This article was downloaded by: [York University Libraries]

On: 20 November 2014, At: 04:14

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:
Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Gender & Development

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription
information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cgde20

Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

– the move towards practical, worker-driven
change for sportswear workers in Indonesia
Daisy Gardener
Published online: 23 Mar 2012.

To cite this article: Daisy Gardener (2012) Workers’ rights and corporate accountability – the move towards
practical, worker-driven change for sportswear workers in Indonesia, Gender & Development, 20:1, 49-65,
DOI: 10.1080/13552074.2012.663623

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2012.663623

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)
contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our
licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or
suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are
the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,
claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of
the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial
or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use
can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Workers’ rights and corporate
accountability
the move towards /

practical, worker-driven change for

sportswear workers in Indonesia
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

Daisy Gardener

Women workers across Asia and throughout the world continue to face long hours, low
wages and discrimination when they try to organise into unions within garment and
footwear factories. Millions of young women are making products for companies Nike
and Adidas. Over the past decade, under considerable public pressure, these companies
have developed standards on workers conditions for their supplier factories. Despite
this, there is still a considerable gap between sportswear companies’ policies and the
actual conditions inside factories. This article explores a process in Indonesia from
2009 to 2011 which brought together Indonesian factories, international sportswear
brands and Indonesian unions to develop a protocol in an attempt ensure that workers’
human rights are upheld inside factories. Women union leaders were instrumental in
the development of this protocol and will be integral to the implementation of these new
guidelines.

Les ouvrières des quatre coins de l’Asie et du monde continuent de se confronter à de

longues journées de travail, à des salaires faibles et à la discrimination lorsqu’elles
tentent de s’organiser en syndicats au sein des usines de vêtements et de chaussures de
sport. Des millions de jeunes femmes fabriquent des produits pour des entreprises
comme Adidas et Nike. Au cours des dix dernières années, subissant une pression
considérable, ces entreprises ont mis au point des normes relatives aux conditions de
travail des ouvriers dans les usines qui les fournissent. Pour autant, il continue d’y
avoir un écart considérable entre les politiques générales des entreprises d’articles de
sport et les conditions en vigueur à l’intérieur des usines. Cet article traite d’un
processus mené en Indonésie entre 2009 et 2001 qui a rassemblé des usines
indonésiennes pour qu’elles mettent au point un protocole en vue de faire respecter
les droits humains des ouvriers dans les usines. Les déléguées syndicales ont joué un
rôle primordial dans l’élaboration de ce protocole et feront partie intégrante de la mise
en œuvre de ces lignes directrices.

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

ISSN 1355-2074 print/1364-9221 online/12/010049
17 – Oxfam GB 2012
49
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13552074.2012.663623
 Daisy Gardener

Las trabajadoras de Asia y de todo el mundo siguen enfrentando largas jornadas de

trabajo, bajos salarios y discriminación cuando intentan organizarse en sindicatos
dentro de la industria textil y del calzado. Millones de mujeres trabajan para las
empresas Nike y Adidas. Como resultado de la presión pública, en la pasada década
estas empresas establecieron normas sobre condiciones laborales para las fábricas de sus
proveedores. Sin embargo, todavı´a hay una considerable distancia entre las polı´ticas de
las empresas de ropa deportiva y las condiciones reales en las fábricas. Este ensayo
analiza un proceso que se desarrolló en Indonesia de 2009 a 2011 en el cual las fábricas
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

y los sindicatos de ese paı´s, junto con las empresas internacionales de ropa deportiva,
elaboraron un protocolo para garantizar los derechos humanos de las trabajadoras de
las fábricas. Las dirigentes sindicales participaron activamente en la elaboración del
protocolo y vigilarán el cumplimiento de estas nuevas normas.

Key words: workers’ rights; corporate social responsibility; corporate accountability;

women workers; decent work; Indonesia; Play Fair

Introduction
The Freedom of Association Protocol is a new set of guidelines for sportswear supplier
factories and sportswear brands on the implementation of freedom of association
(FOA) in Indonesia. The FOA Protocol was first signed in Indonesia by sportswear
brands, Indonesian unions, and supplier factories on 7 June 2011. Indonesian women
workers and union leaders provided critical input into the development of this
Protocol, ensuring that it is a tool that workers will be able to use in a practical sense to
bargain for better conditions in their workplaces. If implemented properly, the FOA
Protocol should mean that women and men union leaders are not discriminated
against or dismissed when they try to organise in sportswear factories.
Decent work is one of the central Millennium Development Goals. Millions of
women working worldwide are making products for brands such as Nike and Adidas.
Long hours, low wages, and poor health and safety conditions are commonplace in
factories. Women workers are often subjected to gender-specific abuses of their rights
in their workplaces, including sexual harassment and discrimination against workers
who become pregnant.
Women from across Asia continue to fight for their rights and take significant risks
to be able to organise1 in factories. The right to organise and collectively bargain is
essential for men and women workers to be able to bargain for improvements in
wages, working hours, and other conditions (Connor 2002, Connor and Dent 2006,
Maquila Solidarity Network 2008). Indonesian union leader Ngadinah Binti Abu
Mawardi was exercising her rights when she was arrested in 2001 after organising a

