Su, Julie A.Public Interest Lawyer
Litigation Director,
Asian Pacific American Legal Center
Los Angles, California
Education:
B.A., Stanford University, 1991
JD, Harvard University, 1994Honors:
MacArthur Fellow, 2001
Citation from MacArthur Foundation
Julie Su
Public Interest Lawyer
Litigation Director,
Asian Pacific American Legal Center
Los Angles, California
Age: 32Julie Su is a young public interest lawyer who has broken new ground with litigation strategies for protecting undocumented immigrant garment workers, a largely invisible population found not only in large cities but also in suburban areas. Moreover, through her tireless efforts to cultivate the ability and willingness of these workers to protect their own interests, Su demonstrates that legal counsel, regardless of how creative and effective, represents only one element of a more comprehensive approach to public advocacy.
Su came to the public's attention in 1995 when, soon out of law school, she represented a group of 80 Thai women and men who were sewing garments for 18 hours a day in a sweatshop in El Monte, California. Su filed a landmark federal lawsuit on behalf of these workers, establishing a precedent that expands the scope of employment responsibility beyond manufacturing subcontractors who hire undocumented workers to the retailers and designer labels who initially contract for the work. As a result, Su recovered monetary compensation for her clients. She also earned them legal immigrant status from the U.S. government by successfully arguing that statutes originally written to protect narcotics informants also apply to undocumented workers who expose the criminal behavior of their employers. These legal victories resulted in large measure from her initial organizational strategy, which held that the immigrants themselves could and should constitute a key component of the litigation team. By earning their trust, nurturing their confidence and cohesion, and synthesizing their insights with her technical skills, Su transformed her clients from victims to colleagues, and in the process provided them with the means and experience to protect their own interests in the future.
Su shows that issues of undocumented worker exploitation extend well beyond the abstract, faceless institutions of jurisprudence and public policy – they affect the lives of real people in dire circumstances. Her simultaneous attention to the human and legal dimensions of the abuses of immigrant laborers provides a powerful model for public advocacy.
Biography:
Julie Su received a B.A. (1991) from Stanford University and a J.D. (1994) from Harvard University. Su has been affiliated with the Asian American Legal Center since 1994 and is currently the Center's litigation director. She is also the co-founder of Sweatshop Watch, a coalition that addresses labor abuses with the garment industry. Su is the recipient of a Skadden Fellowship (1994-1996), a Reebok International Human Rights Award (1996), the State Bar of California Individual Award of Achievement (1996), a Changing Images in America American Spirit Award (1997), a National Asian Women's Health Organization Advocacy Award (1998), and a YWCA Achievement Award for Public Service (1998).
The slave labor sweatshop in El Monte reminds us that flagrant abuses of labor and human rights occur not just in distant countries. Sweatshops in America are not the products of individual contractors who choose to flout the law. They are the result of corporate decisions and corporate indifference.
Garment manufacturers and retailers make it their business to know every detail of production. They go to sewing shops and, with excruciating attention, inspect their clothes yet close their eyes to the inhumane conditions endured by those bent over the machines. It is these manufacturers and retailers who need to be monitored for their role in creating sweatshops.
Today immigrant workers cross continents and oceans for a country that has offered hope and opportunity to so many. Manufacturers and retailers who profit from workers' broken dreams must be reminded that immigrants, no matter how poor, do not check their humanity at the border.
Let us say to corporations who exploit garment workers that we will not pay this price for fashion. Manufacturers and retailers must exercise their power to eliminate sweatshops, rather than pay lip service to codes of conduct and then cry ignorance when those standards are violated. They must stop scapegoating immigrants, blaming government, and insisting consumers do not care. Only then can we ensure that the horror of El Monte will never, ever be repeated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Su is a community activist and attorney for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center representing the El Monte sweatshop workers. Co-founder of Sweatshop Watch, she seeks corporate accountability through worker education, organizing, litigation, and advocacy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an attorney for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California (APALC), Julie Su has become a champion for the rights of immigrant sweatshop employees working in dangerous, illegal, and inhumane conditions. As Julie states, too many new Americans find themselves mired in low-wage factory jobs that exploit "the poor, the person of color, the worker, the immigrant, the non-English speaker, and the uneducated." In 1995, Julie defended 72 Thai garment workers after the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service raided an El Monte, California sweatshop complex. The 67 women and five men in the building were so-called "debt laborers"— modern day slaves who were confined to the factory, working 18-hour days, seven days a week for less than $1 an hour per week. But liberation from the sweatshop did not mean liberation from servitude; as illegal immigrants, the workers were then jailed for nine days in a federal detention center, shackled and forced to wear prison uniforms.
