“We want brands to know that workers are under pressure from the factory to say good things when they contact workers. We want brands to know the reality on the ground.”
A garment worker at the Huabo Times factory in Myanmar made the plea in March, more than a year into the country’s military dictatorship, which launched a coup on February 1, 2021. The worker spoke of desperate times for workers enduring verbal harassment and abuse, without even having time to use the toilet because of the impossible targets set by the factories.
Fast forward a few months and the world watched in horror as Myanmar’s military executed four pro-democracy activists in the country’s first use of the death penalty in more than three decades – marking a deadly escalation of state repression in the 18 months since the Myanmar army was captured illegally. power. The killings followed a wave of brutal – and often deadly – attacks on those opposed to the military regime.
It is a struggle in which garment workers have played a frontline role. Since the start of the coup, at least 55 union activists have been killed and over 300 union leaders and members of the labor movement have been arrested. Almost all union leaders have been forced into hiding, while those still working in the factories have been effectively silenced due to real fear of consequences. Due to severe restrictions on civil liberties and reporting under military rule, it is now almost impossible to get a clear picture of the reality on the ground.
Since the military takeover, the London-based Business and Human Rights Resource Center has monitored significant increases in labor and human rights abuses of garment workers in Myanmar. Together with partners and allies, at home and abroad, we have tracked over 100 cases of alleged abuse of at least 60,800 garment workers in just 18 months. There is no doubt that widespread and systematic labor violations are occurring in Myanmar’s fashion supply chains. These allegations have been linked to factories that supply some of our favorite fashion brands such as H&M, GUESS, Inditex (Zara & Bershka), Next and Primark, raising serious concerns about who is suffering from the production of the clothes in our closets.
The cases we have recorded present a grim picture. Over half involved wage theft (55 cases), while other common violations included abusive work rates and mandatory overtime (35 cases), attacks on freedom of association (31 cases), and gender-based violence and harassment ( 28 cases). We have also recorded the killing of seven workers by the military and security forces, and the arbitrary arrest and detention of at least 29 workers.
Some of the allegations of abuse included the violent suppression of union leaders and workers. On April 20 this year, two women’s trade union activists were brutally attacked and arrested by six soldiers after they joined a protest against the military regime in Yangon. On the way home, a military vehicle crashed into their taxi before soldiers beat the two women, loaded them and the taxi driver into their vehicle and took them to an interrogation centre.
In another incident a year ago, six workers – including a woman union leader – from Xing Jia Footwear were shot and killed by the army and police after workers gathered outside the factory to demand unpaid wages. Several workers were arrested and three sentenced by a military court to three years in prison on what rights groups say are baseless charges.
Many cases of abuse are alleged to have been carried out directly by the suppliers of the brands’ factories, or by the military in collaboration with the suppliers. Workers and unions have suspected business-military collaboration in 15 percent of recorded cases, although the number may be much higher given that garment factory management and the armed forces appear deeply intertwined. The military has raided factories to arrest workers they suspect of taking part in anti-coup protests, and factories have shared lists of union leaders with the junta, according to unions. The army has also conducted door-to-door checks at workplaces, hostels and homes. Given that garment workers are at the forefront of the country’s civil disobedience movement to demand the end of dictatorship and the restoration of democracy in Myanmar, these alleged abuses are perhaps only the tip of the iceberg.
In the face of this ongoing and often violent repression, many local and international trade unions are calling on international brands to withdraw from Myanmar until democracy is restored.
There are certain risks associated with taking brands out of Myanmar. The country’s garment sector employs about 700,000 people. If the orders run out and factories close, these workers, 90 percent of whom are women, will lose their jobs. Many may end up poor amid a crisis of conflict and economic instability. According to Save the Children, families in Myanmar have lost more than half of their income on average since February 2021, and a third of families rely on the help of others to survive.
However, some labor groups argue that the remaining brands are prioritizing profits over human rights. Garment workers are now earning less than $2 a day – far less than is needed to survive. Factories have taken advantage of the dictatorship to remove hard-won labor rights and protections that unions have fought for over the past two decades.
The Resource Center has invited 33 brands, all of which are said to come from factories in Myanmar with recorded abuses, to respond to the allegations. Of the 23 brands that responded, the majority (16) highlighted their political commitments to protecting the human rights of workers in their supply chains, including conducting human rights due diligence. Despite these commitments, most cases of alleged abuses in the brands’ supply chains remain unsolved, demonstrating a worrying gap between the company’s commitments and the reality at the factories. This raises the question of whether it is possible for brands to perform effective due diligence in the current situation.
Importantly, 17 brands said they had launched their own investigations into the allegations. And seven brands – including C&A, H&M, Lidl, Next and Primark – outlined the actions they were taking to provide redress for affected workers, a critical step in realizing any corporate commitment to human rights. But just over a third (nine) of brands highlighted findings from social audits or their supplier interviews to refute allegations, without any direct engagement with unions or workers, which is essential for effective worker engagement. It is also worrying for the future of the sector in Myanmar.
The reality is that as the dictatorship drags on, it seems that the situation for labor rights – and human rights more broadly – will only continue to deteriorate.
“We have tried hard to protect jobs and workers’ rights,” said Khaing Zar, President of the Myanmar Industrial Workers Federation. “But … we see that the military dictatorship is not disappearing … It is important that we contribute to their immediate and permanent defeat … it is our moral duty to take difficult decisions that will shorten the suffering of our people.”
These circumstances raise serious questions for brands that continue to source from Myanmar, and their investors, about their ability to do so responsibly and ensure the protection of workers in their supply chains. At the very least, they must undertake the ongoing and heightened human rights due diligence that operating in an active conflict zone requires. But it is increasingly difficult for brands to achieve true oversight of conditions in their supplier factories and ensure compliance with their own and international standards and obligations.
What is clear today is that brands need to wake up to the harsh reality that continuing business as usual is simply not an option in Myanmar. And where due diligence is impossible, or where it leads to the conclusion that protecting workers’ rights is not possible, a responsible exit strategy should be considered – in consultation with unions and the workers themselves. Now is the time for brands and the world to stick with what has ensured the profitability of so many clothing companies whose clothes hang in our closets today.
