LESOTHO

Baseline Report: Worker Perspectives

from the Factory and Beyond

August 2012

Copyright © International Labour Organization (ILO) and International Finance Corporation (IFC) 2012 First published 2012 Publications of the ILO enjoy copyright under Protocol 2 of the Universal Copyright Convention. Nevertheless, short excerpts from them may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation, application should be made to the ILO, acting on behalf of both organizations: ILO Publications (Rights and Permissions), International Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland, or by email: pubdroit@ilo.org. The IFC and ILO welcome such applications.

Libraries, institutions and other users registered with reproduction rights organizations may make copies in accordance with the licences issued to them for this purpose. Visit www.ifrro.org to find the reproduction rights organization in your country. ILO Cataloguing in Publication Data Better work Lesotho: garment industry baseline report / International Labour Office. - Geneva: ILO, 2012 25 p.

Better Work discussion paper; ISSN 2227-9539 (print); 2227-9547 (web pdf) International Labour Office clothing industry / clothing worker / working conditions / occupational health / child labour / labour standards / Lesotho 08.09.3

The designations employed in this, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IFC or ILO concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers.

The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles, studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the IFC or ILO of the opinions expressed in them.

Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the IFC or ILO, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval.

ILO publications can be obtained through major booksellers or ILO local offices in many countries, or direct from ILO Publications, International Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland. Catalogues or lists of new publications are available free of charge from the above address, or by email: pubvente@ilo.org

Visit our website: www.ilo.org/publns

Page ii of 32

Table of Contents Acronyms/Abbreviations ..........................................................................................................................................................iii Preamble ................................................................................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................... v Section 1: Background ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Industry profile................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 The regulatory environment in Lesotho .......................................................................................................................... 3

Section 2: Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1 Demographics of workers participating in the research .................................................................................................. 4

Section 3: Findings .................................................................................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Core labour standards...................................................................................................................................................... 7

3.1.1 Child labour ............................................................................................................................................................. 7

3.1.2 Discrimination ......................................................................................................................................................... 7

3.1.3 Forced labour .......................................................................................................................................................... 8

3.1.4 Freedom of association ............................................................................................................................................ 9

3.2 Four clusters of working conditions .............................................................................................................................. 10 3.2.1 Compensation ........................................................................................................................................................ 10

3.2.2 Contracts and human resources ............................................................................................................................. 11

3.2.3 Occupational safety and health .............................................................................................................................. 12

3.2.4 Working time ........................................................................................................................................................ 14

3.3 Training and skills upgrading ........................................................................................................................................ 15 3.3.1 The training centres ............................................................................................................................................... 15

3.3.2 Training and skills upgrading in the factories ....................................................................................................... 17

3.4 Human development issues: Education and health ....................................................................................................... 18 3.4.1 Education system .................................................................................................................................................. 18

3.4.2 HIV/Aids ............................................................................................................................................................... 19

3.5 Impact beyond the workplace: Household-related issues .............................................................................................. 20 3.5.1 Household income and spending patterns ............................................................................................................. 20

3.5.2 Who is contributing to household income? ........................................................................................................... 22

3.5.3 Supporting multiple dependents ............................................................................................................................ 22

3.5.4. Gender dynamics at home .................................................................................................................................... 23

Section 4: What do workers think about Better Work? ............................................................................................................ 26

List of Tables Table 1: A snapshot of the apparel firms in Lesotho.................................................................................................................. 2 Table 2: Head office and end-user market of the ten firms interviewed .................................................................................... 2 Table 3: Details of the ten factories interviewed ........................................................................................................................ 2 Table 4: Demographics of questionnaire and focus group discussion participants .................................................................... 5 Table 5: Trade union membership among participating workers ............................................................................................... 6 Table 6: Minimum wages for employees with less than 12 months’ continuous service with the same employer .................. 10 Table 7: Minimum wages for employees with more than 12 months’ continuous service with the same employer ................ 10 Table 8: Worker feedback regarding OSH management systems and policies at their workplace........................................... 12 Table 9: Percentage of workers experiencing health and safety issues in their factories ......................................................... 13 Table 10: Level of education among questionnaire participants .............................................................................................. 18 Table 11: Workers’ experience relating to HIV/AIDS in the workplace ................................................................................. 19 Table 12: Workers’ perception regarding percentage of workforce living with HIV/AIDS .................................................... 19 Table 13: Workers’ average monthly earnings in LSL ............................................................................................................ 20 Table 14: Workers’ average monthly expenses in LSL ........................................................................................................... 21 Table 15: Workers’ reponses to the question: “If your wages increased, how would you spend the money?” ........................ 21 Table 16: Ability to sustain household on individual and combined earnings ......................................................................... 22 Table 17: Average number of children and other dependents per worker ................................................................................ 23 Table 18: Workers’ awareness and perception of Better Work Lesotho .................................................................................. 26

iii

Acronyms/Abbreviations AGOA: African Growth and Opportunity Act ALAFA: Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight Aids DDPR: Directorate for Dispute Prevention and Resolution FAWU: Factory and Allied Workers’ Union LECAWU: Lesotho Clothing and Allied Workers’ Union Lentsoe: Lentsoe la Sechaba (English: Voice of the Nation) LNDC: Lesotho National Development Corporation MFA: Multi Fibre Arrangement NUTEX: National Union of Textile Workers UNITE: United Textile Employees

Page iv of 32

Preamble The purpose of this report is to summarize the findings of research conducted as a complement to Better Work Lesotho’s baseline assessment between October 2010 and December 2011. This report was written by Kelly I. Pike. Its contents represent the views of the author and are intended to provide insights to Better Work on the basis of field observations in Lesotho. It does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of Better Work Lesotho. The report begins with a contextual background to the emergence of the clothing industry in Lesotho, followed by a basic profile of the industry today. Findings are organized according to the Better Work compliance clusters relating to core labour standards and working conditions. The information shared in this report draws heavily on focus group discussions with workers, as well as a workers’ questionnaire and interviews with factory management staff.

Page v of 32

Executive Summary The objective of this research assignment was to collect baseline data in garment factories in Lesotho as well as from secondary sources. The data will inform Better Work Monitoring and Evaluation reporting activities and the broader impact assessment agenda for Better Work Lesotho. Interview schedules and focus group discussion guidelines were designed with input from Better Work Lesotho, Better Work Global and Capturing the Gains researchers based at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. These were designed to allow for comparison with other Better Work country surveys. Interviews with factory management staff covered issues of labour productivity, human resource management, export markets, and social and economic upgrading. Focus group discussions provided the opportunity to investigate in detail factors affecting workers’ well-being (such as working conditions, health and safety standards, working hours and wages), gender dynamics, household spending, training and education opportunities, as well as challenges related to HIV/AIDS. In order to understand the challenges and opportunities facing the clothing industry in Lesotho today, it is necessary to appreciate its delicate positioning in the global context. The majority of the industry is heavily dependent on foreign investors who are doing business in Lesotho to take advantage of duty-free exports to the United States, a provision of the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA). However, AGOA is set to expire in 2015. While there is scope for an extension, this would likely be on a short-term basis, and would not therefore provide the kind of incentive needed for owners to invest in long-term planning or infrastructure. It is also important to look within the industry on the shop floor to understand how local dynamics shape working conditions. Different owners are under different pressures, in part owing to the market they are serving. The US brands in Lesotho have built themselves on the strength of their reputation and are under pressure to uphold certain standards of corporate social responsibility. South African retailers are not under the same degree of pressure, so they tend to have more leeway in how they structure and run the operations in their supplier factories. Several key themes emerged in the focus group discussions. In particular, these related to occupational safety and health, supervisor-worker relations, human resource management and training. While there is pressure from US buyers to maintain certain standards of health and safety, workers report that improvements in this area are either short-lived or not made at all. When buyers visit, they may be directed away from the areas where issues exist. In several cases, workers reported that, when owners knew that buyers were visiting, entire sections of the factory were closed down and the workers concerned sent home. The masks workers are given are not strong enough to provide adequate protection from the chemicals they use and there is a serious issue regarding extreme temperatures. Lesotho is a mountain kingdom and one of the very few places in Africa that sees harsh snowy winters. At the opposite extreme are gruelling hot summers, when factory ventilation is often insufficient to ensure workers’ comfort, causing some to pass out. Power dynamics between supervisors and workers can make it difficult for workers to do their job. Local Basotho are often employed as supervisors to “motivate” workers and push production. They follow the foreign supervisor, who provides the technical advice. Workers believe that supervisors are selected randomly and on a basis of favouritism. As supervisors receive certain benefits, there is an incentive for those selected to stay on good terms with the management. Almost all workers expressed that they were subjected to rude treatment by their supervisors, who tried to push them harder and harder in order to impress their bosses. Moreover, many stated that, where a Basotho

Page vi of 32

supervisor had taken a dislike to a particular worker, they might make someone else’s mistake appear like that of worker they disliked, such that he/she would be reprimanded rather than the actual perpetrator. Many felt that it was better to have a foreign supervisor than a local one. A similar problem existed with the locally staffed human resources (HR) managers, whom workers felt were constantly “siding with the Chinese”. There is evidently a severe lack of training at the supervisory level in Lesotho. Of the 70 workers who participated in the first two phases of focus group discussions, fewer than five suggested any need for training at the technical skills level. A disproportionately large number of workers, however, indicated a strong need for supervisors to receive training in how to handle workers – that is, in “people” or “soft” skills. A fear of asking questions prevents workers from performing their best. Being shouted at, talked down to, or otherwise humiliated at work does not provide workers with the proper motivation to work harder. Better Work Lesotho has been laying the groundwork to conduct training in the factories. As each factory subscribes to the programme, Better Work conducts a training needs assessment designed on the basis of feedback from both workers and managers. In addition, the Better Work training officer was usually present during the focus group discussions, providing an opportunity to ask the workers about their training requests and needs. Better Work Lesotho will be conducting training for Chinese supervisors through the services of a Chinese national who will travel to Lesotho for the purpose. Training for local supervisors, in Sesotho, will be conducted by the Better Work Lesotho training officer, who has a background in HR. Better Work Lesotho offers an opportunity to transform how employers view the importance of training, particularly at the supervisory skills level, as well as in HR and occupational safety and health (OSH). It will be important to balance the training offered by of Better Work Lesotho with measures through which the factories can adopt more sustainable in-house practices, for example by incorporating supervisory skills training into their company policy. Providing forums for extensive worker feedback is of utmost importance in identifying both the root causes of existing workplace issues and the areas most in need of training services. This report provides feedback from workers as a baseline for assessing the impact of Better Work Lesotho’s services over time.

