PPR/Gucci - Clean Clothes Campaign

["Ersilia Monti" <ersilia.monti at mclink.it>]

PPR/GUCCI: UNA CAMPAGNA INTERNAZIONALE CONTRO IL GIGANTE DEL LUSSO - Clean
Clothes Campaign
(fonte: Campaign for Labor Rights)

Il gruppo francese Pinault-Printemps-Redoute e' un colosso della
distribuzione specializzato nella vendita di articoli di lusso. Possiede le
case d'alta moda Gucci e Yves Saint Laurent, le catene di distribuzione Le
Printemps, La Redoute, FNAC (multimediale e libri), Conforama (arredamento)
e svariate partecipazioni nel settore dell'informazione e dei servizi
finanziari. Nel 2001 ha realizzato vendite per 27 miliardi di euro
triplicando gli utili nell'arco degli ultimi 4 anni. Il suo amministratore
delegato, Serge Weinberg, guadagna la bellezza di 2 milioni di euro all'
anno. Non e' invece un campione di liberta' sindacale e di giustizia
retributiva, anzi. Secondo il segretario della federazione internazionale
dei lavoratori del tessile-abbigliamento Neil Kearney, PPR e' la societa'
piu' arretrata in fatto di responsabilita' sociale nei paesi Ocse al punto
che nel luglio scorso le federazioni sindacali statunitensi AFL-CIO e UNITE
congiuntamente alle federazioni francesi CFDT, CGT, FO (PPR ha sede in
Francia), e all'olandese FNV (Gucci ha sede in Olanda) hanno presentato un
esposto nei rispettivi paesi ai Punti di contatto nazionali  previsti dalle
linee guida Ocse sulle multinazionali  nel  tentativo di dare  il massimo
della pubblicita' possibile al comportamento antisindacale perpetrato dalla
consociata americana Brylane, specializzata in vendite per corrispondenza,
nelle sue due sedi dell'Indiana negli USA. Il caso ha origine dalle
intimidazioni messe in atto dall'azienda, spalleggiata dalla casa madre, per
impedire ai dipendenti di costituirsi in sindacato (creazione di un comitato
di lavoratori contro il sindacato, distribuzione di materiale antisindacale,
minacce e licenziamenti di iscritti a Unite). La forza lavoro della Brylane
e' costituita per il 70 per cento da donne ed e' per meta' di origine
afroamericana o ispanica, di cui un terzo di recente immigrazione. La
speranza di chi si iscrive al sindacato e' poter  negoziare un contratto di
lavoro che innalzi i salari oltre il livello di sussistenza e riduca il
rischio di malattie professionali, causate dalla ripetitivita' dei
movimenti, che alla Brylane hanno un'incidenza 18 volte superiore alla media
del settore. Questo per quel che concerne gli Stati Uniti, ma le accuse
riguardano anche la catena della subfornitura oltreoceano. I lavoratori che
cuciono capi d'abbigliamento per conto di PPR guadagnano nelle Filippine
meno del salario minimo legale e vivono in baracche di legno; a Tirupur, in
India, lavorano 13 ore al giorno per 6 giorni alla settimana per una paga
pari a un quinto di quello che sarebbe necessario per mantenere le famiglie;
a Bandung, in Indonesia, crollano esausti alla macchina da cucire per
mancanza di sonno. In seguito alle denunce lanciate intorno a questi casi da
un centro di ricerca francese sul comportamento sociale delle imprese, si e'
formato un coordinamento internazionale di sindacati e gruppi di base che ha
chiesto a PPR di porre rimedio agli abusi scoperti. La risposta della
multinazionale e' stata il taglio delle commesse onde evitare i rischi di
una pubblicita' negativa. Esattamente il contrario di quello che le era
stato chiesto. In questo modo a pagare sono i lavoratori che hanno avuto il
coraggio di raccontare la loro dolorosa storia. Sono in preparazione per la
fine di ottobre mobilitazioni locali coordinate a livello internazionale.

