Nike e Decathlon in Thailandia: servono a qualcosa i codici di condotta?

Le lavoratrici si rivolgono a Clist, una ong locale che presta assistenza ai lavoratori, la quale riesce ad organizzare alcuniincontri fra le sindacaliste licenziate, i rappresentanti locali di Nike e della Fair Labour Association e un funzionario del ministero del Lavoro in veste di mediatore. A giudizio di quest'ultimo è stato violato il diritto di organizzazione sindacale e le tre lavoratrici devono essere reintegrate. Il titolare della MSP, Peter Krautler, dichiara in una lettera che non intende revocare i licenziamenti, offre invece una buonuscita pari a dieci mesi di salario. L'offerta viene respinta. Le ritorsioni verso il sindacato continuano con un altro licenziamento e un trasferimento arbitrario preludio al licenziamento.
A metà dicembre Clist chiede a Nike un nuovo incontro per discutere le violazioni del suo codice di condotta. Nike risponde di non essere riuscita a far cambiare idea al suo fornitore, pertanto si atterrà alle decisioni del governo sulla base delle procedure legali previste in questi casi, alle quali le lavoratrici dovranno in ultima istanza appellarsi. Un nuovo pronunciamento del mediatore governativo getta acqua sulle speranze del sindacato, le soluzioni proposte sono ora due: un risarcimento più cospicuo o la risoluzione del caso per vie legali.

Si apre a questo punto un vicolo cieco. L'esperienza insegna che i dispositivi di legge messi a tutela dei lavoratori sono a maglie molto larghe, in particolare in tema di libertà sindacale, le procedure sono lunghe e si concludono il più delle volte non con il reintegro dei lavoratori licenziati  ma con un risarcimento in denaro, spesso del tutto insoddisfacente. E' ciò che Clist e la Clean Clothes Campaign hanno ribadito a Nike, ricordando che se il rispetto delle leggi locali è doveroso, non meno doveroso è pretendere il rispetto del proprio codice di condotta quando questo sia stato violato. Se ai lavoratori non viene lasciata altra scelta che ricorrere al giudizio della legge, qual è in definitiva lo scopo di un codice di condotta?

Un'altra richiesta attende ancora risposta da parte di Nike, quella di rendere pubblici a tutte le parti in causa i risultati delle indagini che Nike avrebbe svolto sul caso.Le lavoratrici hanno proposto ricorso contro il loro licenziamento il 23 dicembre, ma sono fermamente convinte che Nike dovrebbe rendere noti i risultati e le conclusioni delle sue indagini, e dare applicazione al suo codice di condotta senza aspettare gli esiti dell'iter legale.

Hanno già preannunciato che sottoporranno ufficialmente il caso alla Fair Labour Association.Nel frattempo Decathlon ha fatto ancor meno, limitandosi ad assicurare che si sarebbe occupata del  caso inserendolo nel suo normale programma di audit, in calendario per la fine di dicembre. Nessun contatto è stato preso con Clist o con il sindacato malgrado i ripetuti inviti.

Per partecipare all'azione, scrivete a Nike , Decathlon e a MSP  (inviando copie a Clist: clist@loxinfo.co.th)

Per ricevere informazioni sulla Clean Clothes Campaign, inviate un messaggio a: ersilia.monti@mclink.it
Ersilia Monti (Coordinamento Lombardo Nord/Sud del mondo – Rete di Lilliput Nodo di Milano)
Info: www.lilliputmilano.org/lab/consumocritico.html al link Abiti Puliti
Altre Info: www.cleanclothes.org

[pagebreak]
LETTERA A NIKE
(harsh.saini@nike.com; krittika.W@nike.com)
(si chiede a Nike di non aspettare gli esiti delle procedure previste dalla legge ma di far leva sulla propria influenza per pretendere il rispetto del proprio codice di condotta imponendo la revoca dei licenziamenti e il rispetto della libertà sindacale. Si chiede inoltre che siano resi pubblici i risultati delle sue indagini e avviato un processo con tutte le parti in causa per migliori relazioni sindacali)

