- By Walton Pantland

The Rana Plaza disaster in Bangladesh has shone a light on conditions in the textile industry, and put pressure on major retailers to take responsibility for their supply chains.

Unions and campaigners have been applying pressure for years, but most companies have ignored it or paid lip service to demands to improve conditions. The outrage over this entirely preventable tragedy has changed things: a new accord on fire and safety in Bangladesh, driven by the global unions UNI and IndustriALL, has been developed, and signed by a number of the world’s biggest fashion retailers.

This New York times article gives a good overview of the issues and negotiations that lead to the signing of the accord.

But not all retailers have signed up. A number of high profile retailers, including Gap, Walmart and Debenhams, have failed to take responsibility for their supply chains. They are afraid of the legally binding clauses in the new Accord, and seem to believe that the old formula of whitewashing conditions, denying liability and kicking the issue into the long grass will continue to work.

The TUC is running an excellent campaign to keep the pressure on these retailers. The campaign invites you to write to the companies involved and demand that the sign the Accord. We urge you to do so.

We wrote to the companies, and received this response from Debenhams:

Debenhams say they agree with the intent of the Accord, and that they are “working through” the agreement, speaking to the ETI and the unions.

But they still haven’t signed it.

We need to shame them into doing so.

The ETI referred to in the email is the Ethical Trading Initiative, an alliance of unions, NGOs and companies working to improve conditions in the textile industry. Debenhams have signed up to the ETI, which commits them to implement the Base Code. This is a Code of Conduct calling for, among other things, safe working conditions, a living wage and the right to organise.

Quite how Debenhams square their membership of the ETI with conditions in their supply chain is beyond me: until recently, unions in Bangladesh needed the factory owners’ permission to organise, and we know exactly what safety and wages are like. Hardly compliant with the Base Code.

The ETI, while an important initiative, is a process rather than a result: companies sign up and pledge to “improve”. It seems like Debenhams are using it to provide a bit of PR cover while they get on with business as usual.

We can’t let them.

Visit the TUC campaign page and write to them.

Or send them a tweet:

Not good enough, @debenhams. You need to sign the #Bangladesh safety accord usilive.org/not-good-enoug…

— Union Solidarity Int (@USILive) May 20, 2013

Signing the accord is a major step in the right direction, but it’s not enough on its own. Agreements are only as good as their enforcement, and more than anything else, Bangladeshi workers need strong unions on the ground to monitor compliance to this agreement, and use it as an organising tool to fight for better conditions.

Poor conditions in countries like Bangladesh make it much harder for factories in countries with decent conditions to compete.

The textile industry needs effective collective bargaining, both at a national level and through the global unions, to finally put a stop to the exploitative conditions characterised by the race to the bottom, and to create quality, sustainable jobs.

Can we use the legal system to hold corporations to account in the US? Jeff Monahan looks at the opportunities and limitations.

- By Jeff Monahan

Typically an arms race is a competition between enemy states to innovate and design the most dangerous technology in order to gain the upper hand.  It requires (I imagine) meticulous testing and attention to detail on both sides of the conflict.  In the business of outsourcing product labor, however, each side competes to pay the least amount attention as possible while not innovating at all.  This arms race creates danger as the byproduct of having the upper hand in the court room.

Companies that engage in outsourcing labor do so by contracting with a foreign factory as opposed to buying the land and setting up the factory themselves.  This way they can avoid liability for accidents that happen on site.  The more contact a company like Walmart, Adidas, or Gap has with the factory that makes their products, the more likely they are to be found liable for what happens.  This stems from legal principles of agency, which essentially say that the less control a company exerts over a subordinate employee or subsidiary, the less they can say that a resulting accident was the company’s fault.  This makes sense, but it means that the companies have an incentive to keep as far away from the actual production factory as possible.  Full accountability is placed on the foreign factory.

