Levi Strauss & Co

Download Levi Strauss & Co's Submission Here (pdf)

Responded to survey: yes

MSI involvement: no [what's this?]

Grade 0: Does not accept the principle of a living wage [what's this?]

Summary

Accepts no responsibility for workers’ wages, but has made some effort to engage with governments to lobby for increases in minimum wages.

Position on living wages

‘Levi Strauss & Co. believes in the principle that wages and benefits for a standard work eek should be sufficient to meet workers’ basic needs and provide some discretionary ncome. Markets set wage rates. Where wages fail to keep workers above the poverty line, governments should set minimum wages consistent with the cost of living, in consultation
with representatives of workers and employers.’

Position on freedom of association

‘We understand that the right to freely associate and organize is an issue where there remains significant historical, social and legal obstacles. We are committed to working with our suppliers governments, other companies and interested stakeholders to uphold
these rights for all workers.’

Work so far on living wages

None mentioned

Plans on living wages

None mentioned

Other significant information

‘Our work in the public policy arena and at the government level enhances our overall responsible sourcing work in that it seeks to lay foundations for and improve upon local policies that directly affect workplace standards and workers’ rights in countries where we source.’

Detailed information was included on monitoring of its terms of engagement, involvement in an ILO/IFC Better Work Project, and its advocacy for worker rights provisions in trade agreements.

Our comments

Levi Strauss takes no responsibility for living wages as it believes that responsibility lies with the market and with governments to set and enforce decent wage levels. It fails to recognise that companies have a role to play in setting market rates and prices. Its business model encourages governments to keep wages low and places suppliers
and countries in competition.

It is of little use for Levi’s to support the principle of a living wage if it takes no responsibility for the root causes of poverty wages. However, it is worth mentioning, that Levi’s does engage in public policy lobbying in line with this wage position and can give examples of this work. It is unclear if its purchasing practices also support a move toward higher wages.