Labour standards, human rights?

Stranded garment workers in Jordan

By Gomi Senadhira-August 28, 2020

(Specialist in Trade and Development Issues)

Recent news items about the tear gas attack by the Jordanian police on stranded Sri Lankan garment workers in Amman has once again turned the spotlight on the problems faced by the migrant garment workers in Jordan. Unfortunately, the United States and the European Union, the two main proponents of the use of trade policy instruments to uphold the basic labour standards and human rights continue to turn a blind eye to gross violation of the basic rights of these poor migrant garment workers working under conditions similar to those of indentured labourers.

The tear gas attack, last month, by the Jordanian police on Sri Lankan garment workers stuck in their overcrowded dorms without adequate food and water, thousands of miles away from their families and loved ones, illustrates the plight of the migrant garment workers in Jordan. According to the available reports, these workers along with migrant workers from several other Asian countries laid off by their employers with the onset of COVID 19, had remained unemployed for the last five months. Naturally, all of them want to go back to their countries immediately but are unable to do so due to the non-availability of flights.

In the case of Sri Lankan workers, three staff members from the embassy had visited a hostel attached to the garment factories to look into their welfare were held hostage by the workers for over five hours. During the five-hours period the hostages were even forced to eat the food the stranded workers have been eating for the past five months. Finally, the Jordanian police intervened to rescue the hostages had attacked the workers, and had even fired tear gas on them.

 

The Incident and Sri Lanka Bashing

by the Usual Suspects

This incident had triggered fresh round of Sri Lanka bashing by the usual suspects. “Migrant workers … looking to be repatriated to Sri Lanka were teargassed earlier today, as they stand a protest outside the Sri Lankan embassy in the country. Jordanian police reportedly intervened after an escalation between Sri Lankan Embassy authorities and protesters, with the workers fleeing after being tear-gassed” reported the “Tamil Guardian”.

Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice (Sri Lanka bashing business of Charu Lata Hogg et el) tried to hog the limelight by launching an email campaign against the government as illustrated in their post below;

To maximise the damage, these groups have also used websites like that of the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) for their campaign. The CCC in its blog on “How the Coronavirus affects garment workers in supply chains” tagged the Asia Floor Wage Alliance (AFWA) Sri Lanka Coordinator’s discussion on the Globe Tamil’s Facebook page about the situation of Sri Lankan garment workers in Jordan. Quoting AFWP, the CCC also reported “Sri Lankan migrant (garment) workers …. in Jordan, have not been paid wages since April and are not receiving adequate food and water. When they tried to meet Sri Lankan embassy officials, workers were brutally beaten and tear-gassed…. over 20 workers have been hospitalised…. Meanwhile, … women’s rights groups in Sri Lanka and relatives of the stranded migrant workers are currently protesting in front of the Sri Lanka Bureau of Foreign Employment (SLBFE) demanding urgent support for Sri Lankan garment workers in Jordan.”

These were deliberate attempt to defame the government of Sri Lanka as a government which is insensitive to the plight of the poor migrant garment workers. One cannot expect anything better from them. So, we can leave aside the issue of Sri Lanka bashing by these people. Even then, the question “why are Sri Lankan workers in Jordan going hungry?” is a valid one. It needs to be answered. Actually, we need an answer slightly more detailed question, that is;

“Why are stranded migrant garment workers in Jordan going hungry, not been paid wages, brutally beaten and tear-gassed?”

Before I try to do that, let me start with a true story of a migrant worker in the Middle East. Many years ago, when I was posted in Kuwait, my neighbour, a highly paid Filipino engineer, experienced a minor car accident. He had stopped at a traffic light when the car behind him took a little too long to stop and “bumped” his rear bumper. The driver admitted that he misjudged stopping distance. My neighbour requested that the Kuwaiti arrange to pay for the repairs as it was his fault. “No. It was your fault. This is my country. If you were not here, this accident wouldn’t have happened. So, it’s your fault.” the Kuwaiti said very firmly before he drove away into the sunset.

