Response from Nike to Worker Rights Consortium & Violet Apparel workers' rejoinder
[..]
We continue to stand behind our position on Hong Seng.
For Violet, we would like to share our latest statement:
Nike has not sourced from Violet Apparel since 2006, and they were not authorized to produce Nike product after that time. The Nike Code of Conduct and Code Leadership Standards specify that Nike suppliers may not sub-contract out the production of Nike or Nike Affiliate product to third-parties or supplier owned facilities without Nike’s prior written approval. We take issues of non-compliance seriously and investigate allegations when they come to our attention.
Specific to the situation at Violet Apparel, we conducted an independent investigation of the allegations that the facility was producing Nike products in 2020 and found no evidence that Nike products had been manufactured at Violet Apparel in recent years. As Nike did not have a relationship with the factory, we’re not able to comment on the details of the closure. However, we have received a statement from Ramatex on this matter which notes:
“Violet Apparel ceased its operations in June 2020 due to insufficient production orders to sustain operations as a result of the COVID-19 global pandemic. Following due process, Violet Apparel has worked closely with the Cambodian Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training (MoLVT) and the Garment Manufacturing Association in Cambodia (GMAC) leading up to the date of closure to ensure a fully-compliant and fair severance compensation process for all affected employees due to the closure of the factory.
In September 2020, Violet Apparel decided to engage with the Arbitration Council of the Kingdom of Cambodia along with the other parties (MoLVT and all 3 Union representatives involved) regarding the severance compensation process. The Arbitration Council issued its ruling on 12 November 2020 and all parties involved agreed to recognize the terms and conditions of the ruling as final and binding. Violet Apparel has fulfilled its obligations under the ruling by making the requisite severance compensation payments to affected workers.”