Activists blame Primark, exporters rebuff allegations

Top Stories

»	India’s export outlook brighter as manufactured goods gain share: RBI
»	Private consumption driving growth in Q3 with rural India taking lead: RBI
»	Indian MSMEs create about 10 crore jobs in 15 months
»	Indian prefer Q-commerce for daily essentials, physical stores for high-value buying
»	Embedded finance to unlock $25 bn revenue opportunity for India’s platforms by 2030

Saurabh Gupta & Dhrubajyoti Baruah | 21 Jun, 2008
The issue of child labour in Indian factories have taken center-stage after British clothing major, Primark severed contracts with three suppliers in the textile town, Tirupur in Tamil Nadu.

Activists are now saying that Primark should have worked with them to improve working conditions rather than dropping the suppliers.

Interestingly one of the three sacked suppliers, has been producing garments for the chain since 1996.

Several activists opined that Primark known for being a high-street fashion house offering cheap garments to its consumers are themselves to blame for the recent debacle. They say Primark, all this time, must have been aware of child labour practices in the suppliers' factories, but was mum on the issue because it served its purpose of producing cheap garments.

But with the recent exposé, they have stirred themselves clear off the issue in a bid to prove their innocence, activists claimed.

Good practice where workers' rights abuses are uncovered is to stay with factories and work with them to improve conditions, says Labour behind the Label's Campaigns Coordinator, Martin Hearson: "This reaction from Primark smacks of old school reputation management and falls far short of the response we would expect to see from a company that claims to be committed to ethical trading."

"Cutting and running from suppliers following exposure by campaigners or the media only serves to punish those workers brave enough to speak out against their conditions. It certainly won't do anything to improve their lives. Such actions make Primark's ethical claims ring hollow."

Jane Tate of Homeworkers Worldwide says: "Home working is an important livelihood strategy for millions of women worldwide. The issue is not that women work from home but that, hidden at the bottom of unregulated supply chains they suffer appalling conditions and exploitation. When companies like Primark take a 'no homework' stance they are not helping workers but forcing these supply chains even further underground."

Reacting strongly against the allegations, A Shaktivel, President, Tirupur Exporters Association (TEA) told SME Times over the phone: "Three exporters had given some work to refugees with an aim to provide livelihood to the families. It was not given to a child, but a girl with an intention of helping her parents who were working with them. After the allegations from a NGO it was investigated and found that the girl is studying in a school. No child labourers are being used in any of the mills in Tirupur."

Asked if this knee-jerk action from Primark will affect the industry, Shaktivel said, "This action of Primark is not going to do any harm to the industry, as orders from only three units have been cancelled and overseas buyers are working with Tirupur exporter since last 25 years. They are aware of the fact that there are no child labourers in the factories. The Tirupur industry is sure to come out from this situation soon."

Meanwhile, noting that Child labour is an issue, AEPC Chairman, Rakesh Vaid in a telephonic conversation with SME Times from Srinagar, said that the council in the coming days will hold a series of seminars to discuss the issue amongst its members.

"Exporters will have to be very cautious that such incidents are not repeated again. Incidents like these affect our image, the image of the country and erodes the Government of India's initiatives to do away with child labour, if any."

Vaid went on to say that "all the members will now have to be very vigilant and contractors need to employ in-house auditors to check for any child labourers in the factories of their sub-contractors."

This is however not the first time that India has been in the eye of the storm. A year back, US clothing retailer Gap pulled out a contract with an Indian supplier citing the same reasons after an undercover exposé by the British newspaper The Observer.