Almost four months after the tragic fire that cost the lives of 21 and hospitalized 6 workers, no compensation has been provided for the loss of income to the families concerned. Similarly the family of a worker who died in a fire at the same factory in August 2009 is still waiting for appropriate compensation.
In response to the fire, H&M has commissioned the NGO Save the Children Sweden Denmark (SCSD) to assess the needs of the nearest family members of the deceased workers, and the injured workers. The company decided to focus on the needs of the children and elderly parents, but not to provide general compensation based on the lack of income the family members would have expected until retirement.
H&M has also reported that it has requested all its Bangladesh suppliers to review their safety measures. They also state they have set aside 1 million Swedish Krona (approx. 105.000 euro) for fire prevention measures, in particular hiring experts on electricity safety and promoting fire drills and trainings for workers.
Other international buyers, which includes the Italian company Teddy (brand Terranova), the Turkish company Taha Group (brand LC Waikiki), the Spanish company El Corte Ingles, the French company Provera, and the Canadian company Marks Work Wearhouse, have not taken any concrete steps with regard to compensation thus far.
The moment H&M announced its intention to commission an assessment into the needs of the injured workers and relatives of the deceased workers, the Clean Clothes Campaign urged the company to consult with the unions and workers’ representatives about the minimal requirements of a compensation model.
Although H&M local representatives visited some NGOs and unions to inform them about the planned assessment by Save the Children Sweden Denmark (SCDS), there was no inclusive process to negotiate the compensation model with unions and worker representatives.
The main criticisms of H&M’s proposed compensation model include the following:
- H&M’s proposal does not compensate for the loss of future income of the deceased worker. This would include a calculation on the basis of the most recent salary up to the age of retirement (government employees retire at the age of 60 years)
- H&M’s proposal actually undermines the standard for compensation of the Spectrum workers who were killed in a factory collapse in 2005.
In this case companies agreed to pay pensions to relatives until they die. In addition, recently compensation was paid to the family of a worker at the Matrix Sweater factory who died in the panic following a false fire alarm. This factory was producing for international companies Inditex, Gap and HBC, and the compensation paid was based on loss of income.
Other buyers at Garib and Garib:
Teddy and LC Waikiki announced that they were willing to contribute to the compensation of the victims. However, no concrete proposals have been developed thus far. Provera announced that it was willing to help the families of the victims, but never informed us of how they would do so. El Corte Ingles so far has not given any response regarding compensation. Mark’s Work Wearhouse stopped production at Garib and Garib, reportedly because of the chronic safety problems, after the first fire in August 2009. Finally Ulla Popken never responded to calls, and therefore no other conclusion remains than that they are not taking any responsibility for the death of the Garib and Garib workers.
None of the other companies that confirmed production at Garib and Garib in 2009 and 2010 have yet to agree to attend the ITGLWF meeting. CCC calls upon these buyers to also as soon as possible confirm their attendance at the July 21st meeting.
Garib and Garib buyers invited to round table meeting:
Recenlty ITGLWF has invited H&M and other Garib & Garib buyers to a meeting on July 21st to discuss the Garib and Garib case. H&M has indicated they will attend the meeting, which CCC considers is a positive step. The meeting, scheduled for July 21 in Dhaka, aims to review developments in compensation in Bangladesh; examine the needs of those affected by the fires at Garib & Garib; determine what compensation has been received to date and what further compensation may be required; examine what improvements are needed at the factory; and asertain what lessons can be learned from Garib and Garib.
None of the other companies that confirmed production at Garib and Garib in 2009 and 2010 have yet to agree to attend. CCC calls upon these buyers to also as soon as possible confirm their attendance at the July 21st meeting.
Action for safe factories in Bangladesh:
To prevent further disasters in the Bangladesh garment industry, notorious for its bad safety record, the CCC, the Maquila Solidarity Network (Canada), and the International Labor Rights Forum (USA) have called upon all buyers sourcing garments in Bangladesh to take proactive, sustained, and coordinated measures to help eliminate these systemic problems.
In consultation with Bangladeshi unions and the US-based Worker Rights Consortium, and incorporating proposals developed earlier by the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers Federation (ITGLWF), we have compiled a list of actions that companies sourcing garments from Bangladesh should take within their own supply chain to prevent future tragedies. We are also asking that companies to collectively press the Government of Bangladesh and the BGMEA to take specific actions to address these problems industry-wide in Bangladesh.
Most of the companies approached have responded to this call for action, and are currently engaging in discussions with our organizations regarding a collective approach to ensure that progress is made.
