The decision by the US government to suspend, as opposed to revoke, preferential trade access under the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP), is indeed a sad blow to our ready-made-garment (RMG) sector, the largest export, foreign exchange and employment sector of the country. The RMG sector employs over 3.5 million workers, majority of them women, and plays a critical role in both economic growth and empowerment of women in the country. Though only a portion of our exports – 0.54% of US$5 billion – falls under the GSP program in the US, there is no doubt that the decision from one of our most important bilateral partners will adversely affect the image of our country’s largest export sector with possible fallout in Europe and other markets. Hence, the wake-up call before further damage is done.
Collective guilt
While our political parties are engaged in mutual mudslinging to pass the buck, Nobel Laureate Prof Mohammad Yunus has rightly pointed out that the decision to suspend our preferential access took place because we failed to convince US buyers about our working conditions and industrial safety. In this respect, I believe “we” refers not only to our leaders but to all of us collectively as a nation. The burden of guilt in reality falls on the shoulders of the government, opposition, business lobby, consumer groups, trade unions and citizens alike.
AL and BNP can blame each other, but in truth neither of them can be absolved of some degree of responsibility as we have witnessed one accident after another, including Rana, Spectrum and Tazreen, under successive governments led by both parties. Not only our political parties, each of us share the collective guilt for building a society characterised by political, social and economic inequality that has led to the marginalisation and exploitation of workers without protection of their rights.
Complacency
It is important to bear in mind that the original petition by the American Federation of Labour & Congress of Industrial Organization (AFL-CIO) seeking the withdrawal of our preferential access is not new and was filed as early as 1990. This was followed by subsequent petitions in 2001, 2004, 2005 and 2007, raising the issue of worker rights. In response to the petition filed in June 2007, the US Trade Representative (USTR) accepted the petition for consideration in September that year and subsequently placed Bangladesh under “continuing review” to monitor our progress towards a set of workers’ rights benchmarks that were elaborated in 2008.
The US government’s decision to withdraw our preferential access was not an abrupt development, but the result of a long-drawn-out process that started years earlier. The truth is we had at least six years since the last petition in 2007 to get our act right before the US was forced to take this unfortunate, yet inevitable, decision after the Rana Plaza tragedy. But, the country was asleep at the wheel over this period. In fact, it can be argued that the US government has shown utmost consideration for the plight of our largest export industry and garment workers to wait for such a long time before taking this unfortunate decision. As one of Bangladesh’s strongest development partners and time-tested friends in the international community, there is no doubt that the US clearly hesitated in making this decision until it had no choice but to do so due to our continued complacency. Even when the US took this decision, they opted to suspend – instead of revoke - preferential access, implying the decision is temporary and will be reviewed following positive responses from our side.
While one wishes the US did not take this decision, we had enough time to take remedial action but were caught unawares. We failed to take adequate action to improve working conditions of our garment workers – some of the best citizens of our country, who have kept our economy afloat through their sweat, literally. Our governments failed to rein in errant garment factories with the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association emerging as the most powerful industrial lobby, above regulation and oversight. Similarly, our labour rights groups, human rights organisations and consumer bodies failed to take proactive action against the violation of labour rights based on the fallacy that global competitiveness required some degree of local exploitation.
‘Dreams’
In 2010, this writer was involved in a television reality show called “Dreams” with politician-cum-television personality Mahi B Chowdhury and learnt firsthand from the garment workers about their day-to-day experiences of deprivation. The harsh reality is that our garment workers worked in hazardous environments that violate even the lowest standards of occupational health safety, while they lived in abject poverty, being denied adequate healthcare and education for themselves and their family members. Not only that, some of the garment workers spoke about their harrowing experiences of daily mistreatment.
The reality show involved a fashion show with the garment workers as models after two weeks of intensive grooming, choreographing and leadership training lessons. The writer gave motivational talks for the garment workers to achieve their best. The program was moving because it was an opportunity for our garment workers to model apparels that they had manufactured yet could not imagine wearing in their lifetime. Hosted by Mahi and his wife Ahsfah Huq Lopa, the program wanted to show the world that our garment workers deserve better rights.
