May 10th, 2011
Members of Cornell Students Against Sweatshops meet with a representative from the Fair Labor Association.
THE CORNELL DAILY SUN
May 8, 2011
By Rebecca Harris
Cornell Students Against Sweatshops continued its fight against the Fair Labor Association, an anti-sweatshop group CSAS claims has failed to crack down on international labor abuses, in a talk Wednesday with FLA Executive Director Jorge Perez-Lopez.
At the discussion — during which students raised concerns and posed questions to Perez-Lopez — CSAS criticized FLA, to which Cornell pays dues, for not doing enough to ensure its member companies are running their overseas factories in compliance with FLA’s code of conduct for labor rights.
The dialogue between CSAS and Perez-Lopez followed a series of letters written by CSAS to FLA and University administrators calling for Cornell to cut ties with the association. In January, President David Skorton told CSAS that the administration would not support ending Cornell’s relationship with FLA “until an adequate dialogue … had been realized,” according to Casey Sweeney ’13, a regional organizer for United Students Against Sweatshops.
After the conversation, Sweeney said CSAS still believes the University should sever ties with FLA. She added she was particularly dissatisfied with Perez-Lopez’s response to whether the FLA has implemented changes in response to concerns expressed by students nationwide.
“To hear from him directly that the FLA has not changed at all in response to these concerns that we’re raising shows that there is fundamental disconnect between the FLA’s values and the values of students,” Sweeney said.
Alex Bores ’13, liaison between CSAS and United States Association of Students, pressed Perez-Lopez on why the FLA had not raised its standards for labor conditions to match those of Cornell and the Worker Rights Consortium, Cornell’s other non-profit anti-sweatshop affiliate.
Perez-Lopez responded that the board of the FLA stands by its current code of conduct, which he said has led the organization to make progress in several areas of workers’ rights.
Much of the conversation focused on a few prominent cases, involving companies such as Nike and Russell Athletic, for which CSAS believes the FLA did not seek “outcomes that the University considers hugely successful for the workers,” according to Sweeney.
CSAS members said that the FLA board, which includes corporations such as Nike and Adidas that give money to FLA, prioritizes its corporate interests over potential labor violations. Perez-Lopez rejected accusations that the board of directors influences the monitoring of factories for conduct breaches.
“The board sets general policy,” Perez-Lopez said. “It does not get involved in monitoring. We have a complete separation between the policy-making board and the professional staff that acts as the implementing arm.”
Cornell is one of several universities at which students are currently petitioning administrators for disaffiliation from the FLA. Wednesday’s dialogue was broadcast live online to allow other branches of USAS to participate by emailing in their questions. Bores fielded inquiries from students at Georgetown, University of Chicago and Penn State, among other schools.
The fight to withdraw Cornell from FLA membership has been ongoing since the University participated in the creation of the FLA in 1996, according to Sweeney.
“More than a decade later we are still raising the same concerns,” Sweeney said. “We have found that the FLA is not adequately doing its job in engaging work operations in a productive way that leads to good solutions for workers and for students.”
May 10th, 2011
WE CAN RAISE $2,000 THIS WEEK!
Team Sweat:
This past week I put out the call that I need to get back to Indonesia a number of times this summer to help Nike workers organize and advocate for their rights. To this end, I set a fundraising goal of $12,000 to cover expenses for travel, accommodations, local staff, videotaping, photography, meals, etc.
With the help of only five individuals and one group, we raised close to $1,000 last week. That rocks!
Now let’s double that effort.
Will you give $10, $25, $50, $100… and help us raise $2,000 this week?
Click here to get us to our goal.
DONATE NOW!
Thanks in advance for your support!
Peace (and Justice), Jim Keady
p.s. Be sure to check out the latest with the campaign at www.facebook.com/teamsweat and www.teamsweat.org.
May 10th, 2011
A group of students at San Diego State is ensuring that ethically made clothes will be on sale at the SDSU Bookstore this fall.
“Bring ‘Sweat-Free’ Clothes to the SDSU Bookstore” is a movement by students who have encouraged the SDSU Bookstore to sell clothes made by Alta Gracia, a company that guarantees its clothes are not made in sweatshop conditions.
The clothes are expected to arrive in the Fall. There will be four items for sale: a pullover hoodie, a long-sleeve shirt and two types of short-sleeve shirts.
