Oxfam logo
The Future is Equal

Bangladesh

What She Makes – Brand tracker

Woman sitting on bed with 'brand tracker' text

IT IS POSSIBLE TO PAY THE WOMEN WHO MAKE OUR CLOTHES ENOUGH MONEY TO LIVE WITH DIGNITY

There are no valid reasons why brands shouldn’t do everything they can to ensure that living wages are paid to the women in their supply chains. The women make the clothes, the brands make millions of dollars, but the women continue to live in poverty. This isn’t right.

The What She Makes campaign is tracking the actions taken by the most popular brands being sold in Aotearoa New Zealand. We started with six well-known clothing brands. We want to create a race to the top by celebrating the companies that show leadership in this area and highlighting the gaps where brands need to improve. Each brand’s progress is tracked on their living wage journeys, based on publicly-available information. Explore below to see what some of your favourite brands are doing to create a fairer fashion industry.

We need your voice to make the most impact. Let these brands know you expect more from them.

Oxfam is willing to help brands on each step of their journey because we care about #WhatSheMakes

SIGN THE PLEDGE

Brand Tracker
1
Get the
basics right
2
Create a
plan
3
Pay a
living wage
Make a
commitment		 Be
transparent		 Separate
labour costs		 Create a
plan		 Pay a living
wage		 Demand
action

Make a commitment:

Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have been working towards a higher wage structure through a roadmap that aims to close the gap to a living wage. In their most recent sustainability report, Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have made an explicit comment to support a living wage by working with their suppliers to meet the living wage benchmark. The latest publication of their 2022 Sustainablity Report includes a clear definition of a living wage, milestones and timeframes, as well as a commitment to reporting results annually. These are strong indicators of a credible, public commitment to working towards living wages in the supply chain.

Be transparent:

Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have not made the full list of their Tier 1 suppliers and other important details about their sourcing factories available publicly. Partial lists of the brands’ suppliers can be accessed online. These lists however do not add up to the number of suppliers indicated on the supplier map on their website, which only shows the number of suppliers the two brands have in each country. The partial lists themselves provide information on the names and addresses of some of the factories, the number of workers, the percentage of women working in each of those factories and even the size of the factories. Whilst this is a good start, regrettably this information is only available for some of the factories from which these two brands source their clothes. These lists also do not include the date on when they were last updated and reviewed. To achieve complete visibility and transparency of their Tier 1 suppliers, key to ensuring ethical supply chains and fair treatment of workers, Glassons and Hallenstein Bros will need to: publish a comprehensive list of their Tier 1 suppliers, include a statement that it is a complete list of their Tier 1 suppliers, and indicate how often the list will be updated and reviewed.

Make a commitment:

Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have been working towards a higher wage structure through a roadmap that aims to close the gap to a living wage. In their most recent sustainability report, Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have made an explicit comment to support a living wage by working with their suppliers to meet the living wage benchmark. The latest publication of their 2022 Sustainablity Report includes a clear definition of a living wage, milestones and timeframes, as well as a commitment to reporting results annually. These are strong indicators of a credible, public commitment to working towards living wages in the supply chain.

Be transparent:

Glassons and Hallenstein Bros have not made the full list of their Tier 1 suppliers and other important details about their sourcing factories available publicly. Partial lists of the brands’ suppliers can be accessed online. These lists however do not add up to the number of suppliers indicated on the supplier map on their website, which only shows the number of suppliers the two brands have in each country. The partial lists themselves provide information on the names and addresses of some of the factories, the number of workers, the percentage of women working in each of those factories and even the size of the factories. Whilst this is a good start, regrettably this information is only available for some of the factories from which these two brands source their clothes. These lists also do not include the date on when they were last updated and reviewed. To achieve complete visibility and transparency of their Tier 1 suppliers, key to ensuring ethical supply chains and fair treatment of workers, Glassons and Hallenstein Bros will need to: publish a comprehensive list of their Tier 1 suppliers, include a statement that it is a complete list of their Tier 1 suppliers, and indicate how often the list will be updated and reviewed.