Julie worked around the clock to free the El Monte workers, whom she believed to be doubly victimized—first by the exploitative employers who brought them to the United States as indentured laborers, and then by federal authorities who treated them as criminals. While the former sweatshop workers are now free and seven of their employers are now serving prison sentences ranging from two to seven years, Julie has not given up her fight against sweatshops. In the course of seeking back wages and damages from apparel firms that used the El Monte sweatshop, she founded Sweatshop Watch, a coalition of human rights activists, lawyers, community advocates, and factory workers. The organization publishes a newsletter that calls attention to substandard working conditions and pressures corporations and retailers to sign corporate codes of conduct aimed at putting sweatshops out of business.
The daughter of Chinese immigrants, Julie also works with community groups and law enforcement agencies to monitor and combat hate crimes and curb anti-immigrant violence. She co-authored APALC’s 1995 report, "Audit of Violence Against Asian Pacific Americans: The Consequence of Intolerance in America," which reported an 80% increase in anti-Asian violence from the previous year. Julie’s main focus remains helping immigrant garment workers speak out against dismal conditions and demand a living wage, and she is currently developing educational initiatives designed to make "purchasing and wearing clothes made in good conditions a fashionable trend."
Julie A. Su is a civil rights attorney and Litigation Director at the Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California (APALC) where she works to defend equal opportunity and end discrimination in education and on behalf of indigent laborers to end sweatshop conditions. In 1995, the Los Angeles Times called her "Los Angeles’ most celebrated, young, non-O.J. lawyer." She received her law degree from Harvard Law School in 1994 and her undergraduate degree from Stanford University in 1991. She joined APALC as a Skadden Fellow in 1994.
Su was one of the leaders in fighting for the freedom of the Thai garment workers who were enslaved for years in an apartment complex in El Monte, California. She has since helped the workers to adjust to life in America and was lead counsel in a federal lawsuit against the garment manufacturers and retailers whose clothes they sewed. She also works with Latino workers and other Asian immigrant workers to call for corporate accountability and an end to sweatshop conditions. She has focused on developing worker leadership and activism through participation in impact litigation and has fostered multiracial alliances among workers and between workers and advocates.
Su is one of six "national leaders" to appear in the Smithsonian National Museum of American History’s exhibit on sweatshops. In December 1996, she met with President Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton at the White House to discuss human rights abuses of low-wage workers in the United States.
Su also litigates and organizes to end discrimination against African American, Latino and Asian students in education. Su has been recognized by the American Lawyer as the youngest of 45 public interest lawyers under 45 whose work has made a difference. She was a 1996 recipient of the Reebok International Human Rights Award, which is given out each year to four human rights activists from around the world and was recognized in Ms. Magazine as one of 21 women activists to watch for in the 21st century.
Formerly Enslaved El Monte Garment Workers Win $1.2 Million Settlement Against Last Garment Manufacturer
March 23, 1998Contact: Julie A. Su, 213/748-2022 x 40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In August 1995, the garment industry was rocked by the discovery of Thai garment workers found sewing behind barbed wire and under armed guard in El Monte, California for some of the nation’s top manufacturers and retailers. Nearly four years later, the case filed by the 80 Thai garment workers and 22 Latino garment workers comes to a close. (Bureerong, et al. v. Uvawas et al., Case No. CV-95-5958-ABC)
Just before trial was set to begin in the Federal District Court in Los Angeles, the last remaining defendants, garment manufacturer Tomato, Inc. and its principals, agreed to the workers’ demand for a $1.2 million settlement.
"This is a tremendous victory for these workers and for all garment workers," said Stewart Kwoh, President and Executive Director of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, lead counsel for the workers.
Mali Bureerong, a Thai worker who spent over a year in the El Monte slave sweatshop, said, "We taught the companies a lesson, that they should not abuse garment workers. I believe our case has helped to improve conditions in the garment industry for workers like me."
In the settlement agreement, Tomato, Inc. states, "The defendants recognize the serious injustices and harms caused to garment workers by manufacturers who use sweatshop contractors. The violations of state and federal safety, minimum wage and overtime laws in garment sweatshops result in exploitation of low wage workers. Defendants recognize that such exploitation will not be eradicated until all garment manufacturers take responsibility for the conditions in the garment shops where clothes are made."