Page 1 of 32

Section 1: Background Lesotho is a small country with a population of less than 2 million. It is landlocked and enclosed entirely within South Africa. The apparel industry sprang up in the 1980s as a result of the Multi Fibre Arrangement (MFA), which imposed quotas on the quantity of apparel that developing countries could export to developed countries. These limits caused apparel manufacturers in certain countries to move operations to countries with unfilled quotas, a practice known as quota-hopping. This was the catalyst for the development of the apparel industry in Lesotho and caused a number of East Asian-owned firms to establish subsidiary operations in the country. The industry was given a further boost by the US AGOA, which came into effect some two years prior to the end of the MFA. The rapid growth of the industry halted when the MFA expired on 1 January 2005, causing several factories to close down and leaving thousands of workers unemployed. Today the apparel industry accounts for more than 19 per cent of the country’s GDP and approximately 75 per cent of its total exports. Lesotho has very high unemployment and almost half the population lives below the poverty line, making the government heavily reliant on the apparel industry for jobs and tax revenue and anxious for further investment. From the perspective of all stakeholders – workers, manufacturers and government – the viability of the industry is of utmost importance. 1.1 Industry profile Apparel firms in Lesotho generally fall into two broad categories, although a third category is beginning to emerge, discussed below. (See Table 1.) In one category are Asian-owned firms exporting predominantly to the US market. The US buyers include major brands and retailers such as Gap Inc., Levi Strauss, Wal-mart, Kmart, Kohls and The Children’s Place. With one or two exceptions, almost all of the Asian-owned firms are located in Maseru, Lesotho’s capital. While most managers and supervisors at the Asian-owned firms are Asian, many line-supervisor positions are held by Basotho. In the second category are South African-owned firms exporting predominantly back into the South African market, generally to retailers with whom they have longstanding relationships. Among these are Woolworths, Edgars and Foschini. All of the South African-owned firms are located in Maputsoe, approximately 80 kilometres north of Maseru. Middle- and upper-level management staff at the South African-owned firms are most commonly South African. Similar to the Asian-owned firms, many line-supervisor positions are held by local Basotho. In both categories, the HR position in all firms is held by Basotho. Importantly, Maseru and Maputsoe are right on the border with South Africa and opposite fairly large South African towns. Almost all the managers in all the firms live across the border in South Africa, commuting to work each day.1

1 Thanks to Shane Godfrey, Mike Morris, Cornelia Staritz, and Justin Barnes for contributing to the development of research on two global value chains in Lesotho.

Page 2 of 32

Table 1: A snapshot of the apparel firms in Lesotho2 City No. of firms3 Owner origin Export market Buyers4 Maseru 25 Asia US Gap, Levis, Kmart, Childrens Place, Kohls, etc. Maputsoe 20 SA SA Mr. Price, Foschini, Edgars, Woolworths, etc.

As mentioned above, a third category of firms is beginning to emerge. Among the Asian-owned firms, most have their head office located in China or Taiwan, although there are a handful that are entirely Lesotho-based. Those that are Lesotho-based also export to the United States, but have a small percentage going in to the South African retail market as well. One can speculate that this is a strategic response to challenges arising from the global financial crisis and the pending expiry of AGOA in 2015. Relying solely on the US market could be risky, particularly for smaller firms without additional operations in other countries. Furthermore, a few of the Asian-owned firms (with headquarters in Asia) have also started to export a small proportion of their output to South Africa, and a small number of South African-owned firms have started to export small quantities overseas. Of the ten firms at which interviews were conducted with management representatives, nine were Asian-owned and one was South African-owned. Of the nine Asian factories, five had their head offices in China or Taiwan, while four were fully based in Lesotho. Of those four, two were exporting to a mixed market of South African and US retailers. Tables 2 and 3 illustrate this breakdown, together with more detailed information on the firms. Table 2: Head office and end-user market of the ten firms interviewed End-user market Asia head office Lesotho head office South Africa head office United States 5 firms 2 firms – United States & South Africa – 2 firms* – South Africa – – 1 firm** – = none *The percentage ratios of exports to US and South African markets are 60:40 and 80:20 respectively. **Company exporting approximately 20 per cent of its products to other countries. Table 3: Details of the ten factories interviewed

Year established

Address Head office Origin End-user market (% of exports)

Product No. of employees

1997 Maseru China China United States (100%) Knitwear 1 086 2001 Maseru Taiwan,

China Taiwan,

China United States (100%) Knitwear 1 500

2004 Maputsoe Taiwan, China

Taiwan, China

United States (100%) Knitwear 130

2001 Maseru Taiwan, China

Taiwan, China

United States (100%) Jeans 2 331

1998 Maseru Taiwan, China

Taiwan, China

United States (100%) Knitwear 4 000

2002 Maputsoe South Africa South Africa

South Africa (80%), Other (20%)

Knitwear 1 790

2000 Maseru Lesotho China United States (100%) Knitwear 445

2 Based in part on information supplied by the LNDC (2010) and subsequently adjusted to reflect a third category of firms (Asian-owned, Lesotho-based) as a result of observations in the field 3 Approximate. Numbers are based on 2010 LNDC data, but recent interviews indicate that this make-up is beginning to shift. A small proportion of the Asian-owned firms are now fully based in Lesotho and exporting to a combination of South African and US markets. 4 Note that some South African-owned firms are also being audited by the South African-based retailers they supply.

Page 3 of 32

Year established

Address Head office Origin End-user market (% of exports)

Product No. of employees

2000 Maseru Lesotho China United States (100%) T-Shirts 1 217 2000 Maseru Lesotho Taiwan,

China United States (60%),

South Africa (40%) T-Shirts 651

2000 Maseru Lesotho Taiwan, China

United States (80%), South Africa (20%)

Jeans 2 250

By December 2011, 14 of some 40 factories had subscribed to Better Work Lesotho. Only 1 of the 14 is South African-owned, which is indicative of the level of pressure applied by US buyers regarding standards, compared to that of South African buyers. The ten factories interviewed had all subscribed to the Better Work Lesotho programme. The remaining four factories were not interviewed during this phase of research owing to time constraints. 1.2 The regulatory environment in Lesotho Lesotho has been a Member of the International Labour Organization (ILO) since 1966 and has ratified 23 Conventions, including those that cover the four fundamental principles and rights at work: freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining (C.87 and 98); elimination of all forms of forced labour (C.29 and 105); abolition of child labour (C.138 and 182); elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation (C.100 and 111). The body of laws governing labour and employment in Lesotho is contained in the Labour Code of 1992.5 In 1988 the government sought the advice of an expert in the field who would assist them in updating and revising their existing legislation, which at the time was “dispersed and rather piece-meal, making it difficult for all concerned to find and apply the law in force” (ILO, 1990). The existing laws covered certain areas, such as the establishment of trade unions and the recruitment of international workers, but did not deal with some crucial issues such as women in the workforce or proper protocols for safety and health. In 1990, a technical memorandum was issued by the ILO to the Government of Lesotho entitled Mission to Advise on the Reform of Lesotho Labour Law. The memorandum was in effect a draft Labour Code. It had three main features: it regrouped existing and newly formulated legislative provisions by topic, reinforced tripartism, and called for the establishment of a Labour Court to resolve disputes. It also included proposals on how to address wage-fixing and on standards in respect of hours of work, weekly rest periods, public holidays, unfair labour practices, the settlement of disputes, occupational safety and health, and so on. Much of what was proposed in the initial draft was retained in the final Labour Code Order, 1992. A number of amendments have since been made, such as the Labour Code Amendment Act of 2000, which established the Directorate for Dispute Prevention and Resolution (DDPR), and Labour Code Amendment Act of 2006, which introduced provisions on HIV/AIDS and transferred jurisdiction for certain types of employment dispute from the Labour Appeals Court to the Labour Court.

