Health hazards in China’s denim factories

War on Want is a movement of people committed to global justice.

Our vision is a world free from poverty and oppression, based on social justice, equality and human rights for all.

Our mission is to fight against the root causes of poverty andhuman rights violation, as part of the worldwide movement for global justice.

waronwant.org

Students & Scholars Against Corporate Misbehaviour (SACOM) monitor working conditions in the factories of brand suppliers in China.

Our vision to connect consumers and workers together for sweat-free working conditions.

Our mission to uncover the unethical labour practices of theglobal supply chain and mobilise public support for decentworking conditions.

sacom.hk

The IHLO is the Hong Kong Liaison Office of the internationaltrade union movement, founded in 1997, shortly after HongKong's reunification with China.

We have a mandate to support and represent the internationaltrade union movement in Hong Kong and to monitor trade unionand workers' rights and political and social developments inChina. IHLO also plays a key role in ensuring more effectiveparticipation of independent and democratic trade unions inHong Kong in the international trade union movement.

ihlo.org

The Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) is an international alliancethat works to improve conditions and support the empowermentof workers in the global garment industry.

The CCC has national campaigns in 15 European countries with a network of 250 organisations worldwide, and an internationalsecretariat based in Amsterdam.

cleanclothes.org

01Executive summary

Blue jeans are big business, and inrecent years fashion designers havecreated new demand for denim whichcomes with a pre-worn look. To meet this demand, the process ofsandblasting was introduced as a cheapand easy way of ‘distressing’ jeans.Sandblasting involves firing abrasivesand onto denim under high pressure,whether in a machine booth or simplyvia an air gun attached to a hose. Oftenperformed without proper ventilation,safety equipment or training, thepractice exposes workers to serious risk of silicosis, the deadly lung diseasecaused by inhalation of silica dust.

This report investigates six denim factories in the south China province of Guangdong, a region that is responsible for half of theworld’s entire production of blue jeans. Eventhough many well known brands have bannedthe use of sandblasting in the production oftheir denim, workers in these factories revealthat the practice continues behind closeddoors. In addition, many factories haveintroduced other methods of distressingdenim which bring their own health risks, and workers are rarely given the necessarytraining in how to use the new techniquessafely. Many are forced to work up to 15 hours a day with little or no protectiveequipment simply in order to earn enough to live on, exposing them to potentially fatal illnesses. Medical checks offered to

the workers are woefully inadequate,increasing the danger when diseases remain undiagnosed.

It is almost a decade since doctors in Turkeyfirst raised the alarm at the threat of silicosisin the garment industry. In response to thegrowing number of deaths and illness amongyoung denim workers in that country, theTurkish government introduced a national ban on sandblasting in 2009. The following year, the Killer Jeans campaign succeeded in persuading over 40 major denim brands to announce their own bans on the use ofsandblasting in the production of their jeans.Yet the practice of sandblasting continues,now augmented by other harmful finishingtechniques such as hand sanding or chemical spraying.

This report provides recommendations for action by brands, governments andinternational bodies in order to end the use of sandblasting in denim production onceand for all.Voluntary bans have been shownto be inadequate as a means of tackling theproblem, as brands themselves admit thatthey have been unable to verify thatsandblasting has been discontinued in reality.A mandatory global ban on sandblasting inthe garment industry, coupled with fulltraining on all other finishing techniques, isthe only realistic answer to a practice thatcontinues to threaten the occupational healthand safety of workers around the world.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

02

Contents

1. Sandblasting: an introduction 03

1.1. Risk of silicosis 05

2. China: health and safety 0 7

2.1. No compensation 08

3. China: factory findings 10

3.1. Factories and buyers 11

3.2. Sandblasting 12

3.3. Other techniques 14

3.4. Potassium permanganate 16

3.5. Health examinations 18

3.6. Wages 19

3.7. Piece rates 21

3.8. Hours and rules 23

3.9. Freedom of association 24

3.10. Auditing failures 26

4. The Killer Jeans campaign 27

4.1. Brand reactions 27

5. Conclusion 29

Appendix 31

03

“Occupational health should aim topromote and maintain the highestdegree of physical, mental and socialwell-being of workers in all occupations;to prevent amongst workers thedeparture from health caused by theirworking conditions; to protect workersin their employment from risksresulting from factors adverse to health;to place and maintain workers in anoccupational environment adapted totheir physiological and psychologicalcapabilities; in summary, to adapt workto the workers and each worker to hisor her job.” Joint ILO/WHO definition of occupational health1

Occupational health and safety (OHS) is oneof the cornerstones of industrial workplacelegislation. It served as the foundation for theestablishment of the International Labour

Organisation (ILO), which sought to establishOHS as not only a basic labour right but as afundamental human right. OHS remains oneof the ILO Constitution’s main objectives, and as early as 1950, the ILO and the WorldHealth Organisation (WHO) had alreadydeveloped the above definition ofoccupational health and safety as a buildingblock for labour legislation.

OHS is recognised as a set of coherentmeasures designed to protect workers fromsickness, disease and injury arising from theiremployment. But the steady improvement ofworkplace practices and declining rates ofoccupational disease and injuries in the globalNorth has meant that the most dangerousand unregulated working conditions shiftedtoward cheaper labour markets of thecurrent garment-producing countries. Every15 seconds, according to the ILO, a worker

1. Sandblasting: an introductionPhoto: SA

CO

M

Workers in the mechanical polishing department in Yida factory, Guangdong Province

dies from a work-related accident or diseasesomewhere in the world.2

While the garment industry may not seem at first glance like a high risk occupation, itcontains more than its fair share of deadlypractices and toxic chemicals, especially indenim production. By the mid-1980s,manufacturers had begun using techniques to‘distress’ denim in order to make jeans lookused or pre-worn. By the 1990s, the trend for distressed jeans had become so popularthroughout the West that it ushered in the widespread use of sandblasting. Thesandblasting process is fast and cheap, and can increase product value tenfold.Sandblasted jeans are big business.

As described in more detail below, thesandblasting process entails a treatment thatinvolves blasting abrasive sand under highpressure to create worn patches on thedenim fabric. Sometimes sandblasting boothsare used, but in many cases the work is donemanually. In addition, other techniques usedto distress denim include hand-sanding, stonewashing and various chemical treatments, allof which involve their own risks.

It has been almost a decade since the firsthigh-profile silicosis epidemic among denimproduction workers was highlighted bydoctors in Turkey. Thus it is all the moreshocking that garment workers are still beingforced to risk their lives for the sake of afashion detail today. Meanwhile, despite all the available data that point to the hazardsinvolved, many factories continue to usesandblasting and have countless workershand-sanding denim in extremely dustyenvironments, or spraying jeans with toxicchemicals with no regard for their safety.

In response to the global campaign to endsandblasting led by the Clean Clothes

Campaign (CCC), over 40 brands havepromised to ban sandblasting. Yet the researchundertaken for this report into China’s denimindustry, together with an earlier CCC reporton the situation in Bangladesh,3 shows thatthe practice continues. Moreover, theresearch also revealed many other potentiallydangerous techniques involved in theproduction of denim – such as chemicalspraying, bleaching, hand-sanding and polishing– that are increasingly being used as asubstitute for sandblasting, all of whichpresent their own particular risks and havenot been adequately tested or investigated.

Garment workers in China can face appallingworking conditions that often includeextremely long hours, low pay, insecureemployment situations and the lack of formalcontracts. These hallmarks of the Chinesegarment industry were summed up by onemale garment worker in his 30s interviewedfor this report: “Earning a hundred dollars is no easy matter. I have to risk my health toearn it. Even if you’re not working, standing up for 12 hours straight is very tiring. Ofcourse, it’s even worse if you’re polishing a few hundred pairs of jeans per day.”

Combined with the fact that China outlawsindependent trade unions and that themajority of employees are rural migrantworkers, often female, who encounterconsistent institutionalised discrimination, it is evident that the garments industrysurvives on the hard work of an underpaidand vulnerable workforce. As in many otherlow wage countries, gender discrimination is widespread, with women often occupyingthe lower paid, less skilled jobs. As oneseamstress noted: “We don’t receiveovertime premiums, statutory holiday time or any regular days off. We are busy every day,month after month. We work harder thanbuffalo, but the management never treats us

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

04

Photo: IHLO

like human beings. I may earn ¥3,000 a month, but I don’t dare buy anything other than the barest necessities.” (£1 =approximately 10 Chinese yuan, ¥) Manywomen workers are forced to quit their jobswhen they become pregnant, and few areever afforded the maternity rights to whichthey are officially entitled.

1.1. Risk of silicosisThere are two major types of sandblastingprocesses: manual sandblasting andmechanical sandblasting. Both can be deadly. Manual sandblasting is performed byindividual workers manually operating an airgun attached to a hose and compressor fromwhich the sand is blasted under high pressureto distress the denim. This remains the mostcommonly used process in most garment-producing countries in the global South, andis often used without installing properventilation equipment, exposing workersdirectly to silica particles that are releasedfrom air compressor guns. These tinyparticles of blasted sand (silica dust), ifinhaled, can cause severe respiratoryproblems for workers; in cases of intense or long-term exposure, inhalation can lead

to fatal diseases such as silicosis and lungcancer. Experienced sandblasters cansandblast between 500 and 600 pairs of jeans per day, which includes reloading thesandblaster with sand three to four times a day, the fully reloaded equipment weighingsome 60-70 kg.

Mechanical sandblasting is performed inside blasting cabinets, and companies havetherefore often insisted that this method is safe for operators. However, even thecompanies that use this technique are nowbeginning to admit that there is no truly safe sandblasting method, because even withmechanical sandblasting particles escape fromthe unit to expose factory workers duringthe process of cleaning the containers.Moreover, when mechanical sandblasting isused in various garment-producing countries,the units are seldom sealed properly due toheat issues and lack of proper ventilation,which renders this technique even moredangerous for workers.

Whilst sandblasting to achieve that pre-worndenim look is a relatively new phenomenon inthe clothing industry, similar techniques have

05

Sandblasting worker in an undisclosed factory in China

been used in the mining and buildingindustries for decades, and the link betweenthe use of sandblasting and the risk of silicosishas long been acknowledged. In fact, healthrisks associated with manual sandblastingreportedly prompted the initial drafting ofsandblasting regulations throughout much ofWestern Europe in the 1960s.4 Sandblastingtechniques that use natural sand areespecially problematic, as workers inhalecrystalline silica dust particles during theprocess, causing serious damage to therespiratory system. These particles areinvisible to the naked eye; the body is unableto expel them and they gradually impair lung capacity and a worker’s ability tooxygenate blood.

