The current issues between the University of Wisconsin and Adidas over fair compensation for workers is not the first time the Madison campus has had to wrestle with apparel company contracts and workers’ rights.
Currently, UW is moving into a mediation period with Adidas to address a dispute about the university’s code of conduct regarding the ongoing case involving an Adidas-subcontracted factory owner fleeing without paying 2,800 workers.
After the Worker Rights Consortium report solicited by Interim Chancellor David Ward provided more information, Adidas released a statement denying responsibility. When the UW Labor Licensing Policy Committee recommended Ward place Adidas on notice, he decided to move into mediations to resolve the dispute.
University spokesperson John Lucas said each of the past situations has been complex and emphasized there are two current contracts with Adidas for all extensive purposes – one stipulating Adidas can produce apparel with the motion W, and the other that provides the exclusive contract making Adidas is the sole provider of UW sports team athletic gear.
The dispute with Adidas comes after three main cases in the past few years which have involved Adidas, Nike and Russell Athletic.
The case with Adidas arose when Adidas-subcontracted factory Hermosa Manufacturing closed in 2005 without compensating 260 workers $825,000 in back pay or severance, according to a UW statement.
In response, Adidas committed to a rehiring effort and a plan to curtail future abuses.
In the 2007 case involving UW’s license with Russell Athletic, workers at the company’s Jerzees de Choloma were fired for union activity. According to a UW statement, after UW put the company on notice, it agreed to provide back pay to the workers and job reinstatement.
In the case with Nike, UW severed its ties in April 2010 after two Nike-contracted factories in Honduras closed without paying $2.2 million in severance pay to 1,800 workers. According to a UW statement, Nike had made no clear indications that it would remedy the situation after placed on notice.
Later in 2010, although UW had cut ties with the group, Nike announced a decision to contribute $1.54 million to a worker relief fund to aid those affected by the Honduras case, according to a UW statement.
In an email to The Badger Herald, Trademark Licensing Director Cindy Van Matre said the mediation with Adidas will be the first time the university will go into mediations for a labor licensing issue.
Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Community Relations Dawn Crim said cases like this are unfortunate and UW is committed to ensuring and promoting fair labor practices.
“In each of these cases, the university takes the allegations seriously and works with the group to remedy the situation,” Crim said.
Crim also said the nuance of each situation which has arisen with licensees of UW is different and dependent on the nature of the factory owner and the license itself.
“There’s a different outcome depending on what the leverage points are,” Crim said.
In a letter sent Feb. 14 to Chairperson of the LLPC Lydia Zepeda, Senior University Legal Counsel Brian Vaughan wrote that the university is contractually obligated to pursue mediation when disputes over sponsorship agreements arise, although the LLPC recommended that Ward put the group on notice before cutting ties.
Vaughn wrote that the current case with Adidas is unique because mediation was not available in past disputes, and in past cases the companies have not disputed the applicability of the code to severance pay in the past whereas Adidas now is.
