Slaves of fashion: outworkers in the garment industry
By Kim Linden
Imagine a job where you work 12 to 18 hours a day, seven days a week for about $2 an hour. Worse, you have to use inappropriate and sometimes dangerous machinery, you are subject to sexual harassment and intimidation, you often need your children to help you do the work, and you have no enforceable minimum working conditions.
This is some of the evidence being presented to the Senate's Inquiry into Garment Industry Outworking, initiated by the Australian Democrats in response to the findings of an information campaign by the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia. TCFUA's findings were presented in The Hidden Costs of Fashion, which was released in March, 1995.
The estimated 329,000 outworkers in the clothing industry sew garments in their own or someone else's home. In this industry they outnumber factory-based workers by about 14:1. The majority are non-English speaking background migrant women. Due to the lack of formal statistical evidence, these figures could actually be much higher
TCFUA estimates that around 75% of companies in the industry have the majority of their production carried out in private homes. Around 50% of these companies use at least 10 outworkers, the rest use at least 50. There are different levels within outworking. Some companies employ outworkers directly, others pass work on to contractors who in turn employ outworkers. However it operates, as the TCFUA report states, "outwork is not only a characteristic of the clothing industry in Australia, the industry is structured around it".
When gathering this information, TCFUA found that many outworkers are cautious about talking about their work for fear of losing their job. Many of the 3000 people who phoned in to the information campaign were distressed when relaying their experiences but were reluctant to name their employers.
The research reveals the extent to which outworkers are abused by their employers. The report documents the case of one woman who worked for an employer for eight months. "She hadn't been paid for quite a lot of work. When she approached the employer about the money owed to her, he punched her and took the receipt book — the only evidence she had of the work she had done."
Clothing companies make huge profits out of this sort of work. One contractor in Victoria showed the TCFUA workers a vest made by an outworker for which the contractor received $21. The outworker, who the contractor estimates made it in two hours, received $9. The estimated retail cost of the vest is $150. With such a huge profit for the retailers, it is not surprising that most retailers are unconcerned about the garment production methods.
The Australian government also uses outworkers. A recent Four Corners program on ABC TV revealed that Australia Post uses outworkers to make its uniforms and has even been found to use intimidating behaviour towards the outworkers. Evidence submitted to the Senate inquiry reveals that other government departments have also been using outworkers.
According to a TCFUA submission to the inquiry, many of those involved in government industry policy making hold the view that the rapid expansion in the number of outworkers is a result of import cost pressures and the fact that government policy on the industry, the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Plan (TCFP), did not provide adequate protection against unfair competition from low-wage Asian countries.
The TCFUA submission argues that the main effect of the TCFP was massive job shedding in the industry, creating large numbers of unemployed and vulnerable workers — easy targets for outwork. Furthermore, because the unemployment rate of migrant women is very high, and they often have family care responsibilities and/or have to support their family financially, there is no shortage of women who will work from home.
The TCFUA submission explains that the women's fashion sector — where outwork is the most prevalent — is the sector most able to withstand import competition. Despite claims of president of the Council of Textile and Fashion Industries of Australia, Tim Todhunter, that consumers would have to wear the cost if workers were guaranteed minimum award conditions, manufacturers, retailers and government departments have in fact been promoting the use of outworkers to minimise their own costs. Other evidence to the inquiry also shows that companies can well afford to pay minimum awards without affecting retail prices.
The public hearings phase of the inquiry has now finished. Because this Senate committee is also responsible for examining the Coalition's proposed industrial relations bill, the outworker inquiry has been put on hold. However, since the industrial relations bill would likely result in even less regulation over outworkers, the outwork inquiry is also looking at this bill.
Victorian Democrat senator Sid Spindler, one of the main advocates of the inquiry, told Green Left Weekly of the "welcome development" that the Textile and Fashion Industries Council had agreed in principle to a proposed scheme of registration at every point of the garment production process. He said that unions and government would be able to keep track of the use of outworkers. The proposal also involves the translation of award rates of pay into piece-work rates with the hope that conditions such as sickness benefits, workers compensation and superannuation can be included in the pay rate. The inquiry is also looking at tax incentives for companies which pay award rates. Such a proposal would be enforced in the relevant act.
In response to suggestions that the extensive use of outworkers in Australia makes it unlikely that the legislation will make any difference, Spindler says: "I am not overstating this proposal. There is still a lot of work to be done on it, but it's a start."
Annie Delaney, coordinator of the TCFUA's outworker information campaign, told Green Left that the proposal is a long way from where the inquiry process started. "The Textile and Fashion Industries Council originally said that they'd look at paying $4 an hour, then they said that they'd offer $10 an hour which, when you looked at the proposal, really meant $5 an hour, and now they are looking at a tighter proposal of $13 an hour."
Delaney said that the inquiry is looking at three ways of making sure that outworkers are not ripped off. First is the use of agreements with employers to make sure they register the quantity of work and who gets it, and agreements on pay rates. Second is the possible use of legislation to enforce conditions and an information campaign to help workers understand the legislation. Third is a public education campaign which aims to use consumers as pressure groups. This involves labelling clothing to identify that made by outworkers on award conditions, and relies on consumers consciously selecting those clothes off the shelves.
One of the problems with the proposed agreements and legislation is how to make them binding on employers. Delaney admits that this will be difficult. "Employers have so many things in place to keep outworkers invisible that it's hard to often reach them", she says, adding that while the agreements are not "great enforceable documents, they are a stick to wield over employers, giving the union some leverage to do something for outworkers".
However, the federal government's refusal late last month to ratify a new International Labor Organisation convention which calls for minimum wage rates and employment age levels for outworkers, and access to maternity and other work related benefits, does not inspire confidence that the government will assist with the enforcement of any such agreements.