A Cambodian Labor Group Could Be Shut Down. Here’s Why It Matters.
As one of fashion’s preeminent trade groups, the American Apparel & Footwear Association (AAFA) pens a lot of statements—most of which it publishes on its website.
A September missive to the Cambodian government was notable for several reasons, however. For one thing, it was the second letter in just as many months expressing the organization’s “serious concerns” about the Ministry of Interior’s ongoing—and many say retaliatory—investigation into the Center for Alliance of Labor and Human Rights, the Phnom Penh-based workers’ rights organization better known as CENTRAL. For another, it listed 19 signatories, including top-flight brands such as Adidas, American Eagle Outfitters, Gap Inc., Puma, Tommy Hilfiger parent PVH Corp. and The North Face owner VF Corp.
More from Sourcing Journal
“It appears that the government’s investigation and document requests of CENTRAL [are] in reaction to their June report,” said the statement, referring to a critique of Better Factories Cambodia (BFC), an International Labour Organization (ILO)-backed program designed to improve working conditions in the country’s garment sector, for failing to identify breaches of workers’ rights.
“As global brands sourcing from Cambodia, we respectfully urge the Cambodian government in the strongest possible terms to immediately cancel the audit of CENTRAL and refrain from taking any measures that could be perceived as restricting civil society space or freedom of speech,” it added.
The AAFA also called for the dismissal of a criminal complaint against CENTRAL program manager Khun Tharo. Insiders have blamed more than a dozen pro-government “yellow” unions for filing the complaint and petitioning the government to delve into CENTRAL’s operations and finances. The Clean Clothes Campaign, the garment industry’s largest consortium of trade union and labor organizations, has dubbed the proceedings nothing short of a “smear campaign,” one that it says “fits in seamlessly” with the broader repression of democratic voices in Cambodia.
Tola Moeun, CENTRAL’s executive director, said that the so-called unionists who protested outside the organization’s office in June to accuse it of being a “puppet of foreign countries and Americans” and taking money away from workers, for instance, appear to have direct and indirect links to various ministries.
“It clearly shows the current security audit conducted by the National Audit Authority is [very] much political and [a form of retaliation] against CENTRAL’s report,” he said.
Tharo, whose lawyer has been unsuccessful in unsealing the claims made against him, said he’s grateful for the show of support, believing that it sends a “strong signal” to Cambodian authorities to reconsider their actions and ensure that the fundamental freedom of expression is untainted by intimidation and retaliation—just as the country’s constitution and international conventions demand.
Even so, one critical stakeholder has been pithier in its response. Other than saying it will be internally discussing improvements based on CENTRAL’s recommendations, BFC—and by extension, the ILO—offered “no new updates.”
“The BFC program is a joint initiative run by the International Labour Organisation and the International Finance Corporation,” Tharo said. “Both of these organizations advocate for the ability of civil society to engage freely, advise and criticize the activities of these organizations. Given that CENTRAL’s report specifically critiques an ILO-run program, it is incumbent on the ILO to recognize its responsibility to act in defense of labor and human rights [activists] like me and CENTRAL and publicly acknowledge the value of critical research and advocacy, such as that displayed in the report by CENTRAL.”
CENTRAL is currently waiting for the ministry’s report, which will include recommendations on what the next steps should be. The nonprofit will have 28 days to respond, after which it could face a strong possibility of permanent suspension.
Anne Bienias, living wage coordinator at the Clean Clothes Campaign, said that the AAFA’s second statement was more powerful because it included names. The United States remains the No. 1 destination for Cambodian-made goods, accounting for nearly 36 percent of the country’s exports, or $4.4 billion worth, in the first six months of 2024, according to Cambodia’s General Department of Customs and Excise. But it’s the brands and not the body as a whole that provide factories with the much-needed orders, particularly in the face of rising minimum wages, which will climb by nearly 2 percent to $208 per month beginning January.
At the same time, she questioned why two of the world’s largest fashion companies—H&M Group and Zara owner Inditex—didn’t include their names despite being card-carrying members of the AAFA.
“H&M is still a major buyer from Cambodia and they say that they care a lot about freedom of association and these kinds of things,” Bienias said. “They’ve been participating in the Better Factories Cambodia program since the beginning, so this should matter to them, but they’ve remained silent—as have a few other brands as well.”
The Clean Clothes Campaign has also called out Asics, one of the letter’s signatories, for not intervening in alleged union busting at Wing Star Shoes, one of its Cambodian suppliers. Chea Chan, who helped organize the union to improve working conditions, was arrested without a warrant, prosecuted and imprisoned for six months on false charges of theft as a result of his activities, she said.
H&M said that it’s following developments in Cambodia and is engaging with different stakeholders. (The retailer declined to say why it didn’t sign the AAFA letter.) Inditex did not respond to a request for comment. Writing on its website, Asics said that it has urged Wing Star Shoes to stop interfering with union activities and is engaging with CENTRAL and the Cambodian Alliance of Trade Unions to “thoroughly investigate the facts.”
In a statement following its examination of BFC’s methodology, CENTRAL said it wanted to make clear that its report was never meant as an “attack” on any party or institution. Nor was it intended to damage Cambodia’s reputation.
“The role BFC has played in improving labor rights compliance in Cambodia’s garment, footwear and travel goods industry is undeniable,” it said. “Brands, workers and employers alike depend on its existence to be able to conduct business responsibility and support their livelihoods. Our report recommendations simply raise awareness for further action to ensure that the public data is fully representative of all workers’ lived experiences.”
But Bienias said that CENTRAL’s predicament was never really about the report.
“The yellow trade unions in Cambodia used the report to sort of spark the fire, but the real thing is not the report,” she said. “It’s just that there has been a wish to shut down CENTRAL for a very long time with the Cambodian government, so they’re just using it as an excuse, basically, to pursue this.”
And while the AAFA did not return an email asking what would happen if the Cambodian government shuts down one of the few independently functioning organizations in the nation, its statement puts the issue in focus.
“A vibrant civil society, guaranteed in part by freedom of speech, is a key part of what makes Cambodia an important sourcing partner for the apparel and footwear industry,” it said.
Solve the daily Crossword
