Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Garment-Industry-Development Corp in QCM
Garment-Industry-Development Corp in QCM
Employment
Development
Learning
Project
The Garment
Industry
Development
Corporation
A Case Study
of a Sectoral
Employment
Development
Approach
Copyright 1999 by the Economic Opportunities Program of the Aspen Institute
ISBN: 0-89843-274-X
A Case Study
of a Sectoral Employment
Development Approach
Maureen Conway
with
Suzanne Loker
November 1999
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of the third member of
our research team, Jeff Thompson, who provided thoughtful comments and tire-
less oversight of the logistics of the research process. The research team members
also extend our heartfelt thanks to Linda Dworak of GIDC for her invaluable par-
ticipation in the research process, openly sharing both the successes and difficul-
ties her organization has experienced, as well as her thoughtful insights regard-
ing the workings of the garment industry. We also thank Peggy Clark, Elaine
Edgcomb, and Amy Kays for their insightful comments on drafts of this work
and Erind Pajo for his background research on industry trends and assistance
with the editing of the industry section. Finally, we must thank the entire staff at
GIDC for patiently answering our many questions, and we thank the organiza-
tion for providing the photographs used in this case study.
C O N T E N T S
OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
APPAREL INDUSTRY CONTEXT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
The Role of Labor in Apparel Production . . . . . . . . . .6
The U.S. Apparel Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Globalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
New Technology and Teamwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Apparel Industry in New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
GIDC’S STRATEGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Historical Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
GIDC Today . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
Organizational Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
MAKING A SECTOR FOCUS OPERATIONAL . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Connecting with Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25
Leveraging Resources through Partnerships . . . . . . .32
THE TRAINING STRATEGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
Displaced Worker Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33
Employed Workers Training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43
COSTS AND OUTCOMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
Outcome Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48
Training Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50
LESSONS AND CHALLENGES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
Working in a Declining Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53
Working on the Supply and Demand
Sides of the Labor Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Attracting Public Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54
Creating Systemic Change in a
Fragmented Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55
Implications of Becoming an Industry Actor . . . . . . .55
Defining a “Good” Job . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56
O V E R V I E W
Page 2
• Exists for the primary purpose of assisting low-income
people to obtain decent employment.
The population that GIDC targets in its training programs is
clearly low-income. A recent survey of participants in
GIDC’s training programs showed that their median personal
earnings were $9,898 in the year before they came to the
training program.2 GIDC seeks to upgrade the skills of these
workers in order to help them obtain full-time employment
with benefits.
• Eventually creates systemic change within that occupation’s
labor market.
GIDC seeks to create systemic change in a variety of ways.
By linking firms to new markets, GIDC hopes to protect New
York City’s large base of jobs in the industry. GIDC also
attempts to introduce new technologies and production
processes to the industry in order to increase local firms’ effi-
ciency and competitiveness. The organization has successful-
ly influenced public officials’ views of the garment industry,
convincing New York City, state, and federal officials of the
importance of the industry and the possibility for the indus-
try to be competitive within New York City.
1
For an explanation of this definition see: Peggy Clark and Steven L. Dawson, Jobs and
the Urban Poor: Privately Initiated Sectoral Strategies, The Aspen Institute:
Washington, DC, November, 1995.
2
Unpublished data from a survey of GIDC participants conducted as part of the Sectoral
Employment Development Learning Project (SEDLP).
Page 3
OVERVIEW
Page 4
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
Introduction
he garment industry provides significant numbers of jobs in the
Page 5
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
while at the same time increasing the speed with which they fulfill
orders. In the words of one expert:
“As the domestic retail-apparel-textile channel
reduces lead times to market, particularly with fashion
In 1996,
and fashion-basic products, the comparative advantage
there were of imports declines, despite lower wage costs and tariff
reduction...The domestic apparel sector for some prod-
835,000
ucts is not necessarily doomed by comparatively higher
apparel direct labor costs. In fact, a resurgence in certain sectors
may be expected because of the innovative policies
workers in
some manufacturers are now pursuing.”5
the United
States, 70 The Role of Labor in Apparel Production
pparel production jobs include everything from accepting fabric
percent of
whom were A delivery, cutting, sewing, and finishing, to shipping to the retail-
er. Unskilled work that can be learned on the job includes
receiving and shipping positions and fabric and apparel inspection
sewing positions. Sewing machine operator positions, which employ the largest
numbers of workers, are semi-skilled positions that generally require
machine
either training or prior experience. Floor supervisors and sample mak-
operators. ers are traditionally selected from the sewing machine operators as a
form of advancement to recognize expertise and leadership. Mechanics
are either trained or hired with prior experience. Designers, managers,
production engineers and logistics specialists are generally required to
have higher education degrees in their specialty area.
There are several potential career paths for apparel production
workers. A sewing machine operator can learn multiple sewing opera-
tions and become a sample maker or a floor manager. Floor managers
can move up to higher levels of managerial responsibility. In New York
City, however, the typical small and family-owned apparel production
shops offer limited advancement opportunities to employees. On the
other hand, there is a significant amount of entrepreneurship in the
industry; becoming a shop owner is another avenue for advancement
open to New York City apparel workers. For pattern makers, learning
the computer-assisted design (CAD) system can be a path to broadening
opportunities. Generally, sewing machine operators do not become
5
Frederick H. Abernathy, et al. “The Information-Integrated Channel: A Study of the
U.S. Apparel Industry in Transition,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,
Microeconomics. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. 1995. pp.228-229.