Make a commitment:

Since 2013, when H&M first made its public commitment to pay a living wage, the brand has been actively working on its wage strategy and improving the way they do business with its suppliers. While H&M has not succeeded in paying a living wage yet, their commitment to continue what they have started is evident. Their commitment to a living wage, which includes details on what they have achieved so far and what they are working on next, is outlined clearly on their website, and in their code of ethics and sustainability statements. However, H&M still needs to clearly state how they define a living wage, beyond “meeting the basic needs.” H&M is also a member of the Action, Collaboration, Transformation multi-stakeholder initiative that actively works toward the payment of living wages in their supply chain together with other clothing brands.

Be transparent:

H&M has excellent transparency about who makes their clothes and has shared details of both their Tier1 and Tier 2 suppliers. They review and update their supplier list every month, and provides all of the key details such as factory names, locations, parent company, number of workers and share of women employed in factories, and even the status of worker representation. H&M have also noted that their transparency is aligned with the requirements of the Transparency Pledge, which sets the international minimum standard for supply chain disclosure. H&M’s commitment and practice of disclosing full supplier transparency are commendable and show the other brands that this is possible. Way to go, H&M!

Make a commitment:

Kathmandu has provided a definition of a living wage on its website, but it does not include crucial elements of a living wage, like being able to afford a decent standard of living and provision for unexpected events. They have also acknowledged that a regular work week shall not exceed 48 hours in its Code of Conduct. While they have not explicitly committed to working towards a living wage, their membership with the Fair Labour Association (FLA), shows Kathmandu’s willingness to advance living wages in the supply chain. Kathmandu’s approach to living wages follows recommendations from the FLA workplace code of conduct. They require suppliers to progressively realise a level of compensation that meets workers’ basic needs if current wages are insufficient. This is a start. To make their commitment credible, Kathmandu needs to specify a timeframe and milestones on how these will be achieved, and show how they will transparently report on progress.

Be transparent:

We found that Kathmandu has excellent transparency of its final stage production suppliers. The supplier list is easily accessible from the website and on Open Supply Hub. It includes the most important details about their sourcing factories including factory names, locations, parent company, number of workers and even the product types. They have also committed to regularly review and update this list every 6 months. Kathmandu is also working on making available details of their Tier 2 suppliers. Awesome!

Make a commitment:

lululemon has adopted the Global Living Wage Coalition’s definition of a living wage and stated how the brand sees a living wage, but so far, this has not been reflected in their Vendor Code of Ethics. lululemon also needs to integrate the concept of families in their definition. Also, as part of their ongoing accreditation with the Fair Labour Association (FLA), we acknowledge lululemon’s ongoing work to advance living wages in the supply chain. lululemon’s approach follows recommendations from the FLA workplace code of conduct. According to their 2021 impact report, they aim to be accredited by the FLA by 2024. Their Vendor Code of Ethics requires suppliers to progressively realise a level of compensation that meet workers’ basic needs and some discretionary income if current wages are insufficient to do so. This is good – but lululemon still needs to detail a timeline and milestones, and make an explicit commitment to a living wage.

Be transparent:

Based on the brand’s latest supplier list (March 2023), we found that lululemon has excellent transparency of the factories they source from. The brand includes the most important details such as factory names, locations and addresses, parent company, number of workers and breakdown by gender, sourcing channel, and the date when their list is reviewed and updated. They update their list every six months, with the latest list reviewed in March and published in April 2023. The list is easily accessible from their website and from Open Supply Hub. We also note that there is a statement that it is a complete list of the brand’s tier-one suppliers, and includes 75% of tier-two suppliers. We laud Lululemon’s efforts in having full transparency to the factories they source from, as this is one of the crucial foundations of ethical supply chains and fair treatment of workers. Great work!

