CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

1. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO FACTORY INVESTIGATION: The Case of Robinson Textiles Office of Labor Standards Enforcement and the Worker Rights Consortium

2. PURPOSE • The purpose of the Sweatfree Contracting Ordinance (San Francisco Administrative Code, Chapter 12U) is to ensure that the City and County of San Francisco purchases goods from contractors who pay fair wages and maintain humane work environments and conditions. • The Ordinance applies to City contracts for purchase or rental of apparel, uniforms, garments and textiles.

3. HISTORY • In 2005, the Ordinance was introduced before the Board of Supervisors by Mayor Gavin Newsom and former Supervisor Tom Ammiano and was passed unanimously. • In 2007, the Ordinance was amended to allow the City to establish a process to evaluate bids and to award contracts to vendors that were partially compliant to sweatfree requirements.

4. ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT • OCA administers the bids, evaluates and awards contracts. • OLSE monitors, investigates and enforces labor standards of the awarded contracts. • OLSE contracts with WRC to monitor and report on conditions in factories outside of the United States.

5. INMATE CLOTHING CONTRACT • The City awarded the Inmate Clothing contract to Robinson Textiles for a two year term contract. • Robinson Textiles listed ITIC Apparel as their only subcontractor; factory location in the Dominican Republic. • The vendor signed a contract and agreed to comply with the Sweatfree requirements including supplier factory inspection. • The projected dollar amount to be spent was over $350K.

6. CONSIDERATIONS FOR SELECTING FACTORIES FOR INSPECTION • Dollar value of the contract - Is there sufficient leverage to compel the factory and vendor to make the necessary improvements? • Is there evidence of possible labor rights violations based on outreach to workers? • What do we know about working conditions in the country/region? • Is there supply chain overlap with other public entities or institutions that have adopted labor rights standards?

7. WRC INVESTGATION OF ITIC APPAREL FACTORY (DOMINICAN REPUBLIC) • WRC’s investigation included: • Offsite worker interviews • Review of workers’ paystubs • February 2011 factory visit including comprehensive health and safety inspection • Interviews with ITIC owner, managers, and supervisors • Review of relevant documentation including financial statements, accident reports, and legal documents • Collection and testing of drinking water samples • Review and analysis of applicable Dominican laws

8. WRC FINDINGS – ITIC APPAREL • WRC’s investigation revealed the following violations of San Francisco’s Sweatfree Ordinance: • Sexual and verbal harassment by top management and supervisors • Underpayment of wages • Failure to provide workers with appropriate access to government health insurance program • Occupational safety violations • Failure to pay San Francisco non-poverty wage

9. LEGALLY MANDATED BENEFITS • Findings: • ITIC did not follow the legally mandated procedure for determining workers’ vacation periods • ITIC failed to properly report work-related and non-work-related injury or illness to government insurance program • ITIC did not educate workers about their rights to medical/disability benefits and how to access them

10. WAGE AND HOUR • Findings: • Violations of Dominican Labor Code’s requirements re payment of hours and overtime • ITIC had required employees to work unpaid overtime since spring of 2011 • Regular errors in workers’ paystubs resulting in underpayment of wages. The original amount printed on the paystub represented, on average, 86% of the correct pay and in some cases, as little as 61.8% of the correct pay • Failure by ITIC to pay the San Francisco non-poverty wage rate. Workers earned US $0.74/hour vs. the non-poverty wage rate of US $2.27/hour

11. HARASSMENT AND ABUSE • Findings: • Sexual harassment of female workers by male supervisors and managers • Workers reported that female workers who had refused sexual relationships had been fired as a result • Verbal harassment by certain supervisors including yelling at workers and insulting them with obscenities • Worker testimony that after the worker complained about a supervisor’s use of obscene language, the supervisor isolated the worker so that the worker could not interact with other employees • Failure by human resources department to address complaints regarding verbal harassment of employees

12. FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION • Findings: • Workers expressed a significant amount of fear that workers who exercised their associational rights would be fired and blacklisted • Many workers were reluctant to even talk about freedom of association for fear that their jobs would be at risk for discussing this topic with the WRC interviewer • ITIC owner expressed a hostile attitude towards workers’ exercise of freedom of association in the presence of WRC investigators

13. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Production Equipment and Ergonomics • Unguarded belt/pulley drives • Forklift with unguarded sprocket chain drive

14. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Production Equipment and Ergonomics • Dryer lacks an emergency stop device • Workers in the silk screening department were not provided floor mats

15. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Plant Hygiene and Safety • Lack of exit and directional signs to facilitate quick exit in case of emergency • First aid kits were missing several items • Significant airborne cotton dust, which can lead to respiratory problems for workers and can present combustion hazards • Health and Safety Committee • No records documenting that Health and Safety committee had met since 2007

16. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Worker Training • No records documenting that workers had been provided with training re first aid, fire drills, or handling of chemicals since 2007 • Handling of Chemicals and Flammable Liquids • Oil drums were not grounded or bonded, creating a fire hazard in the storage of flammable liquids • Failure to provide approved eyewash station

17. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Electrical Systems and Procedures • Sewing machine with exposed conductors • Drop cord with exposed conductors and cracked insulation • Incorrectly wired outlet

18. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Electrical Systems and Procedures • Overhead outlet with no outer insulation • Pedestal fans with ungrounded cord and accumulation of combustible fiber dust • Uncovered and ungrounded outlet boxes

19. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY • Electrical Systems and Procedures • Overhead outlet with open contacts and accumulation of combustible cloth fibers • Exposed conductors on cloth cutters • Forklift with exposed electrical equipment • Lack of formal lockout/tag-out system

20. WRC’S NEXT STEPS • After completing factory assessment, WRC presented its findings to ITIC Apparel and OLSE, along with recommendations to correct the violations • ITIC failed to respond to these recommendations • WRC informed OLSE about ITIC Apparel’s failure to commit to remedy the violations of the City’s Ordinance

21. VENDOR RESPONSE • September 2011 - • OLSE wrote to Robinson Textiles asking that they urge ITIC Apparel to address WRC recommendations. • Robinson Textiles responded that they were encouraging ITIC Apparel to address WRC’s recommendations and they were looking for a new supplier.

22. VENDOR RESPONSE • October 2011 - • OLSE asked for specifics of Robinson Textiles attempts to get ITIC Apparel to comply and objected to Robinson Textiles replacing their supplier rather than attempting to remedy the violations.

23. VENDOR RESPONSE • November 2011 - • OLSE spoke to Robinson Textiles representatives several times to encourage them to engage ITICI Apparel to address violations. • January 2012 - • Robinson Textiles notified OCA that they did not want to renew the contract because the City had only spent $1,096. Contract expired 1/31/12.

24. LESSONS LEARNED • Contractors are willing to terminate a small contract rather than to work with the supplier to remedy violations. • The City is considering amending the Ordinance to provide for longer term contracts to incentivizes contractors to remedy violations.

25. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS