Letters to the editor
Some overseas manufacturers are just
The smiling Eskimo is imprisoned
Some overseas manufacturers are just
I head up the social compliance department at VF Corporation. It is my job to make sure that all of our suppliers operate their facilities in a healthy and safe environment. Where the employees are treated ethically and the local laws are observed. We have a full time staff located all around the world who are dedicated to this effort.
I am responding to your recent article about sweatshop labor [November, 2005]. Specifically your comments about Nautica In your article you state that “Other affiliates of VF Corp., such as Nautica, are known to have sweatshops in Myanmar, which is a military dictatorship”. For the last 6 years VF has not allowed any of it’s affiliated brands or licensees to import any products from Myanmar. In fact for the last year and a half it has been illegal for any US company to import any apparel products from this country.
Nautica has only been a part of VF Corporation since July 2003. At that time there was no merchandise being produced in Myanmar and none has been placed there since. It is quite possible that Nautica did place goods in Myanmar prior to the purchase date while they were under different management.
Ron Martin
Compliance Director, VF Corporation
Ian Overton responds:
The quote you reference is from a report written by C. Coward (2001) at Marlborough University detailing the various companies that had factories in Burma (Myanmar). This includes Nautica. As my article dealt with specific Anchorage contractors I was not inferring anything about other VF brands. In the interests of justice and ethics I do suggest VF follow in the footsteps of other businesses and initiate disclosure of factory locations and what varying protective measures all its affiliates may engage in. For example, many companies include photographs of factory conditions, while others make freely available their internal code of conduct.
The smiling Eskimo is imprisoned
As you well know our state is served primarily by one Airline, Alaska Airlines.
I would like to see an exposé on the true Alaska Airlines, with emphasis on the fact that Alaska Airlines is neither Alaskan (its headquarters is in Seattle), in attendance or business (Alaska Airlines is under Alaska Air Group or AAG, a Delaware corporation since 1985). Yet the smiling Eskimo and this state are plastered and hijacked for corporate commercial endorsement.
Taking this story to deeper waters would mean investigating the current conditions in which Alaska Airlines finds itself.
1. Labor problems (a simple internet search will lead you to all stories for reference, including recent layoffs).
2. Safety problems (flight 261 crashed on Jan. 10, 2000, yet Alaska continues to pile-up fines from the FAA.
3. Internal problems. The current Board of Directors is seemingly in a battle against its own shareholders. Evidently many votes were withheld in the last shareholders meeting. source:votepal.com
4. Two of the current board members have questionable affiliations, one being a former employee of Arthur Anderson, the accounting firm implicated in a recent corporate scandal, the other being a former official with a California electrical entity which had a hand in the California blackouts. Other problems include AAG having a sham trust to pay workers sick-leave while enjoying certain tax benefits.
Could it be the smiling Eskimo has been hijacked and held hostage? Please shed some light on this company who at the surface appears to be wholesome and friendly. I believe the public needs to know that Alaska Airlines crafts an image that is not true to it’s character.
Charles Brenner