10.4.2 Public campaigning and the termination of the supplier relationship

On 1 June 2006, CCC/ICN went public with its campaign against G-Star. First, an online press statement was issued alleging labour rights violations at G-Star's Indian supplier FFI/JKPL and G-Star's general lagging behind in the field of CSR. Conversely, G-Star also published press statements on its website explaining the events and facts presented by CCC/ICN and how these were addressed. G-Star also stated that it had opted to rely on the internationally well-known SA 8000 certification to ensure decent working conditions at its suppliers (Box 10.1). On 11 June, G-Star informed CCC/ICN that SGS would audit the FFI/JKPL production units on the basis of the SA 8000 certification requirements. In its letter of 12 June, G-Star concluded that the violations alleged by GATWU could not be substantiated, thereby relying on FFI/JKPL's report concerning its meeting with GATWU on 9 June. Subsequently, G-Star pointed out that it was not a party to the conflict between FFI/JKPL and the Indian Organisations and it required CCC/ICN to amend its website by deleting any and all references to G-Star. However, CCC/ICN refused to remove these references - to the contrary, CCC/ICN informed G-Star that it would continue to frequently release updates on the issue. In response, G-Star'slawyer informed CCC/ICN about the respective legal responsibilities of G-Star and CCC/ICN.1 The latter responded that it no longer considers direct contact with G-Star to be of any added value. The dialogue seemed to have come to an end.

CCC/ICN indeed continued its campaigning. In early August 2006, G-Star made a move by conveying to CCC/ICN that it was considering terminating its relationship with FFI/JKPL. CCC/ICN approved of this step and the parties agreed to meet. However, shortly thereafter, the Bangalore Civil Court issued the abovementioned restraining order against the Indian Organisations. CCC/ICN deemed the order to be an obstruction to consulting with its Indian partners and it postponed the scheduled meeting with G-Star. Since then, CCC/ICN and G-Star no longer had any direct contact, but frequently updated their position on their respective websites.

A year later, in December 2007, after various audits, the Labour Department inspection, the interference by Mr Nath on behalf of the Indian government, and the failure of a joint mediatory attempt by Dutch NGOs and unions (see Section 6), G-Star announced its withdrawal of future orders from FFI/JKPL. It publicly stated that it could no longer afford to be held hostage by two fighting groups both trying to use G-Star as a means of leverage in managing their dispute. CCC/ICN was satisfied with this decision but it urged G-Star to implement a 'socially responsible exit strategy' by placing orders with other Bangalore apparel suppliers, while demanding first-hire preference regarding former FFI/JKPL employees.2