Faster, Longer, Cheaper

Phan, 22-year-old migrant worker, sews sportswear for Puma at garment factory S in Thailand. This is her account of life at the factory.

'Every day we work from 8 am until noon, then break for lunch. After lunch we work again from 1 pm until 5 pm. We have to do overtime every day, starting from 5.30 pm. We work until 2 am or 3 am during the peak season. We always have to work a double shift. Although we are very exhausted, we have no choice. We cannot refuse overtime work, because our standard wages are so low. Sometimes we want to rest, but our employer forces us to work.

'I earn around US$ 50 per month, but I pay US$ 3 for electricity, water, and dormitory. I also pay US$ 5 for rice. The employer also asks us to pay US$ 7 per month for the workers' registration fee. So, I only have US$ 35 left for all my other living expenses. In some months during the low season when I earn less, I only have 30 or 40 cents left that month.

'I would like to demand the improvement of working conditions. However, we do not feel we can demand higher wages, welfare, and legal status.'

Phan's experience resonates with that of thousands of workers in the global sportswear industry. In interviews with workers in athletic apparel and footwear factories across seven countries, accounts of excessively long working hours, forced overtime, lack of job and wage security, poverty wages, denial of the right to unionise, poor health, exhaustion, mental stress, and dysfunctional family life were repeated over and over again. The reality of life in a sportswear factory, particularly in the workplace further down in the supply chain, is a far cry from the guaranteed workers' rights that are stipulated by law, or indeed the ethical commitments on labour standards proclaimed by many of the big global sports brands.

Too long and too hard

Long working hours and forced overtime are of most serious concern to all the women workers to whom we spoke. Factory managers typically push employees to work between 10 and 12 hours, sometimes extending to between 16 and 18 hours without a proper break. When order deadlines loom, working hours lengthen. A seven-day working week is becoming the norm during the peak season, particularly in China, despite limits being placed by the law. In two Chinese factories producing for Umbro, workers said that they were made to work a seven-day week frequently during the peak season. In one factory they worked a total of 120 hours of overtime during the month of October 2003 – three times in excess of Chinese labour legislation. 'We have endless overtime in the peak season and we sit working non-stop for 13 to 14 hours a day. We sewing workers work like this every day – we sew and sew without stopping until our arms feel sore and stiff,' said one of the workers. A 21-year-old woman working in sports garment factory H in Indonesia reported having to work more than 12 consecutive hours of overtime to meet an export deadline: 'In June and July 2003, the sewing department I am part of worked from 7 am until 4 am the next day because of a large Reebok order. We were allowed to go home for about seven hours, but had to be back at the factory at 11 am to work until 10 pm.' Krishanti, a 28-year-old worker in Bangkok garment Factory T producing for Fila, Nike, and Puma, reports: 'Sometimes we had to work on overtime in a night shift. It upsets the normal body functioning ... I work like a machine, not a human being.'

Overtime is usually compulsory; and workers are informed only at the last minute that they are expected to perform the extra hours. In four Turkish factories producing for Lotto, Fila, Puma, and Kappa, workers all reported being forced to work overtime. In many instances, workers report being threatened with dismissal and subjected to penalties as well as verbal abuse if they cannot work the additional hours. Soy, a garment worker at a Cambodian sportswear factory, told researchers: 'They force us to work overtime. If we refuse three times, the managers threaten us with dismissal. If we refuse to work on Sundays or public holidays, they also threaten us.' In Bulgarian factory U supplying Puma, refusal to do overtime is often used as a pretext for dismissing the worker. Fines are imposed on those who do not work the overtime hours as instructed. In a Chinese factory Q, producing for Umbro, workers were fined RMB 30 (US$ 3.60) for refusal to work overtime. In extreme cases, workers in three factories in China – two producing for Umbro and one for Mizuno and Kappa – reported being prevented from resigning during peak production periods. The management does this by retaining their wages (ranging from half a month to two months' worth). Often, management do not pay workers the overtime premium rate as stipulated by law.

For those with families, working days that often start in the early hours of the morning and extend late into the night leave little time for child-care or family life. Laila, who works in Indonesian factory D, producing goods for Fila, Puma, Lotto, Nike, Adidas, and ASICS, laments: 'There is no time for housework. For our friends who have children, we hear from them that they feel very upset in their hearts, that they never get time to spend with their children and to watch them grow. During the spare time we do have, we feel constantly exhausted.' A fellow Indonesian worker from Factory I, producing goods bearing the logos of Umbro and Puma and the Olympics emblem, adds: 'When there are stretches of overtime work, many workers who have children never get to see them. When they come home from work, their children are already sleeping. And all of us have to come to work so early in the morning that the children are usually asleep in the morning too. Family life is cut short'. As a worker in Bulgarian factory U sadly concludes: 'It is chaos at home.'