As an alternative to sandblasting, it is alsopossible to distress denim just by sanding,either by hand or by machine. Machinesanding is done by using a sanding machineacross a wider area of the denim, while hand-sanding is done with a fine grain sand paperby hand. There has been no research, as yet,into the long-term effects of hand-sandingdenim for 12 hours a day, every day, formonths or years on end. Given the dust andcotton fibres that almost all of the workersinterviewed complained about, dust levels inthe workplaces we investigated are likely tobe much higher than the required levels forclean air in a workplace. As such, workerscontinue to be put at risk of developing other potentially serious respiratory diseases.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

06

Silicosis is an incurable lung disease caused by the inhalation of dust containing freecrystalline silica. It is one of the oldest knownoccupational diseases, and still leads tothousands of deaths every year worldwide.Symptoms include shortness of breath duringexertion and, as the disease develops, alsowhile resting.This places an additional strainon the heart and eventually leads to death.The progress of silicosis can be slowed ifsymptoms are diagnosed at an early stage, but it cannot be reversed.

The risk of developing silicosis is mainlydependent on the intensity, nature andduration of exposure. Extremely highexposures are associated with much shorterlatency periods and a more rapid progressionof the disease. There are four main types ofsilicosis: chronic, accelerated, complicated andacute silicosis. Chronic silicosis is the mostcommon form and is the result of long-term

exposure, usually appearing 10 to 30 years after initial exposure; this form wascommonly diagnosed among coal miners,quarry workers and similar occupations.

Acute silicosis (silicoproteinosis) develops at anything from a few weeks to five years after initial exposure to highconcentrations of silica dust, and can oftenlead to a rapid death. It is this form thataffects garment workers exposed to intensesilica levels during manual sandblasting.Silicosis has also been linked to thedevelopment of other diseases includingtuberculosis, cancer and autoimmunediseases. Its symptoms may actually be very similar to tuberculosis, which hindersproper diagnosis, and pulmonary tuberculosis(silico-tuberculosis) is itself a frequent causeof death in people with silicosis. Respiratoryfailure and heart failure are other majorcauses of death.

WHAT IS SILICOSIS?

07

2. China: health and safety

The ILO estimates that some 2.3million workers lose their lives everyyear around the world as a result ofworkplace accidents and diseasescontracted on the job. Moreover, 340million workers worldwide are involvedin workplace accidents, and 160 millioncontract occupational diseases eachyear. These statistics comprise reportedcases only, and so the true figures wouldno doubt be much higher. The actualfigures for workers contractingoccupational diseases are particularlydifficult to ascertain, as so many areunable to obtain proper diagnoses andmany more are uninformed about thedetails of a particular diseasecontracted in the workplace. Employersoften use ignorance as their excuse toavoid blame while other employers willuse any means necessary, legal or illegal,to avoid recriminations and lawsuits.

Despite extensive global legislation onoccupational health and safety and otherworkers’ rights, employers remain negligentand many do not comply with even the most basic regulations. This is especially true in garment producing countries, amongsubcontractors and under informalcontractual conditions. These are often the very situations where trade union rightsare undermined, leaving workers exposed to the risks of OHS violations.

China has thus far only signed four ILO core conventions, and these do not includeConventions 87 and 98 on freedom ofassociation and collective bargaining. Chinahas recently signed Convention 155 onoccupational health and safety, which forcesthe Chinese government into the spotlight inrelation to ensuring safe working conditions.But China has an appalling national record ofworkplace accidents and illnesses: accordingto official Chinese government statistics,

there were 380,000 incidents in theworkplace during 2009, in which 83,196people lost their lives – a total of 228 worker deaths per day.5

China’s OHS system is characterised by an overall lack of coordination between thevarious departments, regional bureaus andnational ministries responsible for OHSissues. There is a dramatic lack of resources,monitoring is lax, corruption is endemic andabuses of power by local authorities remainhigh. Corruption occurs where localauthorities and factory owners (includinghospital officials) are complicit in a variety of illegal activities. The lack of effectivelegislation and punitive measures to confrontthe factories that violate OHS regulations,and the low levels of authority and manpowerfrom factory inspection teams and the labourdepartments, mean that appallingly low levelsof health and safety compliance can gounnoticed and unpunished.

In China, occupational health hazardsgenerally remain invisible and underreported.Officially, employers are required by law toprovide health examinations for workersexposed to hazardous working conditions,not only in the course of their duties but also prior to the commencement of theiremployment as well as upon their departure.Employers seldom abide by this legalrequirement, and the workers themselvesknow very little about the occupationalhealth hazards they may encounter on the job.6

In theory, diagnosis of a work-related illnessby a recognised health official can serve asthe initial step towards receiving proper andtimely medical treatment. The initial diagnosiscan then be verified by a local labour andsocial security authority to ensure that theoccupational illness is indeed work-related. A subsequent diagnosis would establish

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

08

the severity of the disability resulting from the work-related illness. Furthermore,the victims are theoretically able to claimcompensation for their illness from socialsecurity authorities.

All this is hypothetical because many Chinese garment workers are unaware thattheir illness may be work-related. Diagnosisremains very problematic. For instance,garment workers without a formal workcontract may not be eligible for the officialmedical examination. Workers often believethey cannot afford to go through the time-consuming process, while others may simplynot trust the system and prefer to settle theircases with their employers in private. Thesetypes of arrangements often lead to muchlower compensation payment than the legal minimum.

Even when workers have been diagnosed assuffering from a workplace-related disease,they often face insurmountable hurdles ingetting compensation, and migrant workersare often shuffled between variousdepartments and regions as they pass throughthe elaborate bureaucracy in pursuit ofcompensation for work-related injuries ordisease. Additionally, workers often faceenormous obstacles to obtaining justcompensation, as many factories simply refuseto pay the workers even after the courts haveordered them to do so. The official Chinesetrade union, the All China Federation of TradeUnions (ACFTU), is usually absent during theproceedings, and traditionally backs theinterests of local government in the name of preserving a ‘harmonious’ society: “Tradeunions, and local governments, tend toprotect and coordinate with the companiesto ensure good relations and do nothing thatwill disrupt the flow of tax and rent revenuesof the investors.”7

2.1 No compensationWhile China has passed many occupational health and safety regulations,their actual implementation and enforcement,like most other labour laws, remains poor. It takes months or even years for a worker to be properly diagnosed before they canenter into legal compensation proceedings.Some workers die before they even make it to the examination stage. If they do manage to get diagnosed, workers must prove that their injuries were caused on the job. They must then be assessed toestablish the level of disability or illness, forwhich workers must prove their employmentrelationship with the factory, which usuallymeans providing a written contract. Thisremains one of the greatest hurdles, givenhow few garment workers actually haveofficial contracts.

To obtain full compensation, workers musteither quit their jobs or be dismissed to even begin the compensation process, thus leaving them with no income during the protracted legal process. The finalcompensation rate is based on the averagewage of the preceding year. However, workershave to provide proof of their average wages,including pay slips, which many workers neverreceive. Wage slips often quote a lower wage, usually the minimum wage, to reducean employer’s social insurance contributions.This affects the calculation of thecompensation because when the worker has no proof of actual wages, thecompensation is calculated with the averagewages from social insurance records, reducingcompensation to below what they have aright to. Thus, if a worker earns ¥3,000 amonth working 15-hour days, seven days aweek, their official wages may be just theminimum ¥1,000, reducing the compensationthey are entitled to by two thirds.

09

Workers who demand compensation can alsogo to court, but cases may drag on for years.In the end, the factory owner may simplyrefuse to pay up, with the worker having noreal legal recourse. This process is so difficultthat seven out of 10 workers are unwilling topursue a legal settlement.8 Most workersprefer more informal negotiations with theiremployers, which generally results in a muchlower monetary settlement, with manysettling for 40% less than the legal standardfor compensation for their disease. Migrantworkers who contracted silicosis in southChina’s gemstone industry have enduredyears of lawsuits to gain compensation, andseveral have died prior to a court decision.9

Official Chinese figures for workplace injuriesor work-related illnesses since 2001, whengovernment records began detailing OHS-related diseases, remain unreliable. However,the most prevalent illness is certainly silicosis.In 2009, over 90% of new OHS cases werepneumoconiosis cases, which includessilicosis. The second most prevalent disease

was workplace poisoning, primarily fromexposure to lead, benzene and arsenic. Thegenerally low total figures are clear evidenceof unreliable data: for instance, official figuresrecorded 22 cases of benzene poisoning inChina in 2009, while an NGO report in thesame year detailed 50 cases of workerssuffering from the effects of leukaemia causedby benzene poisoning in Dongguan (a city inGuangdong province) alone.10

In 2010, over 20,000 industrial and miningenterprises in Dongguan experiencedoccupational hazard incidents. Thesecompanies employed over 5.5 million people,but only 6,000 of these enterprises actuallyreported occupational hazard incidents to the government. The State Administration of Work Safety monitored only 280 of these6,000 companies. Moreover, only 58,000 of the total 5.5 million workers reportedlyreceived regular occupational healthcompensation examinations – less than 2% of the total number of workers who areeligible to receive such check-ups.11

Photo: SAC

OM

Yida factory, Guangdong Province

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

10

3. China: factory findings

This report presents the findings ofresearch in six factories in Guangdongprovince, home to the largestconcentration of denim manufacturersin China, and responsible for roughlyhalf of the world’s entire production of the fabric. The factories varied insize, levels of modernity and workingstandards. Of the six factories, two areconsidered major garment producers,each employing thousands of workers:Conshing Clothing Group Co Ltd(hereafter Conshing) and ZhongshanYida Apparel Ltd (hereafter Yida); Yidaclaims it supplies approximately 4% ofthe total US jeans market. TheConshing factory, meanwhile, producessome 50,000 garments per day for both domestic and export markets.

