the 1% of the richest people globally is 65
times more than the poorest half of the world. So who is to blame? Is it the consumer for
buying the goods and not boycotting these stores or is it the retailer for not providing
safer and fairer working conditions? Do you look at the label on where your item
of clothing is made and would it deter you from buying it? Let us know your comments
below. It seems the Western World could be naive
of all of this and could be partly held responsible. The retailer could also be held accountable
for continuing to use these manufacturers who perhaps turn a blind eye.