Page 6
pattern makers, and it is even more unlikely that they would become
cutters, a position that traditionally has required a great deal of physical
strength. While new technology, where it is adopted, is changing the
level of strength required, the occupation remains distinct from sewing
and continues to be dominated by male employees.
The following diagram shows the paths typically available to
sewing machine operators. It should be noted that the vast majority of
sewing machine operators remain sewing machine operators, but they
may improve their skills, enabling them to work more regularly and
earn higher wages. In addition, English language skills are shown as
leading to opportunities outside of the garment industry, but they also
lead to expanded opportunities within the garment industry. Many of
the better paid sample maker positions require English language skills.
For a number of GIDC participants, their experience in the Super Sewers
class is their first attempt at learning English, and several that we inter-
viewed commented that their experience in Super Sewers has encour-
aged them to continue English language lessons.
Entrepreneur Supervisor
Page 7
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
7
Percentages derived using Bureau of Labor Statistics Data series for National
Employment, Hours, and Earnings and State and Area Employment, Hours, and
Earnings. http://stats.bls.gov/sahome.html
8
Interview with May Chen, Associate Manager of Local 23-25, at UNITE offices, 275 7th
Avenue, NY, NY. Tuesday, February 23, 1999.
Page 8
a limited number of sewing operations vulnerable to layoffs and periods
of unemployment. Robert Jordan, international vice president and
manager-secretary of UNITE Local 62-32, notes that “workers [sewing
machine operators] have to be multi-talented to be able to work
steadily.”
T chain, depending upon fiber and fabric production for raw mate-
rials, and upon the retail sector for marketing to the consumer.
The industry is segmented by product category — men’s, women’s, and
children’s, and suits, dresses, and underwear and lingerie. Trade associ-
ations and union locals generally follow these segmentations. With
about 24,000 shops in 1996, the apparel manufacturing sector produced
more than $45 billion of apparel and imported another $40 billion. It
shipped more than $78 billion of apparel, contributing almost $40 billion
value-added manufacturing dollars to the U.S. GNP.9 With more than
three-quarters of a million people, it employs approximately 6 percent of
all manufacturing production workers. U.S. apparel manufacturing is
concentrated in California, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,
Tennessee, and Georgia.
With the large size of textile and retail firms compared to appar-
el firms, the relative power among these actors can be predicted. Textile
firms dictate fabric design choices, length of time for textile production,
and minimum order sizes that are often large. Retailers dictate the order
size, price, and shipping and delivery requirements. The small apparel
firms are essentially “price takers.” That is, due to their limited negoti-
ating power with the textile and retail firms, apparel contractors have
little influence over the price they receive for a job. GIDC staff note that,
in this context, a firm’s ability to cost a job becomes critical; firms need
to recognize and refuse jobs on which they would lose money. Linda
Dworak, GIDC’s acting executive director, developed the following dia-
gram to illustrate the relationships between the key actors in this indus-
try, also noting the important trends that have influenced industry
dynamics.
9
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Available from Statistical
Universe Online Service. Bethesda, MD: Congressional Information Service.
Page 9
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
,
licy Co
e Po n s u Fa s h i
d re mp on/
Tra ho n tion
US Off-Spetitio Tre
m n
Co ds
C O N S U M E R S
tic Fo
es re
m RETAIL ig
n
o
D Retail Consolidation — in US, 5 companies control 48% of total sales
Suppliers: textile trimmers
M A N U F A C T U R E R S TRADE
ASSOCIATIONS
Union Union Non-Union Non-Union
Inside
Shop Cutter, graders, designers, sample makers, etc.
80,000 jobs in design, sales and promotion
C O N T R A C T O R S UNITE
l
labe
ate
Priv 85,000 production employees
Wo Tech r
abo
rk O n o l
rga gy, n of L s
niz sio a r d
atio Er o S t a n d
n
Due to
Traditionally, an apparel manufacturer used to perform design,
their limited
pattern making, cutting, sewing and finishing, as well as inspection, and
negotiating often took orders and delivered directly to the retailers. Some apparel
manufacturers would contract out some of the processes — such as
power with
assembly or cutting — to smaller shops that specialized in that one
the textile and process. Sometimes, jobbers served a brokering role between manufac-
turers and contractors and wholesalers or retailers without actually
retail firms,
performing any of the production processes. After decades of change,
apparel however, many of today’s apparel manufacturers with their own labels
do not actually cut and sew any of their goods. Instead, serving more
contractors
of the traditional jobber role, they contract out many or all production
have little processes. These contractors may in turn subcontract pieces of large jobs
to other firms in order to get a job finished in time. As Linda Dworak,
influence over
training director and acting executive director of GIDC states, “There is
the price they so much subcontracting going on at this point that sometimes it’s not
clear where the product is actually being made anymore.” UNITE
receive for
officials in New York City have developed the following diagram to
a job. illustrate potential contracting relationships in the local market.
