Purdue will not adopt designated supplier program, urges cooperative efforts

President Martin C. Jischke said the designated supplier program in its current form is not compatible with the business standards Purdue observes, and he expressed doubt that it could be administered successfully. However, he said he will remain open to the possibility that the designated supplier program can be modified in the future, and he will accept an invitation to send a Purdue observer to meetings of a group that is working to implement the program for universities that have agreed to adopt it.

Jischke said he made his decision not to adopt the designated supplier program after considering input from the university's committee responsible for reviewing these issues, students who support the program, economists and executives of peer universities, including some that have made the decision to adopt the designated supplier program.

"I have tried to examine all sides of this very complex issue," Jischke said. "We have agreement on one point: We all care about economic and working conditions, especially in those countries where standards of living are far below ours and human rights are too often violated.

"I agree with the committee's view that we do not have convincing evidence that the designated supplier program would achieve its objective of ensuring that Purdue-licensed apparel was not manufactured under inhumane conditions. In my opinion, the consequences of adopting the program are not understood at this point, and I cannot, in good conscience, make a university decision when so much doubt exists."

Jischke said Purdue will continue to study the designated supplier program (DSP) if other universities implement it successfully. He asked the university's merchandise committee to continue to meet and said he will send a Purdue representative to meetings of representatives of universities that are trying to adopt the program.

"We have received an invitation to send a Purdue representative to future meetings of the designated supplier program working group, which is studying implementation of the DSP by the universities that have decided to adopt the program," Jischke said. "I have decided to accept that invitation and to ask Doug Sabel, director of the University Contracting Group, to represent Purdue at future meetings. He will report back to the committee. I believe this step will allow us to become better informed about the program and to evaluate any modifications."

Purdue's Merchandise, Licensing and Marketing Policy Committee voted 4-2 on Nov. 15 to recommend that the university not participate in the Worker Rights Consortium's designated supplier program.

The merchandise committee includes three faculty members, two administrators who work daily on contract issues that relate to licensing and two students — a representative from the Purdue Organization for Labor Equality and the president of Purdue Student Government. James Dworkin, chancellor of Purdue North Central and an expert in labor issues, chairs the committee.

The committee is the university liaison to two international watchdog groups: the Worker Rights Consortium and Fair Labor Association. The groups work with industry, governments and social organizations to monitor and improve working conditions.

"These organizations have made some progress with this cooperative approach, and major companies have been responsive," Jischke said. "For example, Nike last month determined that its primary supplier of soccer balls, located in Pakistan, was not meeting human rights standards. In response, Nike no longer does business with that supplier."

The designated supplier program, on the other hand, would give the Worker Rights Consortium authority to determine which companies would be allowed to manufacture university-licensed products.

The consortium proposes that for a supplier to be approved, it would have to allow union activity, pay a living wage and ensure the price paid for the product is sufficient to meet the living wage requirement.

Jischke took exception with each of these stipulations:

"First, the requirement that suppliers be neutral about union organization does not exist in federal or Indiana law, and it would be inappropriate for Purdue to stipulate that in a contract in any other area of business.

"Second, a living wage is not defined in law, and efforts to develop such a definition have been unsuccessful. I am not persuaded that the Worker Rights Consortium can or should determine what constitutes a living wage in the numerous markets and nations where apparel is manufactured.

"Finally, price fixing is illegal in most cases, and it is at odds with Purdue's policy of accepting the best, lowest bid in contracting.

"Overall, the designated supplier program would create a separate set of standards for one business sector, and I believe that is not in Purdue's best interests.

"While I sympathize with the goals of those who support the designated supplier program, I believe it has the potential to do more harm than good. Moreover, I believe the present system has made some positive strides toward improving working conditions."

While Purdue will not support a designated supplier program, Jischke urged everyone concerned about these human rights issues to continue to work together in a productive manner.

"There remains evidence of abuse and exploitation in the global apparel industry," Jischke said. "Our students who have engaged in civil disobedience, which for some included a hunger strike, have demonstrated their deep commitment to solving this problem. They have successfully called attention to this important issue. I urge them to discontinue the strike in the interests of their own health.

"We can address this matter most effectively by reasonable discussion among people who are both informed and committed to finding solutions."

Writer: Jeanne V. Norberg: (765) 494-2084, jnorberg@purdue.edu

Source: Martin C. Jischke: (765) 494-9708; mcjischke@purdue.edu

Purdue News Service: (765) 494-2096; purduenews@purdue.edu

To the News Service home page