United Students Against Sweatshops
Support Hunger Striking Students at Purdue!

Since November 17th students at Purdue Univeristy have been on a hunger strike until President Martin Jischke signs onto the Designated Suppliers Program. Yes, today is the 19th day of hunger striking for some students. As of right now, there are fifteen students currently striking. Multiple students have required hospitalization and some have been forced to stop striking for health reasons. The students will contine the strike until Purdue makes a real commitment to supporting the rights of workers producing their clothes. Show your support today by calling and sending a letter to Purdue University President Martin Jischke. President Martin Jischke 765-494-9708 Phone script: My name is __________ and I am a ___________ at __________ University. I am appalled that Purdue has not signed onto the Designated Suppliers Program and has forced students to hunger strike for 20 days before Purdue saw fit to even discuss the issue. I demand that Purdue University adopt the DSP on the 6th. Not signing the DSP shows that Purdue wishes to remain complicit in some of the worst human rights abuses occurring in the world. I hope that Purdue University does not wish to present this image to the rest of the university community.

Sample Letter for Campaign

Subject: Students need to be heard!

Dear [ Decision Maker ] ,

I am appalled that Purdue has not signed onto the Designated Suppliers Program and has forced students to continue hunger striking with not even so much as a meeting. Professors, students and members of the community are focused on how poorly Purdue is handling this issue. I will continue to follow this until the DSP is signed. I fully support the actions of Purdue Organization for Labor Equality and all allied organization who are taking part in this hunger strike. Standing in solidarity with the students, I make the following demands:

A. Purdue University must immediately issue the following public statement, signed by President Martin Jischke and inform all of apparel licensees of the policy:

Purdue University Statement of Adoption of the Designated Suppliers Program

In order to best uphold and enforce our commitment to workers' rights, Purdue University announces its support for the Designated Suppliers Program (DSP). Purdue University is committed to the adoption and timely implementation of the DSP as outlined by the DSP Working Group in September, 2006. We intend to amend our code of conduct to reflect the requirements of the DSP once the DSP Working Group has agreed to move forward with implementation and a positive Business Review letter has been obtained from the US Department of Justice. Additionally, Purdue University will join the DSP Working Group in order to work with other colleges and universities to move the program forward.

B. Purdue's Merchandise, Licensing and Marketing Policy Committee must immediately be restructured to include equal student to non-student representation. Further, the committee must have regular meetings, and defined bylaws.

C. In the time between endorsement of the DSP and its nation-wide implementation Purdue must take action on factory cases where our Code of Conduct has clearly been violated. Specifically, Purdue must immediately suspend or eliminate contracts with apparel brands implicated in the Hermosa case.

Sincerely,

Campaign Launched:
November 28, 2006



Background Information

Why Hunger Strike?

Why are all these students doing a hunger strike? Isn’t there a better way to get your point across to President Jischke’s and Purdue’s administration?

To answer these questions in more detail, we need to look at some facts and ask some questions.

Is Purdue apparel is made in sweatshops?

Yep. Believe it or not, Purdue apparel that you get at the bookstore was most likely made in a sweatshop. This is an undeniable fact: the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), an independent monitoring agency, has the list of factories in which Purdue apparel is produced. A good number of these factories are sweatshops. If getting numbers from an agency isn’t good enough, three workers from these factories came up to Purdue and spoke about the horrible conditions in those factories. These workers recognized the Purdue logo and confirmed that Purdue apparel was made at their factories.

What’s so bad about sweatshops anyhow?

Sweatshops suck!. The WRC reports on factories where collegiate apparel is produced. In these factories, there are an overwhelming amount of examples of physical and verbal abuses of workers. For example, the reports state that in the Kukdong factory in Atlixco, Mexico, “managers and supervisors have committed, and continue to commit, sporadic acts of physical assault and verbal abuse against workers. These acts range from physical assaults such as blows by hammer and screwdriver, to slaps on the front and back of workers’ heads, to screaming of racial epithets and obscenities.” (These are abuses that the managers themselves admitted!)