Page 10
MARKER-MAKING
CONTRACTORS
REPAIR FABRIC SUPPLIERS
Marking
CONTRACTORS Converters
Grading
Overseas Textile Makers
CONTRACT JOBBER
Design CONTRACT
WAREHOUSING/ DUPLICATE (SAMPLE)
DISTRIBUTION Finance
Licensing MAKERS
CENTER
Sample-Making
Fabric & Trim Sourcing
Contractor Management CUTTING
PERIPHERAL SEWING • Domestic CONTRACTORS
CONTRACTORS • Imported
Active Sales
Inactive/Backup Shipping
APPAREL SERVICES
CONTRACTORS
CORE SEWING TRIM SUPPLIERS Pleating
Belts Embroidery
CONTRACTORS
Buckles Other Services
Buttons
Zippers
Other Items
At the other end of the spectrum, the retail industry has consoli-
dated in the last decade, and new retail strategies are driving changes in
the apparel industry. Many large companies engage in “lean-retailing”
practices, in which retailers seek to hold inventories low while working
closely with suppliers to insure rapid replenishment of items that sell
well. Furthermore, stores have moved beyond the traditional four sea-
sons and now have eight or more seasons for introducing new apparel
items. Thus, producers need to achieve faster turnaround times and
adjust rapidly to frequent style changes. In addition, the growth of
chain specialty stores, such as The Gap and Ann Taylor, and the
increased proportion of private label apparel found in department stores
has created new dynamics between retailers and contractors. In produc-
ing their own labels, retailers often circumvent the manufacturer and go
straight to a lead contractor or agent with a production order, preferably
in a “full-package” arrangement; that is, retailers look for a firm that has
the capacity to purchase the fabric, make patterns, cut, sew, finish,
inspect, and ship or, more likely, the capacity to subcontract these
services and take responsibility for the delivery of a final product.
Page 11
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
“...[in] Mexico, These full-package arrangements allow retailers to shop for private label
garments with one stop. Most U.S. contractors, however, are set up to
you can have
offer only assembly operations and not full-package services. In addi-
the garment tion, manufacturers have traditionally negotiated with the union and
paid contractors for benefit plans for the workers through “jobber agree-
produced and
ments.” Retailers do not pay these costs and contractors do not have the
shipped to the resources to cover this gap.
warehouse—
Globalization
only about ver the past two decades, a variety of trade agreements have
a week
difference from
O opened U.S. apparel markets to increased overseas competition.
These trends are better understood in the frame of international
trade agreements. Since 1963, the Tariff Schedule of the Unites States
charged “re-entry” duty only on the value-added or assembly portion of
us...the reason
apparel items for firms that assembled outside of the United States of at
why we still least partly U.S.-made and cut components. The 1986 Item 807A added
quota allowances or “guaranteed access” to firms assembling apparel in
can survive is
Caribbean countries when fabric for the apparel was both made and cut
we have a in the United States, causing much apparel assembly to be shifted to the
Caribbean Basin, with its advantageous geographic proximity.10
quicker
The 1988 U.S.-Mexico maquiladora agreement and the 1989
turnaround Canadian Free Trade Agreement set the foundation for the 1994 North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which allows apparel
time; we have
produced in Canada or Mexico to be imported duty-free to the U.S.
better quality.” The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) started
gradually phasing out protectionist policies toward apparel on a multi-
—Wing Ma Wong,
national basis. The World Trade Organization (WTO), created in 1995,
a Chinatown will take over GATT functions and oversee the dramatic restructuring
and delimiting of the textile and apparel arrangements that have pro-
apparel contractor
tected the industries from “market disruption” for all these years. In
particular, WTO’s Agreement on Textiles and Clothing will eliminate
quotas and reduce tariffs for apparel products that are traded among
participating countries. This agreement should be fully phased in
by 2005.
These agreements, particularly NAFTA, were cited as concerns
by New York City’s apparel producers. Wing Ma Wong, a ladies sports-
wear sewing contractor, notes that most production overseas is indirect
10
Dickerson, K.G. Textiles and Apparel in a Global Economy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1995.
Page 12
competition because of the longer shipping times, but that Mexican pro-
ducers are direct competition, since there is only one week’s difference
in shipping time. He states, “...[in] Mexico, you can have the garment
produced and shipped to the warehouse — only about a week difference
from us, that’s all. The reason why we still can survive is we have a
quicker turnaround time; we have a better quality than the Mexicans.”
Page 13
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
systems have been found to reduce production time and improve quali-
ty. Unlike a UPS, a modular approach does not require a significant
capital investment, but rather an investment in training workers to
produce in a new way. Modular organization decreases the need for
Modular supervisors, but requires workers with decision-making skills and a
variety of production competencies — new expectations for most piece-
organization work operators. While the capital requirements of modular systems
decreases the make them an accessible innovation for small producers, the traditional
mind set of many apparel producers is a barrier to their widespread
need for adoption. Spreading understanding of the benefits of such systems also
supervisors, can be difficult because of the lack of sophistication of many apparel
firms. For example, one firm that agreed to adopt the system for part of
but requires its production did notice that production was much faster in the modu-
workers with lar unit, but the firm owner could not state exactly how much faster
production occurred, nor could he describe the effect of the system on
decision- quality or estimate a bottom-line impact.
making skills New technology also is important to more efficient production.
New, more technologically advanced machines that, for example, reduce
and a variety waste in cutting or improve the quality of products sewn, are available
of production and can improve the production efficiency of small shops. Richard
Feldman, owner of Feldman Manufacturing Corp., noted the improve-
competencies ment in cutting quality and the reduced scrap costs that he experienced
— new following his purchase of a Gerber cutter. One barrier to small firms
investing in this new equipment, however, is a lack of confidence in the
expectations ability of workers to use it properly. According to Charles Wang, execu-
for most tive director of the Greater Blouse, Skirt and Undergarment Association,
apparel producers “need to put machines to good use to get the most
piece-work out of your investment...members (apparel contractors) want to see that
operators. workers can use machinery.”