50 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

strike at an Adidas supplier factory near Jakarta. The workers at the factory, Panarub,
were striking for the right to be paid for overtime at the legally mandated rate; to be
allowed to take (unpaid) menstrual leave and to receive higher allowances (Connor
2002). Ngadinah was charged under Article 160 (inciting others to break the law) and
Article 335 (unpleasant conduct toward others) of the Indonesian criminal code.
International organisations and groups, including Oxfam, were concerned by her
arrest and the vagueness of the charges laid against her. More than four months after
her arrest, Ngadinah was found not guilty on both charges filed against her. Whilst
participating in a focus group in 2002 which was held to gather information for the We
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

Are Not Machines Report by Oxfam, Ngadinah, who was interviewed together with
other workers from the Panarub factory, expressed a strong belief that the support she
received from international human rights organisations was the only reason she was
found not guilty (Connor 2002).
Whilst workers’ rights abuses in the garment and footwear industries persist
across Asia, the past several years have seen a growing number of companies in the
private sector, including major brands, adopting policies around environmental
and social standards. These standards are part of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) programmes, and include guidelines relating to FOA and wages that should
be implemented in supplier factories. CSR itself is a contested concept, which is
understood quite differently by various companies and civil society groups. Whilst
Nike’s Corporate Responsibility Report broadly describes ‘philanthropy and com-
pliance . . . [that brings] people, planet and profits into balance for lasting success’
(Nike 2009, 22); the United Nations talks very specifically about corporations’
obligation to respect human rights in their supply chains (Ruggie 2011). Oxfam refers
to accountability rather than responsibility, describing corporate accountability in the
area of workers’ rights as the obligation of corporations to respect and uphold the
human rights of workers making their products.
In spite of the proliferation of CSR reporting and discourse, poor conditions persist
for many women and men workers. Ongoing problems for women workers include
low wages, excessive overtime and difficulty taking sick and menstruation leave. A dec-
ade after Ngadinah’s case, women workers in Indonesia continue to face discrimination
in their workplace when they try to organise to bring about change for their members.
From the 1990s, when workers’ rights violations were first being exposed in
sportswear factories, women took risks to speak out about their experiences; Oxfam
has sought to amplify the voices of these women workers in their fight for improved
conditions. Oxfam has campaigned for 16 years, since 1995, on decent work and
workers’ rights
/ with a focus on women’s rights. A coalition of labour rights groups
and organisations including Oxfam has pressured global sportswear brands to ensure
that workers’ human rights are implemented in their supplier factories.
Building on the work of this 16-year international campaign, in 2009
/11 a number
of groups came together to develop a set of concrete guidelines called the Freedom of

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 51

 Daisy Gardener

Association Protocol, to try to close the gap between CSR policies and real practices in
sportswear factories. This article focuses on the recent negotiations in Indonesia to
develop this Protocol, and explores what will be necessary to ensure its effective
implementation throughout 2012 and beyond. The article proposes that a number of
factors could determine the ongoing success or failure of the Indonesia agreement.
The article draws on filmed interviews conducted in May 2011 with union leaders
who were involved in the Protocol negotiations. All quotations included in the article
come from these interviews, unless indicated otherwise. The article also draws on my
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

experience as the Labour Rights Advocacy Coordinator with Oxfam Australia. I have
been involved in the Protocol process in Indonesia since January 2010, facilitating
dialogue and supporting the negotiation and implementation process.
The next section provides a short background on the global campaign for workers’
rights in the sportswear sector. This global campaign paved the pathway for the
Indonesian process.

The global campaign for workers’ rights in the sportswear sector

Raising the issues: the initial stages
From the early 1990s, public interest grew in the conditions facing sportswear workers,
as individuals, campaign groups, and journalists began to expose the low wages and
long hours faced by sportswear workers. Nike products were a particular focus. In
1992, Harper’s Magazine published an article by Jeff Ballinger which focused on the pay
slip of Sadisah, an Indonesian woman employee of Nike supplier Sung Hwa (Ballinger
1992, 46
/7). This pay slip showed Sadisah worked 63 hours of overtime during a one-
month period, and was paid only 14 cents per hour.
Throughout the mid-1990s and into the 2000s, groups across the globe, including,
the Clean Clothes Campaign, United Students Against Sweatshops, Oxfam and The
Canadian Catholic Organisation for Development and Peace, publicly pressured Nike
to improve conditions for workers who make the company’s goods. As global pressure
on Nike grew, and women workers such as Sadisah spoke out, the company started to
take more public responsibility for the conditions for workers in its supply chain. From
1991 to 2010, the company underwent a significant shift in its public discourse around
workers. In 1991, John Woodman, Nike’s general manager in Indonesia, was quoted
responding to a question about labour conditions in Nike’s supplier factories as
follows: ‘They are our subcontractors. It’s not within our scope to investigate . . . I don’t
know that I need to know’ (Schwarz 1991, 16)
In contrast, Nike’s website states:

Our greatest responsibility as a global company is to play a role in bringing about positive
systemic change for workers within our own supply chain, and in the industry. When we look at

52 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

our overall footprint in the world, the needs of nearly 800,000 workers in our contract supply
chain overshadow any other group. (Nike 2011)

As a result of sustained anti-sweatshop campaigns, the world’s largest sportswear

brands, such as Nike and Adidas now take workers’ rights more seriously than a great
majority of other transnational companies, including smaller sportswear companies.
However, much remains to be done to turn the stated commitments into sustained
and practical changes on the ground. Tim Connor (2007), an academic (and former
Oxfam employee) who wrote his PhD thesis on the topic of sportswear companies
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

and workers’ rights, has suggested that improvements in workers’ lives have been
significantly less than Nike’s rhetoric might perhaps suggest.

