Previous reviews have highlighted the issue of forced child labor, and in fact this year’s list of questions that the committee submits to the government ahead of the review specifically asks:

17.1. Please provide information on the effectiveness of the steps taken by the State party to enforce the legal provisions (Rights of the Child [Safeguards] Act of 2008) aimed at eradicating child labor, including very young children e.g. in the cotton industry (previous concluding observations, para. 25).

The government’s written reply pushes the art of bureaucratic obfuscation to new heights (or new lows).  Inter-agency committees, task forces, ministries of labor and education, the procuracy, all holding meetings, seminars, prophylactic discussions, printing brochures and booklets and posters…a whirlwind, no, a tsunami of activity, all aimed at eradicating child labor.  Funny how  the three-and-a-half page single space reply avoids mention of the continued, well-documented and widespread mobilization of children for the cotton harvest, on government orders.  But what it does mention, several times, is government cooperation with UNICEF:

Together with UNICEF, the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection held a round table on August 8, 2009, in which the General Prosecutor’s office, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Public Education, the Ministry of Health, the center for specialized professional training, the Council of Federated Trade Unions, the Kamolot movement and the Mahalla Foundation all took part… The Ministry of Labor and Social Protection has signed an agreement with UNICEF on carrying out a sub-project, “Support for the Realization of the National Plan of Action on Child Labor,” of the Annual Defense of the Child work plan, which includes: creation of a joint working group; carrying out research on the social protection of vulnerable children; increasing awareness of child labor; developing informational and training materials; carrying out trainings and the creation of pilot centers; developing minimum standards for children with special needs, etc.

Splendid, isn’t it?  More working groups! More research!  The government is hoping that the committee, in a year that human rights activists have found the worst, most exploitive ever for children in the cotton harvest, will take participation in UNICEF-sponsored seminars as evidence of change.  The Committee’s experts, one hopes, are not so gullible…now if one could only say the same of UNICEF.

See the group’s call to action here, and here.

Unfortunately this seems like too much to ask.  The World Bank has decided to devote this year’s small grants program, intended to develop Uzbek NGOs, to the topic of  ”creating conditions for upbringing healthy and harmoniously developed generation, and realization of the young people’s creative and intellectual potential”–yes, the government’s own propaganda theme for 2010, expressly intended to obscure its annual mass child mobilization.  The deadline for the competition is next week, so it will be interesting to see what projects are actually funded.

Institutionally, the Bank seems to have very little to say on the matter of child labor.  On a web-page headed “child labor” it describes its partnership with UNICEF and the ILO on a research project  called the Understanding Children’s Work initiative, that seems to have more to do with promoting youth employment than with stopping child exploitation:

The primary areas of focus for the partnership are Africa and the Middle East, as well as Latin America.  The partnership works together on several projects designed to better understand the determinants of youth labor market outcomes, to learn what works to promote youth employability, and to promote evidence-based policy debate and coordination.

The Bank’s materials on Uzbekistan make little or no mention of the problem, including a 2005 research report that explicitly deals with the subsidy and taxation policy (including labor and income taxes) that structure the current system of cotton-growing, which completely ignored the massive subsidy inherent in the forced mobilization of low- or no-cost child labor.  And, like the ADB, World Bank officials just can’t get enough of Uzbekistan, it seems: its new country manager there, Loup Brefort, has been quoted extolling results in the country, and announcing 150 million euros worth of new projects.

The head of the Asian Development Bank, Haruhiko Kuroda, was in Uzbekistan on February 16 meeting with President Karimov in February, promising new loans and intensified cooperation.  Wonder if this means continued carte blanche to abuse children? Uzbekistan has already received loans from the bank totaling more than 1.2 billion USD.  The great irony is that while agriculture (especially irrigation) is the target of much of the ADB’s lending, improving the quality of primary education  is the other.  You might think that encouraging the government to actually allow children to attend primary school would be an obvious step in that direction–that is, unless you were the ADB.  So much for the ADB’s mission of “fighting poverty.”

Thinking about 2009, it might be possible to conclude simply “more of the same.”  But what stands out is how successful the Uzbek government’s strategy has been, of stepping up repression at home, and obfuscation abroad.

Despite clear evidence of abusive practices, they seem to have sold their entire harvest, quite a bit of which ends up in clothes sold in the West.  From the report:

In October 2009, just as hundreds of thousands of children and adults were compelled by the State to hand pick cotton, the Uzbek Government announced contracts to sell 1 million tonnes of cotton to buyers mainly from Bangladesh, Iran, China, South Korea, Moldova, the United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey and Japan76. Bangladesh is the destination of a large proportion of Uzbekistan’s raw cotton: the ready-made garment industry manufactures it into clothes, of which 61% are exported to the European Union77. There is therefore a good chance that a proportion of the cotton in goods where the country of origin is unknown, is from Uzbekistan.

