Greetings fellow worker(s)
How is this case going? We would like to know so we might print
something about it.
Solidarity
Robin/Industrial Worker Collective
----- Original Message -----
From: margaret <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 6:59 PM
Subject: Fw: LL:ART: HISTORIC CASE FOR OUTWORKERS' RIGHTS
> From: Left Links <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 9:02 AM
> Subject: LL:ART: HISTORIC CASE FOR OUTWORKERS' RIGHTS
>
>
> > Historic case for outworkers' rights
> >
> > ******************************
> >
> > The Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union (TCFU) has begun Federal
> > Court proceedings against several clothing companies on behalf of
> > eight Victorian outworkers. The claim is for the payment of award
> > entitlements for the outworkers who have been employed for
> > periods ranging from six weeks to 21 years. This is an historic
> > test case, the first time in Australia and perhaps the world,
> > that outworkers will claim their legal award entitlements.
> >
> > by Magda Hansson
> >
> > The companies involved include AKF Clothing, Glenda Clothing,
> > Cupid Bridalwear, Ebony Lace, Blue Calix and Pelaco. Pelaco is
> > not a direct employer of these workers but is supplied with
> > clothing manufactured by them through the other suppliers.
> >
> > Since the Kennett Government abolished all state awards in 1992
> > outworkers have been covered by a Federal award.
> >
> > In the state awards of New South Wales, Queensland, South
> > Australia and Tasmania, outworkers are classed as employees and
> > entitled to annual leave, public holidays, superannuation,
> > overtime and other protections from extreme exploitation.
> >
> > However, unscrupulous employers will go to great lengths to set
> > up sham arrangements to avoid their responsibilities to their
> > workers.
> >
> > In the case of outworkers, employers usually advertise in the
> > ethnic press and require interviewees to demonstrate their sewing
> > skills in their factories.
> >
> > If satisfied with the demonstration, the worker will then be
> > required to take out a business registration, which is usually
> > described as a "licence".
> >
> > The employers set all the conditions and pace of work. Workers
> > have got no control over how much work they do, when they do it,
> > how much they are paid for it, if at all.
> >
> > In order to meet the unrealistic times set to complete the work
> > family members, including children, are often engaged to meet
> > these deadlines at no cost to the employers.
> >
> > One worker in the test case was paid $3.50 per hour for work done
> > in the factory and her home and two other workers have not been
> > paid at all for their work.
> >
> > One of the workers for Blue Calix and their family had to move
> > house because of fears of retribution for the temerity of asking
> > for their wages. This resulted in further financial hardship.
> >
> > In a week where the minimum wage has just risen to $400.40 per
> > week these most vulnerable workers are receiving nothing like
> > that.
> >
> > The TCFU is challenging the premise that these outworkers are
> > contractors simply because employers call them contractors.
> >
> > The outworkers want the protection of the award and to be
> > correctly classified as employees.
> >
> > An alternative argument is for the court to find them independent
> > contractors but entitled to fair contracts and the same
> > entitlements as other employees.
> >
> > The union is very optimistic that it will achieve pay
> > justice.
> >
> > Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
> > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html
--
Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html
Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop
Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