Scriviamo a PPR un messaggio di protesta. Dal sito di AFL-CIO:
www.unionvoice.org//campaign/brylaneppr potete inviare direttamente una mail
digitando nella stringa 'add a subject line': Labor rights abuses at PPR's
factories o qualsiasi altro oggetto riteniate appropriato e inserendo i
vostri dati personali (se non volete ricevere altre comunicazioni da AFL-CIO
annullate il segno di spunta dal riquadro 'Join the working families
e-activists network for occasional alerts'. Oppure copiate e spedite per
email il testo che segue (nell'oggetto della mail scrivete: Labor rights
abuses at PPR's factories)

(in estrema sintesi in italiano il testo da inviare: mi preoccupa l'
atteggiamento adottato da Pinault-Printemps-Redoute in risposta alle denunce
per attivita' antisindacale e violazione dei diritti dei lavoratori. A
Brylane e' in atto una campagna intimidatoria al fine di impedire l'
esercizio delle liberta' sindacali, nelle Filippine e in India PPR ha tolto
le commesse anziche' impegnarsi nella risoluzione dei problemi denunciati.
Vi chiediamo di porre rimedio agli abusi accertati, fornire i nominativi di
tutti i vostri fornitori, cessare le azioni antisindacali alla Brylane e
riconoscere il diritto dei lavoratori a organizzarsi, aprire un tavolo
negoziale con le organizzazioni sindacali e le associazioni per definire un
accordo valido per tutto il gruppo sulla base delle convenzioni fondamentali
dell'OIL).

Chairman of Pinault-Printemps-Redoute
Serge Weinberg (sweinberg at pprgroup.com)

VP Human Resources PPR Group
Francois Potier (fpotier at pprgroup.com)

Dear Sirs,

I am concerned by Pinault-Printemps-Redoute's (PPR) reaction to reports of
illegal and abusive conditions at its operations and supplier factories
around the world.  In facilities where PPR goods are manufactured, sold or
distributed workers are being punished for speaking out about their
treatment and conditions.

At the Brylane distribution center in Indianapolis workers are subject to a
campaign of harassment and intimidation aimed at preventing them from
exercising their freedom to choose a union. In the Philippines and India
where sweatshop conditions have been reported at PPR suppliers, rather than
trying to ensure that its supplier firms have safe, legal and fair working
conditions, PPR has cut off orders from its suppliers - jeopardizing workers
who spoke the truth about their conditions.

Whether at its Brylane distribution center in Indianapolis, FNAC stores in
Spain and France or at PPR suppliers in the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia
and India, PPR has a responsibility to ensure that its goods are produced
and handled under legal and ethical conditions.

At PPR operations and supplier firms in the United States, Europe and Asia,
when workers try to exercise rights to freedom of association and collective
bargaining, or speak out about unsafe and abusive working conditions, their
rights and livelihood need to be protected, not attacked.

I urge you to seek immediate solutions to the problems at Brylane and PPR's
operations and supplier firms. I ask that you:

 Correct labor rights violations at the PPR supplier firms that have been
reported, and, in order to ensure transparency, disclose the locations of
all other PPR supplier factories. Other apparel retailers have already
publicly disclosed the names and addresses of factory suppliers.  PPR must
seek remediation for workers at supplier factories - and not cut off orders
or shift operations.

End the anti-union campaign at PPR's Brylane subsidiary and respect the
expressed will of a majority of Brylane employees to choose union
representation.  The freedom to join a union is recognized internationally
as a fundamental human right.

Immediately engage in good faith dialogue with trade unions and labor rights
advocates to develop a company-wide policy covering all workers producing
goods or services for the company, which is based on the Declaration of
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work by the International Labor
Organization (ILO).