The workers are also subjected to severely unsafe working conditions. In the PT Kolon Langgeng in Jakarta, Indonesia, “the Assessment Team observed many workers operating equipment at extremely high temperatures, or with naked blades, without gloves, and noticed that the sewing machines had no finger guards. The survey by the Occupational Health and Safety team led by HIPERKES (the Indonesian governmental agency for workplace health and safety) confirmed, on a subsequent visit, that very few workers were wearing personal safety equipment (PSE) such as masks, gloves, earplugs and goggles.”

In Kukdong, workers are paid severely less than what is considered a living wage, “Many workers at Kukdong are not paid the minimum wage mandated by Mexican law for the occupation of seamstress. The Kukdong wages are grossly insufficient to meet the barest needs of a family of three. (The Kukdong General Manager conceded that it would be difficult even for a single person to live on the wages of a Kukdong worker.) A worker with one dependent would fall below the commonly recognized line of ‘extreme poverty.’”

What can Purdue do?

Adopt the Designated Suppliers Program! The DSP stipulates that university logoed clothing must be made in factories:
1) Where workers have a democratic union or are free to form one
2) Where workers can bargain toward a living wage
3) Where Purdue’s already established Code of Conduct is followed
Check out the DSP and the DSP FAQ on the main page.

Okay, I know what you’re trying to do now, but why a hunger strike? Isn’t there more acceptable channels?

You would think so. United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) and Purdue Organization for Labor Equality (POLE) have been running this campaign for over a year. Here is a brief timeline of all the events that took place concerning the DSP during this time period:

September 28, 2005 – The campaign to adopt the Designated Suppliers Proposal (DSP) is launched on over 40 campuses across the US, including Purdue University. POLE does an “office theater” in President Jischke’s office, demonstrating the unsafe and harmful conditions for workers producing Purdue apparel.

February 28, 2006 - Workers from Mexico, the Dominican Republic and El Salvador that produce Purdue appeal speak on campus about sweatshop conditions. 70 students respond with an impromptu protest at Hovde.

March 21, 2006 – The Merchandise, Licensing and Marketing Policy Committee meets without inviting the POLE representative to the meeting (by accident), and voted to not endorse the DSP at that time.

April 13, 2006 – POLE stages a large rally on the Memorial Mall, urging Purdue to adopt the DSP. Over 100 students and community members attend.

September 14, 2006 – POLE stages a “dance-in” in President Jischke’s office in support of the DSP. Eight Purdue police arrive to contain seven dancing students.

September 29, 2006 – The DSP is revised taking into account numerous suggestions by a working group composed of university administrators. Purdue actively refuses to participate in this working group.

October 17, 2006 – POLE holds a rally with more than 60 students urging Purdue to adopt the DSP.

November 15, 2006 - The Merchandise, Licensing and Marketing Policy Committee meets, this time with POLE present, and voted not to endorse the newly revised DSP.

November 16, 2006 – 11 students from POLE enter President’s Jischke’s private office, refusing to leave until Purdue adopts the DSP. Police, administrators threaten suspension unless the students leave. (Exponent article: http://purdueexponent.org/?module=article&story_id=2988)

Can’t POLE work through official channels to get Purdue to sign onto the DSP?

Purdue has an advisory committee called the “Licensing, Marketing and Purchasing Policy Committee”. The committee was created in response to POLE’s (then Purdue Students Against Sweatshops) activism concerning the sweatshop issue in 2000. POLE has been an active member of the committee ever since and will remain so. However, the committee only serves to advise the President and has no power to make decisions. Furthermore, POLE strongly believes that the committee does not operate in a viable way: meetings take place sporadically, there is a lack of informed discussion and no accountability (on the administration’s end), and interested students have practically no voice. Also, administrators outnumber students on the comittee, despite the fact that it was and still is students who bring forth the issues that the committee discusses.

Sounds like you guys need to do this hunger strike. What can I do to support this campaign?

Online you can:
Sign the petition!
Join the Facebook Group!
Write a Letter to the Editor in Support:
Purdue Exponent
Lafayette Journal and Courier
Email us with words of support!

Offline you can:
Do a solidarity fast with us
Come by the camp and hang out
Tell your friends!