Sweatshop purchasing law debated

December 10, 2009  The Pittsfield Gazette

Regulating conditions of workers who create city-purchased garments should not be accomplished through an ordinance, several city councilors stated this week.

During a Monday meeting of the ordinances & rules subcommittee, a proposed “sweatshop” law detoured back to the city solicitor for a makeover into a less formal “policy.”

The “sweatshop” initiative — based on laws enacted in other municipalities — was first proposed locally by Rinaldo Del Gallo III. Liana Foxvog, an activist supporting such laws, has travelled to Pittsfield to promote the discussion.

The intent is to ensure that public dollars aren’t used for purchases through vendors who don’t provide humane working conditions.

“We want to ensure that citizens’ dollars don’t support sweatshop conditions,” said Foxvog.

City attorney Rich Dohoney provided councilors with a proposed ordinance based on documents from other communities, provided by Del Gallo and Foxvog.

Based on a quick review, Foxvog deemed the Pittsfield wording acceptable. “It’s still a very strong ordinance,” she said.

But several councilors questioned whether the city should place purchasing guidelines in law as an ordinance, regardless of whether they support the philosophical intent.

“I’m struggling with the concept of creating an ordinance to determine how we buy items,” said at-large councilor Peter Marchetti. “We don’t have an ordinance to discuss how we buy a new policy cruiser, we have a policy... We don’t have an ordinance on the books how we buy a new plow.”

Marchetti worries that the proposal would set a precedent “going down a slippery slope of creating ordinances for everything we do in the city.”

Dohoney concurred with Marchetti. “You’ve keyed on an important aspect of this,” said the attorney. “There’s a distinction between law and policy.”

He said that “those who agree on the sentiment behind the policy can disagree on how best to implement it.” He feels that as the “chief policy-making” body, the council could achieve this goal, if desired, by approving an order related to purchasing garments.

The attorney added that most purchasing laws for municipalities are set and enforced by the state, though within that framework communities can set up policies.
Marchetti said the ordinance as written could actually discourage disclosure of possible sweatshop violations. “It seems awkward to me... who is going to blow the whistle on themselves?” he said.

At-large councilor Kevin Sherman said “I don’t disagree with the sentiments... but I think it would be better as a policy.”

Ward 5 councilor Jonathan Lothrop noted that the proposal is atypical because ordinance changes usually initiate with the mayor, not the council or a citizen.
“This is an unusual procedural matter,” he said.

Foxvog said she doesn’t disagree with setting up the proposal as a policy instead of a law. “To me it doesn’t make a difference if it’s a policy or ordinance if it’s the same content and implementation,” she said.

Ward 2 councilor Lou Costi suggested referring the proposal back to Dohoney and having it redrafted as a policy.
“It’s getting confusing,” he said. “We’re taking things out of context... We should have him look it over and not do it off the cuff.”

With Lothrop dissenting, the subcommittee voted 4-1 to refer the matter back to Dohoney, asking he redraft it as a policy for further review.