The Solidarity Fund and Gildan Active Wear, Inc. Essay

There are many ways that the Solidarity Fund used its position as an institutional investor to try to influence Gildan Active wears Inc. For example the solidarity funds of the Quebec Workers Federation: a collective tool in service of the community. The Mutual aid funds MAF was created in 1983 at the instigation of the Quebec Trade Union, the Quebec Workers Federation (QWF) and the government of Quebec. The creation of the Funds is carried out in a context of power change between the social agents.

In the eighties, the closing-down of factories and the rise of unemployment were being advantageous to the “responsible of growth” or company and the investors. The MAF positioned itself next to the growth boosters and proposes a form of partnership that profits from the government’s support which then starts a new turn in its economic policy (CRISES, 2001). First in its kind, the Mutual aid funds has the role of collecting the voluntary saving of the workers in particular that intended for their retirement, in order to capitalize Small and medium-sized Enterprises (SME).

The Mutual aid fund is a stock development company. Its principal mission is to contribute creating and maintaining jobs in Quebec, while investing in SMEs. Today this Mutual aid funds counts 551 202 shareholders, or 59 % of trade unionists and 41 % coming from general public. In 2003, the Funds represented a credit of 4. 6 billion CAD. One of its objectives is also to provide a fair output to its shareholders.

The objectives are defined as follows: -To invest in Quebec companies and to provide them services in order to contribute to their development and to create, maintain and safeguard jobs in Quebec; -To promote and contribute for the training of the workers in the field of economy; -To stimulate the Quebec economy by strategic investments which will be advantageous to employees and companies; -To raise awareness between the workers for saving for their retirement and to take part in the economies’ development by subscribing in Funds shares (Belem and Boulash, 2003).

The Mutual aid funds FTQ selects companies in which to invest according to the following criteria’s: -Experienced, qualified and dynamic team; -Output equivalent to the risk is being taken; -Business opportunities and attractive market; -Judicious business concept and model; -Shareholders and top management respectful of the Funds mission and objectives; -Opening to partner-investors and to alliances; -Creation and maintenance of decent and sustainable job

If these conditions are met, the Funds carries out a demand analysis or a financial situation, a market research, a management assessment and finally a companies’ social check-up (Belem and Boulash, 2003). The Mutual aid funds seem to be a great success: since its creation, it reaches an annual average output of 4. 9 %. Since 1983 more than 90 919 jobs have been created in Quebec. The Funds seems today as a good model for many European and African trade unions.

The MAF currently collaborates with the Francophone Cultural and technical Cooperation Agency for creating the Senegal workers Mutual aid funds. Other trade unions such as LO of Sweden, CGT and CFDT of France, the Metal-workers of United States, the Metal-workers of Argentina are impressed by the Funds achievements without however seeking to create a similar Fund in their countries. Indeed, although this innovation appears interesting in many respects, it is not necessarily transposable in another institutional context.

On November 12, 2003 the FTQ Solidarity Fund announced it was selling its shares in Gildan because of the company’s actions in Honduras, and the Solidarity Fund’s representative on the Gildan Board of Directors resigned. I do be believed they should sell their shares. Just because If they stay aboard it’s going to hurt them. I mean with all that’s going on its just not good business. I’m just saying who make their employees take a pregnant test and if they don’t pass it they can’t work for them. Then they got young women working at a furious pace in noisy and dusty place (Lawrence pg 519).

They can fixed the issue but once all this all cleared up in the public eyes, they can just go back to the same old thing they been doing to their employees. And why take that chance again? Then we have more employees being fired all over again its just not worth it.

Reference page: http://www. yorku. ca/ddoorey/lawblog/wp-content/files/campaign-gilden. htm www. socioeco. org/bdf/_docs/doc-7531_en. rtf[-;gt;0] Anne T. Lawrence. Copyright 2009 [-;gt;0] – http://www. socioeco. org/bdf/_docs/doc-7531_en. rtf