The bookstore will have about $15,000 worth of merchandise to start, which is nearly 570 pieces of clothing.
According to one of the movement’s members, Ashley Wardle, Alta Gracia products sell for nearly 80 cents more than comparable clothing items made by other brands.
“It’s not like we’re asking students to spend $10 or $15 more per sweater, it’s 80 cents,” Wardle said.
The movement was started at the beginning of February and consists of about eight students. They first met with the directors of the SDSU Bookstore in early March and by the end of the month, the SDSU Bookstore had agreed to carry the products made by Alta Gracia.
Alta Gracia pays its workers in the Dominican Republic a living wage more than three times the Dominican Republic’s minimum wage.
“It is very admirable that Alta Gracia is paying its workers a living wage,” Director of Aztec Shops Campus Stores Todd Summer said. “It is great that we can support that, and we are very excited to do so.”
The SDSU Bookstore’s primary brands are Nike, Champion and JanSport.
“Many of our other brands and products have benefits such as being made in the U.S.A. or being environmentally friendly,” Summer said. “Each brand has its own story and it will be up to the SDSU consumers which brands and stories resonate with them and, ultimately, are carried at the store in the longer term.”
According to Summer, SDSU’s decision to carry Alta Gracia products will not affect SDSU’s support for other brands.
Whether or not the bookstore continues to carry Alta Gracia products will depend on customer support.
“Our goal is to have those things (clothes) sold out in the first two weeks of school so that we can show the university that this is a cause students care about,” Wardle said.
Wardle said that she and others working for the movement are trying to increase awareness for this clothing line by circulating petitions. The movement’s most recent petition gathered more than 600 signatures from students and faculty.
“I think it’s really empowering for students to see that it only takes this much work and that students really do have a voice, and that when you have something that you are passionate about and willing to fight for, you really can make a change,” Wardle said.
Students who are interested in becoming involved with the movement can search Facebook for “Bring ‘Sweat-Free’ Clothes to the SDSU Bookstore” to contact the group.
May 10th, 2011
Team Sweat:
As I write this email I am juggling three instant message conversations with labor contacts in Indonesia about issues at Nike factories there.
At one factory, the union chairman has alleges he has been illegally fired for being too outspoken about labor rights issues. From the facts I have to date, this is a classic case of union busting. It is also important to note that this factory employs 7000 workers producing only for Nike and I have NEVER heard of this factory until yesterday. Why? It is not on Nike’s public factory disclosure list.
At another factory, workers who are producing on the Converse line, (Nike owns Converse), are reporting daily verbal and physical abuse, including supervisors slapping workers, calling them “dogs,” and hurling shoe parts at them across the factory floor.
At another factory, workers report they have been cheated of millions of dollars in overtime pay and when Nike was given this information, the workers were intimidated by the factory management into recanting their stories.
Some of you might ask, “Is this stuff still happening? Haven’t you been working on this for 14 years? Shouldn’t it be fixed by now?”
Yes, it is still happening. Yes, I have been in this fight for 14 years. And it isn’t fixed yet because we are up against a monster of corporation that will take whatever means necessary to maintain their multi-billion dollar profits.
But do not despair. We will win this fight. We must win this fight.
But I need your help to do it.
Given everything that is going on right now, I will need to make at least two trips to Indonesia in the coming months to meet with workers and union and NGO leaders.
To make these trips possible, I have set a fundraising goal of $12,000 to cover travel, accommodations, local staff, videotaping, photographer, meals, etc.
Would you sacrifice $2, $5, or $10 a month to help us win this fight? (That would be a $24, $60 or $120 donation.)
Ready to do it?
Click here to make it happen.
Thanks in advance for your support!
Peace (and Justice), Jim Keady
p.s. Be sure to check out the latest with the campaign at www.facebook.com/teamsweat and www.teamsweat.org.
May 10th, 2011
Dick Meister, formerly labor editor of the SF Chronicle and KQED-TV Newsroom, has covered labor, politics and other matters for a half-century.
OK, Nike, pay up! You owe me big. Exactly how much, I can’t say, since I don’t know the going rate for athletes and others who act as human billboards for you. You know, those whose team uniforms, workout gear and other garments display your swoosh brand symbol prominently.
I assume the swoosh-marked college athletes are not paid openly, lest they lose their amateur status, although their colleges, while profiting from the athletes’ play and display of the swoosh and other brand symbols, of course face no penalties for doing so.
