IT is an open secret that Top Glove Corp Bhd has been subject to forced labour related sanctions for more than a year by the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) department.

On a similar note, one may wonder how come fellow Big-Four glove maker, Supermax Corp Bhd, is able to get away scot free for what one prominent migrant rights activist described as much more “blatant and systemic abuses of its very often irregular and captive foreign workforce, mostly from Bangladesh and Nepal”.

The question of the rationality and fairness in CBP’s approach in sanctioning Top Glove but failing to act on alleged abuses at Supermax follows its letter dated Feb 22 this year to migrant worker rights specialist Andy Hall following the latter’s complaint on the situation.

In the letter, CBP said the allegations and information provided by Hall about continued abuses he has documented for several years at Supermax was sufficient to merit a more detailed investigation.

The need for CBP to respond to the alleged abusive situation facing foreign workers at Supermax seems to have been given a higher relevance now following Hall’s findings – shared with FocusM – from his personal interviews with almost 60 deported Nepalese workers who recently returned to Kathmandu from various Supermax glove plants in Malaysia.

Almost all of these workers were irregular when departing Malaysia, holding expired visas for up to 15 months or more and allegedly having been blacklisted by the Malaysian authorities for up to 10 years on their departure through no fault of their own.

The workers alleged to Hall that they suffered systemic abuse during their years working at this leading Malaysian glove company which is one of the largest in the world and recently boasted of record profits.

Hidden agenda

“It’s highly questionable how Top Glove remains subject to sanctions when despite all the evidence against Supermax, the CBP, CBSA (Canada Border Services Agency) and even the UK’s NHS (National Health Service) being a major buyers of the company’s gloves, have yet to take action against the company,” Hall told FocusM.

“Could this discriminatory approach by CBP be due to the fact that Supermax is such a large glove supplier to the US (and Canada, the UK and Europe) during the pandemic that they cannot sanction them due to the US’s consumptive needs for its gloves?

“Or is there some other political or hidden agenda at play? Whatever the reason, CBP cannot stay silent at this contrast in approach between two major gloves companies accused of forced labour.”

Hall lamented that despite having shared information on Supermax with Malaysian and international law enforcement authorities for so long, nobody has acted publicly to denounce this most disconcerting situation.

Some of the accounts of the Nepalese deported workers shared with Hall concerning their experiences while working at Supermax include:

• 17 months of almost total restriction of personal freedom of movement since March 2020 in the factory compound and living quarters. Many of the workers alleged they were held in their rooms for up to five months prior to departure due to their irregular visa and work status.
• Worker’s personal ATM cards (and passcodes for these ATM cards) have generally been kept by Supermax staff since March 2020 and these staff withdraw a limited amount of money per month on behalf of the workers. Workers are then given whatever amount remains after a compulsory food provision amount is automatically deducted.
• Security deposit of RM2,280 deducted from workers’ salary (at Maxwell plant) upon their arrival (RM120/month for 19 months) which was to be returned prior to their departure. But the workers did not get back their deposit back while their last one month salary is still pending payment to them.
• More than 20 or up to 30 categories of fine or sanctions allegedly imposed on workers by the company with one worker even saying “we would be fined even for not walking straight.”
• Many workers ended up working for up to 11 years at Supermax. When questioned why they would stay so long in such an allegedly abusive situation, they claimed they could not change employer or their savings were inadequate to return home or to allow them to pay off their own and family loans.
• In one positive note, workers reported reimbursement of previously paid recruitment fees over seven months amounting to around RM5,400 (RM18,000 for Bangladeshi workers) that had been paid in full after an external audit.
• Very poor quality food but if workers complained, they would be fined (so they had to lie that the food was good).
• During pre-COVID days, up to 200 workers were housed together in a large room but the number of workers in one room has been reduced to 100 to 150 workers in recent pandemic times (FocusM has seen video footage of the living quarters’ condition).
• Workers consider a 12-hour work per day as their mandatory shift. However, two years ago, they had to work up to 14-15 hours per day and many could work every day in a month to get a RM30 incentive bonus.
• Prior to its removal about one month ago, workers alleged only two toilet passes per department were accorded, forcing workers in extreme cases to urinate on the floor or be subject to a RM300 fine if caught going to the toilet without a pass.
• Workers were charged for small personal lockers provided to them in their rooms which were not large enough to store their clothes which they strung out around their bunk beds subject to removal on inspection by management.
• Poor medical assistance with workers having to pay themselves for better treatment (fellow workers donated for the treatment of one worker who lost his finger as they was no compensation forthcoming from the management).
• If nails or hair are found to be long, they can be forcibly cut off with workers charged RM100 for the ‘service’. Wearing a watch was prohibited with a penalty imposed. – Aug 10, 2021

https://focusmalaysia.my/is-there-double-standard-in-cbp-treatment-of-supermax-and-top-glove/