Kevin Rowan column
Dec 11 2006 By Kevin Rowan, The Journal
Maximising the benefits and minimising the consequences of globalisation is the inherent lingua franca of the current government.
Rightly so, there are precious few elements in our day that aren't in some way affected by global economic, social and environmental forces. The starkest consequences of the global economy are not most harshly felt here in the UK, however.
As War on Want's report, Fashion Victims, showed last Friday, the cheap clothes on offer from some of our big High Street names, are produced through the most vicious exploitation of workers. Primark, Tesco and Asda have all made public commitments to the payment of a living wage to suppliers - commonly calculated to be a minimum £22 a month in Bangladesh. Yet starting wages in the factories researched for War on Want's report were as little as £8 a month. Even better-paid sewing machine operators receive only £16 a month.
These retailers have also pledged that their suppliers must not require workers to work more than 48 hours a week on a regular basis, and they should have at least one day off in seven on average.
But workers interviewed for War on Want's report can put in up to 96 hours a week and often lose their day off. Some factory owners have forced staff to work up to 140 hours a month overtime, often unpaid, or face dismissal.
If we are to protect UK workers from the severest consequences of globalisation, namely the dramatic downward pressure on wages, terms and conditions, we must also take some responsibility in acting against the exploitation of workers elsewhere.
The experiences endured in Bangladesh would simply not be tolerated here, they are no more acceptable anywhere else.
We should set minimum standards, including protection against the exploitation of all workers, through international agreements underpinned by an independently monitored commitment to core labour standards.
Increasingly, we are seeing the `Fair Trade' logo on products that are imported into the UK, this trade mark is often associated with the reality of the `organic' claims around the item being bought, perhaps we should apply it to all goods, awarded on the basis that it has been produced and brought to market in a way that does not exploit labour or the environment.
If products do not carry the fair trade label, we can assume the worst and go elsewhere.