The decree stipulates:

cardinal improvement of the quality of education in schools, professional colleges, lyceums and universities through wide introduction of the new information and communication technologies, providing educational establishments with the modern educational and laboratory equipment and computers, as well as stimulation of the teachers and tutors;

and

expansion of measures to raise healthy generation, including the “Healthy mother – healthy child” program, improvement of the system of protection of reproductive health of mothers, children and teenagers, development of preventive healthcare;

As  Uzbek analyst Sanjar Saidov has noted, these programs are largely if not wholly propaganda exercises.  Last year, after all, was the year of Rural Development and Well-being (!).  But since the realities of life for most of Uzbekistan’s young people are so wildly removed from the puffery of such decrees, does no one in the regime worry that they might make people more cynical, more angry?

-Original Message–
From: cassandra_cavanaugh@yahoo.com
Date: 1/4/2010 4:34:58 PM
To: customer_service@gymboree.com
Subject: Fw: Happy New Year From Our Chairman & CEO [#144624]

Dear Mr. McCauley,

Support for a children’s hospital in no way excuses the misery your corporation is bringing to the children of Uzbekistan , forced by their authoritarian government to pick the cotton that goes into Gymboree clothes.

You have been contacted several times by the International Labor Rights Forum, asking you to pledge, as many other corporations (Gap, J. Crew, Walmart) have, to exclude Uzbek cotton from your supply chain. Why have you not responded?

If in 2010 you pledge to become part of the solution for Uzbekistan ’s exploited children, instead of part of the problem, I can go back to purchasing Gym Mart’s clothes for my small daughters. When I look at them, I often think of their age-mates in Uzbekistan , missing school from September to December, and there’s no way we can support a company that inflicts this upon them.

Sincerely,

Cassandra Cavanaugh

www.cottoncampaign.org

Some customer service drone at Gymboree finally sent of a formulaic response to my queries about its Uzbekistan policy (see the email below).  Though Eric talks of “minimum standards” that vendors have to meet, he refuses to answer the question–do they use Uzbek cotton? Sounds like Gym Mart brands doesn’t know…and doesn’t want to find out.  In which case, their “minimum standards” don’t mean a thing.

RE: Happy New Year From Our Chairman & CEOTue, January 5, 2010 12:49:56 PM

Dear Cassandra,

Thank you for contacting Gymboree Customer Service.

As we research prospective vendors and factories, we select companies that make compliance with laws and labor standards a top priority and whose policies and practices are consistent with our corporate mission to celebrate childhood. Gymboree does not allow forced child labor anywhere in the organization, nor anywhere in the supply chain. For all factories or vendors that we work with, we set forth the minimum standards and ethical requirements that they must comply with in order to conduct business with Gymboree.

As a condition of doing business with Gymboree, we require each factory and vendor to sign a product purchase agreement as a commitment that it will adhere to our Terms. Specifically, our Terms require, among other things, full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations including, but not limited to, environmental, wage and hour, and worker health laws, and the child labor, minimum wage and overtime requirements of those laws. All factories and vendors must also certify, among other things, that goods will not be produced with any use of child, forced, or prison labor, and that all employees will be provided with safe, clean working conditions.

Additionally, for many years now, Gymboree has used a reputable, independent auditing firm to evaluate factories prior to engagement and to routinely perform on-site inspections in order to actively monitor and assess factory operations to ensure compliance.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact us and for giving us the opportunity to provide you with information regarding Gymboree’s production standards and practices.

Sincerely,
Eric
Gymboree Customer Service
877 449 6932
www.gymboree.com

This last email has gone unanswered for a few weeks now, which tells us all we need to know about the seriousness of Gymboree’s pledges.  If they won’t come out, either publicly or privately, specifically rejecting Uzbek cotton, all protestations are pretty meaningless.

Re: Happy New Year From Our Chairman & CEO

Tue, January 5, 2010 1:26:15 PM

From:	Cassandra Cavanaugh <cassandra_cavanaugh@yahoo.com> Add to Contacts
To:	orders@gymboree.com

Matt McCauley just doesn’t seem to get it.  More on that soon.

When I go to buy school and play clothes for my 5 and 6 year olds, the last thing I want to think about are their Uzbek coevals shivering out in the fields getting dysentery from canal water.  So in addition to returning the clothes I’ve bought from Gymboree lately, I’ll be sending this email to Matthew McCauley, Gymboree’s CEO, as well as his callous colleagues.  Please join me.

Duckboots back on the shopping list

Of all the companies named by the International Labor Rights Forum on this year’s Sweatshop Hall of Shame for the use of Uzbek cotton, LL Bean was the fastest to respond, and vowed to (eventually) exclude it from their supply chain.  Let’s hope their follow through is as exhaustive as their initial response was rapid.

Read more on the ILRF blog here.  If you buy LL Bean products, take time to let their corporate office know that this is important to you.