So, as our friendly Kuwaiti said, this teargas attack was the migrant garment workers’ fault. If they were not there this wouldn’t have happened. Actually, I too believe, they should have never been there. Or for that matter, there shouldn’t be a garment industry in Jordan in the first place, for them to be employed in. Jordan, after all, doesn’t have indigenous experience in garment manufacturing or trading, doesn’t grow cotton, or produce textiles. In Jordan, the female participation rate in labour force is very low (garment workforces are predominantly female) and the salaries are relatively high. In other words, Jordan doesn’t have any of those “factors of production” which provide a comparative advantage for her to develop a garment industry. Hence, Jordan is not a country that would usually attract investments from the global garment industry. Not even from those “fly-by-night” types. Yet, garment production has become a major component of Jordan’s export. How did they achieve that miracle?

 

The U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement

(USJFTA) and the Sweatshops

The Jordanian garment industry is a creation of highly generous tariff and other concessions extended by the United States and the European Union and cheap migrant labour from South and Southeast Asia (countries which do not have such preferential tariff in the American market) working under conditions equivalent to those of indentured labourers

The American tariff concession to Jordan, through the United States – Jordan Free Trade Agreement (UJFTA), provide Jordan substantial tariff advantages in certain product categories over more competitive countries in South and Southeast Asia. When the agreement was signed, one of the main incentives for signing it was the possibility of reducing the high level of unemployment in Jordan, which was impacting on her economic, political, and social stability. Given the high female unemployment, the development of the garment industry was touted as an important means of realising that objective.

Though the Jordanian garment industry grew rapidly as a result of the FTA and reached all -important billion-dollar mark by 2006 it did not reduce the unemployment rate in the country as the Jordanian women were not willing to work in garment factories. The industry grew by employing a large migrant workforce (from Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, China, India, or Nepal) who were working under conditions similar to those of indentured labourers. In May 2006, the National Labor Committee (NLC), an American advocacy group for workers’ rights, published a report exposing a series of labour rights and labour law violations in Jordanian garment factories, some of which were at the level of serious human rights abuses. These include, among others, compulsory work shifts that extended from 38 to even 72 hours, inhumane living conditions, beatings, torture, and even rape of young female workers by factory managers.

This report was given wide publicity by American media. “…dismal conditions — of 20-hour days, of not being paid for months and of being hit by supervisors and jailed when they complain…” reported The New York Times. The NLC report also published a list of major brands/ companies that were sourcing from the factories described in its report. It included Wal-Mart, Disney, Jones Apparel, K-Mart, Gloria Vanderbilt, Kohl’s, JC Penney, Liz Clairborne, Victoria’s Secret, Perry Ellis, and Mossimo. This had a devastating impact, particularly on the buyers.

The Jordanian Government was highly concerned about the possibility of losing market share or even the entire industry and acted rapidly to address the allegations. It admitted some weaknesses in the system and, with the assistance of the USAID commissioned a third party report to verify the NLC report. Apparently, his report while confirming many of the NLC’s allegations, had watered down the gravity of most of them. For example, the allegations about sexual harassment, the USAID funded report has stated “could not be confirmed”.

The International Labour Organization too continuously promoted the Jordanian garment industry with major international buyers through their promotional materials and business forums despite many credible reports about inhumane living conditions, beatings, torture, and even rape of young female workers.

To assist Jordan to improve the image of the garment industry, particularly in the eyes of the buyers, the International Labour Organization and the International Finance Corporation, with generous assistance from western donor agencies, set up a shop called, Better Work Jordan (BWJ). The BWJ produced a promotional video on Jordan’s garment industry (Jordan’s Garment Industry: Migrating to Better Work – ILO) painting a rosy picture of the industry. The video even shows an election in a factory to elect worker representatives and comments “it is the first democratic opportunity in which they (the workers) have participated.” In other words, they never had such opportunities in their own countries, namely, Sri Lanka, India, or Bangladesh. This ILO video fails to mention that these migrant workers are not allowed to be full members of the trade unions or whether Jordan has ratified the core ILO convention on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise! How can the ILO justify the application of such double standards, half-truths, and lies to promote the Jordanian garment industry? How can the ILO deliberately mislead buyers? More importantly, how can the ILO mislead these poor workers (particularly young vulnerable girls) with such claims, so that they migrate thousands of miles for “better jobs” and to go hungry, get teargassed, beaten up, and even get raped?