The Play Fair alliance

From the late 1990s, international campaign groups broadened their focus to other
sportswear brands. In 2003, a group of organisations came together to develop the Play
Fair alliance. This group is made up of international human rights organisations,
development non-government organisations (NGOs) and international trade union
organisations, including Oxfam. It aims to improve workers’ rights and working
conditions in the industries associated with sports and sporting events.2
The first formal Play Fair campaign was launched in connection with the 2004
Olympic Games, held in Athens. During the Athens Olympics in 2004, the alliance
put the spotlight on seven smaller sportswear companies
/ Asics, Fila, Kappa, Lotto,
Mizuno, Puma, and Umbro
/ and pressed these companies to address widespread
workers’ rights abuses in the factories supplying their goods. Following on from this
campaign, and with a specific focus on FOA, Oxfam released a report Offside! Labour
Rights and Sportswear Production in Asia in the lead up to the 2006 Football World
Cup. This report chronicled workers’ rights abuses in factories across Asia, pro-
ducing garments and footwear for brands including Adidas, Asics, Kappa, FILA,
Reebok, New Balance, Nike, Speedo (Pentland) and Puma (Connor and Dent 2006).
The report’s authors, Kelly Dent and Tim Connor, continue to be part of the global
network that pushes sportswear brands to take responsibility for workers’ human
rights.
Whilst companies including Nike, Adidas and Puma have developed more
sophisticated auditing systems, produce lengthy CSR reports, and in recent years
have provided important information about the location of supplier factories, the
ongoing challenge lies in company standards, codes and auditing translating into
concrete and positive change for the mostly young women workers employed in
sportswear factories.
In recognition of this gap between policy and practice, in the lead up to the Beijing
Olympics in 2008, the Play Fair campaign urged sportswear companies to take a series

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 53

 Daisy Gardener

of concrete and measurable actions in close collaboration with multi-stakeholder

initiatives, trade unions, and NGOs.

Momentum builds towards country-level talks

At the end of June 2008, 78 trade unions, NGOs and representatives from global
sportswear brands met in Hong Kong to discuss the recommendations made by the
Play Fair alliance, in its ‘Clearing the Hurdles’ report published in advance of the
Beijing Olympic Games (Maquila Solidarity Network 2008). Union rights are clearly
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

articulated in International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions relating to FOA

(Convention 87), the right to bargain collectively (Convention 98) and the right of
workers’ representatives not to be discriminated against (Convention 135). Oxfam
believes that allowing workers to form trade unions and bargain collectively is the
most effective way to give them greater influence over their working lives and provide
a platform for them to obtain their rights.
Four main issues or ‘hurdles’ were discussed at the Hong Kong meeting: managing
consolidation in the sector; FOA and collective bargaining; a living wage; and pre-
carious employment.3 The participants reflected on the ongoing violations of workers’
rights, and considered the potential role brands and suppliers could play to en-
sure that workers have better access to these rights. Two issues were dealt with
in a working group format: FOA and living wages. The group that held detailed
discussions on FOA identified a need for supplier factories to proactively adopt
written, auditable policies on FOA (ibid.). Participants at the Hong Kong meeting
committed to continue talking at both a global and national level to address these
issues.
Indonesia was identified at the Hong Kong meeting as a strong candidate for the
first country to conduct national-level talks. A document of ‘sector-wide solutions’
had already been drawn up for Indonesia by Oxfam Australia, Maquila Solidarity
Network, and Clean Clothes Campaign (2008), in consultation with Indonesian unions,
outlining several major areas that could form the basis of country talks. The sector-
wide solutions were drafted to tackle a range of common problems that were arising
through disputes in factories.
Jeroen Merk of the Clean Clothes Campaign played an important research and
campaigning role, together with Ineke Zeldenrust, in the developments leading up to
the Indonesia initiative. He explained why Indonesia was a good country in which to
start talks:

The CCC [Clean Clothes Campaign] has been working with groups in Indonesia for a long
time on urgent appeals (cases where workers’ rights are being violated in factories). From that
experience we found there were continuing structural barriers that trade unions were facing
when they pursued freedom of association. At the Hong Kong meeting, we said we wanted
concrete progress on the four hurdles. Indonesia stood out (as a pilot country for country-level

54 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

talks) because it is the largest sportswear producer that has good laws on freedom of association
compared to the other two countries that have a large volume of sportswear production
/ China
and Vietnam. (Skype interview, 21 October 2011)

As part of the process of research for this article, Tim Connor, who was Oxfam
Australia’s labour rights advocate from 1995 to 2010, reflected on the decision to focus
on Indonesia as a pilot location for talks. He noted that:

There were two good things about this initiative: it offered an opportunity for direct discus-
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

sions between groups/unions in country and brands, which was something that we had
been calling for, and it also presented a good opportunity for the development of better
relationships between unions and other campaign allies within Indonesia
/ especially to develop
an agreed set of goals for Indonesia at the country level. (Telephone interview, 19 October
2011).