Poverty wages

The wages of the many workers who sew, assemble, and pack sportswear for export are not enough to guarantee a decent existence for them and their families. Workers in Indonesian factory G, producing for Reebok, told researchers, 'We have many living costs here. We have rent to pay for the dorms; we have food and transport costs. We need at least Rp 10,000 (US$ 1.19) per day for food and transportation. The company gives us only Rp 2,000 (US$ 0.23) per day for transportation. If workers have children, the daily cost of living is at least Rp 25,000 (US$ 2.97). A wage which would allow us to live and make some savings every month would be at least 1 million rupiah (US$ 119).' At the time of our research, the standard monthly take-home wage at this factory was only Rp 816,000 (US$ 98.6), 82 per cent of the amount needed.

Overtime work presents a dilemma. Workers universally hate it for the toll that it takes upon their health, their personal lives, and their family lives. Yet the extra payment (when it is made) brought in by overtime work can make the difference between starvation and subsistence wages. As one worker states: 'We need overtime work because our basic wages are not enough to meet all of our living needs. We have rent to pay for the dorms that we rent on a monthly basis, we have food and transport money that is needed.'

Some of the workers interviewed asked themselves why they worked so hard for so little. Yet for many, the choice to leave is simply not available. As one garment worker from a Turkish factory producing for Puma and Lotto said: 'The wages are so scant and not sufficient for anything. But we do not have any alternative because wages in garment factories are nearly all the same. Our choice is between this wage and unemployment.'

Campaigning on working conditions in global supply-chains has persistently focused upon getting employers to pay workers a living wage: a wage that allows workers and their families to live in dignity. Such a wage would provide for basic needs – food, clothing, health care, housing, potable water, electricity, education, child care, transportation – and a discretionary income that would allow savings to be made. In many countries, the legal minimum wage – and many workers in the sportswear industry do not earn even this – does not amount to a living wage.

Employed – but on precarious terms

Factories often do not issue workers with proper employment contracts, leaving workers no means of redress when their employers fail to respect labour laws on minimum wages, working hours, payment of overtime premiums, provision of health benefits and other forms of insurance, as well as other legal rights. This is further exacerbated when workers are denied their right to join and form trade unions. Many workers – especially migrants – do not feel able to ask for such contracts, and their absence has become accepted as an industry norm. Even where contracts are issued, employers still flout their terms and conditions. Jing, a worker in China-based sportswear factory N, producing for Mizuno and Kappa, told researchers: 'The contract is a scrap. The factory management never give us what is written in the contract. Talk about no overtime work for more than three hours? I can't remember having a day where I have worked for less than three overtime hours.'

Among the worst-treated in the industry are workers who are employed on a temporary basis. Often, factories continually hire them on temporary contracts as a means of evading legal responsibilities to pay time-rate wages or benefits such as maternity leave, health insurance, or severance pay. Workers interviewed from a number of factories reported that, despite being employed by the same factory for periods as long as two years, they were still on temporary contracts. This sort of employment is a particular phenomenon in Indonesia. Another tactic is to hire workers from an agency, where the employer is the agency rather than the owner of the factory. Thus, the enterprise that owns the factory is able to avoid its obligations as an employer. Unions see this as a major barrier to organising workers. When interviewed, a number of union leaders reported that temporary workers who seek to join in union activities often find that their contracts are not renewed.

Many of the workers interviewed reported not receiving legal benefits such as health insurance or wage protection during periods of sick leave or maternity leave. This adds to the precarious nature of their employment. At one Cambodian garment factory, producing for Adidas and Puma, if workers went on sick leave for three days, the employer deducted one day's salary; if more than three days of sick leave were taken, the employer made the worker sign a form allowing the factory to deduct the worker's incentive bonus for that month. At Indonesian Factory B, a worker reported that taking leave was at the expense of wage cuts and other penalties: 'We are not allowed to take sick leave ... If we do anyway, when we come back to work our daily wages are also cut. I have experienced being moved to the cleaning department from the sewing department after I took sick leave. It was humiliating. If we don't agree to move departments, then we are forced to leave the factory without any severance pay or benefits.' It is also common for workers to be denied proper severance pay when dismissed or made redundant.