Make a commitment:

Macpac has provided a strong and credible commitment to a living wage. Macpac has indicated all the required elements of a living wage, including a clear definition of what a living wage is that is enough for the workers and their families to live with dignity, earned in a standard work week of no more than 48 hours. Macpac also includes measurable milestones with a timeframe. They have committed to publicly report on the progress of their living wage journey. It is a compelling commitment from Macpac to the wellbeing of the people who make their clothes and that of their families.


Be transparent:

Macpac has excellent transparency of its Tier 1 trade partners. The supplier list is easily accessible on their website. It includes the most important details such as factory names, locations and addresses, and the number of workers. Macpac has also provided information on the percentage of women making clothes in each of their factories. Macpac has been transparent in classifying the nature of the contract each of the suppliers has with Macpac and has committed to reviewing and updating information on their Tier 1 trade partners list on a six-monthly basis. Bravo Macpac!

BRAND TRACKER

What She Makes brand tracker

Click the ‘demand action’ megaphone icon to tell each brand what you think about their commitment! When we join together and make our voices heard, we show these major brands we want the women who make our clothes to be paid enough to afford a basic and dignified standard of living.

Oxfam Aotearoa will release each brand’s status for Be transparent in 2023, for Step 2 in 2024, and Step 3 in 2025/2026.

How we track their journey

We will give brands a star rating based on a 5-star scale. The number of stars a brand will get will depend on how the elements of the brand’s milestones meet Oxfam’s requirements. We also include an explanation under each brand to give context behind the rating.

How we measure progress

We need brands to signify their intention to change the lives of the women who make their clothes and make a public, credible commitment. A credible commitment to a living wage should include a clear definition of what a living wage is, measurable and verifiable milestones, and a timeline. By not committing to a living wage, brands allow poverty wages to be paid to the women who make our clothes.

Brands need to publish where they source their clothes from and to know where they need the changes to happen. If brands are not transparent about their sourcing, there is no way for us to know if human rights are being violated. They need to disclose their suppliers, including factory names and addresses, parent companies, number of workers and breakdown by gender, and types of products made, so we know where our clothes are being made.

We ask brands to separate labour costs in price negotiations. This way, it will be easier to identify if the wages being paid to the women who make our clothes correspond to a living wage or not. It also allows for a price negotiation that does not affect workers’ wages.

Within 12 months of making a commitment, brands should publish a plan on how they will pay a living wage. This plan should include a step-by-step strategy with measurable milestones and a timeframe. We also encourage brands to develop it in consultation with workers’ representatives, factory management and other stakeholders.

Now we get to the best part. If the brands have diligently followed the journey, paying a living wage is the logical next step. We expect brands to pay a living wage within four to six years from making a commitment.

Engaging with the brands

We’ve reached out to these brands and asked them to join us on a journey to a living wage. We provide them with technical guidance and knowledge and support them in addressing different challenges in paying a living wage to their supply chain. We have developed a Brand Guide and have communicated what the campaign expects from them. We will continue to demand action from brands and support them to succeed in paying a living wage to the women who make our clothes.

Image with fabric scrap

Oxfam Aotearoa does not endorse nor have any affiliation with the companies that are featured in this campaign. Oxfam Aotearoa acknowledges that the copyright in the logos is the property of these companies.

 

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

All images by Fabeha Monir, except where stated otherwise. 

What She Makes – The situation

The situation, woman in blue

Clothing brands sold in New Zealand are keeping the women who make our clothes in poverty.

No matter where we live, we all deserve to live with dignity. We deserve to live in a decent shelter that doesn’t leak when it rains, to eat nutritious food every day and have enough clothes of their own. We want our children to finish their education and thrive. We want meaningful work with businesses that treat us well and pay us a living wage.

But this is not the case for the women overseas who make our clothes. Did you know that the minimum wage in some countries does not even cover the basic costs to live?

