The article discusses the implementation of the Dindigul Agreement at Natchi, a garment factory in India that had faced criticism and scrutiny due to allegations of forced labor and poor working conditions. The agreement was signed by H&M Group, Walmart, Zara's owner Inditex, and other brands, with the aim of improving working conditions and reducing the risk of forced labor.
The article reports on the progress made since the agreement was implemented, including an increase in productivity, a reduction in harassment against women workers, and the establishment of a grievance mechanism. However, it also notes that some brands have been hesitant to source from Natchi, citing concerns about strikes and industrial disputes.
The article attributes this reluctance to a broader industry-wide attitude towards labor laws and regulations. Shivakumar, a professor at Cornell University's ILR School, is quoted as saying that the industry does not care about implementing labor reforms, except in response to major tragedies or disasters.
Kuruvilla, another expert, notes that some brands are unwilling to source from Natchi because they perceive collective bargaining agreements and labor management agreements as a liability. He suggests that this attitude is driven by concerns about strikes and industrial disputes.
The article concludes by highlighting the need for greater transparency and accountability in the fashion industry's supply chain, particularly when it comes to labor laws and regulations. Shivakumar is quoted as saying that unless there is some massive tragedy, nobody will do anything to implement meaningful reforms.
Overall, the article highlights the challenges of implementing labor reforms in the garment industry, particularly in countries like India where labor laws are often weak or poorly enforced. It also underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability from brands and other stakeholders in order to ensure that workers are protected and treated fairly.
The article reports on the progress made since the agreement was implemented, including an increase in productivity, a reduction in harassment against women workers, and the establishment of a grievance mechanism. However, it also notes that some brands have been hesitant to source from Natchi, citing concerns about strikes and industrial disputes.
The article attributes this reluctance to a broader industry-wide attitude towards labor laws and regulations. Shivakumar, a professor at Cornell University's ILR School, is quoted as saying that the industry does not care about implementing labor reforms, except in response to major tragedies or disasters.
Kuruvilla, another expert, notes that some brands are unwilling to source from Natchi because they perceive collective bargaining agreements and labor management agreements as a liability. He suggests that this attitude is driven by concerns about strikes and industrial disputes.
The article concludes by highlighting the need for greater transparency and accountability in the fashion industry's supply chain, particularly when it comes to labor laws and regulations. Shivakumar is quoted as saying that unless there is some massive tragedy, nobody will do anything to implement meaningful reforms.
Overall, the article highlights the challenges of implementing labor reforms in the garment industry, particularly in countries like India where labor laws are often weak or poorly enforced. It also underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability from brands and other stakeholders in order to ensure that workers are protected and treated fairly.