The factories in developing countries that employ the workers have the incentive to remain profitable and stay in business, of course, but improving safety conditions can be expensive and cut away at those profits.  In many of these countries unionization is difficult or illegal, and without strong unions to keep the factory in check and demand improvements their incentive to avoid the cost runs unbridled.  Factory tragedies like the ones in Tazreen and Pakistan are the result.  It’s like the pre-union days in the U.S. and U.K: there is no remedy for on-site injuries.  And even if the factory is sued en masse their pockets aren’t deep enough to cover the damages.  That’s why we boycott and protest Walmart and Adidas until they cover the rest.  Again, there is very little accountability.

The reason that U.S. corporations cannot be sued for injuries or lost salaries is because the laws are not written to cover them.  There are only a couple federal statutes that a foreign union could sue under, but the laws are not written to cover them because corporations fork up millions of dollars to lobby legislators to draft them that way.  The rationale they offer for not holding them liable is the fear of frivolous lawsuits against the company – they think they would get sued for everything.  There is some merit to this fear: lawsuits bring bad publicity and companies may be forced to settle claims that have no basis in the first place.  But the alternative currently in place causes far greater harm.

Forced to choose between two evils, the legislature chose the one that favors corporations, and the result is that full responsibility for sweatshop safety is placed on the foreign factories that house them.  With no law designed to hold Walmart, Gap, or Adidas liable, the only hope would be for a court to interpret a law in a way that reaches them.  The workers are not a party to the contract between the corporation and the factory, however, and although courts have skewed laws to protect third party plaintiffs before, they are unlikely to do so in this context.  The court will not and should not make the laws, and without a strong indication that a law was intended to provide protection, a court would keep the burden on the lawmakers for any change.

How can we use the law?

So, it’s up to the legislature, which is heavily influenced by corporations’ deep pockets, but also controlled by the people.  This leaves two options: we can either affect the laws or we can affect the companies who exploit them.  Call your state rep and tell him or her that the Alien Tort Claims Act (ACTA) or Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act should be amended to hold corporations liable for egregious accidents that they have the money, power, and moral obligation to prevent.  Doing so could potentially force companies to run their own factory abroad if the international owners are not trustworthy enough to do it themselves.

Once you have called your state rep, e-mail the company themselves and ask them why they don’t take the responsibility to manage a factory.  We would be thrilled to hear their responses.  And finally, if all else fails, join organizations like ours and help us raise awareness and activate a change.  The law may not be on our side, but if we work together in solidarity we will make the difference.

Objectifying women is now prime time entertainment in Denmark. A new TV show objectifies women by allowing two men to critique their bodies while the woman remains silent. The ‘chat show’ entitled ‘Blachman’ is possibly the most sexist show in television history.

Who is the brains behind this TV show you may ask? Thomas Blachman – a Danish X Factor judge who is named the ‘Simon Cowell’ of Denmark. But, the best of it is that a woman commissioned this TV show and gave it the go ahead. Sofia Fromberg, the shows producer, states that “The first time I got the idea from Blachman on email I thought, ‘you can’t do that’. I then looked into it more and the programme’s proposed intentions.”

According to Fromberg, “Blachman wanted to look into why men were saying beautiful things about women’s bodies – but not to women themselves. He wanted to discover if there was place in between puritanical style discussions and pornography to discuss women’s bodies decently. I see how women are portrayed in the media – perfectly slim and with silicon breasts. And I agreed with Blachman that it was an issue worth debating.”

Blachman is right to a point where he was women in the media are portrayed as slim, young and cosmetically enhanced. However, does that mean creating a TV show which fundamentally demeans and objectifties somehow liberates women and makes them feel better about themselves? According to Blachman and Fromberg apparently so.

The media notoriously has portrayed women as young, slim and pretty. At a recent conference, Miriam O’Reilly who won a landmark case against the BBC was unfairly dismissed for being ‘too old’ to be on Countryfile, discussed her experience as an older woman in the world of the media. One day she recalled being on set interviewing someone for Countryfile when the camera man and the producer stopped filming and went away to have a private discussion. When they returned they took Miriam aside, only to her horror, to be told that her grey roots were showing and if she didn’t mind putting on some of this black hairspray to cover them up. And the sad thing is, I’m sure that the BBC is not the first to make an older women feel like she is inadequate and they won’t be the last.