Advanced technology and quick response strategies are
competitive advantages that the U.S. apparel industry can exploit.
Unfortunately, small- and medium-sized apparel manufacturing firms,
the type found in New York City, have not adopted technology as fast as
large firms. Cost, need for technical support, and workers’ technical lit-
eracy have been identified as factors in this non-adoption. By providing
both worker training and information on the benefits of new technology,
GIDC has the capacity to address these issues and facilitate the adoption
of new technologies and processes.
Page 14
Apparel Industry in New York
New York is known for its fashion influence in apparel
through design innovation, presence of retail buying offices, and
major retail facilities. Proximity to designers and retail buyers, low
entry barriers for new firms, the industry’s high labor needs, and the
entry level nature of many jobs make apparel manufacturing an
important industry to the economy of New York. New York is the
number two state in apparel manufacturing, based both on number
of employees and annual gross state product. In 1996, New York
employed 86,600 apparel manufacturing workers, about 85 percent of
whom work in New York City’s five boroughs. Average earnings for
production workers were $294 per week. The largest manufacturing
sector in the city, apparel constitutes about one-third of all of New
York City’s manufacturing. In New York State, the industry con-
tributed more than $4.6 billion in value-added manufacturing and
$9.6 billion in shipments to the 1996 New York state annual gross
product.11
New York City’s apparel manufacturing and contracting is
largely women’s and children’s apparel, while there are major men’s
wear producers in upstate New York. In New York City, most appar-
el production is completed by small contractors employing fewer
than 40 workers. There is a large concentration of contractors in
Chinatown, some in mid-town Manhattan and the boroughs, espe-
cially Queens and the Bronx. Matched with the proximity to the
New York City fashion designers and innovators, their flexibility
allows them to adapt quickly to fashion change. In addition, their
location allows for shorter shipping times, which translate into lower
costs and an important competitive advantage, given the move to
more fashion seasons.
The apparel industry has traditionally provided an opportu-
nity for immigrant workers to not only work but to establish their
own businesses as apparel production contractors. Start-up costs are
minimal, with possible equipment rental and little required invento-
ry. Mrs. Yuk Ching Wong, president of the Greater Blouse, Skirt and
11
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1996.
Page 15
APPAREL INDUSTRY
CONTEXT
12
Waldinger, R.D. Through the Eye of the Needle: Immigrants and Enterprise in New York’s
Garment Trades. New York, NY: NYU Press, 1986. p.15.
Page 16
GIDC’S STRATEGY
Historical Development
he impetus for founding the organization came from the results of
Page 17
GIDC’S STRATEGY
great deal of resources but had limited industry impact. At this point,
GIDC changed programmatic direction, and also found a new executive
director, Adam Friedman. Under Friedman’s leadership, GIDC intro-
duced new training initiatives, notably the Super Sewers program, a
core piece of GIDC’s current training efforts, and the Sewing Machine
Maintenance and Repair training program, the longest-running training
GIDC was program at GIDC. The latter offering was a part-time evening training
program, that was, during the two years after its introduction, followed
designed to by an array of other specialized part-time offerings for employed work-
meet needs ers, which collectively became known as the Apparel Skills Courses.
This collection of courses continues to change in response to emerging
identified by industry needs. In contrast to the Apparel Skills Courses, the Super
both employer Sewers program is a full-time training program for displaced apparel
industry workers.
and employee In the early 1990s, just before he left the organization, Friedman
organizations. began to search for funding to support the development of new pro-
grams in the areas of business technical assistance and market develop-
ment. Bruce Herman, the executive director hired in 1991, aggressively
pursued this new direction and, under his leadership, GIDC developed
its Fashion Exports New York (FENY) program, which assists New York
City manufacturers in marketing their products overseas, and the
Training and Technology Extension Services (TTES), which provides an
array of technical assistance services. Also in 1991, in conjunction with
UNITE, GIDC established JobNet, a centralized job referral system that
helps apparel producers locate employees with the production skills
they require and assists the unemployed in finding work. More recently,
GIDC conducted a fund-raising campaign to support the development
of a storefront facility in the heart of Chinatown. In April 1998, GIDC
inaugurated its Fashion Industry Modernization Center (FIMC), a 9,500-
square-foot training and technology demonstration facility that houses
state-of-the-art production equipment, including sewing, pressing, and
cutting machinery, as well as a 20-station computer lab with Computer
Assisted Design (CAD) facilities. Another recent addition to GIDC’s
programming is the new Sourcing Center, established in fall 1998. The
goal of this program is to help manufacturers and others find apparel
contractors who can meet their particular needs. GIDC is now in the
process of refining its database of contractors in order to most effectively
promote employers with “good” labor practices. A current challenge is
Page 18
to reach agreement among the stakeholders in GIDC, namely unions
and industry groups, regarding what should be the standard for “good”
labor practices. Verification of these chosen labor standards may prove
difficult.