5 Available online at: http://www.labour.gov.ls/home/ [05.07.2012]

Page 4 of 32

Section 2: Methodology Baseline data were collected using secondary sources between September and December 2011. Between September and October this was primarily Web-based, and served to put together a framework for understanding the governance structures in Lesotho, such as the legal environment and history of collective bargaining. Such research also helped in compiling a basic profile of the clothing industry and other national and labour market statistics. This information was cross-referenced during an initial visit to Lesotho at the end of October 2011. Interviews with key stakeholders verified expectations about local union dynamics as well as basic dichotomies within the industry, namely the dominance of Asian and South African owners exporting to the US and South Africa, respectively. Access to an updated Lesotho National Development Corporation (LNDC) database served to fine-tune the industry profile initially compiled, enabling the inclusion of new information (including parent company and certain financial indicators) alongside existing details relating to factory location, ownership, products, employment capacity, etc. In addition to the interviews and LNDC database, documentary evidence that could not be obtained online was gathered in person. This included confidential ILO documents containing advice on labour law reform in Lesotho in the 1990s, collective bargaining agreements from a major union, and permission to read approximately 100 arbitration awards issued by the DDPR as background on the types of cases heard and normal procedure for dealing with disputes. Over the data collection period, a total of 23 interviews were conducted with 12 stakeholder organizations. A further 16 interviews took place at ten factories, involving a total of 24 management representatives. Seventeen focus group discussions were held with a total of 143 workers, and 129 workers completed a 110-item questionnaire. Almost all interviews and discussions were digitally recorded, with the exception of a small number conducted with interviewees who requested pen-and-paper recording only. Government affiliates interviewed included the the DDPR, the Labour Court, the LNDC and the Ministry of Labour and Employment. The employer organization interviewed was the Lesotho Textile Exporters Association. Interviews took place with a cross-section of representatives from Lesotho’s five unions: Factory and Allied Workers’ Union (FAWU), Lesotho Clothing and Allied Workers’ Union (LECAWU), Lentsoe la Sechaba (Lentsoe), National Union of Textile Workers (NUTEX) and UNITE (United Textile Employees). Some of these interviews involved the key leaders and general secretaries, while others were conducted with regional organizers and shop stewards. Interviews were also conducted with other organizations in Lesotho, such as the Apparel Lesotho Alliance to Fight Aids (ALAFA), the Skills Development and Training Centre and Better Work Lesotho staff. 2.1 Demographics of workers participating in the research In total, 129 workers completed a questionnaire over two rounds. Sixty workers participated in the first round, which took place in Maseru in May 2011. A further 69 workers took part in the second round, in Maputsoe in December 2011. The adult literacy rate in Lesotho is 90 per cent6 and it was important to ensure that each participant felt comfortable responding to the questionnaire and was able to complete it. The questionnaire itself was translated into the local language, Sesotho, and Better Work Lesotho provided the services of a translator. The translator stood at the front of the room and talked everyone through the questionnaire, one item at a time, so that the participants

6 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and UNESCO/UIS (UNESCO Institute of Statistics), including the Education for All 2000 Assessment.

Page 5 of 32

could raise any questions as they went along, and complete it at the same pace. Only 1 out of 130 participants was unable to follow and complete the questionnaire, owing to to illiteracy. The questionnaire comprised 110 items related to work background, employment conditions, OSH, education, training, dispute resolution, gender, HIV/AIDS and household income. All of of the participants were Basotho, 77 per cent being female and 23 per cent male. Their average age was 34 years old.7 They represented all five unions8 and a total of 35 factories9, 12 of which had recently subscribed to Better Work Lesotho at the time of research. Forty-three per cent worked at Better Work factories. Most (69 per cent) reported that they were employed as temporary employees; 21 per cent that they were permanent employees; and 10 per cent were unsure of their employment status. (See Table 4.) Table 4: Demographics of questionnaire and focus group discussion participants Demographics Questionnaire

participants Focus group participants

Total no. of participating workers 129 143 of whom employed at Better Work factories, by % 43 38

of whom employed at non-Better Work factories, by % 57 62 Total no. of factories represented 35 41

of which Better Work factories 12 11 of which non-Better Work factories 23 30

Gender of participants (Female/Male, by %) 77/23 73/27 Average worker age (years) 34 36* Average length of employment at current workplace (years) 4.59 4.09** Average length of employment in the industry (years) 8.87 n/a Type of worker contract (temporary/permanent/unsure) by % 69 /21 /10 n/a *Figure based on feedback from 15 per cent of total focus group participants (21 of 143), as the variable was added later in the research process. **Figure based on feedback from 44 per cent of focus group participants (63 of 143), as the variable was only added for the December 2011 round of discussions. A total of 17 focus group discussions took place involving 143 workers, averaging 8–9 participants per discussion. These took place in three rounds during May, September and December 2011 and were organized by unions (for example, FAWU on Monday, LECAWU on Tuesday). Nine discussions took place in Maseru and eight in Maputsoe. They focused primarily on issues related to working conditions, safety and health, education and training, gender, HIV/AIDS, and household income and spending patterns. All of the focus group participants were Basotho, 73 per cent being female and 27 per cent male. They represented all five unions (see Table 5) and 41 factories, 11 of which had subscribed to the Better Work programme. Thirty-eight per cent of all participants worked at Better Work factories. Both the questionnaire sessions and the focus group discussions took place away from the factory premises. The questionnaire administered in Maseru was held in an auditorium at a girls hostel, while that administered in Maputsoe was held in a lecture room at the Skills Development and

7 Seventy-seven workers had an average age of 34 years. The remaining 52 reported their ages to be within a range (for example, 21–25, 26–30). Their average age was obtained by assigning to each of the 52 the mid-range value of the age range selected (that is, 23 if 21–25, 28 if 26–30). 8 FAWU and LECAWU are the largest unions in the industry and the only unions representing workers in Maputsoe. Fawu represented 38 per cent of the questionnaire participants, of whom 35 per cent were in Maseru and 65 per cent in Maputsoe. LECAWU represented 34 per cent of questionnaire participants, of whom 18 per cent were in Maseru and 82 per cent in Maputsoe. 9 One firm has six factories, but workers often did not specify which of these they worked at. For consistency, this firm is considered in this report as one factory, thereby keeping the total count represented at 35.

Page 6 of 32

Training Centre. The focus group discussions took place at the Better Work offices in Maseru and, in Maputsoe, at either a union office or the training centre. All discussions were facilitated by the researcher with the assistance of a translator provided by Better Work Lesotho. Each worker signed a consent form and the discussions were digitally recorded. Table 5: Trade union membership among participating workers Union membership (%) Trade union Questionnaire

participants Focus group participants

FAWU 38 50 LECAWU 34 31 Lentsoe 9 5 NUTEX 11 10 UNITE 5 4

Page 7 of 32

Section 3: Findings 3.1 Core labour standards 3.1.1 Child labour The issue of child labour was not raised by any workers during the focus group discussions. The questionnaire contained an explicit question for workers regarding whether or not there were children under the age of 15 working in their factories. Of the 130 workers participating, two responded “yes” to this question. Due to the low incidence of child labour reported by workers, issues of unconditional worst forms, hazardous work and young workers’ documentation (as related to child labour) did not emerge as key concerns in workers’ discussions or questionnaire feedback (that is, workers did not raise these issues). Rather, hazardous work was discussed in the context of OSH (see below). 3.1.2 Discrimination Workers across factories alluded to the issue of discrimination on the basis of race and origin. Unlike some other apparel-producing countries, the workforce in Lesotho’s apparel industry is entirely local (Basotho) rather than migrant. The industry is, however, almost entirely owned by foreigners from Asia and South Africa. As such, according to workers, the discrimination is not targeted at any particular group of workers but rather occurs at an industry-wide level. Many reported that they were disrespected by their foreign managers, often citing being shouted at by Chinese managers or being talked down to by their white South African managers.10 While some workers stated that they had no problem with their managers, and others described the relations as good, this kind of race-based discrimination was a common theme. This could be due to cultural stereotypes about Africans being lazy (a notion referred to in the literature on Chinese attitudes towards African workers11) or to stereotypes about black Africans being inferior (an Apartheid sentiment that does not dominate the industry but appears to linger in the attitude of some managers). Discrimination on the basis of religion or political opinion was not a concern raised by either workers or managers. Lesotho has a very homogeneous population, specifically with reference to race (99 per cent are ethnically Basotho) and religion (90 per cent are Christian). There do not appear to be religious factions in the workplace between groups of workers, and it appears that managers generally respect people’s religious orientation. Where politics is concerned, some managers and supervisors appear to discriminate against shop stewards and union members. However, this research did not unearth any tensions linked to political party affiliation. Lesotho is led by the Lesotho Congress for Democracy, which has controlled a majority in the house of parliament since 1998. Virtually none of the workers from any of the 17 focus group discussions mentioned politics whatsoever. Aside from the key concern of wanting wage increases, the main topics that arose had to do with other conditions of work. There were only occasional references to government, expressing that it was not particularly helpful to them. Regarding gender discrimination, focus group participants were asked one specific question and one general question. The first question was “are men and women treated equally at work?” which led to a discussion of differences in wages and job types. Everyone agreed that wages were the same, regardless of gender. Some mentioned that there were positions traditionally filled by men (such as machinists), and positions traditionally filled by women (such as sewing operators).

10 Workers referred to South African managers either as “white South African managers” or simply “white managers”. They indicated that South African factory managers were white, though there are some black South African line managers and production managers. Here, they were referring to their white South African factory managers. 11 Lee, C.K. (2009). Raw Encounters: Chinese Managers, African Workers and the Politics of Casualization in Africa’s Chinese Enclaves. The Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, WP 2009-14. UC Los Angeles.