Dongguan Tianxiang (hereafter Tianxiang, but also known as Tim Cheung) is a smallerfactory that employs approximately 400workers. The other three factories are muchsmaller and are classified as second-tier

suppliers. Weiqiang Washing Plant (hereafterWeiqiang) and Dongguan Golden CityWashing Sandblast & Brush Factory(hereafter Golden City) are bothsubcontractors that have previously produced garments for Yida, according toYida’s parent company Crystal Group. Golden City also supplies garments for thelast of the six factories researched for thisreport: Dongguan Gloss Mind Apparel Co(hereafter Gloss Mind).

Research in the six factories revealed thatonly one factory, Gloss Mind, had fullyeliminated its sandblasting production line,and that the sandblasting facilities in the otherfactories were reportedly still in operation.While the three factories of Yida, Golden Cityand Conshing had officially announced thatthey were to abolish the practice ofsandblasting, our investigations (includingdirect workers’ testimony) revealed that thepractice may not have been discontinued atall. One factory reportedly continued itssandblasting on the sly, surreptitiously

Photo: SAC

OM

Sewing department in Conshing factory, Guangdong Province

11

dismantling the sandblasting machinery andhiding it in advance of inspections – a practicealso uncovered by Levi Strauss during factoryassessments of one of its suppliers in 2011.Factories had also concealed theirsandblasting units behind locked doors and had increased security for these units,limiting access solely to the sandblasters.

Instead of being eliminated, therefore,sandblasting seems to be morphing into amore covert operation, potentially creating an even deadlier workplace environment. We also found that many of the otherfinishing processes used to distress denimproducts continued to expose workers toextreme risks because the processes wereseldom, if ever, performed in a safe manner.The research revealed that workers whowere engaged in hand-sanding, polishing orchemical treatment processes had neitherbeen trained in the proper use of theequipment and materials, nor had beenprovided with adequate protection such asproper mouth masks and goggles. Theresearch also uncovered widespreadviolations in such areas as working hours,excessive overtime, freedom of associationand employee contracts, thus painting a bleakpicture of a garment industry that relies onmigrant workers who have little choice but torisk their own health and welfare to earn ameagre living, manufacturing jeans for mostlylarge, high-profile brands.

3.1 Factories and buyersYida, located in Zhongshan in China’s PearlRiver Delta and part of the Hong Kong-basedCrystal Group, was established in 2005 andproduces one million pairs of jeans permonth for high-profile Western brands aswell as for the Asian market. The company isthe third largest ‘bottoms’ exporter in China,and has focused on promoting a more eco-

friendly profile, claiming to have invested inmore sustainable denim processes.12 Yidaboasts the following well known Westernbrands among its clients: Levi Strauss, H&M,Gap, Hollister, Wrangler, Old Navy, FadedGlory and Duo.

Conshing’s website states that its guidingprinciple is ‘Quality First, CustomerForemost’, and that the factory is activelydeveloping business links with brands such as Lee, Wrangler, Jack & Jones, Only, Phard,CLRIDE.n and Vero Moda, among others, as it strives to defend its position as “one of thelargest cowboy casual clothing manufacturersin China”.13 Tianxiang’s major clients includeHollister and American Eagle. Weiqiang haspreviously been a supplier to Lee and(through Yida) to Levi’s, while Golden Cityand Gloss Mind are both listed as suppliers of Levi Strauss along with Yida.14

All six factories featured in this report areinvolved in various levels of non-compliancewith existing health and safety regulations.For instance, none of the factories wheresandblasting was still reported to be takingplace provided sandblasters with adequatesafety equipment, and workplace standards in all six factories were far from satisfactory.High levels of fabric fibres and sand dust in the air in the polishing and sanding unitsdrastically increase the risk not only ofsilicosis but also potentially of byssinosis (also known as ‘cotton workers’ lung’),pulmonary fibrosis, and other respiratory and pulmonary diseases. Yida, a relativelystable and prosperous factory, had betterworking conditions than some of the otherinvestigated factories, but levels of dust andinadequate ventilation of its polishing unitswere common complaints among itsemployees. The smaller factories were far from compliant.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

12

Our research found that a number offactories have installed extensive securitymeasures to reduce interactions betweensandblasters and other employees. Forexample, Conshing installed numeroussurveillance cameras on the shop floor to reduce employee traffic betweendepartments, while Golden City has installedextensive CCTV. (Detailed factory profilesand research methodology are found in theappendix at the back of this report.)

3.2 SandblastingOur research found that the use ofsandblasting saw an overall decline between2009 and 2012, partly reflecting the successof the international campaign to bansandblasting. However, many factories were still employing hazardous sandblastingpractices both covertly and in plain sight.Although Yida had reportedly closed down its sandblasting unit two years earlier,workers at Yida interviewed in November2012 claimed that in fact Yida was stillemploying sandblasting and using sandblastingmachines. Two shifts were reportedly inoperation, with five to six sandblasters pershift. This alleged continuing use ofsandblasting runs contrary to Yida’s claimsthat they have eliminated sandblasting, and iscontrary to the policy of one of its mosthigh-profile buyers, Levi’s.

The majority of workers employed byConshing (approximately 2,000) work in thecloth cutting, embroidery and sewingdepartments, with another 300 or soemployed in the polishing department on thesecond and third floors, which includes bothmanual and mechanical sandblasting. Most ofthe workers in these departments are male.The sandblasting unit consists of a sealedroom within the polishing department.Workers from other units are restricted from

entering the sandblasting unit, and most ofthem know very little about its conditions.On rare occasions, when the sandblastingunit’s door is left open, some of the othersmay have a glimpse inside. Workers describe ahot, noisy room with poor visibility due to allthe dust in the air. Sandblasters are providedwith helmets to wear which appear to includerespirators, but they do not always wear theirhelmets due to the extreme heat.

In early 2012, Conshing was still operatingsome 40 to 60 sandblasting machines,employing about 80 sandblasters. However, a general decline in orders and a reportedreduction in demand for sandblastedproducts meant that by October 2012 therewere eight reported sandblasting machinesbeing operated in one or two shifts per day.15

One Conshing worker described how theysometimes couldn’t even see the exit doorthrough the dense levels of dust floating inthe air. Workers say the physical labour isextremely hard and difficult to adapt to.During the recruitment phase, polishingdepartment applicants are asked whetherthey are willing to ‘swallow the bitterness’,i.e., endure the rough working conditions.Many interviewees pointed out that youngerworkers increasingly refuse jobs in thesandblasting unit, which has forced Conshingto offer higher salaries to fill the sandblasterpositions. They reportedly earn a highersalary, some ¥300 per day compared to ¥100-200 for others. Even though Conshing’ssandblasting machines have been moved intoa separate room, some other employees helpprocess the finished products, cutting threadsand keeping an eye on the sandblastingmachines. Sandblasters often complainedabout the levels of dust they were exposedto, and the high pressure that the sandblastinghose is under.

13

Some of the Conshing workers interviewedfor this report said they had heard thatsandblasting might cause silicosis. However,the factory offers its employees only arudimentary check-up, and they are seldomgiven detailed results. Workers made it clearto the researchers that they really neededtheir jobs to survive. Furthermore, althoughthey were aware of the health risksassociated with their jobs, they were willingto take the risk for the higher salaries thatConshing offered sandblasters. Factoryowners and brands that continue to usesandblasting and are aware of the job’s healthrisks have apparently decided to compensateworkers by paying higher wages, which shows a blatant, shocking disregard for the workers’ lives.

Golden City workers declared that therewere two manual sandblasting machines inuse at the time of the research. Theyreported that whenever there was an auditor factory inspection, workers were ordered

to dismantle the two machines into smallpieces, which were then hidden in a smallroom. Workers stated that this was becauseGloss Mind, the chief buyer, did not want itsmajor client Levi’s to know that Golden Citywas still engaged in sandblasting, as Levi’s hadbanned sandblasting from its supply chain.However, other Gloss Mind customerscontinued to order sandblasted denimgarments and needed to keep some of themachines on hand. After auditors or clientsleft, the sandblasting machinery was simplyreassembled and reinstalled in thesandblasting unit.

Golden City’s sandblasters complained aboutsand dust covering their faces and hands. Onesandblaster believed that there wassomething wrong with the inside of his throatand described how he sometimes spits ablue-black dusty phlegm. Golden City,according to the workers the researchersspoke with, did not provide adequate safetyequipment for its workers; in fact, it was

Photo: SAC

OM

Workers at the hand sanding department, Tianxiang factory, Guangdong Province

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

14

pretty much limited to cotton mouth masks,while some workers wore no protection atall. Some of the supervisors made it clear thatthe efficacy of the cotton masks was probablyfairly limited, given the strength of the sandcoming from the sandblasting machines andthe minuteness of the particles.

Gloss Mind officially has no remainingwashing, fading or other technical treatmentunits because it has essentially outsourcedthese processes to Golden City. Hand-sandingand other processes continue, however.Similarly, Weiqiang has about eightsandblasting machines and 40 manualsandblasting machines, but these machines are reportedly no longer in use (or barely so).Workers reported that in March 2011, Leerepresentatives demanded that all of theirproducts be hand-sanded and hand-brushedrather than sandblasted. But other brandscontinued to place orders for sandblasteddenim products until June 2011, when thefactory reportedly decided to subcontracttheir sandblasting orders.

According to hand-sanding and polishingworkers interviewed in Tianxiang inNovember 2012, sandblasting continues totake place with a reported five to six workersin the sandblasting department. The onlyprotection they have from the dust is a simplecotton mask. Although there are ventilationfans in the unit, it remains extremely dusty.

3.3 Other techniques“Danger lurks at every stage of the denimtreatment process,” a supervisor in one ofthe factories investigated for this reportobserved. “It’s impossible to avoid all of thehazards, although you can sometimes opt fora stage in the process that is less hazardous.”This is due to the fact that there arenumerous methods employed to distressdenim, and all of them have their own unique

hazards. Techniques are applied to createdifferent effects based on a variety ofvariables including circumstances, type ofgarment and area of garment. The hand-sanding of jeans replicates a worn look at the knees or thigh creases (‘whiskers’),while polishing creates specific worn effectsthrough use of drills or polishing wheels.Other effects include laser effects, water-based treatments, dye application, and thespraying of chemicals such as potassiumpermanganate.