• I am worried about winter because we do not have enough warm clothes. I made a lot of jackets for western brands, but I cannot afford to buy a sweater for my four-year-old daughter. – Irin, 22
WSM Testimonials - Sima
WSM Testimonials - Jhorna
Irin testimonial
Sima testimonial
Jhorna testimonial

Out of the 75 million women garment workers around the world, only 2% are paid a living wage. The vast majority of women earn poverty wages despite working long hours – up to six days a week, twelve hours a day. Most have to choose between feeding their families or having a dry, safe home.

But we know that a better life is possible for the women who make our clothes. The problem is that companies like Kathmandu, Glassons, Macpac, Hallenstein Bros, Lululemon and H&M allow poverty wages to be paid to the women who make the clothes they make millions off. But they can take responsibility. Other companies such as Cotton On, Country Road and Gorman have taken responsibility – we asked them to make a commitment to do better, and they did. Together, we can get all the companies that sell clothes in New Zealand to do the same.

Across the world, people like you are standing up for the women who make our clothes, demanding that they are paid a living wage. More than 150,000 people have pledged to stand with the women who make our clothes and demand a life of dignity for them.

You can join them.

There is no good reason why women and their families have to choose between rent or food. There are no good reasons companies pay these women less than enough for a dignified life.

Together, we have the power to get the women who make our clothes a living wage, so they have enough to live in a decent home, provide for their loved ones, and watch their children flourish.

SIGN THE PLEDGE
A woman holds a shirt

The basics

Fashion companies earn billions in profits every year, thanks to the women who make the clothes they sell. We know that the cost of paying a living wage can be easily absorbed by these companies.

We would like you to join us and the women who make our clothes by demanding that brands uphold human rights and pay a living wage. We’re starting with 6 well-known brands in New Zealand: Kathmandu, Macpac, Glassons, Hallenstein Bros, lululemon and H&M. These companies have more than enough capacity to ensure living wages are paid to these women.

Oxfam doesn’t believe the cost of a living wage should be put on consumers. These brands make enough profit to pay a living wage. They can afford it without transferring the responsibility to the customers.

Oxfam does not advocate for boycotts, as this may result in workers losing their jobs. The garment industry is an important part of the economy in many low-income countries, and we want this to remain the case.

Instead, we want to see changes in how brands currently do business. We want them to make sure they do not exploit workers by allowing poverty wages to be paid to make their clothes. 

We want people to earn enough so they can put food on their table and live decently, together with their families. We urge you to use your power as a consumer and tell companies that you care about the workers who produce their clothing and ask them to pay a living wage.

The campaign calls on all brands to ensure that the workers making their clothes are paid a living wage. As a start, we are working to influence six brands who could model the journey for other New Zealand brands to follow. We have chosen well-known, high-revenue, and public companies selling their clothes here in Aotearoa. By working with the best-known brands here in New Zealand, we encourage a “race to the top” on wages for the women who make our clothes. We look forward to engaging more companies in the future.

Absolutely! Our policy asks are aligned with many international legal instruments and standards, including:

  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights
  • International Labour Organisation conventions
  • United Nations Guiding Principle on Business and Human Rights
  • OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains in the Garment and Footwear Sector
  • Fair Labour Association Workplace Code of Conduct
  • Transparency Pledge
  • Clean Clothes Campaign

You can learn more about the garment industry and the women who make our clothes by checking out our Resources page.

Living wage vs minimum wage

A living wage is not a luxury but rather a minimum amount that all working people need to escape poverty. It is a basic human right that affords workers to live with dignity.

A living wage needs to be earned in a standard work week (no more than 48 hours) and covers a decent standard of living for the worker and their family.

A decent standard of living includes food, water, housing, energy, healthcare, clothing, childcare, education and transportation. It also includes some savings that can be put aside for unexpected events, such as a global pandemic.

