Here we look at the second question of monitoring and how it seems to us to be leading toward increased levels of government intervention and mandated working and wage conditions. We see French Taylorism action research experiments as a way the Athletic Apparel Industry can proceed which could stem this trend. In either case, research into monitoring that is scientifically conducted is, we think, warranted.
Corporations prefer self-monitoring to government approaches.
We have also been asked by Academic associations to clarify the role of government in the apparel industry. Table One suggests various options for monitoring global enterprise and subcontractor labor, environment and ethical practices that involve government. The government takes no formal role in apparel monitoring forums, legislation or research. Monitoring is left to the voluntary action of the global enterprise, its subcontractors, labor unions, workers, and non-governmental organizations. The government encourages corporations to establish codes of conduct as it did in the case of the Apparel Partnership following public outcry over the apparel industry practices in Indonesia in 1991, Kathy Lee and sweatshops in 1996, and the rise in campus protests over apparel monitoring in the last five years.