Page 8 of 32

Participants were then asked to comment on the dynamics between men and women at work. Some men reported that they were discriminated against, stating that it was difficult for men to get jobs because factory managers “don’t want male workers” or prefer female workers because they “know the machines and are easy to work with”. Women mentioned gender discrimination in the context of pregnancy, saying that “once they see your tummy growing, they send you home on unpaid leave”. Several others mentioned that pregnant women were not always given lighter duties during their pregnancy, or that they might be shouted at for taking a chair to sit on. Their feeling was that the woman was being pushed harder in order to prompt her to leave, rather than being fired outright. They also talked about gender discrimination in the context of sex discrimination. For example, where a male supervisor was interested in a female worker and had made an advance and been refused, he might then treat her unfairly, for example by giving her undesirable tasks or making work more difficult for her in some way. Another issue involved the security procedures at factory gates. One worker stated: “There is no proper way of searching the workers when they go for lunch break or when they knock off. So they will get into their pants, and touch their breasts, and try and take off their shirts...”. Other grounds for discrimination raised were on the basis of HIV/AIDS status and disability, as well as workers’ perception of favouritism as a form of discrimination, with the two terms often used interchangeably. Approximately 40 per cent of factory workers are reported to be living with HIV/AIDS. Discussions with workers revealed that they were generally sympathetic to co-workers affected by HIV/AIDS. However, certain work structures make discrimination against such workers almost inevitable. People living with HIV explained they were easily identifiable because they required permission to get their medication or go for check-ups. Once other people knew their status, they found themselves vulnerable to mistreatment. In addition, they were not allowed to have food or drink with them when working, although they were required to take some food and drink with their medication throughout the day. While some managers might be very open to this, others might make life difficult for these workers. The issue leads back to that of favouritism. Many workers referred to the importance of “being liked” by your supervisor if you wanted or needed anything, be it a break, a pass-out to the bathroom, or a desirable job on the production line. 3.1.3 Forced labour This research did not reveal any bonded labour or prison labour being utilized in the clothing factories in Lesotho. Several workers did mention, however, that they felt there was an issue relating to forced labour and overtime. For example, some supervisors would not allow workers to go for lunch if they had not met their target. Other supervisors would make their workers stay until 5 p.m. on a payday, when in principle they should be leaving at 12 p.m.; this especially worried workers who lived far from their workplace. One worker clarified the implications when she said, “…and if I come to an ATM after 5 p.m., the thugs take my money and I can’t get home”. Several workers mentioned that they had been forced to work overtime on Saturdays, even when they had funerals to attend. When asked what would happen if they did not arrive at work on a Saturday, one worker responded, “If you don’t come, you have to show proof. They keep us in the kitchen. You can spend a whole week in the kitchen without work, just waiting there. And then you don’t get paid for the whole week… It’s like a law at the factory, if you don’t come on Saturday for overtime… .” As a policy, overtime cannot be forced but, in practice, several workers reported that they were punished if they did not accept the work. Some had their contracts terminated, while others were given only part-time work, or “short time”. The reverse problem also exists. While some workers do not want the overtime and are “forced” into it, others both want and need it for the extra pay, but in their case it may be refused – again, on the basis of what they perceive to be a system of favouritism. Neither are workers granted much freedom in terms of when they can take their leave. Each worker is allotted two days leave per month, which they are supposed to be able to use as they

Page 9 of 32

see fit – be that tending to their home or visiting their village. In practice, however, workers are usually told when to take their leave, this being a time convenient for the employer. 3.1.4 Freedom of association Workers are free to join any of the five unions in Lesotho’s clothing industry. While some managers are less keen on unions than others, in general they must allow workers to join a union if they choose to. For around ten years, each union has been acting independently of the others. Recently, however, all five unions have come together aimed at forming a unified voice. Only one is undecided as to whether to go forward with the move – the Maseru segment on board, the Maputsoe segment in disagreement. While employers must allow workers to join unions, some can make it difficult for them to do so. For example, in some factories union dues are deducted automatically from the payroll, while in others workers are required to pay their dues individually at the main office. For some this is not a problem. For others it is quite intimidating to do this in front of their managers, with the result that many have cancelled their union membership for fear of negative consequences at work. Some workers reported that they were taunted or given odd jobs as a form of discreet punishment. They described such tactics as the management’s way of pushing them to resign, to show them that the union could not help them. In addition, once a worker is promoted to the role of supervisor, they are discouraged from joining or remaining with the union, on the basis that they should be “on management’s side”. Some workers felt that managers used this strategy to keep the power of the union at bay. When a keen union member is offered promotion, they are likely to accept for the increase in salary, and may then be persuaded to leave the union. This was not the case in all situations but was a sufficiently significant issue to be raised by several workers. Hidden anti-discrimination was raised as an issue in 8 out of the 17 focus group discussions. It was mentioned by 20 different workers: 15 female, five male. Four of the 20 were working in Chinese-owned factories, and 15 in South African-owned factories (in one case, this information was not specified). Six were working at Better Work factories. In terms of collective bargaining, minimum wages are negotiated by the Wages Advisory Board at the industry-level and are published for all employers to see and follow. Anything beyond the minimum wage can be negotiated at the factory level, and some workers reported that they did have a workers’ committee responsible for bargaining with employers following the annual Wages Advisory Board meeting (see below). Most factories, however, did not appear to participate in negotiations beyond what happened at the Wages Advisory Board. The sense of wanting to push for more was greater in Maseru than in Maputsoe, but the general sentiment was best summed up by one worker, with the saying, “a half-loaf of bread is better than no loaf at all”. Some memoranda of understanding exist, these being recognition agreements. In some factories, unions also have collective bargaining agreements, but these are uncommon. Both unions and workers indicated that they felt that employers “play with the numbers”, for example by employing more workers, in order to keep unions from gaining the 50+1 majority required for a collective agreement. At the time of the research, the leading union in the industry had some nine ‘memoranda of understanding’, which were different from ‘collective bargaining agreements’. These did not include provisions for collective bargaining but rather, in this case, for deduction of dues from the payroll. Regarding industrial action, a politically-driven stay-away and protest marches were led by a coalition group in 2011 to express dissatisfaction with Government policies. Wages were among the issues addressed.

Page 10 of 32

3.2 Four clusters of working conditions 3.2.1 Compensation The Labour Code provides for a Wages Advisory Board that meets once a year to set the wages for different sectors in the country. Representatives from government, business and labour sit on the Board. The wage schedules provide minimum wage rates for key occupational levels within each sector. Tables 6 and 7 illustrate the minimum wages in the clothing, textile and leather manufacturing sector, as of September 2010. Table 6: Minimum wages for employees with less than 12 months’ continuous service with the same employer Worker position Wage rate (Lesotho maloti, LSL)

Monthly Weekly Daily Textile general worker 778.00 194.00 41.00 Textile machine operator 837.00 209.00 43.00 Textile machine operator trainee 778.00 194.00 41.00 Source: Lesotho Government Gazette, Vol. LV, Thursday 30 September, 2010, No. 72 Table 7: Minimum wages for employees with more than 12 months’ continuous service with the same employer Worker position Wage rate (LSL)

Monthly Weekly Daily Textile general worker 916.00 230.00 47.00 Trained machine operator 863.00 214.00 45.00 Source: Lesotho Government Gazette, Vol. LV, Thursday 30 September, 2010, No. 72 Regular workers are paid by direct deposit and withdraw their monies from ATMs at the end of the month. For overtime work they are paid in cash. All factories comply with the minimum wage laws (as confirmed in interviews with both workers and managers). Where unions and factory managers have come to an agreement, union dues are deducted directly from the payroll. In addition, where the employer is willing, workers may negotiate for a higher wage than the established minimum wage. Such negotiations would depend on the individual employer and the financial viability of the firm, among other factors. As with promotions, workers reported that they felt that individual pay increases were sporadic and awarded according to an unwritten policy of favouritism. Many mentioned that among workers who did the same job and had been employed for the same amount of time, one would receive a raise while the other would not. The same applied to annual bonuses. Years could go by without some workers getting a bonus, whereas others in an equal position would receive theirs. It was not clear to workers what they could do to ensure they received a raise or bonus, other than try to get their supervisor to “like” them. Paid leave exists for pregnant women, although workers complained that two weeks’ maternity leave was not enough. There is also paid sick leave, but it is only paid to workers who have completed more than six months’ employment, and lasts no more than 12 days fully paid. One group of workers reported that they knew of workers who needed more than the 12 days off, were unable to return to work and ultimately starved to death.12 While all workers received two days’ paid leave 12 Workers who have completed 12 months’ employment are entitled to 12 days fully paid sick leave, and 24 days at half-pay, per year (as per labour law). These statements refer to workers having completed six months’ employment.

Page 11 of 32

per month, they were not at the liberty to take those days when it suited them but rather when it suited the employer. Some workers reported that those entitled to severance pay had to wait one year before receiving it.13 Funeral leave also exists, but the amount varies from factory to factory. There is no social security, provident fund or medical aid available to factory workers, although there is some provision for workers’ compensation. This had helped some workers, but had created tension for others who claimed they had been blamed for causing their own injuries through being inattentive or overenthusiastic to leave work early. This issue, whereby managers blamed employees for accidents befalling them and for managerial mistakes, came up fairly often in the focus group discussions. 3.2.2 Contracts and human resources Employment contracts are given to permanent employees on a one-year basis, renewable after each year. Some are given a contract on the day they are hired, while others undergo a short trial period of approximately two weeks. Some contracts are written in Sesotho and others in English, and most workers reported that their contracts were not explained to them. One group of workers reported that people standing outside the factory gate seeking to be selected for employment tried to gain an advantage by bribing the supervisor or manager who emerged to make the selection. Once hired, some workers, particularly men, would try to ask for the money back. Male workers were prepared to make more of a scene and so cause sufficient disruption to the person who had hired them to get their money back. Women, on the other hand, were more likely to write the money off rather than confront a supervisor. Dismissals are generally dealt with according to policy. Although unfair dismissals tend to dominate the issues taken to the DDPR, the number of cases has reduced over the years. Interviewed, the DDPR’s Deputy Director considered that this drop was due to an acknowledgement among managers that they could not simply dismiss employees at will. They must provide a viable reason and follow the proper procedures, otherwise there would be consequences: usually, to compensate the employee for unpaid wages and/or to reinstate them. As most of the unfair dismissal cases brought to the DDPR over the past ten years have found in favour of the employee, managers have become more careful in how they go about dismissals. A common disciplinary procedure across factories is for supervisors or managers to issue warnings – up to three – following which the employee may be dismissed. Workers reported that warnings were issued frequently and, at times, unfairly. A warning might ensue from, for example, talking to a buyer, being a few minutes late or making a mistake on the job. Most of the supervisors interviewed alluded to the need to push workers in order to get them to meet their targets, implying that the warnings could assist that process. However, workers with supervisors who helped them learn from their mistakes, rather than reprimanding them, were much happier and more motivated to do better work. One supervisor said that she disliked issuing warnings and that she often tried not to, but that she had no choice if the boss had also seen the mistake happen. She mentioned that it often damaged her relationships with the workers outside the factory. However, holding a supervisor position retained its appeal because of the higher pay. In all the factories, the HR officer positions are held by local Basotho. This was built into employment policy intentionally, in part to empower local people to staff supervisory positions and in part to ease business for non-English-speaking foreign managers. Aside from payroll and other logistics, HR is primarily responsible for dealing with disputes and discipline. When workers have an issue, they

13 This is as per law. Upon termination of employment, workers should be paid two weeks’ wages for each completed year of continuous service. Workers who resign also are entitled to severance pay, but the employer can hold it in trust for up to a year.