After two weeks, the garment workers-turned-models told us this was the best time of their life. Why? Simply because the organisers treated them as human beings, with dignity and respect. They felt for the first time in their life that their dreams matter, not only for the fashion show, but their aspirations in life. The performance of the models, some of whom did not even know about the fashion industry a few weeks back, was outstanding.
The reality show demonstrated our garment workers can achieve their best in a supportive environment. They told us they were proud of their work and looked forward to returning to the factories, but wanted to see better working conditions to maximise their potential. The writer was later told that some of the garment workers were welcomed back to their factories as champions, but there were also cases where the owners and managers ridiculed them for participating in the reality show.
Good apples, bad apples
Is it impossible to uphold competitiveness while ensuring respect and dignity of workers? This is not to say that all garment owners are inhumane and exploitative of their workers. This writer personally knows many garment owners, including current lawmakers, who are not only compliant but provide better salaries and working conditions than their expected minimum obligations. Instead of discrediting the industry as a whole, civil society and the media needs to identify model cases of compliance to set industry benchmarks and standards for others. There is no doubt that a new breed of enlightened entrepreneurs believe the well-being and morale of their workers is directly related to their business success.
However, at the same time, we must not forget that one bad apple spoils the entire barrel. In our case, there seems to be more than a few bad apples, despite the positive exceptions. The insensitive reactions from some BGMEA industry leaders, including the delayed payment of overdue wages for victims in Rana Plaza, lends some credence to the assumption that at least a section of entrepreneurs remain impervious to the needs of their workers.
The silver lining?
The silver lining is that the US government has expressed its willingness to work with Bangladesh to restore our preferential access following improvements in our labour conditions. Though the RMG sector has been profitable in terms of both investment returns and foreign exchange reserves, our entrepreneurs have by and large failed so far to take our garment industries to the next level. Our competitiveness has been more or less based on low cost of production due to poor salaries and working conditions, as opposed to business and operational efficiency. Not only that, we have also been confined primarily to the lower end of the retail market and race to the lowest dollar, instead of graduating to higher segments of the industry. In this respect, our RMG sector has been left behind by competitors in Sri Lanka, Vietnam and China. The rise of Myanmar poses a risk for us to lose competitiveness even at the lower end market if we do not reinvent the industry now.
Herein lies a golden opportunity for us to reform our garment sector, including labour rights and conditions, to be sustainable and expand our industry. Our competitiveness can be based on strategy, efficiency and productivity instead of labour exploitation. The suspension of preferential access in the US market can be seen as a blessing in disguise as it has limited direct impact on our current export earnings, but at the same time serves as a wake-up call for the industry to emerge stronger in the long run.
This calls for us to come together as a nation for soul-searching and corrective measures before other markets take a similar decision. There is no time to lose, as Bangladesh needs to take drastic steps to instil confidence in global buyers before European Union, Canada and other markets follow suit.
Growing pains
The RMG industry has been under pressure even before the US decision was announced. It has been suffering from labour unrest and political instability recently, leading to increased costs, production turn-around time and order cancellations. Concerns over labour rights have led to a number of leading retailers, including Tesco and Disney, to cancel orders from factories with safety concerns. Not only that, labour rights groups in some countries have demanded banning our imports altogether. There is no scope to trivialise the scale of the ongoing crisis that requires a political consensus for the country to protect the industry. The importance of the industry for our economy cannot be overstated.
Political bickering and bankruptcy
Though it is expected that a looming crisis will bring together our main political parties, the country has witnessed continuing mudslinging between the AL and BNP to pass the blame to the other side instead of taking a realistic stock of the situation. In reality, both political parties are to blame just as each of us share the collective guilt for years of complacency in improving our labour conditions and rights. The BNP has come down hard on the government for failing to protect the GSP facility, while the AL has accused the leader of the opposition for lobbying against preferential access by writing an op-ed in the Washington Times on January 30. Though the article was published with the leader of the opposition’s by-line, she denied authoring it in her speech to the Parliament on Saturday. According to the leader of the opposition: “Failing to retain GSP facilities, the government is spreading propaganda to create confusion.”