As GIDC’s service offerings have grown over the years, so too
has its constituency. In the early years, GIDC concentrated solely on the
segment of the industry that was located in Chinatown. As the organi-
zation grew, however, it began to reach out to garment producers in
other parts of the city and in other industry segments. Thus, other
industry groups beyond the New York Skirt and Sportswear Association
became GIDC board members as GIDC sought to provide assistance to
other segments of the industry. An important backer supporting GIDC’s
growth was Jay Mazur. At GIDC’s founding, Mazur was the head of
ILGWU Local 23-25. His influence within the union circles has risen
over the years, and he is now president of UNITE. Under Mazur’s lead-
ership, UNITE has been a key ally in lobbying government officials, par-
ticularly at the New York State level, for support, and the union has con-
sistently provided funds to GIDC directly.
GIDC Today
he box on the next page shows GIDC’s primary program areas.
Organizational Features
Staffing
GIDC currently employs 14 full-time staff people, including the execu-
tive director, the director and marketing assistant for FENY, the manag-
er, technician, and administrative assistant for the FIMC, three full-time
Page 19
GIDC’S STRATEGY
GIDC Programs
Training
• Super Sewers
• Apparel Skills Training Courses
Technical Assistance
• Technology Training Extension Service (TTES)
Page 20
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Manager,
Director of Field
Sourcing Director,
Training & Engineer,
Center FENY
Education TTES
(Consultant)
Vocational Training
Training Field Manager, Program Marketing
Agents (2), FIMC Managers Assistant
TTES (2)
Super Sewers
Technician Instructor (1)
Consultant
Administrative Super Sewers
Assistant Assistants (2)
(Consultants)
AST Instructors
(Consultants)
Location
GIDC has three physical locations in which it operates. The primary
office space is located in a building in Manhattan’s fashion district on
7th Avenue. Teaching space for the Super Sewers program and some of
the evening Apparel Skills courses is located in the High School of
Fashion Industries, about three blocks from the main offices. In addition
to being in the heart of the fashion industry, these facilities are close to
the Fashion Institute of Technology, whose facilities GIDC has used for
some of its evening Apparel Skills courses. Finally, as mentioned above,
GIDC recently opened a new facility in Chinatown, about two miles
from the main office, providing a storefront facility in the neighborhood
that is home to one of GIDC’s primary constituencies. By locating their
Page 21
GIDC’S STRATEGY
need in the
Key Organizational Relationships
New York While a tripartite group comprising industry, union, and local govern-
ment representatives joined forces to found GIDC, the union has had the
market.”
most consistent involvement in the organization over time. May Chen,
—Joan Volpe, associate manager of UNITE Local 23-25, notes that the collaboration
between GIDC and UNITE occurs at two levels, the board level and the
coordinator of Non-
staff level. She says, “we deal with [GIDC] staff all the time — a lot of
Credit Programs at FIT cross-referrals...a lot of day-to-day dealing with GIDC staff.” For exam-
ple, most participants in the Super Sewers program are UNITE members
and many of them were referred to GIDC by UNITE. UNITE staff con-
duct the health and safety training component of the Super Sewers pro-
gram. GIDC also distributes, through UNITE offices, flyers announcing
upcoming Apparel Skills Courses. GIDC’s job counselors not only assist
Super Sewers participants in finding employment, but also help other
UNITE members who have recently lost their jobs. Similarly, GIDC staff
often will refer trainees in need of assistance with child care or other
matters to UNITE staff who can assist them. On the technical assistance
side, UNITE identifies and refers many firms to GIDC for various types
of assistance. GIDC’s technical assistance often is requested for shops
Page 22
that UNITE has just helped organize, since having the union presence
can, in some cases, increase labor costs to the extent that the business is
at risk. GIDC can help the business realize production efficiencies to
help offset the higher labor costs, and thus retain the firm and attendant
jobs in New York City. UNITE provides funds to GIDC for some pro-
grams and also has been an important ally in GIDC’s efforts to lobby
state officials for support. GIDC’s main offices are located in a UNITE-
owned building, which also houses many union offices. At the FIMC,
GIDC has dedicated a space to Local 23-25 for social workers and union
representatives to meet with workers. Thus, over the years a tight rela-
tionship has formed between UNITE and GIDC, and they play comple-
mentary roles as they seek to develop and retain “good” apparel jobs in
New York City.
While not as close a relationship as that with UNITE, GIDC’s
relationship with the Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT) also has been
important. FIT has the facilities and personnel for training people in the
areas in which GIDC is interested in providing training, but there is no
sense of competition between the two organizations since they serve
very different clientele. As Joan Volpe, coordinator of Non-Credit
Programs at FIT, states, “There is a real need for the programs GIDC is
running. The college [FIT] provides management and executive labor to
the market place...GIDC does very well in elevating sewing skills [of
production workers]...it meets a real need in the New York market.”
FIT has been an important source of instructors for GIDC, with most of
the people GIDC hires to teach the Apparel Skills courses having had
teaching experience at FIT; one of GIDC’s technical assistance staff
people had been a professor at the college. As mentioned above, GIDC
has made arrangements to use some of FIT’s facilities for its courses,
and the college is conveniently located near GIDC’s main offices. Since
many GIDC instructors had prior experience at FIT, there is an under-
standing of the types of resources that could be available through the
college, and these are tapped on an as-needed basis. For example, in
beginning its technical assistance efforts, GIDC conducted an intensive
survey of 75 contractors and 25 manufacturers to assess their needs and
determine the types of services that GIDC should offer. This survey was
designed and conducted by consultants hired from among the FIT staff.
FIT has always had a seat on GIDC’s board and has sought to play a
supportive role in GIDC’s efforts; the key to actually implementing this
Page 23
GIDC’S STRATEGY
support, however, has been the on-going interaction between GIDC staff
and FIT personnel.