 

Forced labour and modern day slaves

Due to the seriousness of these allegations Jordan was also placed in the US forced labour list and the country report on Jordan confirmed; “Chinese, Bangladeshi, Indian, Sri Lankan, Nepali, and Indonesian men and women encounter conditions indicative of forced labor in a few of the Jordanian garment sector’s factories, including unlawful withholding of passports, delayed payment of wages, forced overtime, and, to a lesser extent, verbal and physical abuse.”

In August 2019, Bangkok based Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW), presented a research report on the working and living conditions for the migrant garment workers in Jordan. The conditions reported were not much different from what was reported in the National Labor Committee report in 2006. The report also claimed, “…in Jordan, woman migrants routinely face sexual harassment and physical assaults by male supervisors.” In an interview with a Bangladesh newspaper on the GAATW report, Bangladeshi workers’ rights activist Nazma Akter correctly summed up the situation in Jordan when she said, “(in) Jordan migrant workers were often treated as modern day slaves.”

Why do major global brands continue to source from Jordan?

Despite such reports, the Jordanian garment industry continues to thrive due to the availability of the preferential tariff in the United States and the European Union and easily manageable indentured workforce. Then, what about those lofty CSR standards of the major buyers. Why do they continue to buy from Jordan? That because the International Labour Organisation the necessary cover at the Annual Buyers’ Forums organised by the Better Work Jordan. Yes, in Jordan the ILO even organise annual business forums! These forums bring together major international buyers, as well as local and international garment sector stakeholders. At these meetings, the ILO- BWJ assures the buyers that the Jordan’s garment industry is a wonderful place for the workers. If not for the ILO’s continued assurances, most of the major international buyers would have walked out of Jordan many years ago.

BWJ’s unified contract

At the Annual Better Work Jordan Buyers’ Forum in 2015, a new unified contract for all migrant workers in Jordan’s garment sector designed by the ILO experts, was proudly unveiled in the presence of the Jordanian trade minister and the American Ambassador. By 2020 the migrant garment workers in Jordan should be covered by these contracts which requires the employer to provide return air ticket as well as with accommodation and meals until his/her travel proceedings are completed. Largely as a result of these measures Jordan was removed from the forced labor list in 2016.

Now, the factories have terminated some of these contracts, and the workers have not been paid wages for many months and they are held up in the hostels without adequate food and water, beaten and teargassed by the Jordanian police, doesn’t ILO- Better Work Jordan to has responsibility to intervene and assist these workers. These workers should be adequately compensated, provided safe accommodation, food, water and medical assistance until their travel proceedings are completed. The ILO and the IFC as the promoters of these contracts and the industry have a greater responsibility and (certainly) more resources than governments of the labour exporting countries to look after these workers’ welfare. After all, if not for them or the BWJ these workers would not have been there to go hungry and to be teargassed.

. The Government of Jordan also has a major responsibility. That certainly does not include brutal police actions. This is not the first time these workers were beaten and teargassed by the Jordanian police. The United States and the European Union have a responsibility to ensure that their attempts to link trade, labour and human rights policies are not mere rhetoric. The buyers also should demonstrate that there is no deviation between rhetoric and reality of what they call “corporate social responsibility” principles. Under the prevailing conditions, those countries and the organisations are in a position to provide assistance to these workers, more than the governments of Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh or Cambodia.

Then the organisations like the Clean Clothes Campaign should have a better fact-check and refrain from adding credibility to fake news circulated by Hogg and others. They should direct their appeals to the governments and the organizations which are responsible for the plight of these migrant workers. For example; the European Commission, the United States, the Jordanian government, the ILO, the leading international clothing brands and the large garment factories which employed these poor workers

Way forward

Finally, as and when supply chains restart fully, they should be radically restructured. Production should be taken to factories closer to where workers live. The supply chains should not be based on models that force workers to migrate thousands of miles away from their homes, that too after paying many thousand rupees, takas, renminbis or rials, to work as indentured labourers, to go hungry and get beaten. The trade instruments,like FTAs, should not be used to suppress human rights and labour rights of these poor workers.