My days as an athlete are long gone and, sad to say, there were no swoosh contracts back in those days. But now, I think, it’s time for me to collect a little. You see, I was recently quite ill, and on leaving the hospital was under strict orders to go easy and, among other things, to wear light, loose fitting clothing. No tight jeans and such.
But sweatpants, they’d be perfect. So I popped into by favorite clothing establishment and grabbed a pair of sweatpants off the rack without bothering to check anything but the size. Didn’t even try them on.
Oh, but when I got the pants home. The shock, the shock. There it was on the side of the left leg, the dreaded swoosh for all the world to see on my daily doctor-prescribed walks and other sweatpants-clad forays into the community. I had become a walking billboard for Nike.
So where’s my endorsement money, Nike? My pay. I’m working for you, after all. Do I have to bring in a union to get me what I ‘m owed? I’m not asking for much, just whatever you’re paying other human billboards. I’m not exactly a celebrity, but I am known rather well . . . and highly regarded, I like to believe, in some parts of my community. Seeing me wearing the swoosh might influence some of my neighbors to rush out and buy their own Nike gear. Naturally.
But realistically, I must tell you it’s not likely I’ll get paid for my valuable work on behalf of Nike. Big time athletes are paid, and paid well for wearing and endorsing the swoosh. But not us plain folks who wear the Nike brand. We need a union to demand decent pay . . . to demand decent treatment.
That’s it, a union to demand decent treatment for all who wear the Nike brand . . . plus the money they should be owed by Nike for doing so. There are, of course, unions of professional athletes. But their concern, as I guess it should be, is for their members. We need to form a union of our own to also get the big bucks for wearing the swoosh.
And while we’re at it, we could use the leverage of our union to effectively demand much better treatment for the workers in Nike sweatshops in poor countries who produce most of the swoosh brand stuff. Nor should we forget the celebrity athletes whose huge pay for endorsement of Nike products drives up the price we ordinary folks have to pay for sweatpants and other gear that the celebrities endorse only because they are paid to endorse them.
It’s highly doubtful that any of our spoiled, hugely paid athletes would readily agree to share their endorsement money with lesser-paid citizens. But with a union, who knows? Professional athletes have their own powerful unions, so why don’t their unions take up the cause of unpaid Nike endorsers?
That’s one of the basic principles of unionism, unions seeing that their members get a fair share and helping members of other unions get their fair share. You know, solidarity and all that.
So, swoosh wearers, unite! Unionize! We have nothing to lose but our swooshes!
Dick Meister, former labor editor of the SF Chronicle and KQED-TV Newsroom, has covered labor and politics for a half-century. Contact him through his website, www.dickmeister.com which includes more than 300 of his columns.
May 10th, 2011
TESCO, MARKS AND Spencer and Next are among the retailers coming under fire in a damning report by the International Textile Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation.
The lobby group examined the working conditions for 100,000 workers in 83 factories across Indonesia, Sri Lanka and The Philippines in order to assess how the workers who supply western retail chains are treated.
The report found that massive brands like Adidas, Converse, Abercrombie and Fitch, Victoria’s Secret and Billabong are “routinely breaking every rule in the book when it comes to labour rights”. A huge number of high street chains and sporting goods retailers are named in the report – there are 60 brands named in all.
The report found that no factory in the three countries examined paid a living wage to all of their workers, and that some are below the legal minimum wage for that region. Forced overtime is also a common practice. The ITGLWF says that the report’s findings “indicate that widespread violations and abuses of workers’ rights continue to be the norm in the industry”.
The report identifies that many of the factory workers are not members of unions, for fear of having their contracts terminated. In Indonesia factories had taken “anti-union measure” in order to interfere with unions’ activities. The numbers of workers on short term contracts were as high as 85 per cent in some factories.
The study found that young women working in factories in Sri Lanka were told that their employers would prefer if they did not marry, and that some factories carried out pregnancy tests as part of the recruitment process.
Ashling Seely, ITGLWF spokesperson told TheJournal.ie that such a large number of brands and retailers are named in the report that they won’t be approaching them individually, because the findings indicate that industry wide solutions are needed. She says that the factories involved were not identified by name because “less responsible” brands have pulled out of factories in the past after being named and shamed. She says:
“We held a multi stakeholder meeting in Sri Lanka at the end of March and Nike, Columbia Sports, Next and Marks and Spencers attended and examined some findings relating to Sri Lanka. Adidas have pledged to write to their suppliers saying they want their workers to have the right to freedom of association.”