Nell'oggetto, scrivere: MSP Sportswear factory in Thailand

Nike World Headquarters
One Bowerman Drive
Beaverton, OR 97005
Phone: 1-800-344-6453
e-mail: harsh.saini@nike.com (Nike regional coordinator)
Krittika.W@nike.com

Dear Harsh Saini and W. Krittika
I am writing to you because I am concerned to hear about the situation at the MSP Sportswear factory in Huatalea  Moung  Nakornrachaseama in Thailand.
I understand that in 2003, workers at the factory decided to organise and form a union due to the poor working conditions at the factory.Since that time, the union executive has been harassed and threatened.
In October 2004 some of them were unfairly dismissed, and in some cases their relatives were dismissed. Other members of the executive were arbitrarily transferred to other sections without proper training.Since the MSP Sportswear factory produces primarily for Nike, I call upon Nike to use its influence to bring about a fair and acceptable resolution that includes the following demands of the union:
1. Reinstatement of  the 3 dismissed workers with back wages from the first day of dismissal until their reinstatement.
2. The company must reinstate the mother of one of thecommittee members of the trade union, who was also working at the factory and whom the union members believe got fired because of her family connection.
3. The company must rescind warning letters issued to Mr. Pragun Boonluom, a union activist who was arbitrarily transferred from his sewing line to the cutting line without being given adequate training for his new duties. He was therefore unable to meet quotas and received a warning letter.
4. The company must stop all actions against the union and cease distributing misleading information about the union.
5. The company must allow the union to give leaflets  and union membership application forms  freely in the work place without intimidation or any form of  interference to prevent workers from joining the union.

It has come to my attention you, as a representative of Nike, met with the MSP Sportswear workers and the labour organisation supporting them, CLIST,in Thailand. Despite the fact that it was clearly demonstrated that Nike's Code of Conduct was being violated at the factory, Nike has decided to wait for the outcome of the legal proceedings. This is unacceptable because it is Nike's Code of Conduct that is the issue here. If this Code of Conduct is being violated, it is Nike's direct responsibility to intervene, rather thanwaiting for legal proceedings to run their course.
Nike should also call together all parties concerned, as requested in the December 15 letter of CLIST, to share the outcomes of the investigation, and secondly to discuss what steps should be taken after re-instatement of the workers.
I urge you to do everything you can to ensure that the demands of the workers are met and that they will be able to form and join a union of their choosing free from intimidation and harassment. I look forward to hearing from you about actions you have been able to take on this matter.
Yours sincerely,
(nome, cognome, paese, eventuale organizzazione di appartenenza)

[pagebreak]

LETTERA A DECATHLON
(karalvambeveren@decathlon.com)
(si chiede a Decathlon di prendere contatto con il sindacato della MSP e con CLIST, e dicondividere con loro i risultati dell'ispezione prevista per fine dicembre, usando della propria influenza per giungere a una risoluzione soddisfacente della vertenza in corso)

Nell'oggetto, scrivere: MSP Sportswear factory in Thailand

DECATHLON
Bourges
RN 76
Route d'Orleans
18230 Saint DoulchardTel.
+ 33 02 48 23 02 02
Fax. + 33 02 48 23 02 00
Email : karalvambeveren@decathlon.com