Page 12 of 32

must first speak to their line supervisor and then their manager or production manager, but they can go to HR if the issue remains unresolved. This was a problem for workers who found it difficult to approach their supervisors and several mentioned that, if they skipped the usual procedure and approached HR at the outset, they would be treated poorly by their supervisor (the person they should have spoken to first) when they “[came] back down”. The HR-management relationship was another key issue raised by workers in the focus group discussions. Workers were concerned that HR tended to brush aside their issues and side with the management, possibly to hold on to their position of authority. Workers can also refer such issues to the DDPR, but are not likely to do so unless they are union members. Union membership in the industry is currently around 40 per cent. It is also difficult for workers in Maputsoe to reach Maseru, where the DDPR is headquartered, so very few cases are brought from that region. In fact, only a handful of the workers who completed the questionnaire in Maputsoe had ever heard of, or had any interaction with, the DDPR. Those who had heard of it were concerned that taking their employer to court would result in the employer leaving the country – building on the recurrent theme that half a loaf was better than no loaf at all (see Section 3.1.4). 3.2.3 Occupational safety and health Worker protection was a key concern raised in the focus group discussions. There are OSH policies outlined in the Labour Code, particularly regarding equipment, the labelling of hazardous chemicals, and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE), among others. Some company-specific policies have also been implemented – for example, providing tea breaks or uniforms. In addition, some US multinational companies have codes of conduct with which their supplier factories must comply. Despite such measures workers reported that they did not feel sufficiently protected. Tables 8 and 9 summarize workers’ feedback on OSH policies and the provision of PPE in their factories, as well as the OSH issues of most concern to them. Table 8: Worker feedback regarding OSH management systems and policies at their workplace OSH systems, policies and provisions Yes (%) No (%) Do not know (%) OSH committee at factory 48 45 7 OSH manager at factory 39 56 5 OSH policies at factory 4014 58 2 OSH training provided to worker 13 85 2 PPE provided at factory 4715 51 2

Workers were asked about the safety and health issues they experienced in their factories. Presented with a list of seven safety and health issues (back pain, needle pricks, cuts, excessive cold, excessive heat, excessive noise and chemical inhalation), they were asked to circle all that applied. Table 9 illustrates the percentage of workers that reported having experienced these and other issues in their factories.

14 Among the policies specified were first-aid provision and the supply of face masks and/or overalls; one participant reported a “funeral” policy; three cited “many”. 15 Forty per cent of workers who said they received PPE said it was administered on a regular basis; 37 per cent said it was distributed for buyer visits only; 23 per cent did not specify a frequency.

Page 13 of 32

Table 9: Percentage of workers experiencing health and safety issues in their factories Safety and health issues experienced Workers affected (%) Back pain 18 Needle pricks 21 Cuts 6 Excessive cold 57 Excessive heat 22 Excessive noise 19 Chemical inhalation 36 Fibre inhalation16 9 Other17 9

On the topic of OSH management systems, approximately half of the workers said they had an OSH committee or point-person at their factories responsible for OSH-related issues. Some knew that there were policies on paper but stated that the management disregarded these policies. Where workers were provided with PPE, only 40 per cent reported receiving it on a regular basis. Some 37 per cent said they received PPE only when buyers were visiting the factory. Chemicals and hazardous substances created an issue for workers, primarily owing to a lack of (or inadequate) protective equipment provided by their employer. The inhalation of chemical fumes due to continued use of deteriorating face masks was a major concern for 36 per cent of the workers. These workers ranged from those on the sewing line to those in the spraying sections who were subject to even stronger fumes. Workers in neighbouring sections, who did not deal directly with strong chemicals, were equally affected. This issue was of particular concern where pregnant women were involved. Some companies do provide face masks each month, but workers reported that these became filthy after one or two uses. One female worker described a situation whereby she and her colleagues were supposed to be given milk to drink when working with certain chemicals. She did not specify whether this was intended as actual treatment for chemical exposure, or if it was thought by her or the employer to be an effective treatment, but rather suggested that she was being deprived of something that could help:

There are three of us working with chemicals, and we are supposed to be given milk to drink. But we are told to bring our own milk. And when we complain, we are told that, no, there are just three people working there, and we should use our money. And even the money we earn is not even enough to cover the [cost of the] milk… and everyday. Even when we ask for permission to go and see a doctor, because the chemicals have affected us, they say no. We are not given permission. Even when we are absent at work due to illness, when we come back, we are being shouted at. We are told that it’s not our mother’s house, that we cannot do as we please. And now we are being threatened to be fired…

The working environment varies from factory to factory, but one inescapable factor working against everyone are the extremes of heat and cold in summer and winter respectively. Some factory managers appear to do what they can to moderate the temperatures, but it remains an important issue for all workers, some of whom reported that they had passed out owing to a combination of extreme heat and poor ventilation. Some factories appeared cleaner and better organized than others, for instance offering employees warm water or tea in the winter. Others seemed less

16 Twelve people raised the issue of inhaling fibres which rise in to the air when unravelling fabrics. 17 Other issues raised included keeping doors closed, swollen feet caused by sitting all day, eye problems, ulcers, diabetes, tuberculosis, or HIV/AIDS.

Page 14 of 32

organized and generally offered a more uncomfortable environment. Many workers reported that they suffered back pain, hearing loss caused by high noise levels, and injuries ranging from needle-pricks to severed fingers owing to unsafe machinery. Workers at various factories said that bathrooms were not properly tended to, that they smelt bad and were often very dirty. Other workers spoke about infrastructural difficulties – for example, water shortages and electrical faults. These could lead, at best, to increased pressure to meet targets and, at worst, to fires. Health services and first aid are provided to some extent. Most factories have a first-aid kit and a fire extinguisher. However one health and safety manager indicated that these issues were often disregarded by the upper management and were likely to go unattended. Some factories have clinics on site available to workers. While this offers many advantages – travel time is reduced, and a person can receive immediate care if something happens at work – workers also raised some disadvantages. Sometimes going to the on-site clinic made workers feel more exposed, as other people would see that they had an ailment or disability. In addition, for the doctor to allow the worker any sick leave, they would first need to seek the permission of the supervisor. If the supervisor needed that worker, or did not “like” them, the worker might be prevented from taking leave. There is also an issue regarding the need for workers to see pre-approved doctors. If circumstances force them to see a doctor outside the workplace (for example, one located in their village, which might be far from the factory, or one who practises natural/traditional medicine), they must provide proof to their manager. The manager can then decide whether or not the request is legitimate. In most cases reported by the workers, the outcome was not in favour of the employee. Somewhat counterintuitively, therefore, a service intended to help workers and make life easier for them sometimes actually restricted them in some way. Some factories do not have a clinic, and it is not easy for workers to be released on the basis of feeling sick. Various workers described how they might be taken to the kitchen to rest for a moment or out to get some fresh air, and then told they would be fine and sent back to work. Cultural differences could also play a part in such cases, whereby foreign managers assume that Basotho workers are not hard-working and are simply looking for an excuse to take a break. Emergency preparedness provisions are similarly inconsistent, although this is not evident from looking at the policies on paper. Although there are fire escape plans and fire extinguishers and first-aid kits, there are also other factors that make tending to emergencies difficult. For example, transportation for workers runs only for those on the day shift. If a worker on the night shift is injured, they must remain at the factory all night until transport begins again in the morning, unless they have the means to pay the 350 Lesotho maloti (LSL) required for a manager to take them to the hospital (monthly wages are approximately LSL800). The group discussions gave the impression that factories were often poorly equipped to deal with emergencies. This could be true, or it could be due to lack of awareness about existing emergency plans or policies. This would suggest that if practices such as emergency evacuations exist, the management could take steps to better inform their workers. There were reports from at least one factory that the management kept the doors locked, except during visits from buyers. 3.2.4 Working time Feedback from both managers and workers indicated that firms comply with the law on regular hours of work, which amount to 45 hours per week. Most workers are at work from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday to Friday and have an arrangement to work one hour of overtime per weekday, “knocking off” from work at 5 p.m. Most of the workers participating in this research also reported working overtime on Saturday, for anything between 6 and 9 hours. While the rate of overtime pay varied slightly between workers and/or factories, it still matched the minimum requirements set out in the Labour Code.

