Skip to main content

“We were expected to produce between 1,500 to 2,000 garments each per day”

It is almost an oxymoron to say that it is possible to walk into a store and find the merchandise, especially clothing, to have been manufactured in that country - be that store in London, New York, France or Australia.

Garment manufacturers "use" cheap, really cheap, labour to produce goods sold mainly in Western countries, with a whopping mark-up, .

France 24 reports on these workers, in this case, in Guatemala:

"Textile plants called maquilas are considered to be one of the main driving forces of Guatemala’s economy. But behind the factory doors lies a world of overworked and underpaid workers, with no job security and virtually no rights. A “maquiladora” gave us her account.

Guatemala exports more than $1.5 billion (1.08 billion euros) worth of garments every year, mostly to the United States and Europe. There are currently 156 listed maquilas in the country, most of which are Korean-owned. According to the Guatemalan texile and clothes industry commission (VESTEX), over 56,000 people are employed directly by maquilas.

However, despite a "code of conduct" elaborated by Vestex in 1996 to ensure fair working conditions for all maquiladoras (textile workers) and signed by over 120 maquilas, a study carried out by French NGO “Medecins du Monde” (MDM) in 2010 showed that many employers do not comply with the code’s required standards, which are voluntary, and not mandatory. Most maquiladoras work 11 hours a day, 6 to 7 days a week, for less than the legal Guatemalan minimum wage. What’s more, MDM estimates that 90% of "maquiladoras" have been subjected to verbal or physical violence in their workplace at least once."

Continue reading the account of one of these maquilas here.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...