2008 Woodie Awards
Fair labor code of conduct
Joe Ebaugh
Issue date: 3/6/07 Section: Opinion
The university's licensing program and anti-sweatshop efforts have been criticized recently by a group named Feminism Without Borders. The group has demanded the university adopt a particular anti-sweatshop code of conduct, the Designated Suppliers Program.
Our current fair-labor code of conduct, which we and most other schools concerned with laborers' rights issues have chosen to adopt, requires acceptance by every company applying for a license with the university. It uses cooperation between the licensees, labor rights activists and other non-government organizations to assess and improve working conditions in factories spread out from the Caribbean and Latin and South America to Africa to Asia to the western Pacific. The collegiate apparel industry is very small in the overall global apparel manufacturing industry, and it is only working in concert with our suppliers and NGOs that we can have any influence on changing working conditions.
The suppliers program, on the other hand, would require all collegiate apparel to be sourced from a pre-approved set of factories, essentially removing any influence the collegiate market has with the rest of the manufacturing industry. The program has other obvious flaws and is currently under legal review by the Department of Justice. But even with the department's approval, anti-sweatshop activists and NGOs can't agree that this program will result in improving the working conditions for the greatest numbers of workers internationally.
The entire university community should be proud of the fact that the university has been involved in anti-sweatshop efforts since the 1990s, when our licensing program was in its infancy and we joined the Fair Labor Association and adopted the strictest fair labor code of conduct in the collegiate apparel industry. In 2005, because of its record in monitoring labor rights, we also joined another labor rights organization, the Worker's Rights Consortium. Of the more than 3,000 colleges and universities in the U.S., this university is one of only 89 institutions that are members of both organizations.
The suppliers program was first proposed in late 2005, and, since its debut as an alternative code of conduct, I have been regularly attending a series of the program's development meetings with the WRC and the FLA and have been an invited guest of the program's Working Group of the WRC at most of their quarterly meetings.
Lastly, Feminism Without Borders argued we should support the program because Duke has come out in favor if it! Can that writer be serious that we should be influenced merely by what Duke does? Since when? Most colleges and universities do not adopt anti-sweatshop codes, but of those with active labor rights programs in place, the vast majority have not endorsed the program because of concerns that it will be counter-productive in the anti-sweatshop movement. North Carolina, Michigan, Penn State and Purdue have issued statements against supporting the program, and Notre Dame, MIT, Florida and Texas, along with the majority of the 167 WRC members, have declined to adopt it at this time.
Please take time to go to the websites of the FLA (www.fairlabor.org) and the WRC (www.workersrights.org) to view the discussion on the merits of the suppliers program and also to see how much work is being done by these anti-sweatshop activists to improve working conditions around the globe. I will continue to be involved with the WRC and the FLA. I will be the point person for this university in a new FLA pilot program to improve the monitoring of small- to mid-sized licensees, an area that has not received much attention in the past but where an increasing amount of product is being generated as global sourcing becomes easier for licensees of all sizes. I am proud of the strides this university has made in the past dozen or so years as our licensing program has grown, and I feel confident we will continue to be one of the leaders in efforts to help improve working conditions in the factories where the university and other collegiate and non-collegiate products are being made.
Joe Ebaugh is the university's director of licensing. He can be reached at jebaugh@umd.edu.
Our current fair-labor code of conduct, which we and most other schools concerned with laborers' rights issues have chosen to adopt, requires acceptance by every company applying for a license with the university. It uses cooperation between the licensees, labor rights activists and other non-government organizations to assess and improve working conditions in factories spread out from the Caribbean and Latin and South America to Africa to Asia to the western Pacific. The collegiate apparel industry is very small in the overall global apparel manufacturing industry, and it is only working in concert with our suppliers and NGOs that we can have any influence on changing working conditions.
The suppliers program, on the other hand, would require all collegiate apparel to be sourced from a pre-approved set of factories, essentially removing any influence the collegiate market has with the rest of the manufacturing industry. The program has other obvious flaws and is currently under legal review by the Department of Justice. But even with the department's approval, anti-sweatshop activists and NGOs can't agree that this program will result in improving the working conditions for the greatest numbers of workers internationally.
The entire university community should be proud of the fact that the university has been involved in anti-sweatshop efforts since the 1990s, when our licensing program was in its infancy and we joined the Fair Labor Association and adopted the strictest fair labor code of conduct in the collegiate apparel industry. In 2005, because of its record in monitoring labor rights, we also joined another labor rights organization, the Worker's Rights Consortium. Of the more than 3,000 colleges and universities in the U.S., this university is one of only 89 institutions that are members of both organizations.
The suppliers program was first proposed in late 2005, and, since its debut as an alternative code of conduct, I have been regularly attending a series of the program's development meetings with the WRC and the FLA and have been an invited guest of the program's Working Group of the WRC at most of their quarterly meetings.
Lastly, Feminism Without Borders argued we should support the program because Duke has come out in favor if it! Can that writer be serious that we should be influenced merely by what Duke does? Since when? Most colleges and universities do not adopt anti-sweatshop codes, but of those with active labor rights programs in place, the vast majority have not endorsed the program because of concerns that it will be counter-productive in the anti-sweatshop movement. North Carolina, Michigan, Penn State and Purdue have issued statements against supporting the program, and Notre Dame, MIT, Florida and Texas, along with the majority of the 167 WRC members, have declined to adopt it at this time.
Please take time to go to the websites of the FLA (www.fairlabor.org) and the WRC (www.workersrights.org) to view the discussion on the merits of the suppliers program and also to see how much work is being done by these anti-sweatshop activists to improve working conditions around the globe. I will continue to be involved with the WRC and the FLA. I will be the point person for this university in a new FLA pilot program to improve the monitoring of small- to mid-sized licensees, an area that has not received much attention in the past but where an increasing amount of product is being generated as global sourcing becomes easier for licensees of all sizes. I am proud of the strides this university has made in the past dozen or so years as our licensing program has grown, and I feel confident we will continue to be one of the leaders in efforts to help improve working conditions in the factories where the university and other collegiate and non-collegiate products are being made.
Joe Ebaugh is the university's director of licensing. He can be reached at jebaugh@umd.edu.
Submit a letter to the editor or post a comment below.
Be the first to comment on this story