The Demo Site

Triumph International in Thailand:

A Lucrative Process of Production Guaranteed by a History of Union Busting, Government Complicity, and Exploitation
(Revised from the TLC letter to Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union (TITLU), labour movements, Thai civil society)


Dear comrades and friends,

In 2003, the former president of TITLU vouched that “Triumph workers will never face the layoffs and closures that have afflicted other Thai garment factories.” When I posed the question again, she insisted once more: “It will never happen to Triumph workers.”

The impossible has now indeed happened. On 29 June 2009, the management of Triumph International announced the massive dismissal of 1930 middle-aged and elderly workers, all of whom not only have worked in the company’s oldest production unit, Swimwear, but also have been members of the oldest and strongest women trade union in Thailand. Just two days earlier, 1,660 workers were laid-off at Triumph’s Philippines facility as well. This means that in one concerted effort, Triumph International has successfully busted its two oldest and strongest trade unions in two separate countries. In doing so, they have terminated 3590 workers who have constituted, through up to 30 years of dedicated service, the main productive force behind the wealth and prosperity that has made the Triumph International a hugely profitable multinational garment corporation.

Triumph International’s July, 2008 dismissal of Miss Jitra Kotchadej, then-president of TITLU, served as one of the first clear indicators of the company’s new, sustained effort at union busting. When the company attempted to justify Miss Kotchadej’s termination on wholly inadequate grounds, more than 3,000 members of TITLU decided to immediately strike and rally in front of the factory for 46 days, from July 30 to September 12, 2008. While an agreement was reached in which all striking workers were to be reinstated, the company insisted that Jitra could return only under court order. Nevertheless, the union had other plans for their esteemed ex-president, and they hired Jitra as a union consultant, although Triumph prohibited her from entering the company compound to meet union members.

TITLU is comprised solely of women workers, and it has been no stranger to management’s aggressive busting behavior. The union was founded in 1980, and nearly 100% of the production line and sales department staff count themselves among its members, hundreds of whom are in fact founding members. If July ’s strike is any indication of the union’s sense of solidarity, without parallel in Thailand, it comes as no surprise that most of the union members have already dedicated themselves to the company’s service for ten, twenty, or even thirty years.

TITLU is widely recognized throughout the Thai labour movement for its active participation in many campaigns and actions advocating women’ rights. Every year, members have led successful street rallies on International Women’s Day and May Day. Three years ago, the Union and Textile, Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation of Thailand petitioned for abortion rights in the country. Having seen so many of their fellow workers suffering from the dangerous side effects of unsafe abortions in illegal clinics, TITLU members were particularly vocal in their demands for legal standards that meet the basic health needs of the millions of women in Thailand who cannot afford to properly raise children in the absence of any significant social welfare program from either Thai-based employers or the Thai government.

Past and current TITLU leaders have seen many successes in their CBA demands with Triumph’s management over the course of the union’s thirty-year history. On the other hand, many leaders have also been dismissed or forced to resign for their active participation in the union during this same period of time. Triumph employees’ hard-won position in the top payment and welfare bracket among Thai garment workers stands as clear proof of the union’s strength and shrewdness. Nevertheless, TITLU members have yet to secure an acceptable retirement package for workers at the factory.

On account of cheap labor furnished by women workers in developing countries such as Thailand, Triumph International has accumulated huge profits, all while enjoying the added benefits of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) subsidies and myriad other privileges granted by Thai and other developing countries’ governments. Bolstered by such privileges, and with production costs kept at a bare minimum, Triumph’s business has grown rapidly. Today, the company maintains subsidiary factories and distribution centers in 125 countries, directly employing over 40,000 workers (some 5,000 of whom work in Thailand).


Triumph International has always sought out special economic incentive packages from the governments of those countries of the Global South in which it has opened factories or other facilities. On July 8, 2008, in the midst of its heated attempt to get rid of the union leader at its Samut Prakan plant, Body Fashion (Thailand) Ltd., Triumph’s Thai subsidiary, nevertheless succeeded in securing a 75 million Baht (1.6 million Euro) subsidy from the country’s Board of Investment (BOI) for an expansion of another factory, 300 kms north of Bangkok:


BOI said that it has finalized its plans to support investment in Body Fashion (Thailand) Ltd., a lingerie and swimwear manufacturer operating under the Triumph trademark, that now ranks of among Thailand’s most essential productive forces. Triumph is also the biggest manufacturer in the Asia Region. In order to help the company to increase its productive force of clothes (i.e. lingerie, swimwear, etc.) to two million items, BOI has approved a 75.5 million THB subsidy for the company’s proposed Nakhon Sawan Factory.

Naew Na Newspaper, World Business News Brief-July 8, 2008

In approving Triumph’s grant, BOI turned a blind eye to the company’s sustained, well-documented efforts at union busting, along with other threats against its workers. Companies are ostensibly only eligible for BOI subsidies upon demonstrating some minimal concern for the employment rights of their workers, and yet the government agency has not once cited any of the innumerable workplace violations committed regularly by the recipients of its grants. Because unions representing many such subsidized businesses have submitted repeated complaints to the BOI regarding their employers’ illegal and exploitative behavior, the agency’s silence can only be regarded as full complicity in these businesses unrelenting attempts to further squeeze workers in a time of deepening economic crisis.