Page 15 of 32

A few issues were raised by workers with reference to working time. Although their managers legally comply with the hours worked per week, many expressed concern that starting at 7 a.m. was too early. This was especially the case in the winter, when it can get extremely cold and is still dark when people are walking to work. Workers stated that it was difficult to work under such conditions and that they would be much more effective if the working day could be shifted back by one hour, so that they could work 8 a.m.–5 p.m. rather than 7 a.m.–6 p.m. Some had raised this concern with their respective managers, but no changes had been made. One reason for inaction could be that sending workers home one hour later could create a new problem, especially in the winter when the night sets in earlier. Another issue raised by workers related to overtime, specifically who received it and who did not; and whether or not they felt “forced” into doing it. Some workers reported that they were required to work Saturday overtime even though they did not want to. In Lesotho, Saturday is the day funerals take place as well as a time for people to visit their families. Some live far away from the cities and cannot manage a family visit if they only have one day off during the weekend. Others would simply prefer to stay at home and manage their households, spend time with their children and do their chores. It is not necessarily that they do not need the money, but for some workers losing a day off is a payoff they are not happy to make. Some have spouses who also work, so there is a second source of income and they can afford to take both Saturday and Sunday off. Others are supporting many dependents and have no choice but to work as much as possible. The focus group discussions revealed workers who were happy with their working time, some who wished they did not have to work overtime but felt they would lose their jobs if they resisted, and others who constantly sought overtime but were never given it. The issue of working time, in particular the overtime issue, shed further light on the theme of favouritism. Workers felt strongly that favouritism penetrated many aspects of the workplace, including: hiring and firing procedures; the kind of job they were appointed to; their access to bonuses, promotions or overtime hours; when and if they could take leave; and their general treatment at work. On the issue of leave, most workers reported that they were not allowed to take their two days when they chose, that the maternity leave was too short, and that they felt the sick leave should be more flexible for those who were too ill to return to work within the given deadline. Those who lived far away from the city found it difficult to come in to the factory to explain to their boss when they were ill and to present the required proof from a doctor. They were therefore penalized upon returning to work. On the issue of working time, some felt that overtime could be used against them: if the supervisor disliked them, they would either be made to work overtime (where they did not want to) or have it withheld (where they were in search of it). 3.3 Training and skills upgrading 3.3.1 The training centres There are two skills development and training centres (hereafter training centres) in Lesotho for textile and apparel workers. One is located in Maseru, just outside the Maseru West Industrial Area. The other is located in Maputsoe, also within the perimeter of an industrial area. This leads to a situation in both cities whereby the training centres are easily accessible for one group of workers (those working in the nearby factories) but more difficult to reach for the other group of workers (those working some distance away), as transport can be costly. The training centres were established in 2007 through a donation by the World Bank (administered through the Ministry of Trade and Industry), which was to span three years and expire on March 2011. Those funds having since run out, the centre’s director is exploring potential new sources of

Page 16 of 32

funding (discussed below). There are additional funds coming from the private sector, with some factories contributing more than others.18 A management council oversees the operations of the training centre. On the basis that employers are important donors to the training facility, the director of the Maputsoe centre reported that he felt it important to keep his distance from unions and avoid communicating with them. In subsequent meetings with different union leaders, one or two mentioned that this was an issue for them. They felt that the training centre management focused on staying afloat financially rather than taking into genuine consideration the interests of workers.19 A rough breakdown of the costs of maintaining the Maputsoe training centre is as follows: every six months, it must pay LSL6,000 of rent to the LNDC, plus LSL2,500 for electricity and LSL1,100 in telephone bills. This equates to roughly LSL1,700 per month in rent and utilities. Payroll is the largest expense, amounting to LSL50,000 per month for all seven staff members. In the period during which this research was conducted (October 2010–December 2011), there was no director at the Maseru training centre. According to an interview with the Maputsoe director, when the World Bank money ran out, the Maseru director’s contract was not renewed. For some time, the Maputsoe director also looked after the needs of the Maseru centre. However, given dwindling participation and interest in the centre, operations slowed down and the position ceased to be staffed. One benefit of the training centre is that it offers a space for workers to come and acquire technical skills needed to perform basic sewing operations. It can also provide training in higher-level skills needed to finish more complex garments. A potential downside, yet inevitable aspect of doing business, is that it is obliged to charge the workers who take part in the training. Workers can sign up for a two-month training course for LSL850 (approximately US$105). This is available to the unemployed as well as those currently working in factories, as it can make them eligible for employment or promotion. Under an arrangement they have made with employers, workers are only charged LSL200 upfront and then, once they are selected from the training centre by an employer, the rest of the payments are deducted from their payroll. Interviews with manufacturers, however, revealed that they felt the training centre failed to instill in workers the sense of urgency necessary to prepare them to work on a production line in real time. They felt the training centre succeeded in teaching workers patience on a job, but not how to work under the pressure of meeting targets and finishing orders. Manufacturers found that they ended up re-training their workers on site, making the training centre redundant. The training centre also offers training for supervisors, through a 20-day course costing LSL3,000 per person. The training covers such areas as leadership, motivation, quality assurance, monitoring, housekeeping and work/time study. Currently, supervisors are only trained at the request of managers, which happens rarely. Managers tend not to be willing to send their machinists on the standard training course either; they rely too heavily on them for production, and two months is simply too long for them to be away from the job. In addition, there is some overlap between the centre’s supervisor training and the efforts of Better Work Lesotho in factories subscribed to the programme. The director of the Maputsoe centre initially felt there was scope for collaboration with Better Work, whereby the centre could provide the training services identified as necessary during the Better Work Lesotho assessments. However, it became evident to him over time that the two organizations were operating independently of

18 The information in this section is based on two interviews with the Director of the Skills development and training centre in Maputsoe on 4 November 2010 and 10 February 10 2011. 19 Interview with FAWU President, 1 December 2010.

Page 17 of 32

each other, so that a collaborative partnership was not really an option. As the centres are not currently sustainable, their future is uncertain. The Government is looking at different public partnership models as a means of keeping them operational. Better Work Lesotho is interested in working with individual local trainers, but does not consider a partnership with the centres to be feasible given the doubts surrounding them. Nevertheless, it appears that there is one area in which Better Work Lesotho could assist the training centres: by helping them engage in social dialogue with both employers and unions. Given that the Maputsoe training centre currently relies largely on employers to fund its operations, it is under pressure to diversify its funding sources. Remaining dependent on purely government and employer funding will leave it vulnerable. Against this background, the director of the training centre mentioned that the centre was considering training workers from different sectors. Rather than confining training to basic sewing skills, it could also offer courses in areas such as carpentry or computer skills. If the training centre could work towards a more impartial and financially stable situation, it could be in a good position to partner Better Work Lesotho in administering its training programmes. This would also align with Better Work’s goal of spending a finite number of years in a programme country, aimed at supporting the development of local capacity. Upon Better Work Lesotho’s eventual withdrawal, local actors would be better equipped to continue conducting training and other aspects of monitoring and evaluation, primarily because they would already have been heavily involved in (and hopefully leading) the processes and activities themselves up to that point, with Better Work Lesotho back-up. 3.3.2 Training and skills upgrading in the factories Workers are trained almost entirely on the job. Few have received training from the training centres and most have acquired their basic skills through experience over years of working in the factories. More often than not, they have been trained on one or two machines. A smaller number of workers have either sought out training, or taught themselves in their own time, in order to operate many different machines. One worker commented that she was happier knowing how to work different machines because it offered variety and made her job more interesting. Most felt that such skills were necessary in order to better position themselves for a hiring or promotion process. Highly skilled workers might earn higher wages or promotion to a supervisory position, which paid more. Previous research indicates that skills upgrading is most prominent in the South African-owned factories (Morris, Staritz and Barnes, 2011). In general, the Asian-owned firms produce very long runs of basic products (such as children’s wear and sportswear for the lower end of the market) whereas the South African-owned firms produce shorter runs of somewhat more complex garments (such as mining work wear or restaurant and store uniforms). The Asian-owned firms are generally much larger than the South African-owned firms, but whereas employment rates in the Asian-owned firms are stable or declining, almost all the South African-owned firms are expanding their operations (something the Asian-owned firms are not doing, perhaps due to uncertainty regarding AGOA). One might expect, therefore, that more advanced skills would be required to perform the work in South African-owned factories, and that skills upgrading would therefore be more common among workers in these factories. Further investigation through interviews with the training centre director, unions and the workers themselves revealed a slightly different story. The workers in the South African-owned factories did not necessarily appear to be acquiring more well-rounded skill sets, but were rather hired to perform a specific task. This might be a more complicated task – a new design, a hidden zipper, different pocket styles – but in the end it was the only skill in which they were being trained. This is not to undermine the importance of learning a new skill, but rather to illustrate that opportunities