(nome, cognome, paese, eventuale organizzazione di appartenenza)

---------------------
Per essere esclusi dalla lista o ricevere informazioni sulla Clean Clothes
Campaign, inviate un messaggio a :
ersilia.monti at mclink.it

Ersilia Monti
(Coordinamento lombardo nord/sud del mondo - Rete di Lilliput Nodo di
Milano)
P.le Governo Provvvisorio 6
20127 Milano
tel.02-26140345
email: ersilia.monti at mclink.it
-------------------

-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: owner-cleanclothes at xs4all.nl
[mailto:owner-cleanclothes at xs4all.nl]Per conto di clean clothes campaign
Inviato: mercoledì 7 agosto 2002 16.58
A: cleanclothes at xs4all.nl
Oggetto: [cleanclothes] update on Brylane/PPR case


Dear Friends,
Please find below a request for action posted by the Campaign for Labor
Rights in relation to labor rights violations at subsidiaries and factories
producing for the French multinational Pinault-Printemps-Redoute (PPR). In
an earlier message (April 2002) we asked you take action in the PPR/Brylane
case (also mentioned below). Some of you who have written letters of
protest to PPR have received responses from them denying allegations of
anti-union activity at their Brylane distribution center in Indiana, in the
United States. For your reference included below is the letter that the CCC
sent to PPR, responding to their denials. This case is ongoing. Since we
first posted an appeal for action, the U.S. union UNITE has filed a
complaint charging PPR with violating the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development's (OECD) Guidelines for Multinational
Enterprises (see press release below), and continues to call for pressure
to be put on PPR. If you'd like more information on the situation at
Brylane, please take a look at the CCC website -- where you can find the
complaint to the OECD and other background information on this case. More
information and requests for action in relation to labor rights violations
at other PPR subsidiaries will be circulated in coming weeks.

The CLR alert below directly links you to a protest letter that will be
faxed to PPR -- please take a moment right now to send a message to PPR
that union-busting is unacceptable.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
EXPOSED FOR SWEATSHOP ABUSES AND UNION-BUSTING, GUCCI PARENT COMPANY TRIES
TO CUT-AND-RUN

source: CLR Labor Alert

posted July 2, 2002

Pinault-Printemps-Redoute, the French multinational apparel company known
for major brands like Gucci, Brylane, FNAC, Yves Saint-Laurent, and Ellos,
is also becoming known for union-busting and sweatshop conditions at its
subsidiary operations and supplier factories around the world.

At PPR's Brylane distribution center in Indianapolis, Indiana, managers are
waging a campaign of intimidation, discrimination and harassment aimed at
preventing workers from exercising their right to choose a union. Brylane
workers are coming together with the union, UNITE, to win a voice at work
and end unsafe conditions in their jobs, including an ergonomic injury rate
more than 18 times the industry average.

But PPR's mistreatment of workers extends beyond its own operations. A
recent report has revealed that poverty wages, excessive hours and unsafe
conditions can be found at PPR supplier factories all across Asia. At a
factory supplying PPR in the Philippines, workers earn the equivalent of
about $3.25 US a day -- less than that country s legal minimum
wage. Moreover, the company cheats the workers of wages and benefits, by
keeping them on temporary status for well beyond the six month maximum
allowed under Philippine law.

At another PPR supplier in Tirupur, India, some workers earn barely 10
cents per hour hardly a fifth of what is considered necessary to support a
family. Some workers have to work 13 hours per day, six days per week for
a total of nearly 80 hours per week, just to make ends meet.

After a report by CFIE (Le Centre Français d'Information sur les
Entreprises, a French organization that reports on the social
responsibility of French companies) revealed these abuses, an international
coalition of unionists and labor rights supporters demanded that PPR work
with suppliers to remedy these conditions. But despite explicit appeals
that the company not cancel orders from these factories, PPR is attempting
to run away from the bad publicity by cutting-and-running from their supply
factories.