Each of these techniques can expose theworkers involved to a dangerous mix ofchemicals and fabric dust all day long. Sandingand polishing workers at Golden City, GlossMind and Conshing all reported that the airin their units is regularly full of black dust orsand particulates, combined with a chemicalodour that overwhelms the workplace. Theonly protective gear that Conshing suppliesare cotton mouth masks and gloves.

Yida’s hand-sanding department may employover 200 workers during the high season, but during the low season the total may fall as low as 70 to 80 workers. In Yida’soverwhelmingly male hand-sanding unit,workers use sandpaper to polish the surfacesof the denim garments and use mechanicalstone wheels to polish the pockets, waist and fringes of the jeans to distress them.Workers in the fringe-polishing departmentoften complain that they are required to bendover the denim all day long, leading to fatigueand numerous back problems. Yida has neverapplied any ergonomic design measures in itsfactory, so that workers end up sitting onstools without proper back support and canbe observed constantly bending over so that,according to interviews, most workerseventually contract chronic back and armpain. As one male worker complained: “I’veworked at Yida for four years. There is not a

15

single day that goes by that I don’t feel thepain in my arms and back.” Another Yidaworker observed how his palms had becomeuneven as a result of extended periods ofhard labour. Tianxiang workers alsocomplained about chronic back pain, irritationand fatigue as a result of their having to standbent over throughout their shifts.

Furthermore, stone wheel polishers at Yidaoften injure themselves by inadvertentlygrazing their hands, which are unprotectedbecause safety gloves are reportedly notprovided by the company. Workers also use a small mechanical device to polish the jeans,which are stretched out over inflated balloonmannequins. Despite the installation of aventilation system, workers often complainedabout the high levels of dust in theproduction unit, which many claim is the

dustiest in the factory because of all theminuscule fabric fibres floating in the air.When the shop floor is swept (twice daily atYida, for example), the act of sweeping sendsthe dust floating around the room again, withelectric fans further blowing the dust fromcorner to corner on the work floor.

Workers in the hand-sanding departments at all of the investigated factories regularlycomplained of being covered in dark bluedust from the indigo denim fabric, which gets under their nails and is difficult to clean off their skins. Yida’s employeesobserved that when they finally get to washtheir faces at the end of their shifts, the wateris a dark indigo colour and the dust is difficultto remove from their ears. Moreover, theheat combined with the pace of the work is so intense that workers complained about

1. A hand sanding worker using sand paper for polishing,Conshing factory,Guangdong Province

2. Polishing department at Conshing factory,Guangdong Province

3. Stone wheel polishing department at Yida factory,Guangdong Province

Photos: SAC

OM

1 2

3

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

16

it even during the winter season. Even the flimsy cotton surgical masks provided for hand-sanding work are often deemed too uncomfortable to wear because of theextreme heat; yet failure to wear theprotection is also due to the fact thatworkers have not been properly trained in OHS issues, including the potential harm caused by the inhalation of dust and sand particulates.

Tianxiang’s polishing department employsabout 100 workers divided evenly over two12-hour shifts, with a total of 30 moreworking in the fringe-polishing department,where workers use sandpaper and wirebrushes to give the jeans a faded, ragged look– a process that also generates a lot of dust.Polishing department workers also complainof the heat and dim lighting on the workfloor; they are constantly inhaling dust despitethe surgical masks they are provided with.Like the Yida employees, they complain thatthe electric fans only make the situationworse because they blow dust around so thatit constantly fills the air. Workers complainedthat when they shower the water turns blackfrom the dust and cotton fibres. As oneyoung male employee observed: “In ourdepartment, it’s full of jeans and black dust.The temperature on the shop floor is high. Itis difficult to breathe. I feel like I’m working ina coal mine.”

3.4 Potassium permanganate Potassium permanganate is today used largelyfor lightening denim. The process involves thechemical being sprayed onto denim garmentsand then washed off, leaving the treated areaa lighter colour than the surrounding fabric.Workers spray the chemical onto the denimusing a hose or sometimes a brush. After thechemical dries, it is neutralised with a secondchemical and then washed off. The processexposes workers to the harmful inhalation of

the chemical’s strong fumes. The advisedmethod usually involves the spraying of denimgarments in a sealed and ventilated booth,and if such a booth is unavailable then usingrespiratory masks, with the potassiumpermanganate applied from a ‘safe’ distance.

The three largest factories involved in thisstudy each had their own potassiumpermanganate spraying departments. Theoverwhelming opinion is that the odour isirritating and strong, although someemployees noted that they eventually gotused to it after being exposed to it every day.Workers in all three factories pointed outthat they had never received the necessaryhealth hazard information or the propertraining in how to handle potassiumpermanganate safely in the workplace. Someinterviewees expressed their anxieties aboutthe potential health risks, but most of themfelt they had no choice but to accept thoserisks. Some Golden City employees wereaware (others were not) that the chemicalswere harmful, but were attracted by thehigher salaries offered to chemical processingunit employees. Yida alone provided workerswith organic vapour masks, ear plugs, apronsand rubber boots, and other workers wereprohibited from entering the department.However, high temperatures in thedepartment make wearing the masks souncomfortable that approximately one thirdof Yida’s employees do not do so. Many nightshift workers take advantage of the morerelaxed supervision to wear the morecomfortable but less safe surgical masks.

Many Conshing employees admitted that theyhad no idea what kind of hazardous chemicalsthey were being exposed to, which upsetthem. They understood that potassiumpermanganate was potentially harmful butwere unaware of exactly how, and many ofthem were willing to take the risk because

17

most would only be temporarily exposed totheir harmful effects for a period of only afew years. Workers also said that supervisorsoften dismissed their health concerns,declaring that the chemicals were not harmful in any way. Conshing workers alsocomplained about the strong smell of thebleach used in the potassium permanganatefinishing process. They further stated thatthey applied special finishing powders to thejeans, which resulted in allergies and rashes.

Few of those employed in potassiumpermanganate units routinely wore safetymasks or gloves. Ventilation was poor and thechemical odours were detected throughoutthe work area. One Tianxiang male employeenoted: “We use potassium permanganate

every day. The air quality is very poor and I worry that I may end up suffering from various occupational diseases.Sometimes I wear more than one mouthmask. This may help filter out most of the dust, but these masks don’t filter out the chemicals.”

Over 80% of Weiqiang’s total workforce of some 200 employees are involved in thewashing processes, while another 30 workersare involved in the hand-brushing and sandingprocesses. Only 10% of the workforce isfemale, which is unusual for the garmentindustry. The researchers spoke to a numberof workers, many of whom complained abouthow poorly laid out the workshops were andabout the poor ventilation.

Photo: IHLO

Workers spraying potassium permanganate in an undisclosed factory in China

18

Employees who worked in Yida’s washingdepartment, where most of the liquid-basedfinishing techniques take place, oftencomplained about the strong and irritatingchemical odours. Bleaching agents, some of which are highly corrosive and irritating,are used extensively in these washingdepartments. But workers here, as almosteverywhere else, simply did not receiveadequate information about the chemicals,their safe use and the potential health risks.Many of them only knew the chemicals bytheir nicknames such as ‘magic water’, ‘whiteglue’ and ‘soft oil’. Of the 80 workersemployed in Tianxiang’s spraying unit, none had sufficient knowledge about thechemicals they were using, calling potassiumpermanganate simply a ‘white paste’ theyapplied to jeans, wearing factory-issue basicmasks and gloves.

Most of the factories surveyed were guilty of supplying limited and inadequate protectivegear. Furthermore, none of the factoriesprovided adequate training in the proper use of protective equipment. Yida’s potassiumpermanganate unit workers were alsoreportedly required to wear goggles; yetduring the research, no workers were seenwearing any sort of goggles. While Conshing

does provide surgical or cotton masks, it islimited to those in the polishing department.Furthermore, gloves were not provided at all.Workers in the hand-sanding departmentcomplained that their hands are often injuredby the sandpaper and are stained indigo fromthe jeans. But most of the employees thoughtthe protective gear that Conshing did supplywasn’t very useful. To illustrate their point,workers noted that they regularly foundcotton dust in their saliva after their polishingand sanding shifts. Meanwhile, Conshingworkers in the chemical treatment unitcomplained of skin allergies and facial acne asa direct result of their exposure to thevarious chemicals, including potassiumpermanganate.

3.5 Health examinations Although some of Conshing’s workers in the polishing and potassium permanganatedepartments noticed that their health wasdeteriorating, with many interviewees citingrespiratory problems, Conshing does nothave a regular medical examination schedulein place for its employees, although some saidthey do have their blood tested occasionally.The most vulnerable of Tianxiang’s employees,those regularly exposed to dust andchemicals, reportedly never receive health

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies Table: average monthly salary per job (in ¥) after overtime and other piece rate wages,

and before deductions

Factory cut/sew sandblast hand/brush wash polish iron packing salary

Conshing 2000-3000 4000-7000 3000-5000 3000-5000 2000-4000 piece rate

Gloss Mind 2000-3000 piece rate

Weiqiang lo: 2000-3000 lo: 2000-3000 piece ratehi: 5000-6000 hi: 5000-6000

Golden City 3000-4000 3000-4000 3000-4000 4000 2000-3000 2000-3000 piece rate

19

check-ups, while others stated they had beenexamined once in two years of employment.

Yida is considered one of the better factoriesin terms of health examinations, providing an annual check-up for the majority of itswashing, mechanical polishing, and potassiumpermanganate department employees. Theresearchers were told by workers that theseexaminations were quite comprehensive.However, some hand-sanding unit workersstated that they did not have access to healthexaminations: one employee who had workedat Yida for four years complained that Yidahad never provided health examinations for him, while another claimed he had notreceived a check-up during his three years of work there. However, although many of Yida’s employees may receive healthexaminations, they never get to see theexamination results and are only informedabout whether they have or do not havehealth problems. Even then, intervieweesrevealed that, although some workers werediscovered to have respiratory problems,their ailments went undiagnosed (or at leastunreported). According to interviewees, Yida’s employees usually resign upondiscovering a serious illness.

China’s Law on the Prevention and Treatment of Occupational Diseases clearlystates that employers must provide healthexaminations for employees exposed to work hazards prior to their commencementof employment, during their term ofemployment and upon their departure, and that workers have the right to beinformed about the results.