TITLU’s fierce response to the illegitimate dismissal of Miss Kotshadej last July testifies to the union’s willingness to demand justice of Triumph International’s management at the risk of protracted weeks of demonstrations. Furthermore, the union proved to be capable of immobilizing Triumph’s lucrative production cycle in Thailand, demonstrating the true value of the company’s workforce all before bigger plans for a massive layoff were confirmed by managers this June.

Triumph’s Thai branch justified this present layoff on the grounds that in the past months it has received no orders, and has consequently been operating at a significant loss. In fact, the company has simply outsourced its ongoing production to many small subcontractors. On May 1st, 2009, when Worldwell Garment Co., a small Thai subcontractor for many premium multinational garment brands, laid off all 41 of its employees, the disgruntled workers revealed that one of the brands for whom they had subcontracted for the past two years was Triumph. Clearly, the orders have continued to come in to Triumph’s Thai office, but have been discreetly moved to small, quiet, nonunion subcontractors such as Worldwell. The Worldwell Garment Co. workers have now entered the third month of their vigil at the gates of their former place of employment, still demanding the 2.5 million Baht that is their legal due after dedicated years of service at the very bottom of Triumph’s subcontracted chain of production.

TITLU and Worldwell workers should now cooperate in disclosing Triumph’s entire process of production, as it is illustrates the brutal race to the bottom to which so many other multinational garment companies have also unwaveringly committed themselves. Triumph is only one of the many garment brands that now resorts to regularly outsourcing orders to local subcontractors, enjoying even lower production costs among migrant workers whose labor rights are nonexistent, while fundamentally challenging unions such as TITLU’s ability to organize and advocate working conditions that do not amount to sheer exploitation.

Recommendations for Immediate Action

1. The precarious situation that Thai (and Philippine) factory employees now face only reaffirms the pressing need for the kind of collective bargaining and solidarity made possible by worker organization. This need was recognized among Thai Triumph staff three decades ago when they first formed their union.

2. TITLU should shift its focus from proving that the factory has misrepresented its sales figures to exposing Triumph International’s exploitative production supply chains, whose inherent abuses of vulnerable workers will only worsen if June’s layoffs diminish the union’s power. Such a reorientation will allow TITLU’s militant leadership to coordinate its actions with those of workers who also have some stake in Triumph’s race to the bottom, namely Worldwell subcontractors and recently dismissed Philippine union members. A linkage among workers’ struggles both in Thailand and internationally can be accomplished by TITLU without compromising the union’s militant stance against worker exploitation. For many years, union members have struggled to hold Triumph to its own codes of conduct, demanding that orders not be outsourced to non-unionized workforces. Consequently, TITLU and other unions should now assert that in dismissing so many active union leaders and union members among those 1930 Thai and 1660 Philippine workers laid off in June, Triumph International has come in serious violation of its own stated labor standards

3. While the union should certainly continue to demand the reinstatement of all terminated workers, a letter from Triumph’s European headquarters responding to an initial query made by the Clean Clothes Campaign insisted that the company’s decision would be final. With this in mind, TITLU should simultaneously negotiate with Triumph’s management over the terms of severance compensation that will be provided for terminated workers, should their jobs indeed not be reinstated. TITLU ought to stipulate that the company offer a payment package beyond Thailand’s legal minimum, as the dismissed women workers have dedicated themselves to the factory for many years. While June’s massive layoff is an unmistakable case of union busting on the part of Triumph’s Thai management, a secondary concern that motivated these employees’ terminations was the company’s desire to further cut costs. Just as an overwhelming number of workers fired counted themselves among the union’s membership, a similarly disproportionate number of senior workers were fired after they had slowly increased their monthly salaries through decades of dedicated service to Triumph.

4. TITLU could stand to learn from the case of Bangkok’s Gina Form Bras workers, all of whom were fired upon the company’s abrupt closure in 2006. In response to workers’ protests, the employer ultimately paid its terminated employees six-months’ compensation package, on top of the Thai Law. Using Gina Form Bras as a model, Triumph’s union should bargain holistically over compensation terms, demanding that the company offer not only the payment that is required by Thai law, but also an additional sum according to the number of years an employee has been with the company, as this system is the standard used in industrialized nations such as Switzerland, where Triumph International is headquartered. Finally, TITLU should insist that ex-workers are given access to an acceptable new job opportunity scheme that is supported by the Triumph International and the Thai government.

5. Triumph union must call for BOI to approve a grant for rehabilitating these dismissed workers’ lives and establishing their own self-managed companies or cooperatives. This grant should either reach BOI’s maximum for cash awards, or total in an amount no less than twice the value of grant offered to Triumph International to expand its’ Nakhon Sawan plant in the midst of worker protests at the company’s Bang Pli facility. Because Triumph workers’ labor has greatly enriched the country for many years, it is high time that the Thai government recognize their contribution by giving a stimulus package to those who need such funding most.