In June, Retail Week magazine reported PPR Chief Executive Officer, Serge
Weinberg saying, Following the allegations, PPR had re-contacted the
companies and ceased to trade with them. Rather than helping end to the
illegal and abusive conditions faced by the workers who made its products,
PPR is now trying to punish workers who told the truth about their working
conditions!

<><><><><>

TAKE ACTION NOW!

Trade unions and worker rights activists around the world are demanding
that PPR take responsibility for ending union-busting and sweatshop abuses
at its suppliers and subsidiaries.

Instead of running away from its problems, PPR needs to recognize engage in
good faith dialogue with trade unions and other labor rights advocates to
fix the violations that have been reported and to adopt effective global
standards and mechanisms to ensure basic rights and decent conditions for
its workers worldwide.

**ACT NOW IT S EASY! Just click on the link below and fill out the
information on the form that appears. Add a subject line to the letter in
the space provided, and your fax will automatically be sent to the company.

Tell PPR to: Stop Sweatshops, Stop Union-Busting, Don t Cut-and
Run! Demand that PPR respect workers rights at Brylane and around the
world. To send a message to Brylane/PPR executives go to:
<www.unionvoice.org//campaign/brylaneppr>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------


For Immediate Release Contact: Erich Hahn, 212-265-7000 x233
Unions Worldwide Charge PPR With Violating Internationally-Recognized
Corporate Responsibility Standards
Call on Governments to Take Up Complaint Against
Pinault-Printemps-Redoute

(Washington, DC, July 22, 2002) A historic array of international unions
have charged French multinational Pinault-Printemps-Redoute (PPR) with
violating key international corporate responsibility standards at the
Brylane clothing warehouse in Indiana. The thousand workers there are
forming a union in order to win safety and a voice on the job, yet the
company has repeatedly harassed and intimidated the workers.
In a step rarely take, the major trade union federations of France, the
Netherlands and the U.S. have joined together in urging their governments
to take up the case against the parent company of French retailers
Printemps, FNAC and Conforama, and Amsterdam-based fashion house Gucci.
Last week, the three major labor federations of France, the CFDT
(Confédération Française Démocratique du Travail), CGT (Confédération
Générale du Travail), and FO (Confédération Générale du Travail -Force
Ouvrière), joined by the leading Dutch trade union federation, FNV
(Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging), and the AFL-CIO, urged their
governments to take up a complaint filed by the U.S. union, UNITE (Union of
Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees). The complaint charges PPR
with violating the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's
(OECD) Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
The Brylane employees are forming a union to improve an extremely unsafe
workplace. According to the company's own records, one out of every ten
workers at its Indianapolis distribution center suffered a repetitive
motion injury a rate of injury nearly 18 times higher than the
industry-wide average for repetitive motion injuries in the year 2000.
John Evans, General-Secretary of TUAC (Trade Union Advisory Committee to
the OECD), which represents the national labor federations of the OECD
countries, called for prompt action yesterday to end PPR's violations of
workers' rights at Brylane. "PPR has the image of a decent company in
France and Europe," said Evans, "yet in Indiana its subsidiary Brylane is
adopting the worst kind of repression of basic workers' rights to organize.
It should stop its repression and respect its workers' right to join a
union."
"PPR's blatant attempt to use intimidation and harassment to deny its
employees in Indiana a voice at work exemplifies the hypocritical behavior
of companies that respect workers' rights at home but cast them aside when
they go overseas" said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney, who also serves as
president of TUAC. "We applaud the actions taken by our brothers and
sister unions in France and Holland, as it is this kind of international
cooperation that is needed to hold multinationals like PPR accountable to
basic standards of corporate responsibility."
The case, which was originally filed by UNITE with the U.S. State
Department Office of Investment Affairs and has now been submitted to the
French Ministry of Economy, Finance and Industry and the Dutch National
Contact Point accuses PPR of violating the OECD Guidelines through a
campaign of harassment and intimidation against workers seeking to form a
union at its Brylane distribution center in Indianapolis, Indiana. In one
incident cited in the complaint, after an employee addressed his co-workers
about why he supported forming a union, a PPR manager allegedly offered to
get a gun and "shut him up." The Guidelines, which have been adopted by the
governments of the 30 OECD member nations, expressly direct their
countries' multinationals to respect the right of workers to form unions.
The call for government inquiry under the OECD Guidelines for
Multinationals is just the latest in a series of sharp criticisms of PPR's
corporate practices being brought by the AFL-CIO and other corporate
responsibility advocates. Last week, over fifty European and US stock
analysts and institutional investors attended a presentation in New York by
the AFL-CIO Office of Investment, which detailed serious weaknesses in
PPR's corporate governance practices
(http://www.aflcio.org/publ/press2002/pr0716a.htm). The New York meeting
followed the release in May at the PPR annual general meeting of a report
by the French corporate responsibility research center CFIE (Centre
Français d'Information sur les Enterprises) which also criticized PPR's
governance and also aired reports of illegal "sweatshop" conditions at
factories producing apparel for PPR in India, Indonesia, Philippines and
Thailand.
PPR is a multinational retailing and distribution firm headquartered in
Paris, France with facilities in 55 countries, including fifteen members of
the OECD. PPR subsidiaries include: Redcats, FNAC and Printemps in France,
and Gucci in Italy and the Netherlands.
The American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations
(AFL-CIO) is a voluntary federation of 66 national and international labor
unions representing 13 million working women and men from every walk of
life.
The Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) is an interface for labor unions
with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD). TUAC's affiliates consist of more than 56 national trade union
centers in the 30 OECD industrialized countries, which together represent
some 70 million workers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------

