The angry protesters marching around Madison these past few days have good reason to be upset.
Last week, UW-Madison and the athletic apparel giant adidas agreed to enter a stage of mediation regarding whether one of the manufacturer’s factories unfairly compensated its workers.
The factory, which was owned by an adidas subcontractor PT Kizone, failed to pay out approximately $3.2 million to more than 2,800 workers. PT Kizone terminated its relationship with adidas and illegally shut down and abandoned its Indonesian factory in January 2011 because of supposed financial problems. It did all this without giving its workers severance pay.
The factory’s apparel included items that bore UW-Madison logos. Adidas also produces other athletic equipment, greatly increasing the worth of it UW-Madison contract. Interestingly enough, such brands as the Dallas Cowboys and Nike have reportedly made financial contributions to the factory workers, according to UW-Madison officials. Yet the factory’s workers are still short some $1.8 million for their labor.
UW-Madison’s relationship with adidas, whose contract with the university runs through June 2016 and is worth nearly $2.5 million dollars a year in equipment and royalties, could be in jeopardy. That is, it could be in jeopardy so long as UW-Madison’s leaders take this issue seriously and demand that adidas take charge of protecting the rights of its workers wherever its factories may be located.
Much of the frustration—frustration with much merit—revolves around the fact such mediations or private talks between adidas and UW-Madison could take up to 60 days before Ward and university officials make a decision. Many of the angry protesters believe that such a prolonged period of time means the university is trying to stall in its decision-making process, and if UW-Madison decides to end its contract with the company, adidas would have 90 days to make all necessary changes to its labor practices or else its contract could be discontinued.
This should not be an issue that revolves around contracts or financial obligations. UW-Madison’s officials must take this issue seriously regardless of the size of the school’s contract with the athletic supplier.
Yet, in fairness, some of the anger directed at the school is without merit. I cannot blame UW-Madison’s university officials for wanting to enter “prolonged” mediation with the company. After all, mediation is a contractual requirement.
It is a pretty well known fact that UW-Madison, as a Division I school, has excellent athletic programs that attract an enormous amount of attention. Athletic achievement is one of the many staples of this university. And it is an important one too, since it is visible by the number of fans that are drawn to athletic events at Camp Randall, the Kohl Center or other venues each year.
Regardless, I implore the university to do the right thing in this situation. If adidas cannot figure out how to fix this problem with PT Kizone’s severance pay, then the university must consider changes to its contractual obligations with the company.
While licensing royalties paid by adidas over the past eight years have provided hundreds of thousands of dollars in non-athletic need-based scholarship support to UW-Madison students, adidas must adhere to UW-Madison’s code of conduct, which includes such things as workers’ wages, child labor, overtime compensation, health and safety, working hours and full public disclosure of factory locations.
While contracts are important, the rights of human beings should always prevail.
Ethan Safran is a freshman with an undeclared major. Send your feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com or tweet us at
@dailycardinal.