The importance of paying a living wage to the women who make our clothes is now more critical than ever. With the compounding impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, climate crisis, and skyrocketing cost of living prices, it is high time that brands ensure that living wages are paid to the women they make millions off. Brands have the power and responsibility to make sure their workers are paid enough not just to survive, but thrive.

There are various ways to estimate the living wage for a specific place, but the two key methods most relevant to the garment supply chain are the Anker Methodology and the Asia Floor Wage. Both provide a clear pathway for businesses to move forward on living wages. Both calculation methods are credible, with the Asia Floor Wage usually providing slightly higher figures due to differences in detail, approach and calculation.

The difference between Asia Floor Wage and Anker is due to the difference in assumptions and methodology. For example, Asia Floor Wage is based on a standard 3,000 calorie intake per day, a family size of two adults and two children, and one wage earner. On the other hand, Anker uses country or area-specific data and demographics to determine the calorie requirements, family size and the number of earning members in a family.

Whichever method companies use, there are some fundamentals that all methods have in common.

A living wage is the amount required to cover a decent standard of living for a worker and their family.

Originally, setting minimum wages in law was meant to ensure that workers were always paid fairly for their work – so that wages were enough for living healthily and in decent accommodation. In reality, many governments have entered a ‘race to the bottom’ on wages, trying to attract foreign companies by lowering wage levels and keeping them low. The result in many countries, including the key garment-producing countries of Asia, is that legal minimum wages are as low as a quarter of living wage.

All human rights are equally important: no one should have to work in an unsafe workplace or put their health at risk to earn money, and everyone has the right to fair pay for a fair day’s work. We believe focusing on a living wage is a crucial step toward protecting and empowering workers. This campaign helps to increase the bargaining power of workers and establish more long-term relationships in apparel supply chains, both of which would likely also lead to improved workplace safety and health.

The Global Living Wage Coalition calculated that the living wage for Dhaka, Bangladesh is $361 per month. With the Asia Floor Wage calculation, it’s about $903. The existing monthly minimum wage is $136. The reality is that current wages in Bangladesh mean that even when the women who make our clothes work six days a week, up to 12 hours a day, they are still living in slums and consistently running out of food for themselves and their families. These wages push workers and families into debt and cause young women to sleep on concrete floors because a mattress is an out-of-reach luxury, and mothers are forced to be separated from their children for months at a time because they cannot afford childcare. This needs to change.

Oxfam thinks we can shoot higher and fight for human rights.

It is practically impossible for the women who make our clothes to live decently on what they’re making. Poverty forces them to live in slums, away from their families, working 12 hours a day and falling into spiralling debt. No one has the right to take advantage of women in poverty and violate their basic human rights in the name of profit.

Globally, the garment sector is among the largest employers of women workers. The sector holds great power and potential to impact the lives of millions of women in low-income countries and, by extension, their families and communities.

Making change together

If we can get even one or two major fashion brands to work towards a living wage in their supply chains, it will have a huge impact and improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of women and their families.

Right now, the women making our clothes often work up to 12 hours per day, plus extra overtime, but are paid as little as 65 cents an hour. That means they don’t have enough money for decent housing, food or health care – let alone any savings. That’s why we are working to change this.

There are many ways to hold brands accountable, and there is a role for everyone in that process. As a consumer, you can let brands know you care about the people who make your clothes and that you want to know their full supply chain. Message them on social media, ask the staff at a store you’re shopping at, email brands or ask in a website chat box – hey, you could even write a letter! The purpose is to let brands know that you care about who makes your clothes and that they receive a living wage.

Brands buy the clothing that is assembled in overseas factories. These brands have the option to change factories at any time and there is no shortage of factories willing to supply products to them. In such a market dynamic, buyers hold strong influencing power over the supply chain. If a brand makes it clear that it will only buy clothes from factories paying a living wage, the impact could be incredible. Brand power to effect positive change is stronger when they collaborate with each other and join multi-stakeholder initiatives.