3.6 WagesDue to China’s size and the significantdifferences in living standards and costs, thereare many different provincial, regional andlocal minimum wage regulations on the

books. Shenzhen municipality and Guangdongprovince offer two of the highest minimumwages in China (up to ¥1,500 a month inShenzhen, for example, and ¥1,300 inGuangdong province).16 However, even within Guangdong province itself the ratesvary significantly. An all too common practice in the garment industry and relatedmanufacturing sectors is making the minimumwage the maximum wage. Workers then haveto work vast amounts of overtime – forwhich they do not receive higher wages, butwhich they accept just to make ends meet.

Although many companies claim that labourcosts in China have been on the rise in recent years, most workers continue to earn well below what is considered a livingwage. According to the Asia Floor WageAlliance, the estimated floor wage in China in 2012 was established at ¥2,332.80, without overtime.17 However, no Chinesegarment industry workers received this basic floor wage.

These already low wages are whittled awayeven more by the tendency of employers towithhold wages or delay payment. Despite the fact that there is extensive legislation on the books to protect workers throughenforcement of minimum wages and timelypayment of wages, garment workers continue

HOW A GARMENTWORKER’S SALARY ISCALCULATEDProductivity (number of units) x unit price + attendance bonus + allowance – deductionfor food and dormitory – deduction of socialinsurance (if any) = monthly salary

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

20

to be the victims of violations of almost every aspect of these laws. These samepractices were found in the six factoriesinvestigated for this report. China’s LabourLaw states that it is illegal not to pay wageson a monthly basis, and that the payment ofwages cannot be delayed for any reason(Article 50). Yet Yida’s employees receive theirsalaries on the 20th of the following month – 20 days late, in other words. Both Conshingand Tianxiang factories withhold wages for a full month, which is in clear violation of China’s current Labour Law. In addition,wage disputes involving worker attendance

may delay payment for an entire extra month. The problem of deferred wage payment is exacerbated by complicated and vague accounting practices regarding official wages earned and unclear piece rates, which means that the calculations often work out to the disadvantage of the workers. Wagesare difficult for workers to calculate with any accuracy because many are paid acombination of piece rate and regular wages, plus overtime rates which are often subject to a confusing schedule of deductions and fines.

Photo: SAC

OM

Worker wearing two masks to prevent inhaling cotton dust,Yida factory, Guangdong Province

21

Finally, as mentioned earlier, if a worker iseligible for compensation after an accident or a diagnosed disease or is eligible for social security insurance benefits, these arecalculated based only on an employee’sstandard wage rate as stated in his or hercontract, and not on actual earned wages,which would include overtime. While the lawstates that compensation should be providedaccording to average wages from the past 12 months, the worker needs to prove this,which requires pay slips to challenge theminimum wage given on the factory’s salary statements. Article 17 of Guangdongprovince’s labour law stipulates thatemployees must receive a pay slip thatprovides salary details. Yet in at least onefactory – Conshing – workers reported they never receive pay slips. Instead they must check their expected monthly wage two days before receiving the definitivepayment. A failure to provide a pay slip is a violation of the law.

3.7 Piece rates The minimum wage in Zhongshan, where the Yida factory is located, is ¥1,100 a month,which serves as the base salary for Yidaworkers. This is not a living wage for a family.Most employees must supplement this basesalary by doing piece rate work and workinglong hours of overtime. Some Gloss Mindemployees pointed out that they were notalways paid even the minimum wage, andoften received inaccurate overtime payments.As noted above, Gloss Mind subcontractssome of the more labour-intensive and‘costly’ processes out to other factories suchas Golden City to reduce costs.

Conshing offers the same basic ¥1,100minimum wage as Yida. All of its productionline employees, except the packingdepartment and the security guards, are paida piece rate, so that an employee’s totalmonthly salary depends on their productivityand on the piece rate. The piece rate is not,however, something that workers have agreedto, and even the most experienced workerscan only estimate the actual piece rate.Conshing workers reported that the piecerate in the polishing department ranged from¥0.25 to ¥1.00. Some 60% of the garmentsproduced have a piece rate of ¥0.25, withmost workers polishing 400-500 pairs ofjeans per day. There is no provision for higherovertime piece rates.

One polishing unit employee who has workedat Conshing for two years explained it thisway: “My monthly salary is about ¥3,000. It’shard to predict your wages; it all depends onhow much work we have. Sometimes I canearn about ¥300 a day. In an extreme case, mydaily income may be as low as ¥30.” Long-term employees pointed out that the piecerate had actually been decreasing lately, andthat their pay was shrinking. Most workers inthe polishing department earn ¥2,000-3,000per month, while the more experienced and

Notice stating wages will be delayed for a month if a worker takes five days’ leave (whether it is annualleave or paid leave)

Photo: SAC

OM

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

22

efficient among them may earn ¥4,000working around 12-15 hours a day, most days a month.

The monthly salary for hand-brushing andsandblasting workers at Weiqiang varied from¥3,000 to ¥4,000 depending on piece ratesand the season, with employees vying for thehigher piece rate garments. For instance,workers working on Lee products hadreceived piece rates of ¥0.70-0.90, whilethose producing Levi’s products for Yida hadreceived just ¥0.55-0.70 for the same work.Weiqiang’s flexible schedules mean that mostemployees work a basic eight-hour day withlittle or no overtime, while some of itsemployees are on call, waiting for largeorders to come in. During the low season,some employees may end up working only 15days per month; during high season they maywork the entire month including weekends.One female Conshing employee describedthe competition between workers: “It is lowseason now. We don’t have much work.Sometimes it’s easy to get into conflicts withcolleagues because we have to compete witheach other for the little work there is. I don’twant to argue with my colleagues, but I badlyneed to earn more money to support my family.”

Tianxiang’s production workers are paid piecerates with contracts stipulating a basicminimum monthly salary of ¥1,100 in cash.However, the contract also sets a limit of 22 working days per month while in reality,during high season, employees work non-stopwith no days off unless they fall sick or haveurgent personal issues to attend to. Someemployees receive a fixed wage. For example,quality control personnel receive a fixedsalary of ¥2,500 per month with no option toearn extra piece rate wages. The working dayis 12 hours, excluding meal breaks. Most ofthe production crew are, however, paid piece

rates with monthly salaries of ¥3,000-4,000,depending on productivity and total working hours.

Yida seems to be the only factory where itsworkers have a clearer idea of piece rates inadvance. The other factories prefer to keep it vague, making it almost impossible forworkers to accurately calculate their wages.Yida’s new hirelings are usually paid on a timerate rather than piece rate because they areless efficient. Working a 60-hour week, theycan earn about ¥2,100 per month. Most ofthe sewing, polishing and washing departmentemployees earn over ¥3,000 per month. Themost efficient and energetic workers mayearn ¥5,000, but this implies a lot of overtimeas well. A piece rate system motivatesworkers to strive for increased productivityand higher salaries, but Yida’s supervisorssometimes find it necessary to put extrapressure on the slower workers, which puts a lot of stress on the newer employees.

Meanwhile, many of Conshing and GoldenCity’s employees were convinced that theywere not being paid fairly, because thesefactories pay little or nothing extra forovertime and do not offer any additionalbenefits. Conshing’s employees claimed thatthey only receive a ¥2 subsidy if they workmore than 4 hours’ overtime on top of their8-hour shift. A piece rate system putspressure on the workers so that many ofthem cut their lunch and dinner breaks towork more. Conshing’s employees seemed ill-informed about their actual piece rates. Thereis also a significant difference in monthlysalaries between the skilled and non-skilled,with recent hirelings earning an average¥2,000 per month and senior employeesearning ¥3,000-5,000.

Golden City’s employees work in one of twoshifts and are paid on a piece rate basis; they

23

end up earning a living wage only as a resultof working almost double the number ofhours allowed under Chinese labour law.Gloss Mind workers pointed out thatalthough they produce for many big brands,their average piece rate is much lower thanother Guangdong factories. They claimed thattheir salaries had not increased in over fiveyears, and that workers earned only ¥0.50per hour of overtime.

According to interviews with workers atGolden City, where Yida’s orders (includingthose for Levi’s) are now being processed byhand rather than sandblasted, strict qualitycontrol requirements have been passed ontothe workers. This means that if a workermakes an error and a garment needs to beredone, penalties can reach up to ¥700 per

infraction. Workers note that Gloss Mindorders some 4,000 garments from GoldenCity per month. Although garments costaround ¥38, the penalty for losing or ruining a pair of Levi’s jeans is about ¥500.

3.8 Hours and rulesThe low basic wages and lack of socialsecurity benefits mean that most workers areforced to work long days to provide for theirfamilies. Overtime is not an option; it is bothan economic necessity and often required bythe factory, with refusal resulting in fines ordismissal. Chinese law states that a standardwork week consists of 40 hours, totalling 174hours per month, and requires that workershave one day off per week. Legally, overtimeshould not exceed 36 hours per month. Ourresearch shows that few workers had a

Photo: SAC

OM

An exhausted worker resting after lunch, Yida factory, Guangdong Province

regular day off per week, with many of themnot receiving a single day off in a monthduring peak periods. The research also showsthat workers are generally required to worktwo to three times the legal overtime limit,especially during peak seasons, whichprovides the necessary income to provide fortheir families throughout the rest of the year.

Chinese regulations stipulate that overtimeshould be paid at a higher rate, with weekdayovertime rates at least 1.5 times the averagehourly rate and weekend overtime rates atdouble the normal rate. Any overtimeaccrued during the 11 official holidays shouldbe paid triple time. These regulations arealmost always ignored. Given the extent ofovertime worked, this constitutes a significantnon-payment of wages. Most factories seemto operate in 10 or 12 hour shifts with a mealbreak in the middle. After the shift workershave a second meal break, and then theovertime shift of 2-4 hours starts. Theresearch reveals that most employees workedbetween 12 and 15 hours per day on average.

Yida’s peak order period runs fromNovember to August, and overtime can reach100 hours, which is nearly three times thelegal limit.18 Shifts run from 0800 tosomewhere between 2000 and 2300, with atotal of two hours of meal breaks. Conshingalso requires its employees to work excessiveovertime: although the factory’s workcontract states that employees work 26 daysper month, they actually have no more thantwo days off per month. During peak periods,leave can no longer be guaranteed andworkers need to ask supervisors forpermission to take a day off. Workers saidthat it is difficult to take a leave of absence,and if a worker fails to show up for work it isconsidered a work stoppage, which may leadto dismissal.