"Acknowledgement of responsibility by manufacturers for conditions in the factories where their clothes are made is critical to the elimination of sweatshops," said Julie A. Su, Litigation Director at the Asian Pacific American Legal Center. "After nearly four years, these workers have sent a clear message to manufacturers – you not only have a moral and ethical responsibility not to mistreat garment workers, you have a legal responsibility."
The workers were represented by the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the ACLU of Southern California and the law firm, Bird, Marella, Boxer & Wolpert, who represented the workers pro bono.
"This is the kind of case the firm felt we had to do," said Ekwan E. Rhow of Bird, Marella, Boxer & Wolpert. "We are proud of the workers and pleased with the outcome."
PRESS CONFERENCE
DATE: THURSDAY, JULY 29, 1999
TIME: 11:00 a.m.
LOCATION: ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN LEGAL CENTER1010 S. Flower Street, Room A (first floor), Los Angeles, CA 90015PARKING: at 9th & Flower OR on Hope Street (1 ˝ blocks south of Olympic)
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCEThe American Worker at a Crossroads Project
Testimony of Julie A. Su
Asian Pacific American Legal CenterMay 18, 1998
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: My name is Julie Su. I am testifying today on behalf of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center of Southern California, where I am a staff attorney and Director of the Workers' Rights Project.
An entire wall of my office is covered with art. Not the kind of fancy art in glass frames that lines the halls of most law offices. My art is twenty pieces of construction paper and is drawn with crayons and colored pencils. The artists are third graders, who had learned of the conditions in L.A. garment factories and had put their thoughts to paper and sent them to me. One drawing has a picture of a big department store, with a salesperson standing outside and a big bubble coming from his mouth that appears over his head with the words, "Want to come in and buy something pretty?" The customer has another bubble that says, "No!" with an exclamation point. The words at the top of the page say, "You can vote between style and justice."
Another drawing has a thick orange line down the middle of the page. On one side is a colorful shirt and on the other a figure bent over a roughly drawn sewing machine. In big block letters at the top, it says, "WHAT'S WORTH MORE A SHIRT OR A LIFE?"
I hung these all up on my wall because they give me hope. On my good days, I believe that by the time these third graders are thirty, we will have eliminated sweatshops. None of us will ever have to look in the shining faces of young people and try to explain why a worker toils endlessly and lives in poverty so someone else can live in luxury. Kids learn early on that they should "share," not only because it's nice, but because it's fair. Sweatshops violate that basic principle.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for initiating these hearings on an issue of such critical importance, the garment industry in Los Angeles and, specifically, the well-being of the hundreds of thousands of garment workers who struggle, working full-time, year-round yet remain in poverty. I understand that you have visited New York's Chinatown and witnessed firsthand the deplorable working conditions that garment workers endure. Unfortunately, the conditions here in Los Angeles are no better. And they are getting worse.
How is it that, in this great nation, at the dawn of the 21st century, we have 19th century working conditions in the garment industry? How is it that in 1995, workers can be held against their will, sewing garments behind barbed wire and armed guards? The answer is, I believe, that we have allowed the industry to forget another basic principle that all third graders learn: take responsibility for your actions -- NOT only when someone else is watching, not merely to avoid punishment, and not because you're legally required. But do it because it's right.
It has been an incredible privilege to represent the Thai workers who were enslaved in El Monte, California. But, while the barbed wire in El Monte has come down, the structure of an industry that gives rise to slave labor has not. For example, the Thai workers have continued to work in the garment industry, many in jobs requiring 6 days a week, many not making minimum wage.
The industry has taken some steps and it should be commended when it does what is right. But too often, resources are devoted to image creation, and this becomes dangerous when it distorts -- or even masks -- the truth, much uglier reality.
While national attention has in recent years turned to garment industry sweatshops, manufacturers and retailers have sought to divert attention from the reality. More often than not they try and focus on the side players. Garment retailers and manufacturers have suggested, for example, that unions, the Department of Labor, globalization of the economy, or the existence of the "underground" are the roots of the problem. But these ignore the true reason for sweatshops, namely, the choice made by industry leaders to ignore their moral responsibility to America's workers, to choose "what is right" over "what they can get away with."
Briefly, let me touch on each of these side players.
First, the union, UNITE. I understand the union has been a focus of the Committee's work. My experience with UNITE in Los Angeles has been that it has a genuine commitment to improving workers' lives and an acute awareness of the formidable challenge of organizing in this industry. Attacking the union is tantamount to blaming the medicine for not curing the disease, but ignoring the disease. Same for faulting the Department of Labor. While the DOL's approach leaves much to be desired, government is not -- nor should it be -- the primary solution.