Bullied, humiliated, abused

Managers in the factories often resort to harassment, humiliation, and abuse in order to exert their authority over the workers. Elina, a garment worker in Indonesian factory PT Busana Prima Global making goods for Lotto, said: 'There is a lot of verbal abuse. The management calls us names throughout the time when we work. They call us "stupid", "lazy", "useless", "bastard's child", and other crass words. They say "You don't deserve any more than this". Some girls start crying. Physical abuse happens too. Our ears are often pulled, and managers yell directly into our ears.' More disturbing are regular incidences of sexual harassment of young women workers at these factories. At Indonesian factory D, producing for Fila, Puma, Lotto, Nike, Adidas, and ASICS, workers reported: 'Pretty girls in the factory are always harassed by the male managers. They come on to the girls, call them into their offices, whisper into their ears, touch them at the waist, arms, neck, buttocks, and breasts, bribe the girls with money and threats of losing their jobs to have sex with them.' Women workers in particular experience a high level of harassment where it is seen as culturally acceptable for male supervisors and managers to treat women in an abusive way.

Trade unions undermined

The ability to join and form a trade union remains a great challenge in the sportswear production sector. In all four of the researched sportswear factories in Turkey producing collectively for Lotto, Fila, Puma, and Kappa, no unions were allowed. In one of the factories producing for Puma in Bulgaria, it was reported that management had a hostile attitude towards any form of worker representation in the enterprise.

The obstacles to forming and joining a trade union are sometimes exacerbated by governments when they undermine workers' rights as a means of attracting foreign investment. Sometimes the employers harass and discriminate against those who join in union activities. Added to this, long working hours leave little time for workers to engage in trade-union organising; and workers refrain from participating because they are afraid that union membership will threaten their jobs.

In many of the factories that we researched, workers reported that management made it clear that union organising was not acceptable. Workers interviewed in these factories felt convinced that joining a union would lead to being fired. Rana, a 22-year-old garment worker in Turkish Factory W, producing for Lotto and Puma, told researchers: 'Last year while the workers of the next factory were striking in front of their factory, our supervisor said to us "You will see – all of them will lose their jobs. You never make this mistake. Otherwise you also face the same consequence.", A young female worker from a Cambodian sportswear factory producing for Fila and Puma reported that there was no union at her factory, and that workers did not dare to protest over anything for fear of losing their jobs. She also said that the employers discriminated against unionists: if a factory manager finds out that a job applicant has been involved in union activities, the applicant will not be employed. One Indonesian worker described what happened after a strike at a factory producing for Umbro and Reebok:

'The strike organisers were initially suspended. They were not allowed to come to work and received only 75 per cent of their standard wages. They were consequently all fired. We felt very scared and powerless when this happened. It was like a slap; it was as if the management were saying to us: "See, this is the consequence of your strike". The constant intimidation by the management gives us no chance to feel empowered.'

Many of the workers interviewed expressed their belief that trade-union representation would give them the bargaining power necessary to change the unhealthy and undignified working conditions in their factories. Yet this means of achieving justice is continually threatened by employers and also by governments. Although freedom of association and collective bargaining is protected as a constitutional right in many countries, governments often allow employers to flout it in order to offer cheaper labour to global buyers. Whether through changes to the law – for example, in a number of countries, the rights to unionise and strike are prohibited by law in export-processing zones – or de facto through non-enforcement, thousands of workers across the globe are unfairly denied the opportunity to defend their rights.

There is clear evidence of violations of trade union rights in this sector in all the countries mentioned in this report. The ICFTU produces an annual worldwide survey of trade union rights. Further details are given in the appendix.

Winning Profits, Losing Rights

Many sportswear companies recognise that there are bad labour practices in their supply-chain. Their response to criticism has been to adopt codes of conduct covering labour practices, which have led to limited improvements. What is not acknowledged openly is the role that the company itself plays in causing the problem. Our research shows that driving the harsh, abusive, and exploitative working conditions in the sportswear industry is a business model designed to bring products to the marketplace speedily and cheaply.

To deliver this model, suppliers must be able to meet faster delivery times, keep labour costs low, and be flexible to respond to the fluctuating size and frequency of orders being placed by global brands. Factory managers respond by pushing their workers to work faster and for longer periods of time; by keeping their wages down in order to maximise their own profits and to meet prices offered by the brands; and by preventing them – through intimidation and other means – from challenging any abusive or unfair treatment, resulting in the kinds of experience described in the previous chapter. Governments, through their failure to enact or enforce workers' rights, make it easier for unscrupulous employers to adjust to market pressures by cutting corners – and costs – through the erosion of workers' rights.