|
From Lenasia
to Newcastle
|
From Lenasia to Newcastle: workers lives in danger
from unscrupulous bosses
By Patrick Craven
On 13 December 2001, in a dawn raid in Newcastle, KZN, a joint team from
the Department of Labour and the SA Clothing and Textile Workers Union
(SACTWU) visited clothing and knitting companies to check on their compliance
with the law on health and safety and labour standards.
The raid followed an earlier incident in which twin babies died inside
a Newcastle clothing factory because their mother, Nokuthula Hlatswayo,
and 15 other workers were locked inside the factory and could not summon
medical help when she went into labour. It also took place just over a
year after the fire in a Lenasia chemical factory, in which 11 workers
were burned to death because they were locked inside.
The Newcastle team discovered substantial evidence of disregard for the
law, including locked factory gates with workers working inside. They
identified evidence of unsafe working conditions, ranging from loose electrical
wiring to unsafe machines.
"The raid showed many examples of inhuman treatment of workers,
ranging from exposing them to life-threatening situations, to gross underpayment",
said SACTWU General Secretary, Ebrahim Patel.
In some factories, workers reported working 85 hours per week. In other
instances, wages of as little as R15 to R60 per week were uncovered. Many
other violations of worker rights were discovered. Pregnant women were
penalised with lower wages when they returned from maternity leave. Fines
were issued on workers who did not clean their machines. In some cases,
mobile toilets inside the work area were provided, resulting in a stench
in the work area, which also served as the rest room and eating area.
In one recent instance where a worker was alleged, six weeks ago, to
have injured her hand at a machine, and did not receive treatment from
her employer. She died shortly thereafter, and the company concerned did
not investigate the incident, nor report it to the authorities. Newcastle
has been allowed to become the country's biggest sweatshop.
Regrettably the investigators identified blue-chip retailers such as
Edgars, Jet, Ackermans and Mr Price as customers of the sweatshops and
found labels of Nike, Levy's, Diesel and Adidas produced in these conditions
where workers were exploited.
"There is a moral responsibility on the retailers and brand owners
to ensure the law is enforced by their suppliers," said Ebrahim Patel.
"We now intend to meet with these retailers and ask them to account
for the actions of their suppliers. We will not accept retailers profiting
from the misery of workers".
An SABC TV crew covered this dawn raid. They filmed inspectors as they
discovered serious violations of labour and health and safety laws and
interviewed people involved, including the SACTWU General Secretary.
It was clearly a major news story. Yet it was not shown on the main SABC
English TV news bulletins. In response the verbal inquiries SABC staff
said that the bulletins were 'full' and that this story had been squeezed
out
COSATU lodged a complaint against the SABC for failing to use this story,
arguing that the SABC as the public broadcaster has a responsibility to
reflect all aspects of life in South Africa in an accurate, fair and balanced
way. It argued that this was a story with strong personal interest and
political importance and undoubted news value and to ignore it did not
constitute fair and accurate reporting.
COSATU demanded that the SABC show this footage, with an apology and
explanation for not broadcasting it.
The Broadcasting Complaints Commission (BCCSA) however rejected the COSATU
complaint, firstly on a technicality about the date on which it was submitted,
but, more seriously, on the basis that "there was a strong possibility
that the Commission would decide, as it has decided in the past, that
unless a complainant can show that a broadcast lacked balance or called
for further response from a person criticised, the matter cannot be adjudicated
upon.
"In other words," they said, "there must have been a broadcast
for a start. Only then would the BCCSA be able to decide upon the question
whether a further broadcast should take place. In the present matter there
has been no broadcast."
This is an extraordinary argument. The whole point of COSATU's complaint
was that the item was not broadcast. Yet they say the fact it was not
broadcast is a reason for rejecting the complaint? It implies that if
a broadcaster ignores an important story, viewers can have no complaint
against the broadcaster nor redress from the BCCSA.
COSATU will be taking this matter up with the BCCSA and urges all its
affiliates to monitor broadcasters' coverage of their disputes, including
when they ignore them and put in complaints until the broadcasters start
to give proper attention to important worker issues like this one.