In a recent survey it was highlighted that people tend to view women as older when they reach 30. Women also stated that “opportunities are not always presented to ‘older women’. Once you hit a certain age it’s assumed you have no drive or ambition left.” The perceptions of older women in society is disgraceful. The older a man gets he seems to gain knowledge, experience and looked upon as a mentor whereas the older a women gets she is less capable, attractive and incompetent. This is not the case. Both sexes gain knowledge and experience – there should not be inequalities here.

The way in which women are portrayed in the media reflects societal views. From being objectified from a young age to being cast aside as older after the age of 30. Attitudes and values must change and the media must include older women as TV presenters at peek times. 

- By Peter Kenworthy

According to a statement today from PUDEMO national spokesperson, Zakhele Mabuza, Wonder Mkhonza has been granted a bail of 15 000 emalangeni, approximately $1,650. Wonder Mkhonza was arrested on April 12 for allegedly possessing 5,000 political pamphlets, and the international ACT Now: Free Wonder Mkhonza campaign started by Africa Contact has called for his release ever since.

“This is quite a huge ransom to pay for ordinary poor Swazis who live on under $1 per day,” says the statement. “But Leo Gama, Wonder’s lawyer has been able to convince the court and secure the release on bail.”

Mabuza thanked those who had campaigned for Wonder’s release, but insisted that Wonder remained a political prisoner even though he was released on bail. “The ransom he is to pay for his freedom is only meant to keep him away from the prison while out there he is still a prisoner. He joins a growing list of many political prisoners who are all our members that have been out on bail, but their cases are deliberately not finalized. In the process these are suffering from the extremely stringent conditions that are imposed on them. Such include unreasonable reporting at a police station and the removal of their freedom to travel outside Swaziland.”

The fight for the release of political prisoners such as Wonder is linked directly to the fight for democracy and human rights in Africa’s last absolute monarchy, said the statement. “However difficult the route to democracy might be, we are never intimidated and we shall continue to call for the release of all political prisoners; respect for people’s rights; unbanning of all political parties; and the democratization of the country’s politics.”

- Peter Kenworthy is a correspondent for Africa Contact

On 28 October 2012, he was arrested over HotDoc’s publication of a document which claimed to be the Lagarde list, a list of 1,991 names of Greek citizens with accounts at the Swiss branch of HSBC, suggesting that they could be tax evaders. The published list according to the magazine, “matched a list of 2,059 people” on the Lagarde list. Vaxevanis was released from Athens police headquarters a few hours after his arrest.

Watch the video to hear more.

Download

You can watch the video:

Or download the podcast:

Download

Image: Jules Vasquez

- By Dr Donna Yates

A Maya temple at Nohmul in Belize has been bulldozed to get aggregate for road construction.

Recently I wrote a short piece for USi about the construction of a Walmart at the Mexican archaeological site of Teotihuacan. I find the destruction of major archaeological sites upsetting and I was relieved to see that so many readers agreed with me.

This morning I woke up to more archaeological destruction. Jaime Awe, the head of archaeology in Belize, has announced that a private construction firm tore into a pyramid at the Maya site of Nohmul with a large back hoe. It isn’t yet clear exactly which company destroyed the temple but, at the very least, they were using equipment labelled “D-Mar Construction” which is owned by United Democratic Party politician Denny Grijalva.

But it is exactly these sorts of sites that give us some of the most exciting information about the Maya world. Nohmul in particular is known for some landmark work on trace element analysis of obsidian tools. The Maya used volcanic glass to make blades and, thanks to modern scientific techniques, we are able to determine exactly which volcano (and even which eruption) produced this glass. Imagine a piece of obsidian from Teotihuacan (famed for its green-coloured “Pachuca” obsidian) ended up all the way at Nohmul. We would know that the Maya had a successful long distance trade system that spanned half the continent. And you know what? That is exactly what happened. Green “Pachuca” obsidian was excavated by Prof. Norman Hammond of Boston University at the site of Nohmul in the 1980s. The people of Nohmul traded down the line with Teotihuacan.

