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
Final report of a complaint filed at a factory in China that supplies FWF member Haglöfs – 7 August 2017
On 17 January 2017, a worker approached FWF’s complaints hotline and said that workers had not received wages for November and December 2016. The worker alleged that concerns had been communicated to the factory management, but that no clear answer as to why there was a delay and when the money would be paid were forthcoming.
FWF asked Haglofs to contact the factory and get a response to the complaint from factory management. The supplier indicated that it had paid the workers on the same day that it had received the complaint. This was supported by documents showing the bank transfers. The complainant confirmed that the payment of the wages of November and December 2016 were paid on January 18, 2017.
The case is closed, to the satisfaction of the complainant.
Download
Complaint at a factory in Tunisia where Bierbaum Proenen has production – Initial Report
On 21 July, 2017, a worker currently employed by a factory where FWF member Bierbaum Proenen has production claimed that management had refused to increase wages according to the new directive by the Tunisian government. Also, that after some pieces disappeared from the work floor and were later discovered, management launched an investigation that included searching workers. Allegedly, if workers refused, they would get their pay docked. A worker who tried to negotiate with management on behalf of all workers was suspended after a heated discussion on the matter. After the discussion, factory management immediately contacted FWF and gave its version of events.
The complaint is under investigation.
Download
Initial report of a complaint at a factory in Vietnam supplying Jack Wolfskin and Schöffel
On 29 July 2017, FWF received a complaint from an employee who was employed at the factory until January 2017. The complainant called the helpline to address two issues. First, she resigned from the factory in December 2016 but claims the factory has not yet paid her remaining salary, even though she has contacted the factory HR personnel many times. Second, she does not understand what needs to happen to settle her social insurance book, as she is getting mixed messages from the factory and social insurance agency.
FWF decided that the case is admissible on 31 July 2017. The authenticity of this case is still under investigation.
Download
Final report of a complaint at a factory in Vietnam supplying Vaude
ON 16 April 2017, FWF received a complaint from a worker who was employed by the factory until February 2017. The complaint is related to the unused annual leave payment for 2015 and 2016. The employee took maternity leave for 6 months from 25 February 2016. In addition she took unpaid leave for 3 months after which she resumed work in December 2016. After that, she has applied a resignation letter with giving prior notice of 45 days before ending of contract. According to the employee she did not receive the unused annual leave payment in 2015 and 2016. According to the employee, she worked 3 months in 2016, so she should be entitled to at least 3 days of unused annual leave.
FWF decided that the case is admissible on 19 April 2017. VAUDE informed the factory management directly and received a reply within one week. Both VAUDE and factory management acknowledge managing the payments in time has been a challenge and are working hard to improve this. FWF’s complaints handler conducted additional research to confirm whether Article 961 of the labour code that deals with the timely payment of salary also applies to annual leave payments. From the interview with the complainant, FWF’s complaint handler learned the factory did not pay the severance allowance for the working time served when she did not pay unemployment insurance contributions as prescribed by law (such as probation period, maternity leave). Even though she did not raise this during the initial complaint, as she was not aware of this right, it is included in the remediation requirements.
Based on the review of the Labour Code, the complaint was found grounded. The employee is entitled to unused leave payment and severance allowance, which the factory must pay. In the evening of 25 July, the complainant confirmed having received the payment of annual leave for 2015 and 2016 with interest. The complainant was positive about the role of FWF’s complaint system, and said the result was better than expected.
Download
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 is admissible on 1 July. The factory is an active supplier of Deuter, members of FWF. The authenticity of this complaint is still under investigation.
Download
Initial report of a complaint at a factory in Morocco supplying Greiff
On March 26, 2017, FWF received a complaint from a worker currently employed at the factory. In October 2016 an FWF audit took place at a Moroccan supplier of Greiff. The report showed issues concerning payment of wages, social security and documentation. Greiff and the supplier had worked on remediation of these issues. On March 26, 2017, a worker contacted FWF with a complaint that contained similar issues. According to the complainant, the company stopped the payment of social security contributions to social security, actual working hours and work recorded on the pay-slip do not correspond. In addition, the time for breastfeeding is still not paid by the company, and the workers claim that there is a problem with the calculation of the income tax. Finally, workers are fined by deducting 3 working days of their salary for anyone who chews gum, speaks while working or speaks on the telephone (even when they contact family in the case of overtime).
