Five Polish women have joined forces to take the Avon Coporation to court.
They contend that their relationship with Avon should have been considered
as an employer-employee relationship, than they were in fact employees of
Avon, not independent contractors selling services to Avon on a goodwill
basis.

Avon has 4.4 million 'sales representatives' worldwide. Sales
representatives usually have no employment relations with Avon. They run
their own businesses, incur their own costs and simply sell products they
purchase from Avon. Their relation to Avon is basically as a wholesaler.

There are other people employed at Avon - 46,000 associates. Most all are
women. (There are some men but the percentage of men only grows in higher
management.)

The Polish women in question were regional sales managers. In the US, such
positions are full-time employed positions, with health and pension plans,
paid vacation and basically all due benefits. In Poland, sales managers
recruit, manage and train sales representatives and oversee regional sales
but these women had to pay for office rental, rental of training facilities,
car leasing, telephones - basically all overheads - but all their taxes and
social security payments themselves.

(In Poland, and elsewhere, Avon has other categories of workers such as
"leadership representatives". These people recruit, manage and train sales
representatives and receive a commission on their sales. They are
contractors. The responsibilities of the Polish women in question apparently
when beyond those of such leadership representatives.)

The case is starting and people in labour law are looking at it very
carefully. What is to be considered is whether the women really were
self-employed contractors or employees at Avon. They have presented lots of
documentation with orders betraying an employer-employee relationship - for
example about whether or not they could have vacation and other
correspondence which showed the true nature of the relationship.

In Poland, like in many places, prospective employees are often told they
will have to register their own company in order to 'work' - and their
actual relation is exactly then like an employee, only without social
security and pension payments, tax burdens and no paid vacation.


****

A couple of years ago I wrote about the closing of an English Avon cosmetics
factory and the moving of production to Garwolin in Poland where wages are
much cheaper. A deeper look into Avon and you can begin to see that
something stinks - and it isn't Sweet Honesty Cologne Spray.

In May 2001, Avon announced a 'business transformation' plan. Within months,
it announced that it would cut approx. 3500 jobs and start outsourcing some
work. Jobs were moved from the UK to Poland. Workers in Puerto Rico were
severely affacted when jewelry manufacturing was moved from the San
Sebastian site to 'somewhere in the Far East'. IT workers were sacked at IT
centers set up in Hungary and Russia, where, among other things, technicians
work to develop online shopping since sales over the internet, without
commissions to sales consultants, will earn the company more money.

This company, which speaks of its 'corporate responsibility' and has signed
a commitment to ensure that it uses good social standards around the globe,
apparently is a master of sweet bullshit. Although it may be that their
cosmetics production in Poland or jewelry production in parts unknown in the
Far East may meet some local standards (it's not hard to meet wage
requirements of 824 zloties a month (180 euro)), Avon's policies are the
same global capitalist policies of driving down wages, moving AWAY from
maintaining good standards in order to increase profit for greedy corporate
governors and stockholders.

Share earnings in 2003 increased 25% and in the first quarter of 2004 they
were up 48%!
The CEE brought is expected to bring in $1billion in earning this year. In
Central Europe, sales and operating profit gains were 38%, in Eastern Europe
(including Russia) 52%. This is largely thanks to high prices but low wages
in key regional markets.

The strategy in clear, as are the implications for the workforce. As the
company talks of further 'workplace rationalizations' , a quick look shows
that Avon is working around the globe not only to push women into buying
unnecessary beauty products, but is also supportive of the divide between
women from the rich and poor areas of the globe. Avon, for example, provides
pension benefits for women "in the US and other select international
locations". Like the UK. In other words, Avon is committed to providing
better compensation for it's employees in such "select" locations as the US
or UK, in providing itself with more profit by creating 'socially
responsible" jobs in production in the countries with low labour standards
and compensation (which they proudly can comply with) and expanding in areas
where they can 'juice' women, especially unemployed women and mothers, for
as much as they can, feeding off their desperation to make a buck. That
really stinks.

L.