To make this even more exciting: imagine that Teotihuacan was the starting point of the trade line and Nohmul was the end of the line. As archaeologists collect pieces of green Pachuca obsidian from small sites throughout the Maya area and plot them on a map, we can see the entire trade network form. We can trace their path down winding jungle rivers and imagine the long-distance traders carrying their wares from site to site in canoes. What else came to Nohmul along with the obsidian? Technology? Literature? Art? People? It is at sites like Nohmul where we really start to see the ancient Maya as people connected to the larger world.

But why was a temple at the site destroyed this week? Time will tell, hopefully. The site of Nohmul is on private land, however the remains of the Maya settlement are not owned by the landowner. They are a protected archaeological site under Belizean law and cannot just be flattened. Yet, who monitors these things? Who prevents this from happening? In a very small, not particularly wealthy country like Belize there is very little money for such projects and, perhaps, even fewer people with archaeological training. It is quite likely that Nohmul was being levelled to provide construction material. This has happened before at Belizean archaeological sites. I hate to say it, but it will likely happen again. It has been announced that criminal charges may be filed in this case, but people always think they can get away with crimes against heritage. The past can seem dead and meaningless. The past seems to not fight back.

Those who think that are wrong. People care about the ancient past in Belize. It may be that the local community in the Orange Walk district notified the national archaeology team of the destruction. I hope that is the case. At Teotihuacan, it was the local community that reported the seemingly-illegal construction activities of the Walmart store, and the unions that have pushed the campaign against corruption. In a country like Belize communities need to band together, decide what is important to them, and preserve their shared heritage.

More

No More Noh Mul: contractor bulldozes Maya temple

 - Dr Donna Yates is a postdoctoral researcher on the Trafficking Culture project at the University of Glasgow’s Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research studying antiquities trafficking and heritage crime in Latin America. You can follow her on twitter or read her blog.

- By Mhairi McAlpine

The situation for the migrant workers of Manolada hit the international headlines last month in the aftermath of a mass shooting. But behind that acute incident lies a murky world of slave labour and sex trafficking all overseen by a corrupt and mafia infiltrated establishment.

In 2010, the investigative journalist, Dina Daskalopoulou, decided to investigate the economic miracle that was happening in the Manolada area of Greece. In a time of crisis, it was hailed as a great success story of Greek innovation, hard work and international trade, but what she found was very different from the official story. In the following three years, things have got worse – much worse.

A small village of around 2,000 people was nearly doubled by the workers who come to pick the strawberries of the area, prouducing nearly 90% of domestic consumption as well as strawberries for export. Some of the migrants live in shacks on the edge of the village on land rented from the farmowners. With no electricity, running water they are tiny haphazard constructions. The “masters” as they are known to the workers, have a deal with the local police to issue fake certificates – for a price of course. These are the lucky ones – they have their own places to stay in and receive their wages.

The unlucky ones are hired and unpaid, shoved into a camp surrounded by barbed wire with open latrines at the edge which overflow directly into the local river, where a company shop provides for their needs with no oversight, while they live in hope of receiving the wages that they are owed. Usually they hope in vain. After a few months, the farm owners will call on immigration and denounce the illegal workers who will be taken to a detention camp, saving on labour costs.

Daskalopoulou found the workers fearful and unwilling to talk openly to her. Once she was rumbled as a journalist, the camp workers were given instructions not to talk to her, word eventually got back that they were being threatened that “for 2,000 euros the “masters” would lay them to the ground“.

Last August, an Egyptian worker was dragged through the town by a car. Two men clamped his head in car’s side window and then drove nearly two miles through the town. Horrified onlookers called the police. Local eyewitnesses stated that the man had gone to demand his unpaid wages, and the brutal assault was the result. The police on the other hand claimed that it was retaliation for a previous assault by the victim.

When the Greek anti-racism organisation UARFT went to investigate working conditions in Manolada in the aftermath, it quickly transpired that the workers there were in fact victims of trafficking, meeting nine out of ten of the Amnesty International criteria. The investigator faced serious harassment, with his car being followed, physical intimidation and anonymous phonecalls repeating the threat that Daskalopoulou had encountered – that 2,000 euros was enough to have a wo/man killed.