Elly Rosita Silaban, President of the Indonesian Footwear, Leather, Textile and Garment
Federation
/ SBSI, agreed that the process was important for Indonesian unions to
develop a common platform of shared goals:

previously we didn’t know one another, we weren’t close with other trade unions like SPN,
GSBI, KABSI and SPTSK, but during this process, we no longer would say that I come from
this particular union: we sat down together and our demands were the same. So we’ve
strengthened one another without differentiating between who has the most members and who
has the least. No! We’ve become united under our shared goal.

Negotiations in Indonesia
The Indonesian discussions began in November 2009 at a workshop in Jakarta that was
attended by representatives from Nike, Adidas, New Balance and Puma. Representa-
tives from four large sportswear supplier factories also attended the meeting as well
as five Indonesian textile and footwear unions and six Indonesian labour NGOs.
Representatives from three international groups attended from the Play Fair alliance:
Ashling Seeley from the International Garment Leather Workers’ Federation, Jeroen
Merk from the Clean Clothes Campaign as well as Tim Connor, Chris Wangkay, and
Mimmy Kowel from Oxfam Australia.
Prior to the November workshop, the Indonesian unions had developed a set of
entry-point demands around three major issues constantly facing their members in
factories: FOA, precarious employment and wages.
As Emelia Yanti (General Secretary of Gabungan Serikat Buruh Independen
/
GSBI) recalls, the meeting in 2009 was not the first time that Indonesian unions had
expressed their concerns about FOA directly to brands like Nike and Adidas.

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 55

 Daisy Gardener

From the time that discussions around freedom of association were first reignited after
political reformation in 1998 we began to voice complaints about anti-union actions or
practices to several brands who we knew had opened local representative offices in Indonesia
/
so we could convey this directly. So back in 1998 we were already raising this issue with
brands.

What the 2009 meeting represented was the beginning of a new way of working
between brands, suppliers, and Indonesian groups, and an effort to look at the concrete
problems at the country level and to develop practical solutions together with the aim
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

of preventing FOA violations before they occurred.

At this meeting, representatives from the Indonesian trade unions presented
information and analysis regarding violations of FOA in Indonesian sport shoe and
sportswear factories. They focused on the impact of these violations on workers, as
well as identifying which of the Indonesian and international laws they believed were
being breached. On the second day of this workshop, Sari Idayani, a female union
leader from an Adidas supplier factory, gave a presentation about the realities for
workers in her factory and the violations that continue to occur at that factory. Tim
Connor said that he believed that Sari’s story provided a compelling context for the
brand representatives at the workshop. In his view, Sari’s story may have contributed
to a shift at the workshop by the brands, particularly the smaller brands, towards
accepting that workers were still experiencing violations, and that these violations
really needed to be addressed (telephone interview, 19 October 2011).
Women workers like Sari have played a key role in creating change in Indonesia
over the last two decades. Indonesian union leaders approximate that more than 70 per
cent of workers in the textiles sector are women. Women constitute at least 70 per cent
of the membership of each of the four unions interviewed by Oxfam about the Protocol
process in May 2011 in Jakarta.4
At Panarub, the same Adidas sports shoe supplier factory where Ngadinah (whose
case was mentioned at the start of this article) worked, Sari Idayani is the current
SBGTS/GSBI union leader. Sari continues to experience persistent difficulties when she
tries to meet with her members within the factory. She is trying to negotiate for a higher
allowance for the mostly female workers at the factory, who continue to struggle on
low wages. Sari spoke up at the 2009 workshop in Jakarta, which formed the basis for
the 17-month FOA Protocol process. She continued to be an active participant in the
process leading up to the first signing of the Protocol by sportswear brands and
supplier factories, on 7 June 2011.
At the 2009 meeting, the participants agreed to begin with discussions on FOA first,
and come back to the issues of wages and contracts. Lilis Mahmudah is one of the
heads of the Dewan Pimpinan Pusat (National Board) of the Indonesian union Serikat
Pekerja Nasional (SPN). She was a participant at both the 2008 Hong Kong meeting
and the subsequent 2009 Indonesian workshop. In an Oxfam Australia filmed

56 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

interview with her in May 2011, she recalled her feelings about the decision in 2009 to
focus on FOA as the first issue:

We, from the trade unions thought that if freedom of association were guaranteed [by the
brands], other issues such as wages and contracts could be negotiated. So if FOA is not yet
guaranteed, we won’t be about to carry out the negotiations [on wages and contracts] because
the companies would surely oppose them.