GIDC’s relationship with the New York City government and
Some industry with industry groups has not been as influential as its relationship with
the union. The city has been an important funder of many of GIDC’s
groups have initiatives, but has not sought to significantly influence the organiza-
served as a tion’s programmatic direction. The industry groups tend to be rather
fragmented, reflecting the nature of the industry they serve, with three
helpful point or four organizations representing Chinatown firms alone. These
of contact groups are formed primarily to negotiate with the union on behalf of
their members, and the level of their involvement with GIDC’s activities
through which varies considerably. Some industry groups have served as a helpful
GIDC can reach point of contact through which GIDC can reach out to firms, without
becoming actively involved in shaping the types of services that GIDC
out to firms. provides to local businesses. Others, particularly those based in
Chinatown, have become close partners of GIDC, providing useful
information on the needs of member firms and advocating for services
on their behalf.
Page 24
MAKING A SECTOR
FOCUS OPERATIONAL
B workers to find good jobs, but also works with industry to create
and maintain good jobs. GIDC encourages firms to embrace a
“high road” competitive model, in which firms invest and innovate to
improve the efficiency of their firms and the productivity of their work-
ers. As gains from greater productivity are realized, they are shared
with workers, encouraging them to continue to be as productive as pos-
sible. In the garment industry, however, there are numerous “low road”
competitors. For these employers, labor is merely a cost, not an asset,
and maintaining safe, healthful working conditions is not necessarily a
priority. Some of these employers do not recognize the true costs of
poor quality, time spent on re-work, and high worker turnover, but can
easily see the cost of providing a decent job. “High road” firms also have
to compete with “sweatshops,” which operate outside the law and disre-
gard regulations on wages and working conditions. These firms can
close and re-open quickly and are not registered, so it is difficult for reg-
ulators to stop them. GIDC works with legally registered firms and tries
to help them change their business model to a “high road” strategy that
can be competitive in the current environment of the apparel industry.
“If employers want to get engaged with us [GIDC], they have to accept
that we will push them, pull them, move them on to the high road, as
we call it, and we’ll do everything we can to block the low road.” —
Bruce Herman, former president, GIDC
Page 25
MAKING A SECTOR FOCUS
OPERATIONAL
Page 26
manufacturers and international buyers and by facilitating sales and
negotiations. FENY also organizes group exhibitions of New York
apparel at international trade shows. FENY has worked with more than
120 apparel firms, including bridal-, career-, sports-, swim-, intimate-,
evening-, men’s-, and children’s-wear manufacturers. Through its data-
base, FENY is able to provide international buyers and agents with
information on 544 New York firms. Since 1991, FENY has facilitated
more than $35 million in first contracts for New York City firms, a big
bottom-line benefit for firms. Further, this number only reflects the
value of the contracts directly facilitated by GIDC, and does not include
the value to the firm of an ongoing relationship with an overseas buyer.
In addition, FENY has a joint project with the Fashion Center
Business Improvement District (FCBID) called New York Fashion
International (NYFI). The purpose of this initiative is to increase the
ability of New York manufacturers to pursue export strategies and to
raise the profile of New York City as a world fashion capital. NYFI pro-
vides export assistance to New York manufacturers and educates inter-
national buyers in how to shop the New York market. For example,
NYFI facilitates the participation of New York manufacturers in trade
shows, and works to disseminate information on New York apparel
offerings to potential overseas customers. Thanks to government sup-
port, FENY and NYFI can offer their services free of charge or well
below cost. Both NYFI and FENY are supported by the U.S. Department
of Commerce.
Page 27
MAKING A SECTOR FOCUS
OPERATIONAL
Page 28
on other sources of information, to synthesize the information, and to
apply it as the organization exercises leadership within the industry. In
addition, the process of gathering and analyzing information leads to
opportunities to expand industry networks and partnerships. For exam-
ple, in the survey of 100 firms mentioned above, GIDC staff estimate
that about half had no prior contact with the organization, so it was also
an opportunity for GIDC to reach out to these firms, and for the firms to
learn more about the types of services GIDC offers. Similarly, doing
research jointly with FIT or FCBID not only has been efficient, but also
has helped strengthen GIDC’s relationships with these organizations.
The role of the information broker is particularly important for
an industry such as the apparel industry, where firms are typically small
and management is thin. Such firms often do not have the resources to
engage in a sophisticated analysis of industry trends. In the area of
marketing, for example, GIDC, in collaboration with the FCBID, has been
able to engage in a sophisticated analysis of export opportunities and
then share that information with New York firms. It is difficult to imag-
ine an individual firm having the resources to undertake such an effort.
GIDC’s role as an information broker also helps to catalyze
change in production techniques as well as in marketing. Mr. Feldman
(see box on next page) notes that the garment industry is an old indus-
try with a lot of tradition and change only comes incrementally. By
providing information on new technologies and new production
techniques, GIDC can educate owners and convince them to begin to
modernize their operations.
