|
Conclusions and Recommendations
Management in transnational corporations often
claim that they are constrained from ensuring better wages and
conditions of labor for the workers who produce their goods by
their need to make a profit in a highly competitive marketplace.
Clearly, business does require making a profit. But what are the
social and moral limits to profit taking? Corporate codes of conduct,
by specifying minimal labor standards, articulate these limits
to profit taking. But how can these codes be made more effective?
How can corporate codes of conduct be used to promote labor rights?
If management is supportive, codes of conduct can
be effective. For example, Mae Sot Maharacha, a satellite factory
of the Bangkok Rubber Group, employed Burmese workers at wages
below the minimum until two non-governmental organizations, the
Union for Civil Liberty and Burma Issues, pointed out the violation.
Reebok responded by canceling its orders. Occupational health
and safety in many footwear factories has also improved with the
application of corporate codes of conduct. Some of the management
at Wongpaitoon and Siam Unisole have tried to implement the Reebok
codes to improve the working environment. Siam Unisole, for example,
uses Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare officers to check their
factory for excessive noise, light, and heat. The personnel management
teams also engage doctors from government hospitals to give free
weekly medical check-ups to the workers. Periodically, they have
organized health information for the workers on AIDS, occupation
health diseases, drug abuse, and workplace safety.
However, in an anonymous interview, some workers
from the Wongpaitoon factory reported that "the only thing
that is better now is that the factory is cooler." They went
on to say that work rules are now stricter and they have lost
many benefits. They said that the company announced that these
measures were necessary because of their increased expenses associated
with complying with the codes of conduct. Whatever the reason,
manufacturers are cutting costs. Target rates are increasing while
real wage rates are contracting. Before 1997, workers at the Wongpaitoon
factory received several benefits. These included an annual bonus
of 4,212 baht [US$ 120.34] (26 days of pay); a monthly attendance
bonus from 60 to 250 baht [US$ 1.71 to 7.14] (depending on seniority)
for regular attendance; an annual attendance bonus of 1,000 baht
[US$ 28.57]; and medical expenses. Unused medical expenses could
be taken in cash. Since 1998, the bonuses have been eliminated
and unused medical expense accounts are no longer available in
cash. Workers need at least four uniforms per year. Previously,
the employer provided these. Workers are now provided with only
two uniforms and must purchase the other two. None of the workers
interviewed knew the details of Reebok codes of conduct, even
after several years of implementation. Nor could they recall talking
to Reebok human rights staff.
Corporate codes of conduct are not designed to
promote social justice or economic democracy. Codes of conduct
do not address such issues as job training and promotion, job
satisfaction, investment in education and health, human dignity
and satisfaction at work, much less the economic policies upon
which footwear and sporting goods production in Thailand are based.
Nor can codes of conduct prevent transnational corporations from
shifting production to areas where workers are more easily exploited.
Corporate codes of conduct are designed only to protect workers
from the worst excesses of labor intensive production. However,
against the relentless mechanization and dehumanization of the
labor process in the apparel and footwear industries, codes can
not be expected to perform even this function. The companies like
Nike, Reebok and Adidas publish (every six months) a list of all
the factory addresses of all their suppliers and the
levels of orders from each supplier.
While the commitment of transnational and production
managers is essential, ultimately the consumer is the key to the
promotion of labor standards through corporate codes of conduct.
Only with sufficient consumer consciousness, can corporate codes
of conduct be instrumental in transforming labor extraction-oriented
production to human investment-oriented production. Only with
sufficient consumer consciousness, can corporate codes of conduct
be made effective in ensuring that employers have greater commitment
to their labor forces. Rather than attempting to extract maximum
work with minimal investment, employers might be persuaded to
invest in workers for greater productivity.
Transnational corporations and their producers should be more
responsive to workers rights. Transnational corporations should
give their producers written guarantees for long term contracts.
The uncertainty of the month by month contract system encourages
employers to extract as much as possible from workers. Transnational
corporations should be more diligent in ensuring that their manufacturers
respect workers' rights, especially the right to a living wage,
to freedom of association, and to collective bargaining. However,
if all of the cost of implementing codes of conduct is transferred
to the producer, there will be early and high limits to the degree
to which exploitation can be reduced.
Labor costs should be calculated upon a realistic
assessment of the cost of living in the area where employees work
and live. The minimum wage is inadequate, especially in and around
Bangkok. Many workers can only afford to work at the minimum wage
because they receive family support. Workers should be given greater
job security. The working environment should conform to occupational
health and safety standards. Workers should be provided with maternity
leave and childcare facilities. They should not be penalized for
having children.
Corporate codes of conduct alone are not sufficient
to improve labor standards. While they articulate admirable ideas,
corporate codes of conduct are so unspecific as to be impossible
to effect. Moreover, without effective implementation and monitoring,
codes of conduct amount to little. They must be accompanied by
vigorous consumer campaigns and truly independent monitoring.
Employers should cooperate with independent monitoring teams.
Employers should promote workers' education programs related to
labor rights, or at least permit other parties to teach workers
about their rights. No programs or mechanisms for social justice
including codes of conduct will be effective unless workers know
their rights. Workers must be granted their right to organize,
to form and join trade unions, and to bargain collectively. Nike,
Adidas and Gap must pressure the Par Garment Company to withdraw
the court case against the thirty union committee and its members
and allow these workers to return to their former positions. Nike
and Reebok should ensure that the workers in Lian Thai are not
dismissed after applying to be union members.
Corporate codes of conduct must be assessed within
the context of the commodification of life, increasing income
inequality, exorbitant salaries and benefits for senior management,
and declining real wages. When asked what recommendations they
had for improving labor conditions, workers report that most of
all they would like to be treated as if they are human beings.
|
Previous Section:
|
Return to:
|
Next Section:
|
Top
|