Seely says Adidas didn’t quite endorse trade unions, but that it is a step in the right direction.
The ITGLWF is criticising big brands for spending billions on corporate social responsibility audits of factories, but failing to notice the problems highlighted in the report. Seely says:
“Brands spend $60 billion conducting audits, but they’re not done by people with an intimate knowledge of the factory. You can walk into a factory and see that there have been improvements in child labour and health and safety, but it’s the unseen problems that need to be addressed.”
The 60 brands named in the ITGLWF report:
May 10th, 2011
Mulyadi is 25, but he’s lost count of how many times in the past three years he has switched factories.
He works in one for a few months before moving to another, all within Jakarta’s massive Kawasan Berikat Nusantara industrial estate in the Cakung-Cilincing area.
Thousands of contract factory workers are employed at the KBN in any given year. Some of those workers have worked within the KBN for more than a decade, despite regulations aimed to prevent it.
“I work mostly for garment factories. The money’s the same everywhere at KBN. I earn Rp 1.38 million [$160] per month,” Mulyadi told the Jakarta Globe.
“Why do I move around? Not by choice, I can tell you. They’ll just give me a three-month contract or a six-month contract. That’s a lot pressure for us [to turn down the offer], because we know how hard it is to get jobs nowadays,” he said on Friday, two days before May Day demonstrations are expected to hit the capital’s streets.
“What all of us here at the KBN are most concerned about, though, is unpaid overtime hours. We have to meet the production target, which is quite high. The target depends on company regulations and the type of clothes produced. Sometimes some of us don’t get paid overtime, but we cannot afford to leave.”
Mulyadi said he would not be among the thousands expected to protest on Sunday. Instead, he said he would join demonstrations on Monday — the details of which were unclear — since Sunday was his day off.
A Jakarta legal aid group said in February that it received almost 200 labor complaints last year that pointed to the uphill battle workers continued to face in claiming their legal rights.
Muhammad Isnur of the Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) said labor disputes over the lack of insurance, wrongful termination, problematic contracts and outsourcing led to 191 complaints being filed by more than 3,000 workers in 2010.
“We received complaints about unlawful dismissals, [wage] payments being put on hold and the status of contract workers,” Isnur said.
According to the 2003 Labor Law, a person can only be employed as a contract worker for two years, with a one-year extension option. Contract workers, he said, are not entitled to receive benefits such as raises, with many being paid less than the standard minimum wage (UMP).
“A [permanent] worker’s rights include a health insurance scheme, a pension fund, leave, overtime and being paid in accordance with the UMP,” he said.
The 2011 UMP for Jakarta is Rp 1.29 million per month, a 15.8 percent increase from last year. Labor unions, however, have said the figure is too low. They cite the Reasonable Living Cost Index (KHL), which has been set at Rp 1.4 million per month.
Laborers at the KBN said their daily problems were usually quite simple, but they still remained unresolved.
Yana, a 32-year-old mother of two, said her major problem at the garment factory was that the model for the clothes was too complicated at times, and that workers could not go home until all the day’s work was finished.
“Our main problem is the high production target. Every garment model is different. We could produce, for instance, 200 pieces in an hour or 400 pieces in an hour. It depends on the make of the clothes. We hate that pressure. We have to finish in eight hours of work, or work overtime until we finish, before we can go home,” Yana told the Globe.
Etty, 27, said she had worked at the KBN since 1999, and she knew that many of the factories there did not pay for menstrual leave. “Every month, the law requires that all female workers are given two days of paid menstrual leave. The company should pay us as much as Rp 92,000 for this leave, but it doesn’t. We lose money like this, but not everybody realizes that,” Etty said.
“Aside from the short-term contracts and unpaid overtime hours, we have many other concerns. However, we are actually quite afraid to join the [May Day] rally. We do not want to lose our jobs.”
A male worker who refused to give his name said he would likely not join in the demonstrations on either Sunday or Monday because he was not a member of a labor union.
“Unless we join a labor union, we do not know what it is we are going to rally for. Most of the time these rallies are organized by labor unions, but our company does not have a labor union,” the worker said.