Indonesia has ratified the core ILO conventions relating to workers’ rights to FOA
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

and the right to collective bargaining. However, these laws have not been consistently
upheld in factories supplying garment and footwear companies. An example is the
ILO Convention 87 on FOA.5 Elly Silaban views the FOA Protocol as ‘important
because it is the first of its kind to take place in Indonesia involving brands, suppliers
and trade unions’.
A team made up of Elly Silaban, Lilis Mahmudah, and Emelia Yanti, as well as two
male unions leaders, spent 17 months from December 2009 to June 2011 negotiating a
Protocol on FOA, directly with brand representatives from Nike and Adidas and their
supplier factories. These union leaders already knew each other and two of them had
participated at the 2008 talks in Hong Kong. These union leaders decided to come
together in 2009 to start talks with the sportswear companies about concrete ways to
improve the implementation of workers’ rights. Oxfam helped to organise the
November 2009 workshop that first brought the parties together in Indonesia to start
the talks. Parto was one of the male leaders involved, and is Co-ordinator of the
Department of Education and Publicity with the Indonesian KASBI union. KASBI
stands for Kongres Aliansi Serikat Buruh Indonesia, in English this stands for Con-
gress of Indonesia Unions Alliance. Parto described the 17-month process as an
arduous one:

There were matters that were accepted by the suppliers but then the brands raised objec-
tions. For example, the union secretariat . . . then about all kinds of other technical details.
Compared with the supplier companies, the brands were more difficult . . . The challenge
perhaps was that the brands have their own interests but were not able to explain those
interests.

As well as negotiating clause by clause with Nike, Adidas, and several large supplier
factories, the union team also went back to their members during the negotiation
process to show them drafts of the Protocol, and check whether they thought the team
was on the right track. This participation and consultation was essential to ensure that
the Protocol was going to be of practical use to the women and men working inside the
sportswear factories manufacturing for these brands. Lilis Mahmudah explains that
the unions consulted with women and men workers on two occasions throughout the
process:

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 57

 Daisy Gardener

The first focus group discussion was a discussion to inspect the first draft and then we shared
our first draft with all [our] members to check whether it was all accurate. Then we made
corrections and added a few extra matters. So we were further enriched by information they
provided.

If this Protocol is successfully implemented and upheld in factories it could have

a positive impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of mostly female garment
and footwear workers. Women union leaders, like Sari, will be closely monitoring the
implementation of the Protocol throughout 2012 as it is adopted into the factories
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

where they work. In the next section I go into more detail about the areas covered by
the Protocol.

The substance of the FOA Protocol

The FOA Protocol covers two major areas, the implementation of FOA within factories
and freedom of information.6 The first area looks at ensuring unions are not prevented
from carrying out their organisational activities within the factory, and at allowing
union representatives or members to be released from their work duties for the pur-
pose of undertaking union activities. Union activities include disseminating important
information to members; helping to resolve industrial disputes within the factory;
and participating in negotiations with factory management to develop a Collective
Bargaining Agreement. Releasing workers from their duties during work time to
participate in union activities is very important because workers assembling shoes for
more than 60 hours a week have no free time to take part in union activities.
The Protocol requires factories and brands to ensure union members and union
leaders are not intimidated during the period of their union leadership. This inti-
midation would include demotions, transfers, wage reductions, criminalisation, sus-
pension or dismissal, and being forced to perform a workload beyond the worker’s
capabilities. This clause on intimidation is important because of a long history of union
leaders being prevented from organising in factories by being intimidated, beaten or
dismissed.
One example of dismissal was in 2005 in the same Panarub supplier factory
manufacturing sports shoes for Adidas. The factory dismissed the entire leadership of
one union after workers held a strike for better pay. Workers were being paid as little
as 60 cents an hour
/ while the cost of food and fuel was rising (Connor and Dent
2006, 30).
After the dismissals, Oxfam supported the 33 union leaders in their campaign
for re-employment. Oxfam encouraged the public via its website to write to Adidas
calling on the company to ensure the workers were reinstated. Thousands of letters
were sent to Adidas from citizens who had heard about the case through the
Oxfam website and campaign newsletters. Over the course of five years, several of

58 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

the union leaders repeatedly applied for employment at other Adidas suppliers, but
were unsuccessful despite their many years of work experience (Oxfam Australia
2011).
Another main part of the Protocol focuses on unions having the freedom to
distribute and display information to members within the factory. This, too, comes
from a history of unions being restricted from displaying information and being
prevented from being able to meet with their members within the factory. The Protocol
also regulates that a Collective Bargaining Agreement must be developed within six
months of the formation of a union within a factory.
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

Importantly, the Protocol binds not just suppliers, but also brands to uphold
the articles and provisions contained in the Protocol. Parto explained the significance
of this:

This is something new which incorporates the brands, whereas the brands used to be beyond the
reach of the trade unions, even beyond the reach of Indonesian law. Because then [before] when
there were problems, the brands were usually free [from responsibility]
/ these were only
workplace matters
/ between Indonesian legal entities. Meanwhile workers were making
products for the benefit of the brands. Now, in this Protocol, whether they like it or not the
brands must join in taking responsibility for freedom of association.

