A story of fashion and Indian slave labour
The TLDR: A new BBC News investigation reveals that workers in factories that supply leading British companies—including Marks & Spencer, Tesco and Sainsbury's, and Ralph Lauren—are routinely exploited. But this story is just the tip of a far bigger and more monstrous iceberg.
Basic deets
- India is the world's second-largest manufacturer and exporter of garments after China.
- Garment exports generated Rs 250 billion in revenue in 2019-20.
- The sector employs at least 12 million people in factories, but millions more work from home.
Tell me about this story, first
BBC talked to women workers in unnamed factories in rural South India. And here’s what they revealed:
- "We're made to work continuously, often through the night, sleeping at 3am then waking up by 5am for another full day.”
- “We don't get toilet breaks, we don't get time to drink water on shift. We barely get time to eat lunch.”
- "They've increased our workload. We're forced to stay late to finish it—or they yell at us and threaten to fire us. We're scared as we don't want to lose our jobs."
- "The supervisor always shouts at us… If we make any error in stitching, I'll be taken to the master who is very scary. The master will start swearing and shouting at us. It's a terrifying experience"
Why this is a scandal: One, these violate Indian labour laws which state that no employee should work more than 48 hours a week (or 60 hours with overtime). And they cannot be forced to work beyond nine hours in one day. Also: women should only work night shifts if they choose to do so.
Two, it contradicts the claims made by these brands. For example:
“Ralph Lauren's 2020 Global Citizenship and sustainability report says the company is ‘committed to conducting our global operations ethically with respect for the dignity of all people who make our products’. The report also includes a pledge to ensure employees ‘must not be made to work excessive working hours’ and says there should be no ‘verbal harassment, coercion, punishment or abuse.’”
The other three brands are members of the Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI)—and have signed up to its base code which includes similar pledges.
Ok, and you’re saying it’s actually far worse?
Yes, this is just a handful of brands and is limited to factory workers. A 2019 University of California, Berkeley study looked at those who work out of their home in North and South India. It is considered the “most comprehensive assessment” of their working conditions. The picture it paints is far more dismal.
The work: Home workers typically put “finishing touches” on a garment, such as embroidery, tasseling, fringing, beadwork, and buttons. Others cut sleeves or stitch shoes. And they are increasingly used by factories to subcontract their work.
The workers: Roughly one in five home-based garment workers in India are aged 17 and under. The study interviewed a representative sample of 1,452 workers. The youngest was 10 years old. Of these, 99% were either Muslim or belonged to a lower caste—95.5% were women. And most are trapped in this industry due to poverty:
“In northern India, one in 10 people were trapped in forced labour. Almost 6% were in bonded labour, where a person is forced to work to pay off a debt. In all, three-quarters of those interviewed said they began the work due to some form of duress, with many citing family pressure or severe financial hardship. Two-thirds of child workers in the north were also out of school.”
The wages: are appalling. These workers typically received the equivalent of Rs. 9 to 11 per hour. Almost all workers—99.2%—did not receive the state-stipulated minimum wage. In most cases, workers received only 1/10th of the minimum wage. None of them belong to a trade union or have an employment contract—which means they have zero protection.
To make things worse: They are not even paid on time: 41.3% in the north had to wait anywhere from a few weeks to a few months. The south fares better: 15.8% of workers suffered wage delays of a few weeks or less. Irrespective, these delays make everything far worse, as the study’s lead researcher points out:
“Imagine you’re earning 13, 14, 15 cents an hour. Then imagine your payments are not even on time, they’re delayed by a month or two. Then imagine you’re given an order that’s going to take you five days to complete and you don’t complete it on time and you’re not paid.”
In essence, the workers are chained to a treadmill—working without income so they can be paid their past due wages.
The fallout: Injury and chronic illness, including back pain and diminishing eyesight. Almost none of the workers received any sort of medical care for work-related injuries.
The final straw: The pandemic has been a far greater disaster for home workers—who have been entirely ignored. They have received no relief from either the government, brands or factories. Many have not been paid, and have little prospect of work. For example, 18-year-old Indumathi in Tirupur who is owed Rs 1,000 and doesn’t have a ration card:
“I can’t even take an advance (on wages) because I am not a factory worker… I am unable to feed my child properly. If this continues, we will not be able to live.”
Point to note: Around 85% of the workers documented by this report worked for companies that supplied apparel companies in the United States and European Union.
So home workers have it worse?
Yes. But so do children who are recruited by spinning mills that supply the cloth to garment factories. They prefer kids because they are cheaper, easily exploited, and belong to poor families which desperately need the money.
According to activists, more than 2,000 children have been taken to Tirupur—the handloom hub in Tamil Nadu—to work in textile units from neighbouring districts. The agents—who earn Rs 2,500 per child—forge Aadhaar cards to duck child labour laws. And the kids soon find themselves trapped far away from home, working 14 hour days—and with no hope of returning to school.
According to Times of India:
“While larger companies are wary of flouting labour laws as well as international obligations, medium and small companies continue this practice of cheap labour. Smaller units function out of rudimentary sheds or even houses, making it difficult for authorities to track. Most of the youngsters employed are girls from backward areas like Tiruvannamalai or Dindigul, underlining the fact that rural poverty coupled with the unscrupulous industrial sector could turn a fertile breeding ground for exploitation of teenagers.”
The bottomline: According to the Berkeley researchers, the big brands have the most clout to push for change. But we in turn have even greater power over these brands as consumers. For it is our hunger for cheap, disposable fashion that powers this toxic supply chain—and connects us to the women and children slaving over our clothes.
Reading list
Read the BBC News expose on South Indian garment factories. The entire Berkeley report is here—but you can read the highlights in The Guardian. Times of India has more on the exploitation of children. An added must read: this Human Rights Watch report that explains how the business model of big brands directly enables worker abuse.