Here's a conversation I had the other day with a person who works for a factory (producing trim for garments). If companies are really serious about CSR in supply chains, then they really do need to give factories a longer lead time... This example show how ridiculous the situation is getting:

Factory Representative [FR]: Sometimes I just don't understand... Why is the lead time so short on this order?
Stephen Frost [SF]: How long is it?
FR: The customer [a factory producing a garment for a big brand] wants us to deliver within two weeks.
SF: Two weeks from placing the order?
FR: Yes.
SF: Is that possible?
FR: You know, the material has to be shipped from Taiwan. It takes eight days for it to arrive at the factory in China.
SF: Why do you use material from Taiwan?
FR: It's higher quality. Then by the time we make the product and ship it... I advised them that the minimum time is three to four weeks, but they insist on two.
SF: Will you do the order?
FR: We can't. I've told them we can't do it. I don't understand why they [the brand] don't give the vendor [producing the garment] enough time to do the garment. They expect something magical...

Everybody reading this would know the name of the brand (whom I won't mention for obvious reasons). They want something more than magical. They want the impossible. And they'll get it; they'll find a factory that can meet the deadline and which does it by working around the clock for a price that can only be met by underpaying workers and sidestepping an array of laws, rules and regulations.

The sad thing about all of this is that the factory in question wants to become more sustainable (and understands that sustainability is the future), but is struggling to understand how brands can preach CSR on the one hand and quote lower and lower prices for shorter lead times. The disconnect does nothing to convince them that anybody is truly serious about this. And in the long run, the damage this does will be hard to rectify...

In the first half of 2008, there were 330 'illegal strikes' in Vietnam (see more here). And now comes news that up to 10,000 workers "have walked off the job to protest low salaries and lousy meals" a shoe factory in Bien Hoa City, Dong Nai Province. The factory is owned by Pou Chen Vietnam, which is in turn owned by the Taiwanese-based Pou Chen Group (whose subsidiary Yue Yuen is the world's largest branded footwear manufacturer). According to the report linked above, workers on the "the picket line threw mam tom (shrimp paste) and pig blood pudding on other workers for not joining the strike". Pou Chen has agreed to raise wages by 5%, but workers have rejected the offer saying that the US$70 per month they earn is not enough to meet rapidly rising living costs.

Today sees the launch of a new international campaign to demand that Samsung accept responsibility for the deaths of young workers from occupational cancer. Spearheaded by a coalition including Supporters for the Health and Rights of People in the Semiconductor industry (SHARPs), Korean Metal Workers' Union (KMWU), Asian Network for the Rights Of Occupational Accident Victims (ANROAV) and International Campaign for Responsible Technology (ICRT), the "Samsung Accountability Campaign" has also launched a new international petition (hit the link to sign) calling on Samsung to accept responsibility for the health of its workers, especially now that it has become a leading global brand promoting itself as a "green company".

The Coalition is calling on Samsung to: 1) accept responsibility for the hazards of semiconductor manufacturing, 2) compensate those harmed; and 3) prevent future suffering and mistreatment of workers by making Samsung a toxics-free model workplace where workers are treated with dignity and respect. You can see a video of some of the Samsung victims and their families here.

The Coalition will hold a press conference this morning in front of Samsung headquarters in Seoul.

Last year, a Foxconn worker committed suicide after accusations relating to an iPhone prototype. Now, Just last week, another young employee (this time a production line worker) has been found dead in one of the company's factories in China. Reports from China say the death is 'suspicious'. Ma Xiangqian, who joined the company in October last year, was found dead in a factory dormitory on 23 January. The police determined cause as 'sudden death' after initial investigation. But Ma’s sister has alleged there are scars on her brother's body, that he was black and blue in the chest area, had blood in his nose and a depression in his forehead. She believes that Ma was possibly beaten to death at work. Foxconn issued a press release on 25 January, and has offered a reward of 500,000 yuan to anyone who can provide clues that lead to the truth. More here (in Chinese only).

Noko Jeans made a splash last week with news that the Swedish company was releasing premium jeans manufactured in North Korea. The company is big on CSR (see its CSR policy here), so it's clearly got more on its mind than the cheapest labour costs in Asia. Nadira Lamrad (who's starting her PhD with me) wrote something about it over at Social Alterations, and is following up with an interview (check back at Social Alterations for the outcome of that). She asked me what question I would ask them: I said that I'm interested in whether they think larger brands should source from places like North Korea and Myanmar in order to affect positive change? Let's hear what they say. It's an interesting story no matter what angle you look at it...