Ideas such as modular production, investments in new equip-
ment, and a sourcing center to link manufacturers and contractors are all
ideas that have met with resistance. The Sourcing Center, for example,
encountered resistance because contractors feared that their current
customers would find new suppliers through the system. They did not
see that the system might bring them additional business. This fear is
reflective of the nature of contractors to wait for their long-standing cus-
tomers to come to them with an order, rather than going out and seek-
ing new business. The Sourcing Center requires contractors to think in a
new way about their relationships with clients. They need to determine
what their strengths are and why a client should choose to buy from
them rather than from a competitor. Investments in new equipment are
a breakaway from the traditional mode of business, and modular manu-
Page 29
MAKING A SECTOR FOCUS
OPERATIONAL
Page 30
The fear of change among contractors is compounded by their
poor experience in recent years. The opening up of overseas sourcing,
particularly in Mexico, has seriously hurt many contractor businesses.
Both Wing Ma Wong and Mrs. Yuk Ching Wong, two Chinatown con-
tractors, say that this is the worst year they have ever had. Under such
conditions, investments in new equipment or trying new methods of
production seem particularly risky to shop owners. Despite this difficult
environment, GIDC has had some success in promoting new techniques
among firms. For example, when we spoke to Charles Wang, executive
director of the Greater Blouse and a representative of contractors, he
expressed a desire to see GIDC spend more resources on the Sourcing
Center. So contractors have seen the benefit of that initiative. Feldman
(see box on facing page) is another example of encouraging change.
GIDC draws attention to the success of firms that innovate through its
newsletter as well as through informal discussions with clients. In this
way, more firms may be convinced to follow suit.
Page 31
MAKING A SECTOR FOCUS
OPERATIONAL
Leveraging Resources
Through Partnerships
y building partnerships with other organizations, GIDC has been
GIDC
recognized
B able to leverage access to financial, human, and information
resources and to create services that GIDC could not provide on
its own. A good example of this is GIDC’s role in the creation of the
Fashion Center Business Improvement District (FCBID), founded in
the 1993. GIDC recognized the importance of the impression that the physi-
cal environment makes on buyers, but at the same time realized that
importance
GIDC itself was not well positioned to effectively address this problem.
of the GIDC therefore worked toward the formation of the FCBID, and cur-
rently sits on its board in an advisory capacity.14 Since it is a business
impression
improvement district, the FCBID works on, among other things, street
that the services and improvements, and the area is now felt to be safer and
more welcoming for buyers and other fashion industry actors. GIDC’s
physical
work with the FCBID has facilitated a greater level of service for buyers,
environment particularly foreign buyers. In collaboration with FCBID, GIDC con-
tributed to the production of a resource guide that helps foreign buyers
makes on
navigate the New York market. In addition, while GIDC was prohibited
buyers and from spending its funds to support the travel expenses of firm represen-
tatives attending foreign trade shows, by collaborating with FCBID
worked to
through the New York Fashion International (NYFI) initiative, GIDC
create the could connect manufacturers with a source of support for this initiative,
a critical component to its success. Other examples of GIDC’s strategic
FCBID,
partnerships include its relationship with FIT, a valuable source of infor-
a business mation and human resources, and its relationship with the union, which,
among other things, provided critical lobbying assistance that led to sig-
improvement
nificant state contributions to GIDC’s budget. These relationships are
district. described in the section titled “GIDC’s Strategy.”
14
Since FCBID is a business improvement district, only representatives of businesses
who contribute to the operations of the BID are eligible to be official board members.
Page 32
T H E T R A I N I N G
S T R A T E G Y
Page 33
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
“to learn
more sewing Quan Li Na
skills so that
Quan Li Na emigrated to the U.S. from Hong Kong in 1981 at
it will be age 21. Since then, she has been working as a garment worker
easier for me and during that time she has been laid off 10 times and has quit
jobs 3 times. In her last job, she estimates that she earned $200
to find jobs.”
per week for a 40-hour week. Mrs. Quan lives with her
husband, who she says earns $10,000 per year, their three
children, and her 72-year old mother. Prior to starting the
Super Sewers program at GIDC, Mrs. Quan had been
unemployed for two months. She heard about GIDC on the
radio and came, “to learn more sewing skills so that it will be
easier for me to find jobs.” When asked what job she hoped for,
Mrs. Quan said, “I have a family to take care of and that does
not allow me to work a long-hours job....I just hope that I can
get any sewing job and start earning money again.” After
completing the Super Sewers program, GIDC helped Mrs. Quan
secure a union job that provides health insurance and pays
$6.40/hour as a base wage.
Outreach
UNITE is a major source of referrals to the Super Sewers program. In
addition, GIDC recruits participants through flyers posted in Chinese
and Hispanic neighborhoods and through ads in the Chinese and
Spanish language newspapers. Technically, participants in the program
are referred to GIDC through the Worker Career Center (WCC), the one-
stop employment services shop in Manhattan. But GIDC participants
learn of the program through the outreach mentioned above, and then
Page 34
GIDC staff help clients register at the WCC so that they may become eli-
gible for the program. To date, GIDC has had little problem recruiting
candidates for the Super Sewers program. The organization offers four
cycles of Super Sewers each year, alternating between Chinese and
Spanish language, and each cycle enrolls 35 participants. Due to recent
changes in funding, however, this number will decline.
Screening
Since Super Sewers had always received Job Training Partnership Act
(JTPA) Title III funds, candidates were required to show that they were
receiving, or had recently received, unemployment benefits and that
they are legal residents of the United States. The remaining factor for
which GIDC screens participants is that they have some sewing experi-
ence. It is desirable for participants to have a basic competency since,
otherwise, it is very difficult for them to keep up with the intensive
eight-week program, although, as mentioned above, the level of skill
among participants varies greatly. The Super Sewers program offers
two levels of training, referred to as “intermediate” and “advanced,”
and on average about one-third of the participants in a cycle will be
placed in the advanced class. GIDC’s screening generally begins with a
telephone conversation about the participant’s background, and if that
goes well, the applicant is invited to come in for an interview and to fill
out an application.
