Background to Fortune Garments Urgent Appeal

In May 2004 over 1000 of workers at the Fortune Garment and Woollen Knitting factory signed with their thumbprints a petition requesting a pay increase. The International Labour Organisation had monitored the factory twice in recent years and found numerous workers rights violations on both visits.

The worker’s demands were denied and they went on strike in June 2004.

Between June 2004 and August 2005 19 union leaders and 120 union members were dismissed and replaced by new non-unionised workers. At least 11 union activists faced charges in the criminal and civil courts as part of this serious anti-union campaign. The man identified by the factory management as the leader during the strike, Mr Sok Vy, was singled out and prosecuted on charges of incitement and criminal damage, despite the fact no evidence was presented against him at court and that witnesses claimed the strike had been entirely peaceful.


Following local and international pressure a partial agreement was reached, with the charges against the 11 union activists dropped and an agreement reached on issues around piece rate and wages. A further meeting was scheduled for late 2005 but failed to take place and in the meantime conditions are once again worsening at the factory.

On 21st February 2006 a further union activist, Mr Sao Sokea, was dismissed. The factory claims his dismissal was because they had no work for him, but given that he was the only person at that time working as a lot counter this claim seems unlikely. Despite this apparent ‘lack of work’ the factory continues to employ 30-40 casual workers per day.

These actions represented a severe violation of the workers' rights to freedom of association and to collective bargaining. Union leaders, above all Mr S, their representative in the original dispute, were consistently singled out and threats of dismissal and legal action were used to attempt to suppress their union activities.

Labels on clothes produced in the factory during the period of the dispute include those of several Philip Green brands: Topshop, Dorothy Perkins, Wallis, and Bhs. Other UK companies including Warehouse were also sourcing from the factory. LBL believes these companies have a responsibility to defend the rights of the workers producing for their labels.

LBL called on these companies to:

Contact the factory management and put pressure on it to,

  • Reinstate all of the dismissed union activists to their original positions and seniority and pay compensation for wages lost
  • Begin negotiations with the C.CAWDU union to allow the workers to organise and speak up collectively for their rights.

Ensure that they have,

  • A code of conduct that is adequately monitored and independently verified to ensure such issues are picked up and properly dealt with in a timely manner
  • Purchasing practices that are compatible with the implementation of internationally recognised rights for workers.

 

Sam Maher

Sam Maher

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Labour behind the label coordinates The UK platform of the clean Clothes campign
The clean clothes campaign 10-12 picton streen, bristol bs6 5qa, UK T +44 (0) 117 944 1700
A not-for-profit company Registered in England No 4173634