Appendix F

When it met last spring, the UC Advisory Committee on Trademark Licensing encouraged UCAS to develop a proposal that would parallel the Harvard Study - one that would draw on the abundant resources at the University of California, rather than rely on external consultants and accounting firms such as PriceWaterhouseCoopers. We must also emphasize that we are skeptical about the ability of BSR and PriceWaterhouseCooper's ability to conduct a truly impartial study.

Our study is premised on the assumption that the best approach to eliminating sweatshop conditions in the factories used by UC licensees is based on verification of worker complaints, rather than sporadic monitoring of factory conditions by "expert" accounting firms. It is our belief that monitoring, particularly as currently envisioned, has several defects: if conducted by major accounting firms, it produces the appearance - and arguably the reality - of a conflict of interest (since such firms often have business relationships with the companies they are monitoring); it fails to produce transparency in the form of full public disclosure of violations; it is extremely costly to the university, since on-going monitoring by large accounting firms carries with it a large price tag; and it leaves the process of detection and enforcement to outside experts, rather than building workers' capacity to secure their own rights under existing laws and the University of California Code of Conduct.

We believe that sporadic visits to a factory by outside entities cannot give an accurate or reliable picture of the everyday conditions within the factory. There is ample evidence that factory Owners temporarily clean up conditions for the purposes of an audit, and that workers do not feel safe revealing any complaints they may have to unknown monitors. We believe that workers themselves, who are a constant presence in the factories and acutely aware of the abuses they may suffer, are in fact, the best monitors.

Therefore, our approach is to foster collaborations between UC scholars and local groups and organizations, to build capacity at the local level - the capacity of workers to complain when violations occur, without fear of retaliation; and the capacity of local groups to independently and knowledgeably verify the accuracy of such complaints.

United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) has proposed a consortium of universities that would follow an approach similar to the one envisioned below. We urge that our study be included as one of the pilot projects proposed by USAS for the first phase of their study.

The Proposed Study

We envision a two-phase effort. The first phase is elaborated below, and entails basic information-gathering as well as a pilot project on verification. The main goals of this first phase are:

3. To start the process of educating workers about their rights.

5. To begin to assess conditions.

The second phase is to be implemented after a Code of Conduct is fully implemented; it is presented in outline form only. It must be emphasized that once a violation at a site is revealed, it is imperative that the pressure on the licensee be squarely on improving conditions, rather than cutting and running from that site, and that the complaining worker's job is safeguarded. Otherwise, the perverse incentive will be created for workers to not report conditions. Licensees should not be allowed to play the game of pretending the problem is the contractor's rather than their own. Our project teams will play the critical role of keeping the spotlight on the licensee's response to exposure of bad practices at specific sites, evaluating the subsequent efforts at remediation.

Three sites will be selected for study, including one inside the United States and two in leading exporting countries. The sites will be selected on the basis of volume of production for the UC system and appropriate conditions. UCOP is to provide a list of the top 25 licensees, who in turn will provide a coded list of all of their contractors, indicating—for each—the dollar value of production during the past fiscal year, as well as the city, state, and country in which each is located. The names and addresses of individual contractors need not be provided in order to determine the study sites; this information will, of course, have to be provided for the sites that are eventually selected. An effort will be made to focus on the largest contractors within a single region of each country, although it might also be useful to look at smaller locations where violations might be more likely to occur.

2. Create a University of California Project Committee to oversee the study

It is the unique role of universities to be centers of inquiry, and the University of California fortunate is in possessing a number of faculty, graduate students, and professional researchers some working independently, others associated with ORUs, MRUs, and other research centers who are knowledgeable about labor processes and working conditions in the apparel industry in different parts of the world. We therefore propose to create a UC Project Committee with responsibility for overseeing the study. The Project Committee will serve as an advisory board to the Center for Labor Research and Education at Berkeley, which will administer the study.

3. Determine which NGOs religious groups, unions, and academics are working in each site, work in partnership with them in order to build their own capacity to conduct the research process

The next phase of data-collection will be to identify the organizations and individuals already working on these issues at the project sites. These will include non-governmental organizations (NGOs), for example those concerned with human nights; churches and other religious organizations; labor unions, and their support groups; and academics conducting research. These individuals and organizations will provide an important source of information on wages and working conditions, as well as the degree of freedom of association. They will also be consulted concerning the most appropriate methodologies for approaching workers and factory owners in the next phases of the investigation. Finally, and most importantly, these groups will become directly involved in the conduct of the study itself, since an overall objective is to build local capacity, thereby opening up the space for workers and their allies to advocate on their own behalf .

4. Pilot worker education project: provide workers with basic education on their rights under local laws and the UC licensing agreement code of conduct

In partnership with local groups and organizations, the project will educate workers about their rights under local labor laws, as well as the standards adopted under the University of California Code of Conduct. Factories would be required to allow project teams to conduct education sessions for one hour every three months, during which time factory work would cease so that all workers could attend. Workers would be paid an hourly wage for their time at these sessions, which would focus on applicable laws in each country, rights under the University Code of Conduct, and available complaint mechanisms. Members of the project advisory committee may observe or participate in this process. Basic data would be gathered at this phase concerning wages and working conditions, if appropriate. The University would agree that there would be no sanctions against any of its licensees or their contractors for violations uncovered during this phase, with the exception of retaliation against workers who participate in the educational sessions. If it is determined that workers have been fired for participating in this study or reporting a violation, the contractor must immediately reinstate them and remediate them for lost wages. Licensees would similarly agree not to sanction their contractors by limiting the work they send to them.

5. Establish and test complaint mechanisms and verification of complaints.

It is necessary to develop safe mechanisms for workers to file complaints, which can subsequently be independently verified on-site by local groups and organizations - a so-called "fire alarm," worker-driven approach to triggering factory inspections. The project team, in conjunction with local groups, will first develop a range of complaint mechanisms, including (but not limited to): inviting anonymous complaints; providing local phone numbers or other places where complaints could be registered; creating "safe" places such as churches and community centers where workers could gather and discuss their concerns; and, where appropriate, anonymous surveys. The pilot study will test and refine these different complaint mechanisms. If necessary, a professional auditor could be hired to work with the project team, if it proves necessary to audit factory payroll and other records.

1. Collect data on factory conditions from the companies themselves.

2. Verify company-reported data on conditions with workers.

The UC-wide Project Committee will also carry out educational activities on the different campuses. The Project Committee will begin by developing a wider network of UC scholars, both as a source of expertise on the topic, and to provide an important vehicle for integrating the study with the educational mission of the university. Such integration will be achieved by means of:

• Involving students in conducting research under the auspices of the study.
• A UC-wide conference entitled "Towards a Sweatshop-Free Campus."
• A speakers' series that will. bring experts (from both within and outside the UC system) to UC campuses, in order to deepen the students understanding of sweatshop issues.
• The creation of educational materials that will enhance understanding of the causes of sweatshops, and how they can be eliminated. Such materials, which would be appropriate for classroom use, would be disseminated on a website developed for this purpose.
• Providing student internships with worker rights groups, human rights groups, or monitoring organizations.
• Organizing fact-finding delegations of students and faculty to garment factories in the U.S. and abroad, focusing on areas where UC goods are made.