Legally binding employment relationship Archives — Fair Wear Foundation Fair Wear Foundation

Turkey Complaint Maier Sports December 2016

Final report of a complaint at a factory in Turkey supplying Maier Sports — December 2016

The complainant, a textile engineer, alleged having been dismissed without a valid reason after four years of employment. While the complainant was paid severance and notice payments, management said that a reference letter was contingent on signing documents. The complainant took the case to court, based on the sudden and rude manner of dismissal.

Factory management said that the complainant’s way of working had caused problems with the brand. According to Turkish legislation, a dismissal is only possible after a written defense statement is received after dismissal. The worker refused. According to law, the employer should have made further efforts to obtain a written statement.

While the dismissal was not carried out according to law, the employer refused to continue to work relation. Therefore, the worker was entitled to indemnity, which they have received.

Download

Share this on

Myanmar Complaint Jack Wolfskin, Odlo October 2016

Final report of complaint at a factory in Myanmar where Jack Wolfskin and Odlo are sourcing – November 2017

In October 2016, Jack Wolfskin received information that two union leaders had been unlawfully dismissed in September of that year. The union believed that their attempts at starting a union at the factory was the main reason for dismissal. A complaint was filed against the factory with the Twonship Arbitration Body for mediation. When these efforts failed, the case was referred to the regional Arbitration Body. By November, FWF was approached by workers with the complaint that about 15 workers had been pressured to resign for their ties or sympathies with the union.

On 21 November, the regional Arbitration Body ruled that the factory is to reinstate the two workers. On the same day, factory management confirmed its agreement to reinstate the two union leaders immediately, and pay full compensation for the period that they had been dismissed, as well as an investigation into the dismissal of the other 15 workers.

While the investigation was taking place, the two union leaders decided not to accept their reinstatement in solidarity with the rest of the workers that had been dismissed. As the 2 workers were not reinstated, the Ministry of Labour sued the factory for not complying with the Arbitration Council decision of 21 November 2016.

By January 2017, the investigation showed that some, though not all, of the workers had been pressured to resign.

Later, in July 2017, FWF received a further complaint about the inability of workers to form a union. This had less to do with legal requirements than with misconceptions and lack of communication between factory management, union leaders and workers.

On 22 September 2017, after the factory had improved its approach to worker organisation and representation, FWF brokered a meeting between the two union leaders and factory management. Workers and factory management requested that FWF facilitates the meeting, and recognise FWF as an independent party.

By 10 October 2017 all workers had been reinstated. Most workers were satisfied with the outcome and with improvements at the factory level regarding representation. However, further monitoring of freedom of association may be necessary at the factory.

Download

Share this on

Vietnam Complaint Deuter July 2017 Final Report

INITIAL REPORT OF A COMPLAINT AT A FACTORY IN VIETNAM SUPPLYING DEUTER

On 1 July 2017, FWF received a complaint through its local complaints handler from an employee who was employed by the factory. The complainant claimed his and his co-worker’s labour contracts were illegally unilaterally terminated by the factory. The complainant wants the factory to compensate him ( and his co-worker) in accordance with Article 42 of the Labor Code.

FWF decided that the case was admissible on 1 July. Deuter informed the supplier and received a reply immediately. According to management, the complainant (and his co-worker) misbehaved, shouting to and threatening workers and disobeying factory manager’s instructions. Factory sent over payment details of the co-worker. On 13 July, the complainant sent FWF the minutes of the unsuccessful mediation dated 10 July 2017. The minutes noted that the complainant did not agree with the two months of compensation as the factory proposed. The parties were entitled to request the Court to settle the case in accordance with the law.

Following the Court decision, the factory transferred the compensation (41,700,000 VND) to the local government on enforcement of civil judgement on November 6, 2017. Then the local government on enforcement of civil judgement paid this compensation to the complainant on 14 November 2017. The complainant confirmed that he received the compensation with no further complaints and thanked FWF for helping him. HR manager and the complainant also sent the scanned payment records for confirmation.

Download

Share this on

Myanmar Complaint Salewa July 2017

Final report of complaint at a factory in Myanmar where Salewa has production – July 2017

On 11 July 2017, a complainant approached FWF claiming that the factory had recruited them on 22 May and then fired improperly on 06 July. The reasons the factory gave were: that the complainant had used a fake ID to become employed a first time. After the complainant had been made redundant, they returned to apply for work again even though there was a policy of not rehiring former employees.

The union leader present at the meeting, said the complainant was threatened with family members being fired from the factory if the terms of termination were not accepted. The factory gave the complainant notice compensation and the wages corresponding to the number of working days worked in July.

During an audit, the union leader reported the case to FWF, and this was discussed with factory management, who denied there was a non-rehiring policy, or having threatened a worker. The HR manager that FWF spoke to, however, said that there was a verbally communicated policy to not rehire former employees. Further, the HR manager said that the main problem was that the complainant had used a fake ID to get recruited in 2015, and the lie that this implied as the worker was underage.

However, since there is no written policy about not rehiring former employees, and the worker was able to submit a current and valid ID, FWF concluded that the reasons for dismissing the worker a second time did not hold, and the worker could be reinstated, with appropriate compensation.

FWF confirmed that the worker joined the factory on 22 September 2017, and the worker called FWF on 25 September 2017 and said that her terms and conditions of reinstatement were fulfilled. The union leaders are happy with the terms of the reinstatement.

Download

Share this on

Tunisia Complaint Nudie Jeans October 2017

Final report of a complaint in Tunisia at a factory supplying Nudie Jeans — October 2017

The complainant claimed that he often works overtime hours. Due to the new Tunisian law, the worker believes that overtime hours are not that beneficial. Furthermore, he also had problems with his supervisor. Therefore, he proposed to management to change jobs within the factory. Management had not given him a response.

Even before FWF could inform Nudie Jeans, the case had been resolved. FWF had to check several details before forwarding the complaint to Nudie Jeans. In the meantime, management had talked to the worker and agreed to transferring the worker to another job in the factory. The worker kept its level of salary.

The complainant was satisfied with the transfer and wished that the other worker who took his previous job will perform well

Download

Share this on

Bangladesh Complaint Takko September 2017

final report of complaint in Bangladesh at a factory that supplies Takko – September 2017

On 19 September, a worker called FWF’s complaints helpline to report that after some pieces were missing from the target quantity, workers at several departments had been fined. There would be monthly deductions from the workers’ paychecks until the entire sum was paid. This coincided with the Eid holiday and workers were taken aback and questioned whether management should have told them about the deduction before this time, and of course investigated the matter further to establish responsibility before taking such action.

In the immediate aftermath, Takko addressed the issue with the factory. By 25 September, the factory confirmed that it had refunded the workers the amounts that had been deducted from their paychecks. More importantly for the workers, they got a statement from the manager to the effect that they had not been responsible for the missing pieces.

The complainants were satisfied as they got back the taken amount from their salary. Besides having a statement from management as clearance of their blame is also a relief for their future work in the factory

Download

Share this on

India Complaint Odd Molly February 2017

Final report of complaint at a factory in India that supplies Odd Molly – 21 July 2017

On 3 February 2017, a worker contacted FWF’s helpline to complain that work had been offered at a different factory from the same owner in the understanding that employment at the previous factory would be terminated and final payment provided. However, full and final payment has not been received. Further, piece rate workers at the factories were not getting social security benefits, or most of the legal protection that hired workers have, such as notice pay or earned leave.

As the factory was unwilling to cooperate on the complaint and the brand has since stopped business relations, no further remediation can take place. The complaint is closed and remains unsolved.

Download

Share this on

China Complaint Continental Clothing February 2017

Intermediate report of a complaint at a factory in China that supplies Continental Clothing –29 August 2017

On 24 February 2017, a worker at the factory called the complaints line and stated that the factory was overcharging workers on their social security deductions to the tune of 92.2 RMB per month. The worker was told that workers were free to waive the fees, for the higher amount. The complainant requested the factory pay the excess money back to workers and start deducting the correct amount.

The factory claimed they were doing a reimbursement of 3 RMB per day. However, documentation showed that this was related to bonus payments and had no bearing on the social security status of the workers.

The supplier needs to ensure that the correct amount of social security is paid. Furthermore, workers are entitled to receive a back pay for the excess that was paid.The brand needs to verify whether the correct amount of social security is now deducted from the wages and whether workers have received a back pay.

Download

Share this on

Vietnam Complaint Jack Wolfskin, Schöffel July 2017

Final report of a complaint in Vietnam at a factory that supplies Jack Wolfskin and Schöffel — 28 August 2017

On 29 July 2017, a worker who had been employed at the factory until January 2017 called because the factory had not yet made the final salary payment, and was informed that the parent company had not approved of making it, after the worker resigned in December 2016. Also, the worker’s Social Insurance Book has not been returned.

The factory replied that the payment and the return of the book had been delayed due to issues with paperwork. The worker received the outstanding payment in mid-August and was in the process of getting a new book.

Download

Share this on

Tunisia Complaint KOI March 2017

Complaint at a factory in Tunisia where FWF member KOI has production March 2017 – Initial Report

On 12 March 2017, a worker complained that the working conditions at a factory different than their own workplace were very unfavourable, with health and safety issues, high worker turnover, and the lack of long-term contracts.

The case is under investigation.

Download