Budi Wardoyo, secretary general for the Indonesian Labor Movement Association (PPBI), said 100,000 workers were expected to join Sunday’s May Day demonstrations.
He said the rally would start at 9 a.m. at the Hotel Indonesia traffic circle. From there, demonstrators would march toward the Presidential Palace.
May 10th, 2011
More than a decade after sweatshop labour for top brands became a mainstream issue, the problem still seems endemic across the global clothing and footwear sector
Marks and Spencer’s, Next, Ralph Lauren, DKNY, GAP, Converse, Banana Republic, Land’s End, Levi’s. And so the list of brands go on and on. What do they all have in common? According to a deeply depressing report (pdf) by the International Textile Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation (ITGLWF), the factories in Asia contracted to make their products are still responsible for shocking working practices.
More than a decade after sweatshop labour for high street brands became a mainstream issue, and after plenty of companies have instituted monitoring of their supply chains, the problem still seems endemic right across the global clothing and footwear sector.
Many of the factories supplying the brands likely to dominate the Olympics in 2012, such as Adidas, Nike, Slazenger, Speedo and Puma, “are routinely breaking every rule in the book when it comes to labour rights”, according to the ITGLWF.
The list of brands ultimately sourcing from the 83 factories surveyed in the report is so comprehensive, it seems to make a mockery of the whole idea that the high street has cleaned up its act.
Factories in three countries – the Philippines, Indonesia and Sri Lanka – were surveyed, and not one of them paid a living wage to their combined 100,000-strong workforce. Many of them didn’t even pay the legal minimum wage. What the report also makes clear is that this is a gender issue: 76% of the surveyed workforce are women. Globalised supply chains exploit predominantly female labour. It’s an irony that probably escapes most of the women who do the bulk of high street shopping in the west. Women shopping for products made by other, underpaid, exploited, women.
What’s more, things seem to be getting worse, rather than better. Employment is becoming more precarious as more workers are put on to temporary contracts, day labour, on call rather than with permanent jobs. That enables employers to dodge holiday pay, sick pay and written contracts. Employers also imposed compulsory overtime, lower wages and higher production targets on workers on these short-term contracts.
Such precarious employment makes it harder for trade unions to organise and recruit, because contracts are not renewed if the worker has been involved in trade union activity. On average, 25% of workers in Indonesia were short-term or temporary, while in the Philippines it rose to 85% in one factory, 50% at another.
In Sri Lanka, wages were paid on productivity targets – despite such a practice being illegal. At one factory in Girigara, basic pay was cut if targets set by the management were not achieved. At another factory owned by the same company in Katunayake, workers didn’t receive any incentive pay unless the entire quota was reached, but workers reported that the targets were impossible to meet so they never got their bonuses, even if they missed toilet breaks and rest periods to try and reach the target. At other factories, workers were forced to work overtime to meet productivity targets.
The report found that excessive overtime was the “norm” in sportswear and leisurewear factories in Indonesia; workers in all the factories surveyed were doing between 10 and 40 hours of overtime a week. There were incidents of mental and physical abuse when workers failed to reach production targets – in one factory, 40 workers were locked in an unventilated room without access to toilet facilities, water and food for over three hours as a punishment.
In Sri Lanka, workers were forced to work up to 130 hours per month in overtime, and anyone asking to leave would be verbally harassed. In the Philippines, 24% of workers said that they did not receive additional pay for their overtime. Typical hours can be 6am to 8pm.
Many of the workers at these factories in Sri Lanka are young women from rural areas. They are told when recruited that the factories prefer them not to marry, and some companies even carry out pregnancy tests to weed out pregnant women. Sexual intimidation and abuse was common.
In many cases, the employers’ behaviour was illegal, but the report – which picked factories at random – points out that what makes laws effective is a well resourced inspection regime. Without inspection, legislation is meaningless.
It’s worth adding at the end of this catalogue of abuse that the UK Department for International Development (DfID) has just axed funding to the International Labour Organisation, one of the oldest international bodies in the world trying to improve labour standards. The ILO brings out a report on Friday in conjunction with the Asian Development Bank on women’s employment patterns across Asia and inequality.
May 10th, 2011
Ms. Winfrey,
I am a former professional athlete and college coach. Fourteen years ago I said “no” to Nike because of their sweatshop abuses. That is why your show yesterday left me both angry and motivated.
