Guardian Covers No Sweat Protest to TUC Over Hosting Primark AGM

This is despite pressure from two general secretaries and Labour MPs who want him to cancel the event. A letter published in today's Guardian attacks the TUC for allowing Associated British Foods, owners of the clothing group Primark, to hold its annual meeting on Friday. The letter has been organised by No Sweat, a campaigning organisation against sweated labour and the exploitation of migrant workers.

Some 106 people, including two general secretaries, five Labour MPs, former minister Tony Benn and comedian Mark Thomas, have signed the letter. It says: "It is embarrassing for trade unionists in the UK to see the supreme body of British trade unionism benefit from Primark's profits, particularly as the AGM coincides with the No Sweat speaker tour, which features a delegation from National Garment Workers Federation of Bangladesh.

"This time last year, Primark was believed to be sourcing clothes from a factory chain in Bangladesh, which forced its workers to work 14-hour shifts for as little as 4p an hour. When workers have organised against these appalling conditions, they were met with severe state repression. Trade unionism in Bangladesh remains illegal. In this sense, a portion of ABF's profits come as a direct result of the merciless violence with which the Bangladeshi state enforces its anti-trade union laws and at the direct expense of our brothers and sisters in the NGWF. We hope that you will do all you can to stop the forthcoming AGM in the spirit of international workers' solidarity. If it continues to go ahead then No Sweat will be calling on trade unionists in London to picket the TUC building on December 5."

Last night the TUC stood by its decision. A spokesman said: "Associated British Foods has made a commercial booking to hold its AGM in the TUC's conference facilities. This is not a Primark event. ABF is a unionised company with good relations with UK unions. The TUC has a proud record of campaigning for vulnerable workers in the UK and developing countries. We believe in constructive engagement with companies. We welcome ABF's membership of the Ethical Trading Initiative and have used that opportunity to press concerns about supply chain issues - including in Bangladesh."

Paul Kenny, general secretary of the GMB union, said yesterday: "We need to raise the bar on what are acceptable standards. Just because a company recognises trades unions in the UK does not mean we should pass over exploitation and abuse of labour standards in China or other overseas territories. Primark has a very poor reputation on labour standards at overseas suppliers'" he claimed. "The TUC's rental policy needs to be changed to exclude the likes of Primark."

If the meeting goes ahead the GMB and the National Union of Journalists are likely to ask for change in the rules governing the letting of TUC premises.

-----------------------------------------------------

TO MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL AND
GENERAL SECRETARIES OF AFFILIATED UNIONS

Dear Colleague
Associated British Food AGM

I have received a number of enquiries from colleagues following the story in today’s Guardian headed ‘TUC in sweatshop labour row over firm hiring congress hall’.

I am therefore writing to all unions to set out the background and the TUC position.

Some months ago the company ABF made a commercial booking for Congress Centre conference facilities for their company AGM on 5th December.

Ten days or so ago, a letter was received by the TUC from Brent Trades Council demanding that the commercial booking should be cancelled because of unacceptable labour abuses in Bangladesh perpetrated by Primark which is a wholly owned subsidiary of ABF.

Their letter purported also to be on behalf of the campaigning group ‘No Sweat’ though no direct approach to the TUC has ever been made by No Sweat itself.

The letter also referred to an on-line petition to the TUC.

The TUC has been well aware of concerns over issues in Primark’s supply chain and has raised these through the Ethical Trading Initiative.

ABF is a member company of ETI and has accepted that they have responsibilities to ensure that their supply chain should observe decent employment standards.

The International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation (ITGLWF) (which is also represented on the ETI) has also been actively following up issues with Primark in Bangladesh and other countries.

On receiving the approach from Brent Trades Council the TUC communications department consulted their counterparts in Unite, GMB and USDAW all of which are recognised within ABF.

None of the unions supported the demand that the contract with ABF should be cancelled.

The following statement was then issued to the Guardian when it raised this issue with us:

"Associated British Foods has made a commercial booking to hold its AGM in the TUC's conference facilities. This is not a Primark event.

"ABF is a unionised company with good relations with UK unions.

"The TUC has a proud record of campaigning in the interest of vulnerable workers both in the UK and developing countries.

"We believe in constructive engagement with companies. We welcome ABF's membership of the Ethical Trading Initiative and have used that opportunity to press concerns about supply chain issues - including in Bangladesh.

"Unions recognised by ABF also, of course, have other direct channels to raise such issues with the company."

If any union ever does have an issue over Congress Centre bookings then of course it is always open to them to raise it direct with the TUC. This is surely preferable to raising issues through the media.

Yours sincerely

BRENDAN BARBER

General Secretary