Page 18 of 32

for skills upgrading in the factories may be limited despite appearances. Ultimately, skills upgrading in the industry appears to be dominated by a reluctance among employers to invest too much. This is due in part to worker mobility, and in part to uncertainty in the industry linked to its reliance on the existing trade regime. Of the 129 workers who responded to the questionnaire, only 67 (52 per cent) were even aware that the training centres existed. Approximately 26 per cent stated that they had received some kind of training before starting their job, usually on-the-job training undertaken at a factory where they previously worked. Approximately 20 per cent said that they had received training upon starting their job, and approximately 26 per cent said they had received additional training after starting their job. Forty-three per cent said they received on-the-job training as they went along. 3.4 Human development issues: Education and health 3.4.1 Education system The education system in Lesotho is broken down into primary, secondary and tertiary levels. Standard 1 through Standard 7 classifies as primary school. Form A through Form E classifies as secondary school. Students receive a junior certificate for completing Forms A–C and a senior certificate for completing Forms D–E. Tertiary is any education beyond that, including diplomas and college and university degrees. Of the 129 workers who participated in the questionnaire, three had advanced through primary and secondary school to the tertiary level, and one had no schooling whatsoever. Eighty-eight had attended both primary and secondary school, although not all of them had completed their secondary level studies. Among this group of 88, only 18 had advanced to the final Form E. The majority of the 88 only reached Form B (28 people) or Form C (29 people). The remaining 37 participants had attended primary school only. (See Table 10.) Table 10: Level of education among questionnaire participants Level of education No. of participants No schooling 1 Primary school only 37 Primary and secondary school only 88* Primary, secondary and tertiary 3 *of which only 18 finished secondary school (Form E). The majority reached Forms B or C. During group discussions with workers, many reported having had to drop out of school in order to find work and support their family. This responsibility often came to them with the death of a parent, upon which the elder children would usually become the main support system for remaining family members. Where there was an uncle, aunt or grandparent, they might assist in raising the family. However, Lesotho does not have a very large surviving population of elder people. According to a report by the US State Department, life expectancy in Lesotho in 2010 was 40 years old, owing mainly to the prevalence of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis there. As such, younger people tend to take on family responsibility at an early age and often have to sacrifice their own schooling in order to further the education of their younger siblings. Several women also mentioned that their daughters had offered to leave school and join them in the factory in order to help make ends meet. The usual reaction of these mothers was to encourage their daughters to stay in school, indicating a desire for their children to create a better life for themselves. One question posed to workers was how they would spend the money if their wages

Page 19 of 32

were to increase. Permitted to select more than one option, the most common response was that they would use it to build a house (selected by 68 out of 129 participants, approximately 53 per cent), and the next that they would use it to send their children to school (50 per cent). Other options, such as returning to school themselves, saving the money or leaving the country, attracted a minority of the responses (see Table 15). 3.4.2 HIV/Aids The following information (see Table 11) summarizes feedback from workers regarding their experience of HIV/AIDS in the workplace.20 They were asked if they had received training related to the topic, whether they knew that factories were required to have an HIV/AIDS policy in place, and if in fact a policy was in place at their factories. They were also asked to share their opinions on how workers treated and talked about co-workers living with HIV/AIDS. Table 11: Workers’ experience relating to HIV/AIDS in the workplace Experience of HIV/AIDS in the workplace Yes (%) No (%) Do not know (%) HIV/AIDS training received 81 19 – Aware an HIV/AIDS policy was required 64 36 – HIV/AIDS policy in place at factory 60 19 21 Access to clinic available without penalty 43 41 16 Peer educator present at factory 76 19 5 Support group present at factory 76 19 5 Considered HIV/AIDS an issue at factory 86 7 7 Workers living with HIV/AIDS talked about in negative terms

47 46 7

Comfortable working next to someone living with HIV/AIDS

93 3 4

Workers able to talk freely about HIV/AIDS 72 26 2 – = none The workers participating in the questionnaire were asked to estimate the percentage of workers in their factory affected by HIV/AIDS, using seven ranges. Sixty-three per cent considered that more than forty-five per cent of the workers in their respective factories were affected by HIV/AIDS (see Table 12). Table 12: Workers’ perception regarding percentage of workforce living with HIV/AIDS Perceived % of workforce living with HIV/AIDS

% of workers considering that the affected workforce at their factory fell within the range in the left column

0–15 8 15–30 10 30–45 10 45–60 18 60–75 19 75–90 15 90–100 11 Unsure 9

20Thanks to Donna Bawden of ALAFA for her feedback during the crafting of these questionnaire items.

Page 20 of 32

3.5 Impact beyond the workplace: Household-related issues Two key issues related to household dynamics emerged in the focus group discussions. One has to do with household income and spending patterns, and the other is gender. Household income and spending encapsulates not just the workers’ earnings and expenses, but all their sources of income and the number of dependents they must support. Gender was discussed in the context of the dynamics between men and women at home, although deeply entrenched cultural roles exist that tend to infiltrate the workplace. One of the topics explored was whether or not the presence of women in the workplace had changed the way men and women related to each other at home. 3.5.1 Household income and spending patterns The topic of household income and spending was discussed to some extent in almost all of the 17 focus group discussions. Three of the discussions, however, focused exclusively on this topic. When talking about what they earned and what their monthly expenses were, many workers became quite emotional. In some cases, specifically when talking about the number of people they had to support, both men and women began to cry and were unable to finish what they had been saying. During these discussions, the air was thick with empathy; others in the circle were often moved to tears themselves upon seeing others in distress over this issue. It was clear that speaking about the pressure to support their families financially was a deeply sensitive experience, more so than discussing topics such as HIV/AIDS. The sensitivity lay not in the notion of privacy – they did not feel uncomfortable discussing the figures – but rather in a sense of helplessness. Of the workers who completed the questionnaire, more than half (52.8 per cent) were earning LSL801–1,000. This figure rose to 62.4 per cent when including those earning up to LSL1,100. Nearly nine per cent were earning LSL1,901–2,000, possibly owing to longer years working in the industry, individual skills or experience, or holding a supervisory position. Table 13 provides a breakdown of average monthly earnings. Table 13: Workers’ average monthly earnings in LSL Wage range (LSL) No. of workers earning in this range No. of workers as % of total responses 700–800 3 2.4 801–900 17 13.6 901–1 000 49 39.2 1 001–1 100 12 9.6 1 101–1 200 5 4.0 1 201–1 300 1 0.8 1 301–1 400 1 0.8 1 401–1 500 4 3.2 1 501–1 600 1 0.8 1 601–1 700 2 1.6 1 701–1 800 3 2.4 1 801–1 900 5 4.0 1 901–2 000 11 8.8 2 001–2 100 5 4.0 2 101–2 200 1 0.8 2 501–3 000* 2 1.6 3 001–4 000* 1 0.8 4 001–5 000* 2 1.6

Page 21 of 32

*Five workers reported that they earned more than LSL2,500, of which only one reported having a spouse who also contributed to household income. One possible explanation is that these workers were also line managers or supervisors with a significant degree of skill and/or years of experience. Additionally, one worker had a spouse contributing to household income, while another had a spouse who worked in the South African mines. In order to get a measure of the discrepancy between earnings and expenditure, workers were asked to provide a breakdown of their monthly spending on housing, food, transport, education, health care, clothes, school fees, entertainment, other costs and savings (see Table 14). Table 14: Workers’ average monthly expenses in LSL Category of expenses Average monthly expenditure (LSL) Median monthly expenditure (LSL) Rent 153 150 Food 447 400 Transport 168 200 Health care 178 150 Clothes 476 400 School fees 507 300 Entertainment 239 100 Savings 27 0 TOTAL 2 195 n/a

Average monthly expenses amounted to LSL2,195. Even excluding entertainment – which one might argue to be less necessary for survival – from the calculation, the expenses (LSL1,956) still outweigh average monthly earnings. Sixty-eight per cent of the workers surveyed earned less than LSL1,200 per month, 53 per cent of whom earned only LSL800–1,000. On the basis of the average monthly expenses calculated above, therefore, only six of the 129 workers (less than five per cent) would be able to cover their bills. After paying their bills, only a handful of the workers had anything left to put aside for savings. In fact, most found themselves in debt and reliant on loans from the “loan sharks”. These personal loans are generally offered to them at a 40 per cent interest rate. Where interest payments are not made, the consequences can be severe. Workers were asked, “If your wages increased, how would you spend the money?” They were given six options, from which they could choose all that applied (see Table 15). These options were: send my children to school; go to school myself; build a house; leave the country; save it to get a better job; or something else. Table 15: Workers’ reponses to the question: “If your wages increased, how would you spend the money?” Preferred use of money in case of wage increase No. of worker

responses* Average (%)

Send children to school 64 49.61 Go back to school 24 18.60 Build a house 68 52.71 Leave the country 3 2.33 Save to get a better job** 25 19.38 Other*** 6 4.65 * Total number of respondents = 129. ** Seventeen said they would save it to get a better job, while 8 said they would simply save it. *** Other responses included: help orphans, start a business, go to the doctor, feed children well.

Page 22 of 32

As mentioned earlier (see Section 3.4.1), the most common responses among workers were to build a house and/or send their children to school. This indicates how important it is to them that they provide both a stable home and a better future for their children through education. 3.5.2 Who is contributing to household income? Lesotho has long served as a source of labour for the South African mining industry. Basotho men travel to Johannesburg and spend months working on the mines, returning once or twice per year to visit their families and bring money. Some women said that their husbands still worked on the mines and that they would usually bring home the money they earned or deposit a portion of it into a joint account. However, steady retrenchments over the years have meant that many of these men are returning home. Only 19 out of 129 workers (15 per cent) reported that they had spouses who were also employed, either at the factory or elsewhere. The majority reported that they were the only ones contributing to household income. Another nine workers (seven per cent) reported that either a child or other relative was contributing in some way to household income. This means that 101 workers (78 per cent) were the sole breadwinners for their households. In focus group discussions, a majority of the women reported that their husbands were either unemployed or had passed away. This is discussed further in the next section. Among the 28 workers who reported having a spouse or relative contributing to household income, only one said that their combined wages were enough to sustain the household. Just three of the 101 sole breadwinners said that their individual earnings were enough to sustain the household (see Table 16). These workers were earning LSL984, LSL1,122 and LSL2,020 per month respectively. Table 16: Ability to sustain household on individual and combined earnings Category of respondent YES, wages are enough to

sustain household (%) NO, wages are not enough to

sustain household (%) Sole breadwinner (101 participants) 2.97 97.03 Spouse/relative contributes to household income (28 participants)

3.57 96.43

All workers combined 3.10 96.89

3.5.3 Supporting multiple dependents There are many reasons why Basotho tend to find themselves supporting multiple dependents. The following observations are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide some background and so put the discussion in context. Basotho are a closely-knit people who deeply value time with family and taking care of one another. Trying financial times can also necessitate joint living situations. Some research has indicated that poor living conditions at the South African mines initially led to the swift spread of diseases such as tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, which the men brought back with them and unknowingly transmitted to their families. Other research suggests that lack of awareness about how sexual diseases are contracted, and how to protect against such diseases, has accelerated the spread of HIV/AIDS in Lesotho. This is particularly so in the highland regions, where people are far removed from city life and may not have had full access to education. Anecdotal evidence also suggests that it is quite common for Basotho men to have multiple sexual partners. It is not condoned by their religion (almost entirely Christian) nor encouraged by society, yet it is generally accepted by both men and women as a fact of life. The combination of these factors, among others, has resulted in low life expectancy in Lesotho; this stood at about 40 years of age in 2010, according to the US State Department. Many female workers reported living in one house with not only their own children but also the orphaned children of their brothers and sisters who had passed away, in most cases from HIV/AIDS.