I am angry because you did a disservice to your viewers and to the cause of social justice by conducting a warm and fuzzy hug-fest with a modern-day slave master. I am motivated, because it is quite obvious by your actions, that despite the decade and half of grassroots education and advocacy on Nike’s sweatshop abuses that others and myself have done, there is still much work to do.
During your conversation with Nike founder and chairman, Phil Knight, you called him a “visionary,” a “great human being” and you gushed over the customized pair of running shoes that he brought for you.
But not one word about Nike’s sweatshops. Not one word about the 1,000,000 Nike factory workers, most of whom live in abject poverty, despite the fact they produce the real wealth for the $19,600,000,000.00 Nike “success story.” Nothing.
Why?
Ms. Winfrey, I have been to Indonesia many times to visit with Nike workers and I was there as recently as February 2011. Despite anything that Nike and Mr. Knight will tell you, workers still report being cheated of wages, being forced to work overtime, of daily physical and verbal abuse, etc.
So why didn’t you ask Mr. Knight about this stuff? Are you simply uninformed or unaware? Do you believe Nike’s public relations ploys that they fixed their sweatshop problem? Clearly you have covered hard-hitting and controversial issues in the past - the Klu Klux Klan, child abuse, rape, fugitives, molestation, murder - but asking Phil Knight about his exploitation of poor women workers in his production plants is off limits?
Why?
I will not believe that you are just a sneakerhead that loves your Nike’s too much to look into where they were made, who made them, and under what conditions.
As I watched your show I thought, “Oprah is lauding praise over a modern-day slave master. He has made his fortune by exploiting poor women in developing countries and she is not saying anything about it.” If you could bring a southern plantation owner back to life and host him on your show, would he receive the same love and affection that Mr. Knight received?
Ms. Winfrey, I know these young women who produce for Nike. I consider them my friends and together we are fighting for the justice they deserve. Knowing their personal stories, I wonder how many of the young, poor women who toil for Mr. Knight to make him his billions have the same potential that the young women in your school in South Africa have? What if they were treated like human beings and were paid a living wage by Mr. Knight, could they make a real difference in their countries and reach their God-given potential?
Ms. Winfrey, I think the way for you to make this right, is for you to have a former or current Nike factory worker on your show to tell their story. You owe it to the poor women who do the real work for Phil Knight and Nike to have their truth be told to the world. If this is something you would like to pursue, please feel free to contact me at info@teamsweat.org.
I eagerly wait to hear from you.
Peace (and Justice),
Jim Keady
May 10th, 2011
Team Sweat:
Today, Oprah Winfrey hosted Nike Founder and Chairman, Phil Knight. I was shocked by how she fawned over this modern-day slave master. We have to let her know that she has a duty to tell the world the truth about Nike and Mr. Knight. She has always brought people on her show to tell their stories. We have to demand that she bring a Nike worker on her show to tell their story.
Please go to this link and send a message to her producers. I have included a sample message below. Feel free to use it and/or to write your own personalized message.
https://www.oprah.com/ownshow/plug_form.html?plug_id=216
Let’s let our voices be heard on this one!
Peace (and justice), Jim Keady
Dear Oprah,
I watched your show today with Nike Founder, Phil Knight. You praised him, you called him a “visionary” and a “great human being,” and you gushed over the new pair of Nike sneakers that he gave you. But not once did you question him about the 1,000,000 workers, mostly young, poor women, that churn out Nike’s products in sweatshop conditions in places like Indonesia, Vietnam and China.
Why?
You have never shied away from asking tough questions of your guests. I am at a loss for what you did today. Are you aware that reports have surfaced as recent as February 2011 about Nike workers being cheated of wages, forced to work overtime, living in abject poverty, etc.?
I wonder how many of the young, poor women who toil for Mr. Knight to make him his billions have the same potential that the young women in your school in South Africa have? What if they were treated like human beings and were paid a living wage by Mr. Knight, could they make a real difference in their countries and reach their God-given potential?
I think the way for you to make this right, is for you to have a former or current Nike factory worker on your show to tell their story. You owe it to the poor women who do the real work for Phil Knight and Nike to have their truth be told to the world. I recommend that you contact Team Sweat (www.facebook.com/teamsweat) to make this happen.
I eagerly wait for your public response.
Sincerely,
Visit Team Sweat on Facebook!
Visit Team Sweat on MySpace!
Visit Team Sweat on Twitter!