Yes, and we will continue to do so. We have contacted each of the brands we are currently focusing on and communicated the need to commit to a living wage in their supply chains. Ongoing corporate engagement, backed by your voice, is how we aim to achieve a living wage for the women who make our clothes.

Poverty wages in the fashion industry is a global issue. Oxfam has focused our campaign on supplier countries where wages are the lowest and people are working long hours, but remain trapped in poverty. While most of the stories that you see here are from Bangladesh, our campaign focuses on paying a living wage to women who make our clothes everywhere. Garment workers in Cambodia, Vietnam and India face the same challenges as those in Bangladesh. The systemic exploitation of women who make our clothes is not just a problem in Bangladesh, but everywhere.

The garment industry employs far more women than men. More than 70% of garment workers in China are women. In Bangladesh, the share is 80%, and in Cambodia, it’s as high as 90%.

Women garment workers are an especially vulnerable group: they are poor, sometimes illiterate and many began working as children, so they lack education. Single women in these societies face further discrimination and marginalisation, making it difficult to secure their rights. Women garment workers have few support systems and endure harassment and abuse from managers.

While it’s not just women who are affected by these human rights violations, women workers tend to be more vulnerable to these risks than men. That is why we’ve put women at the heart of this campaign.

How about in New Zealand?

Yes, it is. While the Living Wage Movement Aotearoa NZ and the What She Makes Campaign are both parts of the global movement for a living wage for all, the two campaigns are separate entities in New Zealand.

The Living Wage Movement Aotearoa NZ focuses on New Zealand businesses and organisations and calls on payment of a living wage to workers here in New Zealand. Businesses and organisations can get accreditation from the Living Wage Movement Aotearoa NZ. They have their own requirements and processes.

The What She Makes campaign focuses on improving the policies and business operations that affect women who make our clothes in overseas factories. 

No. The What She Makes campaign focuses on women overseas who do not earn enough to live with dignity. Oxfam supports a living wage for all workers everywhere. 

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

All images by Fabeha Monir, except where stated otherwise. 

What She Makes campaign

What She Makes logo

TOGETHER, WE CAN CHANGE LIVES

Together, we can change the lives of the women who make our clothes and make sure they earn enough to live with dignity.

Despite making millions in profits, clothing brands do not pay garment workers enough money to cover the basics of life. Join Oxfam and stand with the women who make our clothes so they don’t have to choose between paying rent or buying food each month.

We are exposing the reality behind the clothes sold in Aotearoa. With your voice demanding change and Oxfam’s direct engagement with the brands, we can hold these brands accountable, push for change in how they do business, and end the exploitation of the women who make our clothes. Sign Oxfam’s pledge to demand fashion brands pay a living wage now.

• They make us do overtime, 60-70 hours including overnight. When audit comes, our manager will warn us not to tell that we are doing excessive overtime at night, or they will cut our pay and abuse us with harsh words. – Chameli, 30
• Nothing happens with my monthly salary of 6,000 taka. After spending on food for my family, there is nothing left. I also need treatment for my foot, but how could I afford it? I had to take out a loan of 60,000 taka to get treatment. After I pay the loan monthly, I can barely manage my living expenses. It is difficult to live like I do. I would have to take more loans to survive. – Shima, 26
• Even if I feel sick, I still have to work. What can I do? As I am a garment worker, I am poor. I feel sick because of hunger, but I can’t afford to rest. – Rita, 48
learn more about the situation of these women and how poverty wages affect them and their families. Button: the situation
Chameli testimonial
Shima testimonial
Rita testimonial
Final testimonial

BIG BRANDS SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.

Supply chain transparency is a critical step in paying a living wage and in changing the lives of the women who make our clothes.

ASK BRANDS TO BE TRANSPARENT!

Did you know?

