Well done. Now let’s see David Curmi’s Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry follow suit.
Published:
October 29, 2014 at 11:41pm
The Malta Employers Association has made a strongly worded statement against the violation of workers at Leisure Clothing. It is good to see that it reacted immediately with its wholehearted condemnation.
I suppose over at David Curmi’s Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry, they’re busy weighing up the pros and cons of making a statement against not making one, whose toes they might step on, and who might be interlinked to what.
That is, if they noticed the shocking reports at all, given that they didn’t come in a van from Sicily.
6 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-29/local-news/Malta-Employers-Association-condemns-indecent-working-conditions-for-Asian-workers-6736124619
It may also be in order to trace the production chain and see whose numbers, costs and profits don’t match.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Bortex, the client, imposed terms and conditions knowingly.
Leisure Clothing in this case must be considered as just a subcontractor, and do we know who’ll get all the blame.
Perhaps Lino Spiteri might care to investigate the workings at Bortex.
Leisure Clothing in the mid-to-late 80s/ early 90s may have presented less of a contrast in conditions than today, since Malta itself has also come very far since that time.
I recall that outside presence wasn’t appreciated inside the factory, but I put that – in those days – down to cultural differences.
Who specifically gave a thought as to which jurisdiction the rights of those Chinese came under in those days, when freedom of information was not as accessible? On the back of the Chinese / Mintoff agreements?
I would have thought that with our EU accession, at the very least, it would be the entities sub-contracting to Leisure Clothing that had an insight as to what was happening there, or those Maltese assisting in its management.
Whereas especially upon EU access, other established manufacturers in Malta called the Health department on new entrants and competitors on any imaginable pretext, the situation here has obviously slipped through the net.
The situation, should have been under the overview duty and jurisdiction of Malta Enterprise.
At some point, should it not have been Wenzu Mintoff’s concern to check and report on the reality of conditions in this factory?
If not his then who, at each phase, would workers’ and factory conditions have fallen under?
In terms of other agencies having an official interest in these workers, would such workers now fall under “uprooted?”
Are they “free to leave”? Do they get any form of immediate compensation by the company for their hardship so as to guarantee a minimum amount and level of freedom? Who is representing them?
Condemnation isn’t enough, is it? Suspenidng membership of the Association and all associated rights would be necessary.
The Chamber of Commerce has issued a condemnation but it seems it is more concerned about image than the plight of the workers.
It almost sounds as if their concern is that the abuse was exposed and publicized rather than the fact that it was going on.
“The Malta Chamber condemns this recently exposed case of abuse as it fears it might tarnish the reputation of the local manufacturing industry as well as business in general. ”
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-30/local-news/Leisure-Clothing-Malta-Chamber-welcomes-action-against-workers-abuse-and-exploitation-6736124675
Leisure Clothing have never been members of the Malta Employers Association. Companies who join the MEA have to subscribe to a Code of Ethics and if they are in breach their membership will be suspended.