Quote
|
Workers still find themselves struggling to survive on the breadline, working excessive overtime just so they can make ends meet. |
| Sainsbury | | Print | |
Page 2 of 3 Detail on workers rightsWagesSainsbury’s response reiterated its emphasis on work being done within the ETI, while refusing to state what it was doing itself within ETI:We know from your comments last year that you want to know what WE are doing on the issues you raise, but the point is that much of it we conduct through the ETI.As we have stated before, the ETI is a tool, not a panacea, and Sainsbury’s needs to be able to show what it is doing to make use of that tool. It did set out an example from a supplier in Bangladesh: The wage structure at the supplier is related to the skill base of the worker and a yearly performance evaluation. The national minimum is Tk1663 a month but our minimum wage at the factory is Tk1851 and this increases between Tk250 to Tk300 after each grade increase. There are 6 grades. We have arrived at an understanding of what makes up a living wage...We believe that even at the bottom end of the wage structure then there is a level of discretionary spend and that this constitutes a living wage.This is such an astonishing statement: the lowest living wage estimate from Bangladesh is Tk3000. This figure is accepted by Sainsbury’s competitor Tesco, while Next say they think the figure is likely to be higher than this. Freedom of AssociationIn 2006, Sainsbury’s told us,we are conscious of the need to raise awareness...We are for example engaged on a number of fronts at the moment on a FoA issue in Central America....we have made a wide range of literature available both hard copy and electronically. We recognise that this is not enough though and are also committed to training. We fully support the ETI training that we have helped to develop, but we are also now running training for our Suppliers on a monthly basis.We said that supplier training is an important part of the process, but that it is through training of workers by local labour rights organisations that workers can truly have access to these rights. In 2007, it gave us an example: Our Indian factory have a local trade union named “Kamgar Ekta Sangathan” ( which means Workers unity organization in English) which is recognized by Central and state government. This union is active all over India and works for workers welfare and rights. The union conducts training and seminars regularly every month, on site at the factory. Union members are democratically voted in by the workers on the site. In addition to the seminars and training, the factory, to promote the access for the Unions, has [to] provide the union their own premises on site which the workers are free to join, and use as the point of contact for any issues.As with its references to the ETI, it didn’t tell us what – if anything – Sainsbury’s had done to make this happen. Monitoring and verificationSainsbury’s response in 2006 said that,We have recognised the need to re-evaluate the approach to audits and last year were proactive in bringing together the major audit companies together to review this. Working collaboratively, we now have a revised framework for audits with an agreed set of standards.In 2007 it gave us an example that it said showed how proud it was of its monitoring and verification: our Bangladesh factory has been audited thoroughly by Intertek, BV and SGS [three auditing companies]. The factory is exceeding the standards of the ETI base code. No major issues have developed although a few minor health and safety issues were raised but were dealt with immediately...We visit this factory a minimum of 3 times a year, and have a good relationship with the team there. It is this depth of relationship that we believe underpins our monitoring and verification activity.Sainsbury’s once again did not respond to our points about involving local stakeholders in its monitoring and verification. Our conclusion Of all the ETI-member fashion companies, Sainsbury’s is the most exasperating: either it is playing games with us, or it is in complete denial. Wages in the garment industry are systematically below living wages, and Tk1851 is certainly not a living wage in Bangladesh; without training and a chance to encounter local labour rights activists, most workers will not have meaningful access to their right to freedom of association; social audits by auditing firms do not pick up large numbers of labour rights violations. These points are widely accepted throughout the fashion industry, except, on the strength of its communications with us, at Sainsbury’s, where everyone seems to believe that supply chains are ethical and workers are in full receipt of their rights. We are at a loss as to how we can persuade it otherwise. |
|||||
| Last Updated ( Sunday, 16 September 2007 ) | |||||
Supporters