6. The minimum wages offered to women workers by garment industrial groups are a key component of these companies’ common, exploitative business model. The current wage stipulated by law falls below that required for survival with even basic dignity in Thailand. The Thai government’s current endeavor to carry the multinational-heavy garment industry fails as a sustainable economic solution. In the short term, tax privileges, generous subsidies, and suppressed daily wages of 155 Baht/day (3.3 Euro) may attract some investment from multinationals, such as Triumph’s construction of its Nakhon Sawan facility. Nevertheless, the cost of this government support is severe, for not only the thousands of workers in Triumph’s old Bang Pli facility, whose union is crippled by the new non-union Triumph plant, but also for the future workers of the Nakhon Sawan plant, whose own future attempts at union organization, if any, will be met by just one more campaign of busting typical of Triumph as the company builds yet another factory at some third location. Clearly, there is no way to chase Triumph’s capital once it disappears across a border as soon as subsidies and other acts of government collusion against Thai workers cease. Thailand’s development framework should be directed from the bottom up, and not be partial to the capitalists any more.

7. Thai unions and labour movements, especially the Garment, Textiles, and Leathers Labour Federation of Thailand, should take this opportunity to cooperate in campaigning for their demands, and to call upon both employers and government organizations (including the Ministry of Labour, BOI, and Prime Minister’s Office) to take decisive measures in establishing legal norms within the government’s policy framework to provide for the security of workers who face unfair dismissal.

The Thai Labour Campaign, along with its regional and international allies, will continue to support the struggle of the Triumph union’s members and their families. Having campaigned against multinationals for workers’ basic rights to economic justice over the course of twenty years, we are growing weary of what have become familiar patterns of maximized profits over people, government complicity, and union busting in Thailand and developing nations across the world.

Since 1996, the Thai Labour Movement and its international allies have struggled for workers’ rights against a formidable list of companies that operate out of Thailand: Eden Garment, Par Garment, Master Toy, Thai Krieng Textiles, Iryo Garment, Jintana, Bed&Bath, Lian Thai, Centago Frozen Chicken, Mikasa, Gina Form Bras, Triumph, among many others. The abuses in almost all of these cases took union labor as their common target. While some factories have closed down to escape their trade unions, others were quick to exploit Thailand’s devastating 1997 economic crisis to push through huge layoffs and blatant union busting efforts that would have met with public outrage had the global economic climate not been so bleak. Still, many of these bosses continue to operate their old businesses under new names in new locations (producing for global brands), now exploiting the cheap labor readily available in the county’s impoverished Northeast province, or moving operations to similarly desperate regions in neighboring countries. Having learned in 1997 the almost infinite potential for disciplining union labor during a period of economic crisis, owners of Thai factories are now once again using the global economy as an excuse to launch full scale attacks on their local unions. Although most of the bosses for the above-mentioned companies did not pay the compensation required by law upon the closure of their factories, these bosses have faced no criminal charges in Thailand’s courts.

For three decades the Triumph labor union has built up an exemplary record of labor activism that has inspired workers’ struggles throughout Asia just as much as it has made the union a lightning-rod for an unending series of efforts by company management to divide, undermine, and ultimately destroy its leadership. These busting efforts have yet to have any effect on TITLU’s resolute worker solidarity, which has proved instrumental in securing dignified wages for the dignified labor of Triumph’s employees, and has also allowed the union takes an active role in struggles over women’s reproductive health, subcontracted labor, and the human rights. A crippled Triumph labor union means that 1930 middle-aged and elderly Thai women could face an uncertain future with no employment prospects outside of highly exploitative work in Thailand’s underground economy. Furthermore, because TITLU operates at the radical forefront of workers’ advocacy in Thailand, their diminished capacity to collectively bargain, strike, and in turn inspire others will result in the center of the entire Thai labor movement shifting dramatically to the right, away from workers’ protection and towards a wholesale disregard of basic labor rights. The stakes are thus very high, and the outcome of Triumph’s struggle will have a real effect upon so many other workers whose factories are closed and whose unions are squeezed during this time of economic crisis.

The case of Triumph calls into question the common belief that labor officers must limit their aims to reconciling workers with employers and quickly ending disputes. The government must actively cooperate with trade unions in their negotiations with capitalists who, while have always enjoyed so many privileges by establishing facilities in poor nations such as Thailand, rarely leave any lasting benefits for their workers or the country as they move to another district, province, or country. Systematically, these abuses of workers committed by companies such as Triumph International can only be avoided with better standards and legislation regarding compensation payments and assistance schemes made available to dismissed workers.

Achieving this kind of systematic change is the clear burden shared by the Thai labor movement, civil society, labor activists, consumers and global union’s movement, the abandoned workers of Triumph and Worldwell, and the millions of other factory workers throughout the country whose employment remains so precarious.

In Solidarity,


Junya Yimprasert
Chief Coordinator
Thai Labour Campaign