Yida does not fine its workers except forlateness. If workers are late, they will have a certain proportion of the hourly wagededucted from their pay slip, and receive a verbal warning. New Conshing hirelings pay an initial fee of ¥80 for two uniforms and ¥30 for a work card. Workers with over a year’s service are eligible for uniformdiscounts. If a worker is absent withoutpermission, it is considered a work stoppageand ¥50-100 is deducted from their salary.Polishing department workers are fined fordamaging garments, while other wagedeductions include:

• ¥10-40 for not wearing uniforms properly

• ¥10-40 for forgetting their work cards

• ¥20 for creating a mess on the shop floor

• ¥50 for bringing friends or unauthorisedpeople to the dormitory withoutmanagement permission

A Tianxiang employee who reportedlyjumped the lunch queue was fined ¥50 andhis name and department were publiclyannounced in the canteen. Factories may firea worker with immediate effect if they deemthe offence serious enough; for instance,disobeying superiors may lead to immediatedismissal without pay. At Yida, workers maybe dismissed immediately for idling orsleeping on the job. Most factory rule booksban workers from organising except throughofficial channels. Yida, for example, mayimmediately dismiss a worker for behavioursuch as organising workers to assembleillegally, because it disrupts production.

3.9 Freedom of associationChina has thus far refused to ratify ILOConventions 87 (on Freedom of Association)and 98 (on Organising and Collective

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

24

25

Bargaining). China removed the right to strike from its Constitution in 1982, and Chinese legislation prohibits freedom of association, with only one workers’organisation being legally recognised by the state: the official All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU). It is notuncommon for independent trade union and labour activists, and workers who engage in strikes for better workingconditions, to be beaten or imprisoned for their activities. Despite these blatantrepressions, companies continue to insist that they are complying with current codes of conduct which guarantee freedom of association through the ACFTU’s activities.

Our research reveals that labour rights are regularly denied or repressed. Activistslack access to the essential communicationsand redress mechanisms to voice theirgrievances about current working conditions. The absence of any authentictrade unions in China remains a key stumblingblock to the fulfilment of Chinese labourrights. Conshing, for instance, has an officiallyregistered trade union; but not a singleinterviewee was aware of its existence.

While there was also an official trade union at Yida, workers interviewed neither knew nor cared about the work it might be undertaking. However, Yida has established a number of grievancechannels including a counselling centre, the use of qq (an MSN-like communicationtool) and SMS texting. Yida also hosts worker forums every few months. Duringthese forums, Yida randomly selects workersas representatives and invites them to theforum to gather the comments and criticismsof the workers. Yida posts the minutes on a factory bulletin board.

Workers’ dormitories in Guangdong Province

Photo: Julio Etchart

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

26

3.10 Auditing failuresAll the factories surveyed revealed seriousproblems in potentially misrepresentativeauditing practices. For example, Conshing hasregular social audits and factory inspectionsby third parties. However, workers claimedthat they are trained how to respond tointerview questions about whether thefactory complies with minimum labour lawstandards prior to the auditor’s arrival. Theyare strongly urged not tell the truth abouttheir actual working conditions, especiallyconcerning wages, working hours and days off. Management convinces employees thatcriticism of Conshing’s practices will lead to a decrease in orders, which will in turn meanlower wages. In other words, employees areurged to ‘help out’ by putting on a good show.“Factory inspections are merely a showcase,”some of the more experienced workersexplained. “We don’t take them seriously and

I don’t think the auditor does either. In any case, we don’t believe that they will lead to improvements in our working conditions.”

Tianxiang’s workers generally had no ideaabout codes of conduct but did know that in March of the same year three clients hadperformed factory inspections. But as onemale employee explained, “Managementordered us not to say anything wrong,threatening us with fines of ¥500.” GoldenCity workers said that the factory undergoesregular auditing and inspections by Yida’sbuyers and some of Gloss Mind’s chief buyers.However, they too said they were coached in how to respond to interview questions.Most inspections generally cover only issues regarding the shop floor, cleanlinessand hygiene, with no direct focus onoccupational health and safety.

Photo: SAC

OM

Polishing department at Conshing factory, Guangdong Province

27

Turkey was the first country torecognise the negative health effects of sandblasting in the garment industry,when Turkish doctors sounded thealarm about the silicosis hazard amonggarment sandblasters. In 2005, the firstmajor study to link the process ofsandblasting jeans to silicosis waspublished. At the time of the writing of this publication, some 52 garmentworkers are known to have already diedfrom the effects of silicosis in Turkey.There have now been 1,200 registeredcases – although doctors suspect theactual number is much higher.

Many Turkish garment workers, like theircounterparts in China, were migrants whoreturned to their home villages once theybecame sick, and thus many cannot belocated. One frightening factor that makesaction all the more urgent is the speed withwhich the disease progresses. In the coalmining industry, for example, silicosis onlydevelops after several decades of regularexposure. But in the case of garment workers,it was found that the massive levels of sand inthe air and the force with which the particleswere expelled during the blasting process ledto acute silicosis, the form which takes holdmuch more quickly. Garment workers havebeen known to develop silicosis withinmonths of starting their jobs as sandblasters.

In response to pressure on the Turkishgovernment by the Solidarity Committee of Sandblasting Labourers, a committeeestablished by workers and activists, Turkeyimposed a ban in March 2009 on the use ofsand and silica powder and crystals in theblasting process of denim and other textiles.However, garment producers responded tothis ban by simply moving their operations toother countries such as China, Bangladesh,India, Pakistan and parts of North Africa.

In 2010 the Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC)launched its Killer Jeans campaign, advocatinga total ban on sandblasting in the productionof denim garments. The CCC and theSolidarity Committee of SandblastingLabourers in Turkey demanded that majordenim brands and retailers issue a public banon sandblasting in their supply chains. TheInternational Textile, Garment and LeatherWorkers Federation (now part of the globalunion federation IndustriALL) had also beencalling for such a ban since 2009.

4.1 Brand reactionsBoth Levi Strauss and H&M made publicannouncements declaring that they weregoing to phase out sandblasting from theirrespective supply chains. In the year thatfollowed, many other brands followed suit,including Armani, Benetton, Bestseller,Burberry, C&A, Carrera Jeans, Charles Vögele,Esprit, Gucci, Just Jeans Group, New Yorker,Mango, Metro, New Look, Pepe Jeans, Replay,Just Jeans Group and Versace. However, somebrands simply denied that there was anysandblasting taking place in their supplychains. Dolce & Gabbana has refused topublicly ban sandblasting and has failed toprovide adequate information regarding itssandblasting policies.

The Killer Jeans campaign, coupled withCCC’s Bangladesh report in 2012, led todialogue with several brands that continuedto claim they were not using or had neverused sandblasting techniques in their supplychains. It was suggested that some of thefactories investigated in Bangladesh wereproducing counterfeit jeans, which would notfall under the brands’ responsibility, or thatsome of the violating suppliers wereunlicensed and illegal subcontractors, whichthe brands were powerless to stop. Severalbrands requested more details about thegarment factories with which they did

4. Killer Jeans campaign

business, but none of them were willing toprovide written guarantees detailing theirresponsibility for workers’ safety and health.The campaign called on the brands to takeresponsibility for the regular monitoring ofemployees’ health and for ensuring thatformer employees could be traced and testedfor silicosis. Yet when brands were pressedfor details regarding their actual initiatives,not a single one was willing to ensure regularand comprehensive check-ups for workers, or to take responsibility for current andformer employees.

Research undertaken for the current reportinto denim production in China has revealedthat regardless of whether a brand has‘banned’ sandblasting or not, the practicecontinues – to the point that some factorieshave taken to hiding sandblasting machineryin sealed rooms to avoid detection, whileothers have simply subcontracted theprocedure. The research also makes clear that the shift away from sandblasting does not necessarily translate into improvedmonitoring techniques regarding factoryworking conditions, nor has it led to anysignificant improvements in the provision of protective equipment for workers involvedin the finishing of denim products using other methods.

Some companies that announced they were banning sandblasting from their ownproduction lines also promised to monitortheir suppliers. For example, H&M declared:“Even with our ban, we have decided tocontinue monitoring sandblasting conditionsin supplier factories – even though theprocess is no longer allowed for H&Mproduction. In this way we are continuing to minimise the health and safety risks tosuppliers’ workers from sandblasting, and overall to improve practices in theindustry.”19 Yet such monitoring is unlikely

to reveal the true problems facing workers, and interviewees reported thatthere was almost no ongoing monitoring by the brands. The only major brand thus far that has worked with local trade unionrepresentatives and NGOs to examine theissue of sandblasting in their supply chain is Gucci.

There is an urgent need to increase workers’ awareness of the health risks of sandblasting and other finishing processes.Our research also reveals that, although some workers were aware of the potentialdangers of sandblasting, they were preparedto do the work for even meagre increases in wages. Training workers on how to useprotective gear and on the hazards of thetechniques and chemicals they are expectedto work with must begin prior to thecommencement of their employment. Fulldisclosure of all of the hazardous materials in use must also be provided.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

28

Photo: SAC

OM

Levi’s jeans at Yida factory, Guangdong Province

29

Many brands have announced their intention to ban or phase outsandblasting in their production lines.Yet as this report reveals, the practiceof sandblasting continues – eithercovertly behind closed doors or throughbeing subcontracted to less traceableor illegal factories. It is easy for a brandto promote a positive stance onsandblasting, but extremely difficult tomonitor its compliance. No majorbrand has yet agreed to take fullresponsibility for the detection ofsilicosis in its supply chains, or foridentifying potentially affected workers and treating them.

Consumers are generally supportive of thecampaign to end sandblasting, but it is almostimpossible for them to know whether a pairof jeans has been sandblasted or not. Theconclusion drawn from this report, as well asfrom previous research in other countries, isthat voluntary bans on sandblasting are notenough. Governments across the world mustintroduce statutory bans on sandblasting, andguarantee the enforcement of those bans.

Even where the practice of sandblasting hasbeen discontinued, it has often been replacedby techniques such as hand-sanding, stonewashing and chemical treatments, all of whichinvolve their own health risks. Lighteningdenim with potassium permanganate exposesworkers to dangerous fumes, but few receiveadequate safety equipment to combat therisks of long-term exposure. Brands need tobe fully aware of the health effects of all thefinishing processes used in their productionlines, and should ensure that all workersinvolved in the production of their denimreceive proper training, information andsafety equipment related to the specificprocesses they are engaged in.