Page 23 of 32

While several had also brought their parent(s) to live in their homes, they more commonly took care of their parents by sending or taking money to them. Workers explained that they usually gave the money to someone they trusted, who happened to be travelling to their parents’ village (often a neighbour). Paying a taxi fare to deliver the money personally was not an affordable option. For female factory workers (40 per cent of whom were living with HIV/AIDS), not only are they becoming the sole breadwinners for the family, but they are also taking on more dependents – usually orphaned children or a widowed parent. Providing for additional people in increasingly difficult financial times represents an incredible challenge. In focus group discussions with workers, talking about the money they earned and the people they had to support was a topic that often moved people to tears, women and men alike (see above). Table 17 illustrates the average number of dependents supported by each worker, including their own children as well as other dependents living either with them or outside the household. Table 17: Average number of children and other dependents per worker Type of dependents supported No. of workers that

match criteria Average no. of

dependents among workers that match

criteria

Average no. of dependents across

all workers

Supporting children at home 95 3.39 2.50 Supporting other dependents at home 91 3.08 2.17 Supporting other dependents outside home

91 n/a n/a

Supporting children and other dependents at home

71 6.56 4.67

Supporting children and other dependents both in and outside home

58 n/a n/a

A much smaller proportion of the people interviewed told how they had used these difficult times as an opportunity to build themselves up. One supervisor, who had lost her husband over 20 years previously, leaving her with four children to support, had pushed herself to learn all of the tasks in the factory in order to make herself more marketable and earn a better salary. She had eventually been promoted to supervisor, thereby earning a salary increase. As time went on, she had also managed to get her son and daughter-in-law to work in the factory. As they continued to live with her, they were able to contribute to the household and help put the younger children through school. However, this story seemed to be the exception rather than the rule. Most workers did not appear as motivated to become trained on different tasks in the factory. They were happy simply to have a job and seemed more concerned with gaining liquid assets to buy what they wanted or needed that month than with developing a long-term plan. 3.5.4. Gender dynamics at home In addition to discussing some of the gender dynamics at work (see Section 3.1.2), focus group participants were asked whether the fact that women were now working had affected the gender dynamics at home. Some expressed a positive change, in that men were more likely to share the household chores with women. The majority, however, said that things at home had not changed at all. They described a dynamic whereby the man remained the head of the household, and the woman remained responsible for taking care of the children, cooking and cleaning. Where the woman also worked during the day, there was still an expectation that she would take care of these household-related chores when she returned home. Men and women alike attested to this dynamic and supported it, as illustrated in the following comments made by a male and female worker:

Page 24 of 32

My wife works at the factory. I still expect her to clean and cook. Even if she’s tired, I tell her to cook because it’s a woman’s duty to do all the chores in the house. If she doesn’t want to cook, she cooks enough for me to eat alone. It’s a sign that she’s full, now she can go, she can sleep on an empty stomach. (Male)

On that point of a man being head of the family, even we, as women, we know that we still have to obey our husbands. So that’s why we cannot force them to do what they don’t want to do. (Female)

Men raised the notion that, if the husband were to help with something one day, the wife would expect him to help with it the next day. Therefore they did not want to help too much so as not to increase their wife’s expectations. If the husband were to help, it would be because he had chosen to and not because his wife had asked him to or expected it of him. Again, both men and women attested to this attitude:

My wife always cooks and cleans and does everything around the house. It has been like that ever since we got married. She works at the factory. If you can help your wife, one day she will make it a must that tomorrow you must help her. Like every day you must help her. So I don’t want her to get used to that. (Male)

It’s true, the woman will get angry at the man for not doing the dishes. If they leave for work and he comes early and does them one day, she expects it the next day. (Female)

In other discussions, some women said that their husbands were prepared to help out at home and that things were becoming easier there. Generally, however, these accounts tended to imply that such help was perceived as a favour or privilege rather than as an attempt to balance out household responsibilities. In one case, a man said that he was aware that women were working hard nowadays and that, if his wife were to ask for help, he would do so with a willing heart. He said he was only able to do this now that he had stopped drinking. As long as he continued to drink, he did not think it would be possible to help out with household tasks. Men also experience problems at home, according to both male and female workers. Most of the women agreed among themselves that men “have it hard these days” because women are becoming increasingly disrespectful. One group believed the disrespect was primarily due to laws that allowed women some kind of recourse if they were being mistreated at home, stating that it made them behave more wildly because they knew they could run to the police for help. One man expressed his concern over how the police addressed the issues that women raised with them. He said that “there is gender inequality against males” because women were favoured in cases relating to domestic issues, and the police did not listen to the man’s side of the story. Instead, he said, they would simply call on and beat up the man. There is also tension when it comes to dealing with finances in the household. How pay cheques are discussed, divided and spent emerged as an important issue in terms of dynamics between husbands and wives at home. Many workers mentioned that the end of the month (payday) was a particularly stressful time at home, despite the benefits of having money to buy groceries and clothes, and visit friends and family. While some said that they were able to sit down and draw up a budget with their spouse with their combined earnings, the majority said that the money was a main source of fighting at home. Some men would give all their earnings to their wives, who then budgeted and paid the bills accordingly. However, most of the men said that, if they were then to ask their wife for LSL50 to go drinking (approximately US$7), she would often refuse him. Knowing that this situation would lead to an argument, these men said that it was simply easier to withhold a portion of their earnings

Page 25 of 32

before giving the remainder to their wives. Some women said that doing so could create insecurity: “If the man brings a half or quarter of [his] salary, she thinks he has spent it on other girls at work that he meets every day. Men here have a soft spot, they can spend even if they don’t know you.” One young woman said that her husband wanted to know exactly how much she earned and what she spent it on, implying that he wanted to be able to use some for himself. She said that she refused to tell him so that she could buy things for herself instead without having to fight with him.

Page 26 of 32

Section 4: What do workers think about Better Work? Of the 129 workers who participated in the questionnaire, 71 (55 per cent) had heard about Better Work Lesotho. The vast majority had heard about Better Work from their union leaders. Several had only heard about it within the previous week, when they were told about the opportunity to take part in this research. Only a small handful had heard about it from Better Work staff and an even smaller proportion from a manager. Thirty-five per cent of workers believed that their factories were participating in Better Work; 34 per cent did not believe their factories were participating; and 31 per cent did not know. (See Table 18.) This feedback is an indication that the process of effectively disseminating information about Better Work is still a work in progress. Workers in Maputsoe seemed particularly poorly informed; there the majority of the participants had not heard about Better Work at all. Even among those who had, there was no clear sense of what it is, what it does, or what it could do. Nevertheless, 83 per cent of the workers said that they believed that Better Work would change the working conditions in their factories and 88 per cent that they wished their factory could participate in Better Work Lesotho. A small percentage of workers said they would not want Better Work at their factories; they specified in the comment section that they were afraid participation would prompt their factory owners to leave the country. Table 18: Workers’ awareness and perception of Better Work Lesotho Worker awareness and perception of Better Work Lesotho Yes (%) No (%) Do not

know (%) Had heard about Better Work Lesotho 55 45 Factory participated in Better Work Lesotho 35 34 31 Believed Better Work Lesotho could change working conditions 83 6 11 Wished to participate in Better Work Lesotho 88 5 7 Believed industry stakeholders could work together 94 4 2 Believed in need for a neutral third party 87 10 3 Workers were asked to leave a comment about Better Work so as to better understand exactly how they felt it could help them. Options were not given, but rather a blank space for them to write whatever they wanted to. Sixty-six workers (51 per cent) left a comment. Among those comments, there were two prominent themes. Sixty-one per cent could be grouped under the general theme of improving working conditions, solving problems or bringing change (12.5 per cent specifically referred to wages, a surprisingly small percentage given that this was a primary concern for workers). Thirty-six per cent of the comments could be grouped under the theme of wanting a neutral third party or mediator. Many of them referred specifically to wanting someone to help who “won’t take sides” when addressing issues.

Better Work Impact Research

The Better Work global programme is supported by (in alphabetical order):• Australian Government• Levi Strauss Foundation• Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs• State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, Switzerland (SECO)• United States Council Foundation, Inc. (funds provided by Gap Inc., Nike and Wal-Mart)

Additional funding for this publication provided by the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development, Germany (BMZ), and the International Finance Corporation (funds provided by IrishAid and The Walt Disney Company)