Second, globalization. Yes globalization is real, but it is not an invitation for corporations to initiate a worldwide race to the bottom, where the most exploitable workforce is the production center of choice. Companies can choose to take responsibility, or to close down and move shop, depriving workers in the U.S. of jobs and depressing wages and working conditions throughout the world. It is a choice.
A third side player is the so-called "underground." Industry leaders particularly like to blame an "underground" because it helps to support the myth that sweatshops are isolated incidents or the product of a few bad apples, but not caused by the very structure of the industry itself. The reality is that there is but a very thin line between the so-called underground and other shops. Routinely, the workers who come to my office who have been denied minimum wage, or have worked long overtime hours off the books, or have not been paid at all, work for registered shops. They are sewing big-name labels. Often, registered shops front for unregistered sweatshops.
Let us be clear: if we are serious about ending sweatshops, then we must demand responsibility -- moral and legal accountability -- from all those who are responsible for creating sweatshop conditions.
These include, of course, the contractors. Our current labor laws provide limited opportunities to hold such contractors accountable--through wage and hour claims, for example--and my office regularly pursues such claims. But enforcement against contractors alone is an imperfect and incomplete remedy, as the contractors themselves are under intense pressure by manufacturers to produce their goods ever more cheaply. As a result, contractors--even those that are registered--are often marginal operations with limited assets which fold overnight and effectively avoid full liability to their workers.
Manufacturers decide who to give contracts to, how much to pay, how quickly they want it done. They display enormous creativity in design, advertising, and marketing of garments, yet when it comes to eliminating sweatshops, they are suddenly at a loss for ideas. They claim they cannot possibly know all the conditions of the workers making their clothes, yet they routinely send quality control personnel to factories who examine, with an excruciating eye, the garments being made in those factories. In other words, quality of their product is a priority, so they can know it down to a stitch, quality of life of workers is not.
As the committee is aware, some manufacturers have agreed to self-monitor their contractors. Monitoring is not a panacea, however. Unless manufacturers are responsible, monitoring only identifies the problem, it does not solve it. Manufacturers must be held legally responsible for the wage violations of the workers making their clothes.
Without this, monitoring becomes another image maker. It's good for public relations but meaningless in workers' lives. As such, monitoring will not ferret out the sweatshops. Case in point: the El Monte slave shop operators also operated a front shop where 22 Latino workers, who I also represent, labored in sweatshop conditions. That front shop was registered with the California Labor Commissioner and monitored by Cal Safety. Yet El Monte went undetected for years.
I have also been told that Calvin Klein has an agreement with DoL. Workers sewing Calvin Klein labels have reported minimum wage violations, overtime off the books, even nonpayment for weeks at a time.
Guess. I understand there are serious allegations of wage and hour violations and a homework ring by Guess workers against the company. If monitoring is effective, why weren't they disclosed through the monitoring process?
It is my firm belief that if manufacturers knew they would be held responsible for violations, they would put the the same resources they now put into quality control, sales, design and "image" into ensuring the most basic protections for workers.
As many manufacturers themselves point out, however, manufacturer self-monitoring is an inadequate remedy to the sweatshop problem because retailers turn a blind eye to the process. The manufacturers essentially express the same phenomenon at the hands of the retailers as contractors do at the hands of manufacturers: a downward pressure that makes fair competition all but impossible and sweatshops all but inevitable. Retailers, too, must do what is right.
Poverty and exploitation are not uncontrollable facts of life. We can do much better.
This Committee has labeled its work the American Worker at a Crossroads. This implies a degree of choice that garment workers -- on the whole -- simply do not have given the garment industry structure. The worker is at a dead end, with little choice but to keep working or starve. Yet these workers get up each day, believing in the promise that work brings with it dignity and self-sustenance, embodying this country's work ethic.
A more apt title for this important project might be An American Industry at a Crossroads. We can decide now whether the industry will take one road: a responsible, vibrant, dynamic one, the highway Mr. Chairman, you have talked about, that will "carry the American worker into a future that is flexible, secure and prosperous" -- or whether it will continue down its current path, leader of the global race to the bottom, using sweatshops here and abroad. We can make the right choice.
America has always ben driven by an abiding sense of justice. I believe we want to live in a world where no child has to ask, "WHAT'S WORTH MORE A SHIRT OR A LIFE?" because every life -- including that of every garment worker -- has value, not only in our stated principles, but in our common practice.
The momentum exists to create some real change, to move beyond image; let's not squander it.