Many workers remain unaware of the fullhealth risks of working 12-hour shifts in dustyconditions, and must be able to criticise theirworking conditions as well as assert theirright to take paid sick leave and receiveproper medical care. Those workers that do recognise the health risks of hazardousproduction processes are often forced todisregard the risks as a result of financialneed caused by low wages and rising livingcosts. In all respects, workers need effectivetrade union representation and workerdialogue in order to be able to take forwardtheir rights. In addition, brands and theirsuppliers must take full responsibility forproviding proper medical care for all workersexposed to silica dust and other hazards in denim factories.

We t h e r e f o r e m a ke t h e f o l l o w i n gr e c o m m e n d a t i o n s :

1) GovernmentsWe call on all national governments tointroduce an immediate ban on sandblasting,and to monitor its enforcement and theproper application of OHS rules to improvethe working conditions of workers in thedenim industry. Governments should,furthermore, support all workers in obtainingadequate social and medical assistance, as well as disability pensions from the state.

2) BrandsWe call on all brands to commit to a ban onsandblasting in their own production lines,and ensure that the ban is complied with inpractice. Brands should also press for thephasing out of sandblasting in their suppliers’other production lines, and assist them infinding safe alternative solutions. Brandsshould not work with suppliers that refuse to phase out sandblasting across all theirproduction lines. Brands must ensure that

5. Conclusion

proper training and adequate safetyequipment are provided to all workersemployed in alternative processes such ashand-sanding, polishing, fringing and chemicaltreatments. Brands should undertakecomprehensive risk assessments whenintroducing any new production methods,using the UN Guiding Principles andFramework as their guide as they undertakeextensive due diligence prior to embarkingon new or revised techniques.

Brands can play a further role in ending thepractice of sandblasting by adapting theirfashion designs away from distressed denimto curb demand, or introducing genuinely safealternative methods that will achieve a similarlook. In addition, brands can support an endto sandblasting by altering their suppliers’production schedules and eliminating tightdeadlines to ensure that sandblastingbecomes increasingly unnecessary. Unit pricesand purchasing practices should reflect fairpayment for workers, in order to remove theneed for risk taking in the quest for sufficientpay. Brands must work with suppliers toensure that workers are paid a living wage for regular working hours of no more than 48 hours a week.

Brands should introduce comprehensivemonitoring processes of their supplierfactories in cooperation with trade unionsand NGOs in production countries.Moreover, brands should strive for much

higher occupational health and safetystandards from their suppliers. Brands should furthermore support their suppliers in providing adequate medicalexaminations and diagnostic procedures to ensure early diagnosis, treatment andcompensation for workers suffering from silicosis or other related diseases.Existing problems and illegal workingconditions in factories should be adequately remediated, in conjunction with NGOs and independent trade unions.Freedom of association should be guaranteedto enable workers to voice and help rectifyunsafe practices.

3) International bodiesWe call on the ILO and WHO to includedenim production chains in their globalprogrammes focusing on the eradication of silicosis.

We call on the EU to explicitly ban thepractice of sandblasting in the garmentindustry, and to implement an import ban on sandblasted jeans. We further call for theextensive reports of ongoing sandblastingpractices within the EU itself – notably inPortugal and Italy – to be investigated, and the practice stopped.

Multi-stakeholder initiatives and businessesshould ensure their members implement atotal ban on sandblasting throughout their supply chains.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

30

31Appendix

FACTORY DETAILS AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

1. Zhongshan Yida Apparel Ltd

Address: Shunjin Industrial Park, Banfu Town, Zhongshan City, Guangdong Province, China

Owner: Crystal Group

Website: www.crystal-yida.cn

Estimatedworkforce: 4,000

Clients: Levi Strauss, H&M, Gap, Hollister, Wrangler, Old Navy, Faded Glory, Duo

SACOM researchers conducted research at Yida in March and November 2012, via off-siteinterviews of 50 workers and in-house factory investigation.

2. Conshing Clothing Group Co Ltd

Address: Conshing Industrial Park, Shapu, Xintang Town, Zengcheng, Guangzhou City, Guangdong Province, China

Owner: Hong Kong Shing Hing enterprise

Website: www.conshing.com.cn

Estimated workforce: 3,000

Clients: Lee, Wrangler, Jack & Jones, Only, Phard, CLRIDE.n, Vero Moda, Lee Lang, Cabbeen

SACOM and IHLO researchers conducted off-site investigations around Conshing in spring 2012,September and November 2012. About 50 workers were interviewed, including employees in thesandblasting department. In addition, one of the researchers worked in the factory itself to collectfirst-hand information. In 2012, Conshing’s website listed many other brands as clients, includingPolo, D&G, CBA, A&F, Hollister and others. Shortly before this report was published, the websitewas revised to give a shorter list.

3. Dongguan Tianxiang Garment Co Ltd

Address: Xinji Industrial Zone, Machong Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, China

Estimated workforce: 400

Clients: Hollister and American Eagle

In March and November 2012, SACOM researchers carried out investigations at Tianxiang. Around 40 workers were interviewed. There is no information about the Tianxiang factory available on the internet.

4. Dongguan Golden City Washing Sandblast & Brush Factory

Address: Huayang Industrial Park, Machong town, Dongguan, China

Owner: Local owner, Dongguan

Estimated workforce: 300

Clients/ Levi’s (also second tier subcontractor of Dongguan Gloss Mind Apparel Co Ltd upstream and Zhongshan Yida Apparel), Yishon, Zhenzhi Jeans; 50% of total production is buyers: for export, while all products for Gloss Mind and Yida are for export

IHLO interviewed 10 workers, including sandblasters, in January and October 2012. The main buyerfrom Golden City is Yishon, with 70,000-80,000 pieces monthly. Both Yishon and Zhenzhi requiresandblasting. Products for Yida (and Levi’s) have replaced sandblasting with hand sanding and othertechniques. Orders from Yida have decreased since the start of 2012.

5. Dongguan Gloss Mind Apparel Co Ltd

Address: Xialingbei Industrial Area, Liaobu Dongguan, China

Owner: Hong Kong enterprise

Estimatedworkforce: 500-600

Clients: Levi’s

IHLO interviewed some 10 workers from various departments in spring 2012.

6. Weiqiang Washing Plant

Address: Zhetai Industrial Park, Baoan, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China

Owner: Hong Kong enterprise

Estimatedworkforce: 200

Clients: Yida, Hungying Garment Factory and Baolifa Garment Factory

IHLO interviewed 10 workers, including sandblasters, at Weiqiang in Shenzhen in 2011 and autumn2012. Yida was the main upstream buyer from Weiqiang, although Yida’s parent company CrystalGroup has stated that that relationship has now been terminated.

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

32

33

The information collected in this report is based ondetailed interviews with workers within the factories, asdescribed above, as well as information from companywebsites and other sources. In March 2013 we sent outa draft copy of this report to brands for response, andreceived responses from the following companies:

Bestseller (Vero Moda, Jack & Jones, Only)While Bestseller brands Vero Moda, Jack & Jones andOnly are still listed on the revised Conshing website, as noted above, Bestseller stated that one of its otherbrands, Pieces, was not a buyer at Conshing and that it had been removed from the list of clients on theConshing website. Bestseller also stated: “In 2010,BESTSELLER banned the use of sandblasting on ourproducts in all production countries and since then, wehave had great focus on the issue. The ban was clearlycommunicated to all suppliers and to our entire buyingorganisation, we checked that the buyers knew how tokeep this ban, and we ensured that suppliers actuallystopped sandblasting our products. This was donethrough training of our buyers and designers atBESTSELLER and through audits where we specificallychecked sandblasting facilities. Apart from auditing, wehave also developed posters demonstrating the banwhich have been displayed at the factories. Currently,we are researching and using sustainable alternatives to sandblasting, such as ECO AGING, Ozone, lazer and other technologies for jeans finishing. The supplierConshing is not sandblasting BESTSELLER products, butother clients’ products, which we have not banned themfrom doing. However, they have now promised us tostop all sandblasting – also for other clients. We will of course check that they keep this promise.”

H&MH&M stated that sandblasting was against companypolicy, that it had not ordered any sandblasted productssince 2010, and that the company has used hand sandinginstead. H&M reported that it had learned from CrystalGroup that Yida had eliminated sandblasting in mid-2009and disposed of the equipment in 2010, although H&Mstated that evidence of that disposal was still awaited.Crystal Group had further informed H&M that Yida’srelationship with Golden City had ended in November2012 and with Weiqiang in November 2011. In addition,Crystal Group reported that “Stone wheel polishers willbe provided with appropriate PPE”; that “With regardsto chemical use, Yida will reinforce the chemical trainingalready provided to the workers”; and that “Regardingaccess to health examinations, Yida used to providehealth examination to workers of PP operation and who are in contact with chemicals. In 2012, theyincluded all concerned workers in different sectionsincluding PP spray, hand-sand, chemical warehouse, etc.The reports were submitted to them and get theiracknowledgement.” H&M noted that “Yida areperforming hand scraping for our denim production andhas recently re-arranged a new workplace with betterventilation, including improvement on ergonomic design

of the workstations.” On 21 March 2013, H&M releaseda list of “all our supplier factories with which we have along term business relation – and thereby around 95%of our order volume for all our brands”. While Yida itselfwas not listed, the parent company Crystal Group wasincluded (listed as Crystal Martin in the H&M list). Whenasked about the omission, H&M responded that Yidawas a subcontractor and thus did not have a directbusiness relationship with the company. The H&M list is available at: http://about.hm.com/AboutSection/en/About/Sustainability/Commitments/Responsible-Partners/Supply-Chain/SupplierList.html

VF Corporation (Lee, Wrangler)VF Corporation’s brands Lee and Wrangler are listed on the updated Conshing website, as noted above, but VF Corporation responded to us that it was “notfamiliar with Conshing”. The company did, however,confirm that it has an active relationship with Yida, that it had previously been active with production at Weiqiang and that it had also “recently run somesample garments in Weiqiang’s Shenzhen facility but do not have any plans to proceed with them.”