Parto’s reflection on the responsibility of sportswear companies procuring from

countries such as Indonesia is particularly significant in light of the recent endorse-
ment of the United Nations (UN) of guiding principles around business and human
rights. In June 2011, the UN Human Rights Council endorsed the ‘Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘‘Protect, Respect
and Remedy’’ Framework’ proposed by UN Special Representative John Ruggie
(Ruggie 2011).
Under this new framework companies are obliged, for the first time, to take
responsibility for the human rights of workers in their supply chains. Any further
reflections on this new framework are outside the scope of this article but this would
be an interesting topic for further exploration, particularly as the framework begins to
be applied.
The inclusion of brands and suppliers as parties required to uphold the FOA
Protocol is noteworthy. Brands like Nike and Adidas do not actually own the factories
into which they place their orders for shoes and clothing. As such, they have argued
/
and continue to argue
/ that they are one step removed from the operations and
conditions within those factories. Oxfam believes brands are often giving mixed
messages to suppliers when they place orders into factories. On the one hand, brands
such as Nike, Adidas, and Puma have codes of conduct which require supplier
factories to uphold human rights, including FOA, but, on the other hand, the sourcing
departments of those same companies will push supplier factories to turn around

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 59

 Daisy Gardener

orders in a short time, sometimes giving the factory orders beyond its capacity and
negotiating with the factory management for the lowest prices.
This sends a conflicting message to the supplier factory management. If the factory
management allows a union to form in the factory and the workers to bargain for
higher wages within decent working hours, this may conflict with the turn-around
times that are expected from the brands buying from the factory, and the price per item
that the factory is receiving from the brand. Oxfam sees it as the brands’ responsibility
to offer fair conditions and a good price to the factory, so that the factory in turn has
the ability to uphold workers’ rights and pay a decent wage. The FOA Protocol clearly
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

binds both the sportswear brands placing orders into supplier factories and the
factories themselves to uphold the provisions within the Protocol.
As well as being part of the global push on sportswear brands to take more
direct responsibility for the conditions within factories, Oxfam has played a role in
supporting this FOA Protocol negotiation process, by facilitating communication
between the parties. Oxfam has encouraged and supported communication between
sportswear brand representatives, Play Fair representatives, and the Indonesian
unions. An example of this was ensuring that copies of the draft Protocol, originally
produced in Bahasa Indonesian, were available in English for the Play Fair alliance
and senior sportswear brand representatives.

Implementation of workers’ rights

At the time of writing this article (November 2011), six sportswear brands have signed
the FOA Protocol
/ Nike, Adidas, Puma, New Balance, Asics, and Pentland. Several
large sportswear suppliers have also signed the Protocol, including PT Nikomas
Gemilang, PT Panarub Industry, PT Tuntex Garment, and PT Adis Dimension
Footwear.7 The Nikomas factory alone employs 40,000 workers, most of whom are
young women. Given the history with unions and FOA at the Panarub Adidas supplier
factory, it will be interesting to see how the Protocol is implemented at this factory.
As part of signing on to the Protocol the brands have committed themselves to
supervising and promoting the implementation of the Protocol in supplier factories.
The parties who sign the Protocol are required to be part of a National FOA Protocol
Supervision and Dispute Settlement Committee. At the time of writing, the groups in
Indonesia are arranging a time to meet and formalise this Protocol committee and its
operating procedures.
Nike and Adidas have reported to Oxfam on their efforts to provide the Protocol to
supplier factories, and educate these factories about the content of the Protocol. Adidas
wrote to Oxfam Australia in August 2011:

On July 28, 2011, we have conducted 2 separate workshop sessions for all of our suppliers
within the scope definition set in the Protocol, i.e. Article 2 (1). Management representatives of

60 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

58 suppliers attended the workshop where we explained the content and requirements of the
Protocol. In the workshop we asked for feedback from our suppliers who had not been part of
the Protocol development and discussed practical challenges and ways of implementation of the
Protocol . . . As a 3rd party in the context of management
/union relationship, we cannot
intervene in the CBA [Collective Bargaining Agreement] negotiations undertaken by our
suppliers. However, now that we have formally adopted this Protocol, we will use the
requirements detailed in the Protocol as a best practice standard for our suppliers to follow.
(Letter from Harry Nurmansyah and William Anderson (Adidas) to Daisy Gardener
and Sarah Rennie (Oxfam Australia), 3 August 2011)
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

Nike has also reported to Oxfam Australia that the company is rolling out the
FOA Protocol to Indonesian suppliers from September to November 2011 (telephone
conversation between Daisy Gardener and Sarah Rennie from Oxfam Australia and
Sonya Durkin Jones from Nike, 30 September 2011).
This step of providing the Protocol to supplier factories, and encouraging them to
sign it, is an important first step in implementation. The Indonesian unions are also
rolling out education programmes to their members in factories, to ensure that workers
are aware of the provisions of the Protocol.
Lilis Mahmudah believes that open dialogue will be critical to the successful
implementation of the FOA Protocol:

We have to continue open communication with buyers [brands]. There are numerous cases . . .
at the moment SPN is documenting violations in a factory that produces sports shoes, after we
can analyse this case we want to call the buyers to the factory for talks . . . I see this as the first
step
/ creating a space for dialogue between buyers, suppliers, and unions, this is something
we haven’t done before.