Tape and scissors

In Bangladesh, the minimum wage is only about a third of what is needed to afford a decent standard of living. That means garment workers must choose between paying rent or buying groceries for the family. They cannot afford to get both.

White shirt

Increasing the retail price by just 1% on average is enough to support a living wage for the women who make our clothes.

Sewing machine

It will take a garment worker 70 years to earn what a fashion CEO makes in a week. Meanwhile, it takes one hour for a fashion CEO to earn what a garment worker earns in a year.

Make a donation to support #WhatSheMakes and ensure the women who make our clothes are paid a living wage.

Donate
• 80% of garment workers are women. Gender inequality is stark in the garment industry, with women occupying the lowest-paid positions and enduring sexual harassment and verbal abuse at work.

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

All images by Fabeha Monir, except where stated otherwise. 

What She Makes – Freedom of association

Ask brands to ensure freedom of association

Living wages and safe and healthy working conditions are basic human rights. Speaking out about these is crucial.

Freedom of association is the right of workers and employers to freely form or join organisations that promote and defend their interests at work, without interference from one another or the State. This right applies to all workers and employers.

This is why the freedom of association in supply chains is a fundamental right. The women who make our clothes and those representing them should be able to do so without fearing for their lives.

Template: Letter to the brands

I would like you to ensure freedom of association for the women who make our clothes.

The women who make your clothes deserve to live with dignity and be paid a living wage. They deserve to have the space to express themselves and stand up for their rights without fear of reprisal.

I believe that freedom of association is important as this enables the women who make our clothes to come together and campaign for their basic human rights.

I believe that the women who make our clothes and those who stand for their rights should not fear for their lives and safety when voicing their dissent or fighting for their basic rights.
Your website says your company is committed to being ethical and sustainable, and I care about #WhatSheMakes. Show me that you are truly committed by ensuring freedom of association in your supply chains.

A group of women garment workers

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

All images by Fabeha Monir, except where stated otherwise. 

What She Makes – Modern slavery law

STAND UP FOR A MODERN SLAVERY LAW

You can join us in calling for a robust law on modern slavery, to make sure that human rights standards are upheld in our supply chains. We have made it easier for you and drafted a letter that you can send to the Minister.

Template: Letter to Minister on modern slavery law

Dear Minister Carmel Sepuloni,

I am writing to you regarding the proposed law to address Modern Slavery and Worker Exploitation, both globally and here in Aotearoa New Zealand across operations and supply chains.

It is important to me that Aotearoa has a sound law to make sure that human rights standards are protected throughout our supply chains.

As a consumer, I care that the products I purchase are ethically sourced and that the women and men who make our clothes are treated with dignity.

Several other countries and regions have enacted laws and regulations on modern slavery and due diligence such as the European Parliament’s Corporate Sustainability and Due Diligence Directive.

As we draw closer to the elections, I would like to see Aotearoa stepping up to uphold core human rights values in our supply chains.

Thank you.

A group of women garment workers

Share with someone who will stand with us:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

All images by Fabeha Monir, except where stated otherwise. 

Statement Of Solidarity: Oxfam Condemns The Killing Of Union Leader, Shahidul Islam

Oxfam stands in solidarity with the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF), trade union leaders and all human rights defenders who stand up for workers’ rights and protect human rights.

Oxfam learned of the horrific news of the brutal murder of Shahidul Islam, a union leader who was beaten to death on June 25th for his labour rights activism in Gazipur, a major garment industry hub on the outskirts of Dhaka, Bangladesh. He was an organizer of the BGIWF for 25 years advocating for workers’ rights as a trade union organizer, and was attacked and killed for standing up for basic human rights. We mourn not only the loss of an individual but also the loss of a powerful voice that championed the rights and well-being of workers, including the right to a living wage. We extend our sincere condolences to the grieving family, friends, colleagues and allies mourning his loss.