In April this year, the plight of the Manolada workers hit the international headlines, when 34 workers were injured when two foremen opened fire on a crowd of around 200 workers who had gathered to demand their back wages. The immediate priority of Dendias, the Public Order Minister, was to order the arrest of the injured workers for illegal migration, and indeed four were arrested on leaving the hospital where they were being treated, before an international outcry eventually saw the Greek State announce that they would be given refugee status, whether they will make good on that announcement remains to be seen, however. Two foremen and the farm owner were eventually arrested for attempted murder, but only after several days.

“They hit us and said, ‘We will kill you.’ Three of them were shooting at us while the others beat us with sticks. The shooting went on for more than 20 minutes.” - Manolada strawberry picker

Video showing the aftermath of the shooting (trigger warning)

An investigation by Amnesty International in the aftermath of the shooting found that the conditions described by Daskalopoulou had got worse. They found approximately 5,000 migrant workers, nearly half from Bangladesh, living in sheds made out of plastic sheeting. With each shed housing 20 workers, some in their early teens, with no access to sanitation and a hose their only water supply. Fearing both the gangmasters and the immigration authorities they were trapped. The workers have still not been paid, but without access to legal representation and a lack of documentation, they felt they had no option but to carry on working.

The situation for women at Manolada is particularly horrifying. A solidarity activist who struck up a conversation with one of the workers discovered that it there is not only labour trafficking that takes place there, but also sex trafficking. The worker explained that there were houses “out in the field” where women were available for sex for €20. Owned by Greeks they keep their hands clean by employing men from the Balklans to “manage security”. The women are locked in the rooms and never leave the houses, which operate both day and night. The women are owned by the Greeks, although they themselves do not make use of them, instead the locals frequent one of the 4-5 “legitimate” brothels in the town, where the women are reputed to be “prettier”.
When workers didn’t have the money to visit one of the houses, the activist was told, they raped the younger and weaker female co-workers primarily choosing other nationalities from themselves to rape. The distinction made here is somewhat academic. Both the women in the fields and the women in the houses are being raped. The women of these houses see little of the money which the workers pay to rape them, which goes to in the main to their Greek owners.

In the aftermath of the shooting, a new tactic has come to light whereby farm owners hire workers in groups, led by a “a leader”, who negotiates the fee and is paid the wages for the group for distribution. One such group of 16 was hired over a month ago, and agreed a fee of €350 (€217 net, once the “shack rent” is removed) for 45 days work. Last week the payments were due, however were not paid. In the aftermath of the demand for wages, two of the workers were stabbed, one in the back, the other in the thigh. To scared to call an ambulance in case the immigration authorities appeared to take them to detention, they took them to the main road and flagged down a passing car asking the driver to take the severely wounded men to hospital.

The police informed a journalist who rang to inquire about the situation that this was a dispute between migrants, confiscating the workers wages from the men arrested for the stabbings and refusing to hand it over to the workers. The Greek press have reported it as another example of migrant violence. But this completely ignores the structural issues which allow both the farmers and the “leaders” of migrant worker groups to avoid paying the workers the pittance that has been agreed in exchange for their work.

The idea that all this could be going on without the knowledge of the authorities is simply laughable. People in the area talk of a well-structured criminal group hierarchy, complete with henchmen enforcers and underworld gunmen. The price of a life there – €2,000 – is well known and is repeated as a threat. Immigrants who talk to the mainstream press are targeted by the police and arrested under immigration offences. The slums are known to be rife with informers, yet the houses where women are imprisoned and repeatedly raped to make profit for their Greek owners remain untouched and no investigation into the working or living conditions for the labourers there has been made by the Greek authorities.

With the spotlight drawn to their situation in the aftermath of the shooting, the workers have become braver with the confidence that the world is watching, organising a solidarity march through the village and establishing a union of migrant workers. But between the mafia involvement and the corrupt authorities as well as the “leaders” and informers from their own community who would sell them out, they have an uphill struggle.

- Mhairi McAlipine is an Athens based feminist, socialist and internationalist, originally from Glasgow. She blogs at The Second Council House of Virgo