Ralph Lauren (Polo)As noted above, the Ralph Lauren brand Polo waspreviously listed on Conshing’s website as a client ofConshing. Ralph Lauren responded that: “Ralph Laurendid not and does not have a relationship with thecompany or factory Conshing listed in your report.Ralph Lauren prohibits the use of ‘sandblasting’on any of our products.”

Marks & SpencerThe draft report was sent to Marks & Spencer (M&S), as one of the photographs taken inside the Yida factory showing the clients of Crystal Groupincluded the M&S logo. M&S responded that thecompany does not source from Yida, but only from its parent company Crystal Group.

Levi Strauss &CoLevi’s responded in detail, stating that it had been “clear with our suppliers that we do not allowsandblasting and we do not place orders for sandblastedproducts”. Levi's also stated that it had taken theadditional step of “requesting supplier to remove allblasting tools and abrasives from the site where LS&Co.products are manufactured”. Levi’s confirmed that Yida isone of its supplier factories, that it had “verified that Yidaeliminated sandblasting process in 2010” and that Yidahad “stored its six sandblasting machines in a warehouseuntil April 2012 when they disposed of the machines asabandoned property”. Levi's confirmed that Golden Cityis a supplier factory, and significantly, given the workers’testimony in this report, Levi’s stated that: “In 2011, wefound a similar situation as your report outlines thatsandblasting equipment was being hidden during ourfactory assessment.” Levi’s noted further: “In January2012, factory management informed us that they hadremoved all sandblasting equipment and sent photos as

Brea

thle

ss fo

r Blu

e Je

ans:

Hea

lth h

azar

ds in

Chi

na’s

deni

m fa

ctor

ies

34

Notes 1 Definition adopted by the Joint ILO/WHO

Committee on Occupational Health at its 1st Session(1950) and revised at its 12th Session (Geneva,November 1995)

2 Health and life at work: A basic human right, Geneva: ILO, 2009

3 Deadly Denim: Sandblasting in the Bangladesh GarmentIndustry, Amsterdam: Clean Clothes Campaign, 2012

4 The use of crystalline silica for blast cleaningoperations was banned in Britain in 1950, and in theEuropean Economic Community in 1966.

5 Report on Invisible Victims of Development – Workers’Health and Safety in Asia, Hong Kong: Asia MonitorResource Centre, 2012

6 The Law on the Prevention and Treatment ofOccupational Diseases in China, Article 32, states:“The labourers engaged in hazardous occupationsshall have an occupational health examination beforethey start work, during their career at this job andupon their departure. The factory shall furthermoreinform the workers of the examination results. Thefactory shall compensate for all the expensesincurred for the occupational health examinations.”

7 Becky Fung and Francine Chan, ‘OSH Status Report: China’, Hong Kong: Asia Monitor Resource Centre, 2011

8 Ibid.9 See, for example, the cases of Feng Xingzhong and

Deng Wenping who died at the age of 36, three years after starting work as gem cutters. Also see the overview of the gemstone silicosis campaign:http://www.lac.org.hk/en/node/86.

10 Report on Occupational Disease Prevention and Control,Ministry of Health, 2009; cited in Fung and Chan, op cit

11 Dongguan Daily, 2 August 2011, cited in Fung and Chan, op cit

12 ‘Yida jeans plant takes more green steps’, Crystal Group press release, 7 April 2011

13 http://www.conshing.com.cn/en/about.asp; althoughLee and Wrangler are listed on the Conshingwebsite, VF Corporation (the brands’ parentcompany) has stated that it is not familiar with the factory.

14 As stated on the official Levi’s supplier list, andconfirmed by the company in correspondenceduring March 2013.

15 For a Conshing promotional video advertising its sandblasting capacities, seehttp://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjUwMDkzNzI4.html

16 Rates given apply to 2011/1217 The Asia Floor Wage (AFW) campaign is a collective

Asian demand for a ‘floor’ or living wage for Asiangarment workers who manufacture the majority ofthe world’s clothing in the global garment supplychain. It is based on a family’s basic needs includingfood and non-food expenses. The AFW Allianceurges retailers and brand-name companies to enterdialogue with labour organisations in Asian countriesto address poverty wages; for more information, seewww.asiafloorwage.org

18 China’s Labour Law stipulates that overtime shall not exceed one hour per work day, or, in specialcircumstances and provided that the health of theemployee is not affected, not exceed three hoursper day and a total of 36 hours per month.

19 ‘Joint ban on sandblasting of textiles’, H&M Reporting& Resources: Case Studies, at about.hm.com

proof. We conducted a validation to confirm that nosandblasting equipment remained in the factory”. Levi'sconfirmed that Gloss Mind is a supplier factory and thatour report was accurate in stating that no sandblastingtakes place on the Gloss Mind premises. Levi’s furtherstated that neither Conshing nor Weiqiang had beensuppliers for Levi’s or Yida; however, this latter claim iscontradicted by the information supplied to H&M byYida’s parent company Crystal Group, which confirmedthat Weiqiang had indeed been a subcontractor of Yida.

Workers at Weiqiang have also confirmed to us that, whether or not it was known to Levi’s, Yida had previously subcontracted the production of Levi’s jeans to Weiqiang over many years.

The following brands were contacted but did not respond: Guess, Dolce & Gabbana, American Eagle, Texwood, Clride.n, CBA, Walmart (Faded Glory), GAP (Old Navy), andAbercrombie & Fitch/Hollister.

YES, I WANT TO SUPPORT WAR ON WANT BY MAKING A DONATION

Make your donation worth 25% more – at no cost to you.I am a UK tax payer and I would like War on Want to reclaim tax on all donations that I have

made in the last four years and all future donations that I make from the date of this declaration.I understand that I must pay an amount of Income Tax and/or Capital Gains Tax for each tax year thatis at least equal to the tax that all the charities that I donate to will reclaim in that year. I understandthat War on Want will reclaim 25p of tax on every £1 that I give. I am not a UK tax payer

I would like to make a donation of £20 £50 £100 or £ my own amount

Name

Address

Postcode

Home no. Mobile no.

E-mail

War on Want relies on the generosity of its supporters to continue its work against the root causes of poverty around the world. Every pound counts in our fight against injustice and inequality and we are grateful for your support.

Please fill in the whole form in capital letters using a ball point pen and send to: Freepost RSKC-UCZZ-ZSHL, War on Want, 44-48 Shepherdess Walk, London N1 7JP

You can also donate online at waronwant.org or call 020 7324 5040Thank you

I enclose a cheque / CAF Voucher / Postal Order made payable to War on WantPlease debit my MasterCard / Visa / Maestro / CAF Card

Card Number

Expiry Date Security Code (The last three digits on your card signature strip.)*

Start Date Issue Number

Name of Cardholder Date

Signature(s)

* This number is not retained by War on Want once your donation has been processed.

shaded boxes for Maestro card users only

War on Want will use all the details you provide to keep you informed about the important work we do. However, if you do not wish to receive any further communications from us or related charities, please tick the appropriate box:

War on Want Other relevant charities

Registered Charity N

o. 208724 Com

pany Limited by G

uarantee Reg. No. 629916

N13AB

YES, I WANT TO SUPPORT WAR ON WANT BY BECOMING A MEMBER

Make your donation worth 25% more – at no cost to you.I am a UK tax payer and I would like War on Want to reclaim tax on all donations that I have

made in the last four years and all future donations that I make from the date of this declaration.I understand that I must pay an amount of Income Tax and/or Capital Gains Tax for each tax year thatis at least equal to the tax that all the charities that I donate to will reclaim in that year. I understandthat War on Want will reclaim 25p of tax on every £1 that I give. I am not a UK tax payer

Name

Address

Postcode

Home no. Mobile no.

E-mail

I would like to make a regular donation of £5 £10 £20 or my own amount

monthly / quarterly / yearly (delete as appropriate)

Commencing on the 1st 8th 15th 22nd of mm yy

(please tick as appropriate) should be at least four weeks from today

Please fill in the whole form in capital letters using a ball point pen and send to: Freepost RSKC-UCZZ-ZSHL, War on Want, 44-48 Shepherdess Walk, London N1 7JP

You can also donate online at waronwant.org or call 020 7324 5040

Please call 020 7324 5040 if you would like guidance on how to fill in the formThank you

Banks and Building Societies may not accept Direct Debit Instructionsfor some types of account.

War on Want will use all the details you provide to keep you informed about the important work we do. However, if you do not wish to receive any further communications from us or related charities, please tick the appropriate box:

War on Want Other relevant charities

Registered Charity N

o. 208724 Com

pany Limited by G

uarantee Reg. No. 629916

Instruction to your Bank or Building Society to pay by Direct Debit.

Name and full postal address of your Bank or Building SocietyTo the Manager Bank / Building Society

Address

Postcode

Name(s) of Account holder(s)

Branch Sort Code

Account No.

3 8 8 2 4 0

Service user number:

Reference: (to be completed by War on Want)

Instruction to Bank or Building Society:Please pay War on Want Direct Debits from the accountdetailed in this instruction subject to the safeguards assuredby the Direct Debit Guarantee. I understand that thisinstruction may remain with War on Want and if so, detailswill be passed electronically to my Bank/Building Society.

Signature(s) Date

£

N13AB

Do not return to your bank

War on WantWar on Want fights poverty in developingcountries in partnership and solidarity with people affected by globalisation. We campaign for human rights, especially workers’ rights, and against the root causes of global poverty,inequality and injustice.

Cover picture: Justin Jin / Panos Pictures

Design by www.wave.coop

This report has been produced with the financialassistance of TRAID. The contents of the reportare the sole responsibility of War on Want and canunder no circumstances be regarded as reflectingthe position of TRAID.

With thanks to country researchers Sze WanDebby Chan from Students & Scholars AgainstCorporate Misbehaviour (SACOM) and VikkyChan from the ITUC/GUF Hong Kong LiaisonOffice (IHLO)

War on Want44-48 Shepherdess WalkLondon N1 7JPUnited Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)20 7324 5040Fax: +44 (0)20 7324 5041Email: mailroom@waronwant.org

www.waronwant.org

Company limited by guaranteeReg No. 629916 • Charity No. 208724

Printed on recycled paper

Published: June 2013

Written by Dominique Muller of the Clean Clothes Campaign