El
Salvador: Government Ignores
Widespread Labor Abuse
CAFTA Must Include Strong Protection
for Workers' Rights
Excerpts from:
Human Rights Watch, December, 2003
for
more information, go to
http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=americas&c=elsalv
Human Rights Watch reports that, “workers’
human rights in El Salvador are systematically
violated by employers while the government disregards
or even facilitates the abuses.”
“The
110-page report, ‘Deliberate Indifference:
El Salvador's Failure to Protect Workers' Rights,’
documents serious violations of workers' human
rights and examines the role of the government.
…Three of the highlighted companies supplied
internationally known, U.S.-based apparel corporations.
“Human Rights Watch found that employers
delay salary payments, fail to pay overtime
due, deny mandatory bonuses and vacation payments,
and pocket workers' social security contributions,
preventing them from receiving free public health
care. Most pervasively, employers use myriad
tactics to violate workers' right to freedom
of association.
"If
CAFTA goes into effect with the labor rights
provisions currently proposed, abuses like those
we documented will continue. El Salvador will
enjoy ever-greater tariff benefits for goods
made by workers whose rights are flouted. That’s
inexcusable."
“Employers routinely fire union members
and leaders, target trade unionists for suspension,
pressure workers to renounce their union membership,
and deny jobs to union troublemakers.’
In this hostile climate, only about 5% of workers
in the country have successfully organized.
Workers are usually out of luck if they seek
redress for these violations. Illegally fired
trade unionists are not entitled to their jobs
back. Instead, the fine for firing them is so
minor that, if imposed at all, it is seen merely
as a small cost of doing business. …
“Even the few protections that exist are
barely enforced. …The Labor Ministry regularly
ignores employers' illegal anti-union conduct
designed to thwart organizing drives. And in
extreme cases, the ministry collaborates with
employers to commit labor law violations and
abuse workers' human rights, for example by
honoring illegal employer requests that workers
sign company liability waivers before receiving
severance pay.
“If workers turn to El Salvador's labor
courts for relief, they find long delays and
often insurmountable procedural obstacles. The
law affords no ‘whistleblower’ protection
for coworkers brave enough to testify on behalf
of fired colleagues, and there is no guarantee
that favorable judgments will be enforced. …
“’What you have in El Salvador is
a serious lack of political will to protect
workers' rights,’ said Pier. ‘More
funding only helps if there's a desire to enforce
the law. What we need here is a fundamental
change in the government's attitude toward labor
rights.’
“The report comments that such an attitude
shift should be encouraged by strong labor rights
provisions in CAFTA but laments that the current
proposal is not sufficient. If that proposal
were adopted, the trade pact would only require
countries to enforce their existing labor laws,
even if those laws, like El Salvador's, fail
to meet international standards. Instead, CAFTA
should require local labor laws to meet international
norms and establish a transitional mechanism
to ensure that countries' labor practices meet
basic standards before trade benefits are phased
in.
“’If CAFTA goes into effect with
the labor rights provisions currently proposed,
abuses like those we documented will continue,’
said Pier. ‘El Salvador will enjoy ever-greater
tariff benefits for goods made by workers whose
rights are flouted. That's inexcusable.’
“The report also calls on El Salvador
to strengthen its labor laws by requiring reinstatement
for workers illegally fired or suspended for
legitimate trade union activity, banning anti-union
hiring discrimination, and streamlining union
registration requirements according to ILO recommendations.
Human Rights Watch urges the Ministry of Labor
to uphold workers' human rights by following
legally mandated inspection procedures, facilitating
rather than obstructing union registration,
and refraining from participating with employers
in illegal anti-union conduct. The report is
available at http://www.hrw.org/reports/2003/elsalvador1203/
Selected Case Studies
“Before it closed in March 2002, Confecciones
Ninos was a maquila-a factory in a free trade
zone assembling goods for export-that reportedly
supplied garments to U.S.-based corporations
such as Wal-Mart, JC Penney, Perry Manufacturing,
Kellwood Company (and its subsidiary Koret of
California), Kahn-Lucas-Lancaster, and Kmart.
A Confecciones Ninos worker told Human Rights
Watch, ‘We were required to meet goals,
. . . [but] if we reached our goals, it was
because we didn't get up for the bathroom or
water. . . . I got a kidney infection because
I didn't go to the bathroom . . . or get a drink.
I went to the doctor, and he gave me treatment,
but he said that I had to drink water and use
the bathroom. . . . But the boss doesn't understand
that. He's interested in production.’
“Confecciones Ninos workers began a union-organizing
drive in March 2001. In September, they requested
the Ministry of Labor to register their union.
But the employer responded by calling union
members ungrateful traitors and threatening
to fire them if they refused to sign statements
denying that they had attended the union's founding
assembly. Under pressure, five workers signed
the statements-enough to bring membership below
the minimum number required for union formation.
With no further investigation, the Labor Ministry
denied the union registration, based largely
on the coerced statements submitted to the government
at least two weeks past the legal deadline.
• “Lido, a baked-goods factory,
fired 11 union leaders and 52 union members
in May 2002 and between October 14 and November
4, 2002. One of the leaders commented to Human
Rights Watch, ‘The goal of the company
is that the union cease to exist. . . . The
workers are afraid. . . . They are afraid because
the union leaders are outside. When we were
inside, we intervened if they were denied permission
to use the bathroom.’
“Lido paid the 52 fired union members
the severance pay due for illegal dismissals.
But in exchange, Lido required the workers to
sign company-prepared job resignations and liability
waivers. Under economic duress, the workers
signed, not willing to challenge the requirement
in lengthy and onerous court proceedings. With
resignations tendered and legal claims waived,
Lido could not be fined for the illegal anti-union
firings nor for illegally dismissing union members
in order to destroy the union. Lido thus successfully
evaded the law's weak union protections. “And
the government partnered with Lido in the scheme.
The company sent 22 of the fired workers to
the Labor Ministry to claim their severance
pay. Government officials refused to turn over
the money owed unless workers signed the statements
drafted by Lido. The union's general secretary
commented, ‘We consider that . . . [the
Ministry of Labor] is collaborating with the
company so that the union will cease to legally
exist.’”
©
|