Emilia Yanti feels that the commitment of the brands and suppliers will be key:

All of this will depend on commitment, even if there is a system for implementation. If suppliers
don’t have commitment to implement then it won’t go ahead. So the main investment is still the
commitment of suppliers and the commitment of brands to ensure that the suppliers implement
the Protocol.

To monitor this level of commitment and open dialogue by brands, the Play Fair
alliance will be encouraging brands that have signed the Protocol to report publicly
on how it is being implemented. In the months leading up to the London Olympics in
2012, the alliance will ask brands to share publicly information about which suppliers
have signed the Protocol and report on the numbers of suppliers who have a Collective
Bargaining Agreement which is as strong as the provisions in the Protocol. These steps
will be necessary to check that all this work by Indonesian unions, sportswear brands,

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 61

 Daisy Gardener

and supplier factories has resulted in a document that is being used and implemented at
the factory level.
Tim Connor, who is a former Oxfam Australia advocate, agrees that commitment
and open dialogue will be important to the successful implementation and adds:

This will include whether brands like Nike make it in the interest of their suppliers to implement
the Protocol in line with other commitments such as their code of conduct.

In addition to ensuring that the FOA Protocol is implemented successfully, the unions
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

are looking ahead to negotiating the next Protocol
/ on contracts and job security. Yanti
explains:

There are still many international brands that employ contract workers. In GSBI we
state that the system of short-term work, contracts or outsourcing is a form of depriva-
tion for workers’ employment. As a consequence workers lack certainty about the length
of their work, because it is stipulated at only three months, six months or one year. We
hope that the Protocol for contracts and wages won’t take as long as the last one [the FOA
Protocol].

The Indonesian unions and Play Fair hope that the experience of the Protocol process
will be useful to groups and unions in other countries which are looking to replicate
a similar process with brands and supplier factories. Lilis Mahmudah suggests that
unity is key: ‘My first piece of advice is that the unions must first sit together,
consolidate their aims, they must work on it together’. Elly Silaban recommends that
the Indonesians lead by example: ‘I send this message to unions in Indonesia, let’s do
this well, let’s show the world that Indonesia can do this, let’s make an example of
ourselves’.

Lessons
Consistent and long-term campaign pressure has created the environment in which
sportswear brands were prepared to sit down and negotiate the FOA Protocol in
Indonesia. This article started by discussing the beginnings of the global campaign to
pressure sportswear companies to take responsibility for workers’ human rights. In the
early 1990s, Nike did not acknowledge that it held any responsibility for the conditions
for women workers in its supplier factories. Over the past 16 years, there has been a
tireless public campaign driven by global and national NGOs and unions to mobilise
concerned consumers and the media to push sportswear brands to do more. Nike
would not have sat down with unions in the 1990s or early 2000s to negotiate a way to
uphold workers’ rights more effectively, as it has in this process. Systemic change to
multinational companies’ practices takes time, patience, and a lot of perseverance.
The development of this Protocol was the result of long-term campaigning by brave

62 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

women and men workers fighting for change in sportswear factories, and the soli-
darity of concerned citizens globally who have supported these men and women in
their struggles.
The Protocol is the product of long-term, ongoing advocacy and campaigning on a
key issue, which is unusual in the aid and development industry. International NGOs
working on poverty alleviation often inject short-term investments and energy into
different advocacy topics. The long-term investment into labour rights work has
enabled a real depth of analysis and understanding of supply chain issues as well as
making possible long-term relationships with Indonesian unions, NGOs and sports-
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

wear brand representatives. Over the past decade and a half, Oxfam has supported
space for workers, particularly women workers, to form their own organisations and
collectively influence and improve their wages, conditions, their lives, and the lives of
their families and communities. It fostered long-term relationships with women union
leaders like Ngadinah and Sari, amplifying their voice to an international community
to challenge the dominant business models of companies like Adidas and Nike. Oxfam
has successfully mobilised international citizens
/ in their roles as consumers, workers,
students, and activists
/ to push sportswear companies to change their practices, not
just their policies. All of this network, relationship, and knowledge building takes time.
Another lesson has been the importance of communication between parties, being
able to bring all players in Indonesia and globally together injected momentum into the
process and served to hold each other to account. Communication within the
international Play Fair alliance continues to be an important aspect in the success of
the work. The Clean Clothes Campaign, Oxfam and the International Textile, Garment
Leather Workers Federation kept in close contact throughout the 18 months of nego-
tiation in Indonesia to co-ordinate joint strategies for advocacy and campaigning
towards the sportswear brands. Having a person on the ground to play an intense,
facilitative role between all parties was also essential.
Equally, good communication between Play Fair and the Indonesian unions
/
as well as communication between the sportswear brands and Indonesian unions
/
continues to be imperative to the success of the Protocol. The successes of the work are
built on the cohesion and joint work of alliances like Play Fair, and on the strength and
perseverance of women and men union leaders and union members in countries like
Indonesia who continue to fight for their rights. The Indonesian unions working
together were a key factor in the successful negotiation of the Protocol. Women union
leaders and women workers were part of developing this Protocol and they will be at
the forefront of monitoring its success over the coming years.

