Marian Pallister explains why shoppers are joining the fight against

sweatshop labour on hearing of horrific conditions under their noses.

SHE says: ``In a space no bigger than your living room, they can put 10 machines. And, although the laws don't allow such cramped conditions, if you have no inspectors they'll go on doing it. People would be astounded at the conditions under which the clothes they buy in the High Street are produced right here in Glasgow.''

Mary Harrison is regional organiser of GMB (General Municipal and Boilermakers) Scotland with responsibility for the clothing and textile industry, and she shares the deep and growing concern for the way our clothes are made. She is only too well aware of the fact that conditions exist in the UK which Oxfam aimed to attack in Third World countries when it launched its ``clothes code'' campaign last month, and, more particularly, they exist right under her nose on her own patch. Harrison says that in Glasgow and other Scottish towns, the biggest problems for machinists working for small, un-unionised firms are overcrowding, poor health, and safety conditions, and very short contracts with low wages.

``No-one will own up to it,'' Harrison says. ``No-one will say to Marks & Spencer that out-sourcing is being done by sweatshop labour. You can get a company like Claremont Garments in Pollokshaws, which is an organised GMB workplace with a high quality of work and good working conditions - although there is always room for improvement - and in the same area you could well have a small firm, maybe a family business, where there are sweatshop conditions. I don't have the evidence, but it goes on.''

Rachel Harris, of the Low Pay Unit, who has been conducting research into homeworking for Glasgow City Council, confirms: ``One Asian worker in Glasgow told us she was earning #1.20 to #1.30 for each jacket she completed, which depending on style could take between half an hour to an hour. She knew of around another 10 individuals who were in the same position.''

Now Scottish consumers are joining the unions in their condemnation of such practices. A straw poll carried out in Glasgow's Sauchiehall Street and Edinburgh's Princes Street revealed that 80% of shoppers are concerned about the conditions under which their clothes are produced. Consumers have also been asked by Oxfam to hand in coupons to branches owned by the major retailers to express those concerns.

It is not only small firms which break the rules. Several bigger ones employ people to produce garments in their own homes and there are now 1.2 million home workers in Britain. Oxfam has discovered they are working under the kind of conditions it has condemned in Bangladesh and the Dominican Republic. They often receive as little as #1 an hour, working in conditions which do not meet basic health and safety regulations, where overcrowding, blocked fire escapes, toilets shared by men and women, and old machinery are the rule rather than the exception.

The garments they produce are sold for the going rate in shops such as Marks & Spencer, C.&.A, Next, and shops which are owned by the Burton and Sears networks - the Big Five who control half the UK market - and smaller High Street shops. A coat sold in a High Street shop for #110 could well have been produced by a worker who gets #2.20 in cash for sewing up the garment, and who may make up to 10 such coats a day. If the worker complains about her conditions, she will be sacked.

Iain Gray, acting head of campaigns for Oxfam in Scotland, says its clothes code campaign was launched last month with the intention of focusing on Bangladesh and the Dominican Republic. ``We acknowledge the problem of home workers here in the UK, too,'' he says.

Gray explains: ``The top five retailers control 50% of the market in Britain. Because they are so big, they can demand high quality control.

``We believe they should also be able to wield the same clout when it comes to demanding proper conditions for the people who produce their garments.

``The coupons we are asking people to hand in to stores are not to demand that the retailers stop using these suppliers, because these people need a job. But they need a job where the conditions are reasonable. We want retailers to set up a code of practice with independent monitoring to change conditions.

``The response so far from consumers in the street shows that customers want this kind of assurance.''

At Oxfam's headquarters in Oxford, Michelle Stratford says: ``Our experience lies overseas but we are now working more widely in the UK. We are aware that similar conditions exist in this country and we are pleased with the positive response of the retailers. Four out of the five majors retailers have arranged to meet us. C.&.A have already put forward a code of practice and monitoring programme and we will meet Burtons next week. It will be a slow process. We have always been aware that these changes can't happen overnight.

``We don't support boycott campaigns because they can be damaging to the people we want to help. We want a strengthening of the industry instead.''

She points to Bangladesh as an example of how the industry can be improved. There, where the export economy relies heavily on the fragile rag trade, a factory improved its conditions considerably and found that its production increased as a result by 50% to 60%.

Stratford says: ``We want people to be able to go to the toilet when they want, and not at two designated times during the working day. We want to ensure workers are not harassed at work, that they have a decent lunch break. These sorts of things don't cost money and can actually improve productivity. We also want better conditions and more job security.''

Harrison of the GMB could not agree more - for workers in Scotland's rag trade. ``The organised sweatshop is not only a foreign or an English phenomenon. The child labour situation abroad is much worse, but in small workshops and family firms in Glasgow, bad conditions prevail.

``After the Wages Council was abolished we did a survey of Jobcentres in Glasgow and found machinists were being offered work at #2 or #2.50 an hour. Those were above-board jobs. People would be astounded at conditions in small units. These jobs are mainly done by women and they accept the conditions because we have not radically changed the system of caring for the elderly and children. So women take the jobs others wouldn't do, and if there is no union in there organising, they are all acting as individuals.

``There is no insurance and no legal cover if a needle goes through your finger, and that can happen in the best of factories where cover exists. I know because our union pays out thousands in compensation each year for such injuries.''

The major companies find themselves involved because of the rag trade phenomenon of sub-contracting. This ``out-sourcing'' of work, as the trade's jargon has it, means that, as Harrison puts it: ``Work goes out the back door and is done to the same quality and sells for the same price as work done in a reputable factory - but at a fraction of the cost.''