Cambodian garment workers uneasy as factories shift to shorter-term contracts that increase pressure, while a labour standards group reports excessive hours and banned solvents that contribute to fainting
PHNOM PENH : On July 25, around 50 workers at the Huey Chuen garment factory in the outskirts of the Cambodian capital were admitted to hospital after collapsing on the job. It was the second such incident at the factory this year, after 200 women fainted in April. The factory supplies footwear for the German sportswear giant Puma, which promptly ordered an investigation by the US-based Fair Labor Association (FLA).
The group concluded that there was a “strong likelihood” the April faintings were a result of excessive work hours. It also identified a long list of occupational health and safety shortcomings, including the use of hazardous solvents such as toluene — a substance thought to cause damage to the central nervous system — which are banned under Puma’s regulations.
On the surface, the future of Cambodia’s garment industry appears rosy. It employs an estimated 300,000 people and has seen solid growth since the financial crisis of 2008-09. The Ministry of Economy and Finance reports garments account for more than four-fifths of Cambodia’s total exports and a massive 16% of its GDP. Recent wage hikes in Bangladesh and China — two key garment producers — have opened up new opportunities for Cambodian manufacturers, increasing the sector’s relative competitiveness.
But the industry has also had to weather some recent storms. Nationwide strikes in September 2010 involved an estimated 100,000 workers agitating for an increased minimum wage — the country’s largest-ever wave of industrial action; fainting spells such as those at the Huey Chuen factory have become more common (or at least more public); and unionists complain of the government crackdowns and the lax enforcement of labour standards.
A new report from Yale University Law School argues that the key to Cambodia’s competitiveness as a garment producer is the issue of workers’ rights. The report, titled “Tearing Apart at the Seams”, claims that a major reason for the increased instability in the apparel sector is garment factories’ gradual shift from long-term contracts — or undetermined-duration contracts (UDCs) — to fixed-duration contracts (FDCs). It claims the rise in FDCs has increased insecurity for workers, stoked industrial disputes and threatens to jeopardise Cambodia’s key advantage as a garment producer — its reputation.
Since the 1990s, Cambodia’s garment industry has successfully positioned itself as an ethical alternative to the sweatshops of Bangladesh or Indonesia. “[T]he competitiveness of the Cambodian garment industry and the seriousness with which the Cambodian government approaches its domestic and international legal obligations to uphold workers’ rights must be viewed as inextricably linked,” the report argues. The use of FDCs, it adds, threatens to “destroy Cambodia’s reputation — its main competitive advantage over lower-cost competitors”.
Ken Loo, secretary-general of the Garment Manufacturers Association in Cambodia, dismissed the report’s findings, saying the increased use of FDCs was a result of the sporadic nature of garment orders, which are often granted for short terms of three or six months.
“The reason [factories] have to do this is because they have no security from buyers,” he said. “If the factories only have security for three months or six months, how can they offer open-ended contracts to the workers? This is the way the industry operates at the moment.”
In the meantime, he said workers were not being forced to sign contracts and accepted them according to their own free will.
Others, however, say the motive is more self-interested. Moeun Tola, head of the labour programme at the Community Legal Education Centre, a Phnom Penh-based legal aid group, said FDCs allowed factories to avoid seniority bonuses and use the implied threat of joblessness to extract additional overtime hours from workers.
“They feel they are not permanent workers,” he said of those signed up under the short-term contracts. “If they make any complaints, even if their wage is deducted or miscalculated their contracts will not be renewed.”
Critics also point to an increased crackdown on organised labour. Following the strikes of September 2010, Cambodian police reportedly prosecuted union leaders for organising the action, while hundreds of union members were suspended from work in apparent punishment for bringing production to a halt. In an open letter to international garment purchasers, the Paris-based International Federation for Human Rights expressed concerns about the government’s response to what it said were “lawful” strikes.
“That the Cambodian government decided to take such repressive and threatening actions against those involved casts serious doubt about its commitment to respect labour standards and workers’ rights,” the lettestated. FIDH went on to write that the actions, by undermining the working conditions in Cambodia’s garment factories, “makes it difficult for international firms to uphold their commitments to ensure respect of workers’ rights throughout their supply chain and thereby to avoid reputational risks”.
Mr Loo of GMAC said he was optimistic that despite recent controversies over fainting workers — something he said was hard to put down to working conditions alone — the industry has a bright future. “The foundations of the industry have always been pretty strong. I don’t see anything changing in the near future,” he said. Mr Tola said, however, that despite a modest increase in the minimum wage from $56 to $61 last year, the mostly female garment workforce continued to share cramped rooms and often go without meals in order to save money. He said a race to the bottom on labour standards would be to the industry’s long-term detriment and the government had to ensure workers were granted basic rights.
[Published in the Bangkok Post, July 22, 2011]