Conclusion
Finally, this Protocol, like any agreement, code, or law, will only be as good as its
implementation. The true test over the coming year will be how factories and the

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 63

 Daisy Gardener

brands, like Nike and Adidas that buy from these factories, adopt and support the
implementation of the Protocol. Three things have been identified in this article as
being important to the success of this agreement: open dialogue and transparency
between the parties who are involved in implementing the FOA Protocol, a strong
commitment by brands and suppliers to implement the Protocol, and that suppliers
be supported and given incentives to be able to uphold the provisions within the
Protocol. For the supplier factories to respect FOA and the right for unions to bargain
collectively, the sportswear brands will need to provide favourable conditions to these
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

suppliers and then monitor closely that rights are genuinely being upheld.

Daisy Gardener is the Labour Rights Advocacy Coordinator with Oxfam Australia. Postal address: Oxfam
Australia, 132 Leicester Street, Carlton, 3053, Victoria, Australia. Email: daisyg@oxfam.org.au

Notes
1 The Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining is explained in the ILO Convention 98
(www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C098; last accessed 5 March 2012).
2 Play Fair (www.play-fair.org/) and Play Fair London Olympics (www.playfair2012.
org/).
3 Internal meeting notes, Hong Kong, July 2008. This three-day meeting is also referenced
on Adidas website (www.adidas-group.com/en/SER2008/2008-Issues/Stakeholder-
issues-Play-Fair-2008-campaign.asp; last accessed 5 March 2012).
4 Oxfam Australia conducted filmed interviews in Jakarta in May 2011 with Parto (KASBI),
Elly Silaban (Garteks), Lilis Mahmudah (SPN) and Emelia Yanti (GSBI). These
Indonesian union leaders were part of a team that negotiated the FOA Protocol with
the sportswear brands and sportswear supplier factories between late 2009 and 2011.
These interviews were conducted just before the final Protocol was signed in Jakarta in
June 2011.
5 Convention 87 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise
Convention, 1948 (www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgi-lex/convde.pl?C087; last accessed March 5
2012).
6 Freedom of Association Protocol (English translation), 7 June 2011 (www.oxfam.org.
au/site-media/pdf/OAus_FOAProtocol_7_06_2011_EnglishTranslation.pdf; last accessed
5 March 2012).
7 PT stands for Perseroan Terbatas in Bahasa Indonesian, which translates to limited/
incorporated company.

References
Ballinger, J. (1992) ‘The new free-trade heel: Nike’s profits jump on the backs of Asian
workers’, Harper’s Magazine, August

64 Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012

 Workers’ rights and corporate accountability

Connor, T. (2002) ‘We Are Not Machines (Despite Some Small Steps Forward, Poverty and
Fear Still Dominate the Lives of Nike and Adidas Workers in Indonesia)’, Carlton, Vic:
Oxfam Australia
Connor, T. (2007) ‘Rewriting the Rules: The Anti-sweatshop Movement; Nike, Reebok and
Adidas’ Participation in Voluntary Labour Regulation; and Workers’ Rights to Form
Trade Unions and Bargain Collectively’, Newcastle, NSW: School of Environmental and
Life Sciences, Faculty of Science and Information Technology, University of Newcastle
Connor, T. and K. Dent (2006) Offside! Labour Rights and Sportswear Production in Asia,
Oxford: Oxfam International
Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 04:14 20 November 2014

Maquila Solidarity Network (2008) ‘Clearing the Hurdles: Steps to Improving Wages and
Working Conditions in the Global Sportswear Industry’, on behalf of the Play Fair 2008
Campaign, Toronto: Maquila Solidarity Network
Nike (2009) ‘Corporate Responsibility Report’, www.nikebiz.com/crreport/content/strategy/
2-1-1-corporate-responsibility-strategy-overview.php?cat cr-strategy (last accessed 5
March 2012)
Nike (2011) ‘Workers & Factories: Improving Conditions in Our Contract Factories’, www.
nikebiz.com/responsibility/workers_and_factories.html (last checked by the author
November 2011)
Oxfam Australia (2011) ‘Oxfam Australia: Inside Adidas’ Indonesian Factories’, www.
oxfam.org.au/explore/workers-rights/adidas/inside-adidas-indonesian-factories (last
accessed 5 March 2012)
Oxfam Australia, Maquila Solidarity Network, and Clean Clothes Campaign (2008)
‘Sector-wide Solutions for the Sports Shoe and Apparel Industry in Indonesia’, policy
document, Oxfam Australia, Maquila Solidarity Network, and Clean Clothes Campaign
Ruggie, J. (2011) ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the
United Nations ‘‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’’ Framework’, www.business-humanrights.
org/media/documents/ruggie/ruggie-guiding-principles-21-mar-2011.pdf (last accessed
5 March 2012)
Schwarz, A. (1991) ‘Running a business: shoe manufacturers accused of exploiting labour’,
Far Eastern Economic Review, 20 June

Gender & Development Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2012 65