CCC response to PPR letter denying allegations of anti-union behavior at
Brylane

To: François Potier
Senior Vice-President Human Resources
Pinault-Printemps-Redoute
Paris
Fax: 33-1-44-906-205
E-mail: fpotier at pprgroup.com

From: Nina Ascoly
Clean Clothes Campaign, Amsterdam

Re: Ongoing labor rights dispute at Brylane

July 31, 2002


Dear Mr. Potier,

Thank you for your response to our letter regarding Brylane. I have
obtained more information from UNITE in relation to several of the issues
that you raised, and therefore would like to address some of the comments
you made in your letter.

You claim that Brylane fully respects the right of freedom of association.
According to the principles of freedom of association set down by the ILO,
workers must, in law and fact, enjoy protection from any act of
discrimination on the part of employers in establishing and running the
union of their choice. Employers must also refrain from any act, be it
discrimination against one group or preferential treatment towards another,
that could influence the choice of workers as to the organisation which
they intend to join.

Brylane promoted the creation of "Brylane Associates Against UNITE!"
(BAAU), and assisted its members in distributing anti-union materials.
Supervisors were instructed to support BAAU by feeding them with anti-union
materials, copying materials, allowing BAAU members to distribute the
material during work time and by transporting materials between the
Indianapolis and Plainfield distribution centers.

A former Brylane supervisor, Shelly Fugate, attended training sessions by
Ice Miller Attorneys at which she was instructed to monitor employees'
attitudes towards unionisation on a daily basis and to report to management
any financial, marital or other problems that employees might be having, as
well as to support BAAU. Ms Fugate, a long-standing Brylane employee, was
told that if she supported the union she would be fired, and that is
exactly what happened.

Clearly, the actions of Brylane are anti-union discrimination and
constitute interference in the right of workers to establish their own
organisations and are therefore a flagrant breach of the right of freedom
of association. This makes a mockery of your claim that "it is up to
Brylane associates, and only up to Brylane associates, to decide whether
they wish to be represented by UNITE or not."

You point out that US law provides a mechanism to resolve questions like
those raised at Brylane's distribution centers in Indiana: a secret-ballot
election under the aegis of the National Labor Relations Board.