The article
So what does the article say? The op-ed in question does not directly call for revoking the GSP facility, but nevertheless makes a case for the US to make Bangladesh aware that preferential access will be withdrawn if labour rights and political freedom is violated. The article titled “The Thankless Role in Saving Democracy in Bangladesh” states: the US and allies “must explain to (Prime Minister) Ms (Sheikh) Hasina that general preferences for trade will be withdrawn if those who support workers’ rights and have political views opposed to those of the Prime Minister are not now allowed to express their beliefs. The Western powers should consider targeted travel and other sanctions against those in the regime who undermine democracy, freedom of speech and human rights. They should say and do these things publicly, for all our citizens to see and hear.”
The article received considerable spotlight because it was published under the name of the leader of the opposition, resulting in wide coverage in the local and print media. The Federation of Chamber and Commerce and Industry criticised the op-ed in an official statement: “When the government, private organisations and workers are jointly urging the USA to continue the GSP facilities and give the country duty-free access to its products, such articles by the country’s opposition leader is not acceptable to the country’s business community.”
Now that the leader of the opposition has publicly disowned the article, the question arises how it made it into the Washington Times in the first place. Though five months has passed since then, the BNP should lodge a formal complaint against the newspaper for publishing an article with the leader of the opposition’s by-line if it was not authored by her. To be fair, the op-ed appears to be inconsistent with the leader of the opposition’s public statements seeking continuation of preferential trade access for Bangladesh in the US market.
On May 24, 2011, the New Jersey State Senate conferred a special honour on the leader of the opposition. In her address, the leader of the opposition called for expanding preferential access: “We hope that your lawmakers in Washington will recognize the vital importance for Bangladesh to gain duty free access in the US market and legislate accordingly.” It is plausible that someone, possibly a party leader or adviser, contributed the article without the leader of the opposition’s knowledge or consent. In that event, the individual should take ownership or responsibility instead of Begum Khaleda Zia taking the blame.
Washing dirty linen in public
Irrespective of who the author of the article was, there is no doubt that it was disappointing. As proud citizens of our country with a glorious history, we do not expect our political parties to wash dirty linen in public. The responsibility to uphold the image of our country nationally and internationally lies with both the government and opposition. It is unbecoming of our political parties or leaders to complain about our internal problems externally. Both parties justify that the other side has done the same, but two wrongs do not make a right. Such irresponsible actions are not only demeaning for our nation, but also put our friends in the international community in an uncomfortable position. We must ensure our diplomatic relationships with our most important development partners like the US are kept above partisan politics.
Having said that, the government should not make the article a scapegoat for the withdrawal of preferential trade access. Though the article called for using duty free access as a political tool, it is clear from the US Trade Representative’s statement that the decision was driven by concerns that there has been insufficient progress towards improving basic safety standards despite repeated expressions of concern. The US government decision was neither impulsive nor triggered by an article. Instead of being in denial, the government should take the lead in bringing all stakeholders together to realistically identify the factors that led to this decision by one of our closest bilateral partners. Any attempt by both the government and opposition to gain political mileage out of the GSP issue instead of looking at the national interest will only prove their political bankruptcy further.
‘Made in Bangladesh’ in crisis
There is no doubt that the “Made in Bangladesh” brand is in crisis. At a time of crisis, there is no time to be lost in political mudslinging and acrimony. Despite the shortcomings of our political parties, the fact remains that any sustainable reforms in the RMG industry for improvement of labour conditions require their ownership and endorsement. Both parties enjoy mass support, including influence on entrepreneurs and workers, critical for effective reforms to reclaim the lost glory of our national brand.
While the politicians can provide a policy framework for reform, garment entrepreneurs must take the lead in taking corrective measures to protect the industry. Instead of conspiracy theories blaming imaginary foreign enemies, we need to rise together as a nation to regain the confidence of the global market. The time is apt for change as the international community has been generous in extending support for improving working conditions, while there is growing recognition even amongst global buyers to reform the global sweatshop industry in the aftermath of Savar.
At the same time, civil society groups need to help the industry by bringing together the employers and workers for a comprehensive welfare package with the support of the government and endorsement of the opposition. The industry needs structural reforms for a comparative edge based on strategic efficiency and high productivity instead of labour exploitation. The message is clear that we are suffering from an image crisis that requires us to wake up as a nation for the survival of our largest industry. It is now or never. “Made in Bangladesh” deserves better, so does the nation.