Kalpona Akter, the president of BGIWF, said: “Shahidul mobilised thousands of workers to join unions, empowering them to become solid factory-level trade union leaders. Throughout his life, he assisted thousands of workers in receiving arrears and severance pay wrongfully denied by their employers. With workers’ needs always in mind, Shahidul and three other union leaders met on the evening of his death to discuss a peaceful resolution to a wage dispute and the Eid-ul-Azha festival bonus. He met his fate due to the industry’s ill practice to promote yellow unionism for years and the neglect of workers’ voices. This needs to stop. Let our workers be free to organize and join unions. Shahid’s contributions to the labour movement were remarkable and will be sorely missed.”

Ahmed Sharif, a union organizer who was wounded in the attack, told the Guardian “As soon as we came out of the gate, a group of assailants grabbed Islam and separated him from us. They started cursing and randomly beating us, particularly Islam, some of them were kicking him mercilessly.”

As an organisation dedicated to the fight to end poverty and injustice, we are deeply concerned by the murder of Shahidul Islam. This tragic incident highlights the vulnerability of union leaders and activists fighting for workers’ rights. Oxfam joins BGIWF in demanding a thorough investigation and ensure justice is served for the death of Islam. We further call on all brands and stakeholders to conduct ethical purchasing practices upholding human rights within their supply chain and paying a living wage. We call on the government of Bangladesh to step up their protection of trade unionists who are exercising their fundamental human rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Oxfam stands in solidarity with BGIWF, raising a resounding call for justice in the case of Shahidul Islam and demanding the unwavering safety of workers, union members and human rights defenders. We stand united in their relentless struggle to defend workers’ rights at Prince Jacquard Sweaters Ltd factory and in workplaces across Bangladesh. Together we demand accountability and an end to the systemic violations that perpetuate injustice.

#Justice4Shahidul

Background

Shahidul and his colleagues were attacked after leaving the meeting with the management of a factory named Price Jacquard Sweaters Ltd to help the workers collect their due bonuses and wages. The factory management refused to comply despite being directed by the Deputy Commissioner’s (DC) office of Gazipur District to pay the workers’ salaries.

This is not the first time BGIWF has been the victim of such a fatal attack. Eleven years ago, in April 2012, another worker leader, Aminul Islam was tortured and murdered. Aminul was also an organizer with BGIWF, a vital contributor to the nation’s striving movement to advance workers’ rights. The murders of human rights defenders exemplify the extreme measures employed to suppress freedom of association in Bangladesh.

The tragic death of Shahidul, along with countless incidents of other workers being silenced by violence and fear, highlight the urgent need for change. Brands are responsible for ethical business practices and need to ensure that their purchasing practices are not leading to exploitation and deprivation of human rights. Brands must guarantee the right to a living wage and just, safe and healthy working conditions for garment workers.

Despite legal provisions, union leaders and activists face many challenges and restrictions such as anti-union discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against union leaders and members. Additionally, labour activists have raised concerns about the composition and independence of worker participation committees in factories. Labour activists argue that these ‘yellow unions’ are established by factory owners to exert control on workers raising concerns of workers’ rights to collective bargaining and discriminatory power dynamics.

Oxfam Canada, Oxfam Australia and Oxfam Aotearoa’s What She Makes campaign aims to transform the fashion industry into a more just and equitable space by holding brands accountable for their purchasing practices and advocating for a living wage. A living wage is the minimum amount that a worker should earn in a 48-hour work week and adequately covers workers’ and their family’s basic needs, including food, water, housing, energy, healthcare, clothing, childcare, education, transportation and savings for unexpected events. We stand united with the women who make our clothes, advocating for their right to living wages, freedom of association and labour rights.

Copyright © 2024 Oxfam Aotearoa.

Oxfam is a worldwide development organisation that mobilises the power of people against injustice. Oxfam Aotearoa is a registered charity with the New Zealand Charities Register (registration CC24641). Donations are tax refundable.

Site by