FWF decided that the case is admissible on March 28, 2017, and informed Greiff. Greiff contacted the supplier and asked for a reply. Factory management confirmed several issues, like giving penalties to workers and the fact that workers are not free to go to the toilet. At the same time, factory management denied illegal practices concerning wages and social security. On May, 3 2017 an on-site investigation took place by the FWF local complaints handler and a documents inspector.
During the day of the investigation, management confirmed all issues raised by the complainants, which was also confirmed by worker interviews and documentation. In addition,two trainees were working on the day of the investigation. They did not earn the legal minimum wage as required by law. Also, factory management had changed the phone number of the FWF complaints handler on the FWF Code of Labour Practices posted in the factory. Following the investigation, factory management informed the FWF complaints handlers that they are setting up a production schedule with all their customers. Furthermore, they will look into the costs and set up a system of standard minutes per piece. Management will stop working hours of more than 191 hours per month. FWF submitted a list of suggestions for remediation. The case is still under remediation.
Download
Initial report of a complaint at a factory in Vietnam supplying Jack Wolfskin & Schöffel
On 29 June, 2017, FWF received a complaint from an employee who is employed by the factory. The complainant stated the following:
– Workers have to work during lunchtime.
– Workers have to work overtime from 17:00 to 18:00/19:00 without time recording and no adequate payment. The factory has locked the gate during overtime hours so workers cannot refuse overtime and go home. The factory does not pay the legal premium when workers worked overtime after 17:00 or on Sundays.
– Pregnant workers and workers who are breastfeeding are not allowed to leave early (at 3:00 PM).
– The factory pays piece salary to workers. According to the complainant, the unit price for piece-salary is low, so most of workers are paid top-up to 4,200,000VND/month. He/she thinks his/her salary is low because the salary for new workers and seniority workers is not that different.
– When the customers visit/audit the factory, all of the interviewed workers are trained on how to answer the interview.
– The union chairwoman is Vice General Director, so nobody can raise any questions or complaints to the union.
FWF decided that the case is admissible on 1st of July 2017. The factory is an active supplier of Jack Wolfskin and Schöffel, members of FWF. The authenticity of this complaint is still under investigation.
Download
Complaint at a factory in Vietnam supplying Vaude
ON 16 April 2017, FWF received a complaint from a worker who was employed by the factory until February 2017. The complaint is related to the unused annual leave payment for 2015 and 2016. The employee took maternity leave for 6 months from 25 February 2016. In addition she took unpaid leave for 3 months after which she resumed work in December 2016. After that, she has applied a resignation letter with giving prior notice of 45 days before ending of contract. According to the employee she did not receive the unused annual leave payment in 2015 and 2016. According to the employee, she worked 3 months in 2016, so she should be entitled to at least 3 days of unused annual leave.
FWF decided that the case is admissible on 19 April 2017. The case is relevant to the following labour standards of FWF’s Code of Labour Practices – Payment of a living wage. The authenticity of the complaint is still under investigation.
Download
Final report of a complaint at a factory in India supplying Odd Molly
On 28 December 2016, FWF received a complaint from a worker who recently left the factory. The complainant claimed that management informed him/her on 26th December that his/her work was no longer needed at the company. He/she was asked to sign a resignation letter in order to receive his/her final payment, but did not receive a receipt or breakdown of this payment. He/she believes that not all money owed has been paid.
FWF informed Odd Molly about the case. The factory only replied on 3rd March 2017. FWF verified the shared document (full and final payment receipt) and discussed management’s response with the complainant who had since started working at another factory and was not interested in pursuing the complaint further. The investigation revealed that overtime was likely not being paid at the proper rate.
FWF recommends the following points for remediation:
– Legal procedures must be followed in case the factory wishes to dismiss/terminate a contract.
– Overtime must always be paid at double rate. The factory should pay outstanding overtime wages to the complainant.
Download