Dear Mr. Vambeveren,
I am writing to you because I am concerned to hear about the situation at the MSP Sportswear factory in Huatalea  Moung  Nakornrachaseama in Thailand. I understand that in 2003, workers at the factory decided to organise and form a union due to the poor working conditions at the factory.
Since that time, the union executive has been harassed and threatened. Some of them were unfairly dismissed in October 2004, and in some cases their relatives were dismissed. Other members of the executive were arbitrarily transferred to other sections without proper training.
I was disappointed to learn that to date, Decathlon has not played an active role in bringing about a resolution to this labour conflict, even though it sources at MSP Sportswear and has been kept well informed about the poor labour practices at the factory. I understand that Decathlon has scheduled a regular audit of the factory and would look into the matter at that point. Your audit team however did not at any point in time contacted the fired workers or the organizations workingwith them. This response is therefore completely inadequate.
I hereby urge Decathlon to contact the MSP Sportswear factory union and CLIST (the local organisation supporting the union) and to share the audit report with them, and use your influence to bring about a fair and acceptable resolution that includes the following demands of the union:
1. Reinstatement of  the 3 dismissed workers with back wages from the first day of dismissal until their reinstatement.
2. The company must reinstate the mother of one of thecommittee  members of the trade union, who was also working at the factory and whom the union members believe got fired because of her family connection.
3. The company must rescind warning letters issued to Mr. Pragun Boonluom, a union activist who was arbitrarily transferred from his sewing line to the cutting line without being given adequate training for his new duties. He was therefore unable to meet quotas and received a warning letter.
4. The company must stop all actions against the union and cease distributing misleading information about the union.
5. The company must allow the union to give leaflets  and union membership application forms  freely in the work place without intimidation or any form of  interference to prevent workers from joining the union.

I urge upon you also work with other buyers  towards an effective and immediate remediation process, notwithstanding the legal process followed, and participate actively in organizing for all parties to discuss next steps.
I look forward to hearing from you about actions you have been able to take on this matter.

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

[pagebreak]

LETTERA A MSP (samanya@mpgthailand.com; peter@mpgthailand.com)
(si chiede al titolare Sig. Krautler di reintegrare le lavoratrici licenziate e di venire incontro alle richieste del sindacato, facendo cessare ogni comportamento illegale)

Nell'oggetto, scrivere: MSP Sportswear factory in Thailand

Master Piece Garment and Textile Co. Ltd.
Attn.: Mr. Peter Krautler (factory owner)
88/2 Moo4 Rama2 Road
Samaedam Bangkhuntien
Bangkok 10150 Thailand
Tel 02-4528254-61    Fax 02-4528252-53
E-mail: samanya@mpgthailand.com
E-mail: peter@mpgthailand.com

Dear Mr. Krautler,
I am writing you because I am concerned to hear about the situation at the MSP Sportswear factory in Huatalea  Moung  Nakornrachaseama in Thailand. I understand that in 2003, workers at the factory decided to organise and form a union due to the poor working conditions at the factory.Since then, union organisers and executive members have been harassed at your factory and a number of them have been unfairly dismissed in October 2004.
During talks held between you, Nike representatives, and the dismissed union executives and the organisation supporting them, CLIST, you stated in writing that you had no intention of reinstating the unfairly dismissed workers. Instead of constructive negotiation with the union, you offered the dismissed workers money in the hope that they would drop their demands and leave your factory.
This is unacceptable because it is in violation of Thai labour laws. The workers at your factory have the right to organise and to engage in collective bargaining. To bring a swift and fair resolution to this conflict, I urge you to take steps to reinstate the dismissed workers and ensure that the demands of the union are met, including:
1. Reinstatement of  the 3 dismissed workers with back wages from the first day of dismissal until their reinstatement.
2. Reinstatement  the mother of one of the committee members of the trade union, who was also working at the factory and whom the union members believe got fired because of her family connection.
3. Rescind warning letters issued to Mr. Pragun Boonluom, a union activist who was arbitrarily transferred from his sewing line to the cutting line without being given adequate training for his new duties.He was therefore unable to meet quotas and received a warning letter.
4. Stop all actions against the union and cease distributing misleading information about the union.
5. Allow the union to give leaflets  and union membership application forms  freely in the work place without intimidation or any form of interference to prevent workers from joining the union.

MSP Sportswear employees must be allowed to form and join a union of their choosing free from intimidation and harassment. I look forward to hearing from you about actions you have been able to take on this matter.For your information, I'm also contacting your main clients, including Nike and Decathlon, to express my deep concern over this matter.(nome, cognome, paese, eventuale organizzazione di appartenenza)