Yes, an election is indeed one mechanism of granting union recognition.
UNITE charges that an election is exactly what Brylane and Ice Miller want,
because it opens the way for them to intimidate and harass workers. US
labor law does not demand a ballot: There is an alternative mechanism,
which is through a card count.

UNITE reports that Brylane's actions have created a climate in which a free
and fair election is impossible. It appears therefore that Brylane has
forfeited the election option, and that the only way to mitigate the damage
that has been done is to grant union recognition through an independent
card count.

You deny that Brylane has retained Ice Miller Attorneys as "union-busting
consultants."
The Ice Miller website makes interesting reading. The company's policy is
that employers should be "free to use their human resources in the manner
they deem productive and efficient, with minimal interference from
government regulations and other outside sources." It provides "union-free
maintenance training," represents employers faced with organising
campaigns, and advises employers on matters such as "the removal of work
from unionised facilities." This firm claims to have "successfully pursued
lawsuits for damages against strikers and their unions." If that doesn't
sound like the advice of a union-busting consultant, I don't know what does!

You claim that all eleven charges of unfair labor practices filed by UNITE
against Brylane have either been dismissed for lack of merit or have been
withdrawn by UNITE, specifically including charges alleging threats and
interrogation of union supporters.

The events prompting charges to the National Labor Relations Board of the
U.S. have been documented by Brylane worker testimony. To date, Brylane has
avoided prosecution for these charges, for example by posting notices
within the facility promising not to repeat the illegal action. This
practice of intimidating and harassing union activists, risking only a
mandate from the government to post an apology several weeks after the act
itself has had its impact on workers, is a well-known anti-union practice
in the U.S. In a 2000 report on U.S. labor law, the international human
rights organization Human Rights Watch explained:
"any employer intent on resisting workers' self-organization can drag out
legal proceedings for years, fearing little more than an order to post a
written notice in the workplace promising not to repeat unlawful
conduct..." (http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/uslabor/USLBR008-02.htm).

Although several charges remain in lengthy appeal, we firmly believe that
PPR should act now based on principle rather than on strategic maneuvers
that prolong action and seek to deny workers' demand for union
representation.


You claim that if UNITE receives a majority of the votes in an NLRB
election, Brylane will recognise the union and negotiate in good faith.
This claim is contradicted by Brylane management itself, which has warned
workers of long delays and the possibility of an agreement never being
reached. Pat Cross, the Vice President of Human Resources at Brylane, made
the following statements at a compulsory meeting:

- "A union cannot guarantee that you will get a contract. Negotiations can
last a very long time. In fact, in first time contract situations, it's not
uncommon to take many months, possibly years, and yet there is a chance
that you not end up with a contract. You could ask yourself what happens to
your benefits during that timeframe."

- "There is no guarantee that you won't lose. The truth is that you can
lose wages and benefits in collective bargaining."

- "The union can't guarantee that they're not going to strike. An important
point the union doesn't tell you is that if employees go out on an economic
strike, they can be permanently replaced."

We urge you, in light of your employees' clear demand for unionization
and your ability to sustain working relationships with trade unions around
the world, to engage in this matter at the local level and guide your
American subsidiary to seek a swift and peaceful resolution. In the
meantime, we continue to update our European network on this matter.


Sincerely,
Nina Ascoly
Clean Clothes Campaign


Clean Clothes Campaign
PO Box 11584
1001 GN Amsterdam
The Netherlands
tel: + 31 20 4122785
fax: + 31 20 4122786
e-mail:ccc at xs4all.nl

++++++++ This is the cleanclothes mailinglist. Messages posted to this list
will be received by all the subscribers of the list. Messages can also be
posted by all subscribers to the list. Therefore the messages posted on this
list are not necessarily reflecting the opinion of the Clean Clothes
Campaign. To respond to one subscriber of the list you have to mail the
message to the mailing adress of the subscriber, not to the mailinglist.
Messages only directed to the clean clothes campaign in the Netherlands, for
example, should be mailed to ccc at xs4all.nl ++++++