Staffing
GIDC has two training managers, one a Chinese speaker and the other a
Spanish speaker. These staff people conduct outreach and recruitment
for their respective cycles, interview prospective applicants, oversee the
training, monitor placement and retention, and provide data to funders
and others regarding training results. Throughout the process, they
provide informal support and counseling to participants, and act as a
source of referrals for any needed services. This function helps ensure
that participants can continue with the training through to graduation,
and also is designed to give participants the resources they need to stay
on the job after placement.
The instructor for the Super Sewers program has been with
GIDC for seven years She works for GIDC on a contract basis, and also
runs her own custom design dress-making business. She had 13 years
Page 35
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Page 36
Content and Methodology
The primary aim of the Super Sewers program is to provide participants
with a broader skill base so that they are qualified for a greater range of
sewing jobs, enabling them to remain employed for longer periods of
time or to advance to better paying jobs in the industry. The Super
Sewers program includes training in sewing skills, conducted for four
hours each morning, and English language training, conducted for two
hours, four afternoons per week. The remaining weekly afternoon ses-
sion is generally dedicated to health and safety training. Thus, the
entire cycle involves 240 hours of training.
Hours
• Sewing skills 160
Sewing Skills
The sewing component is designed to teach whole garment construction
with an emphasis on mastering quality sewing techniques and improv-
ing sewing speed. Each day the technical training instructor conducts a
session of formal instruction in English, detailing the technique for
accomplishing a particular sewing operation, such as creating a tailored
sleeve placket or a double welt pocket. Prior to the presentation, each
student receives a handout with a written summary and diagrams illus-
trating the day’s lesson, and during the lecture the teaching assistant
provides translation for the students. The instructor stresses the key
English terms used during each lesson and students are encouraged to
repeat these words in order to reinforce their learning of workplace
Page 37
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Roughly three
quarters of the
class time in
technical
training
involves
students
actually
working at
their
Sewing skills training at GIDC’s Fashion Industry
machines on Modernization Center.
assigned
projects. English. The instructor has completed samples and sample-in-process
pieces prepared to use as visual aids during the presentation. Many
students take notes and the instructor encourages students to ask ques-
tions. Occasionally a student may have learned a different way to do a
particular operation, and this will be discussed with the whole class.
Sometimes, for reasons of quality or efficiency, students may be encour-
aged to avoid using methods that they have learned in the sewing fac-
tory, but occasionally a student may have learned a technique that is a
valid alternative to the one presented, in which case the instructor will
encourage the students to practice both techniques. Following the
formal presentation, the teaching assistant will provide a demonstration
for those students who do not yet feel ready to do the operation on their
own. Students are given materials to do 10 repetitions of the operation
presented. So, for example, if the operation presented was setting a par-
ticular type of pocket, the students will have enough pre-cut pieces of
fabric to practice this operation 10 times. Lessons are cumulative in that
they combine to allow a student to create a whole garment by the end of
the week. As the weeks progress, the assigned garment calls for more
complex sewing skills. The same teaching approach is used in both the
intermediate and advanced sewing classes.
Page 38
Assessment: The instructor and teaching assistant assess stu-
dent performance on a continuous basis, as roughly three quarters of the
class time in technical training involves students actually working at
their machines on assigned projects. The instructor and assistant circu-
late among them, observing their work and answering questions or
offering assistance as needed. The instructor teaches both the advanced
and the intermediate classes, but each classroom has a dedicated teach-
ing assistant. At the end of a training cycle, the instructor and assistant
compile a formal assessment of each student’s skills for the job place-
ment officer.
While the basic eight-week format of Super Sewers has not
changed since its inception, the content is adjusted frequently, according
to perceived industry needs. Minor modifications in the content are the
responsibility of the instructor. For example, in discussions with the
technical assistance staff she may discover that shops are demanding
people with greater skills in working with soft fabrics or that a particu-
lar way of setting a zipper is very much in demand. Thus, exercises
may be modified accordingly. In addition, every year all the staff
involved in the Super Sewers program meet to go over the curriculum
in a more formal way in order to determine if more substantive changes
are needed. For example, a few years ago staff determined that a modu-
lar training component should be included within the Super Sewers
curriculum. The Super Sewers curriculum now contains this modular
training, in which cross-training, problem solving, teamwork and critical
thinking are emphasized. As GIDC has encouraged the adoption of
modular production among some of its technical assistance clients, it has
also incorporated this element into its training of workers so that they
will be prepared for this type of production.
ESL
The basic ESL curricula is established by CWE, and the instructors work
with the other Super Sewers trainers and staff and with materials
provided by the Department of Employment in order to ensure that the
specific areas covered in the Super Sewers ESL training component are
as relevant as possible for garment workers.
The English language training covers basic grammar concepts
and emphasizes vocabulary and phrases relevant for garment industry
work. Basic reading and writing also are reviewed. Students are
Page 39
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Participants assessed for their language capability at the beginning of the program
and are placed in one of two classes according to their ability. While an
interviewed all eight-week training, involving 64 hours of language instruction, is quite
commented short in terms of the level of language improvement that can feasibly be
accomplished, it is hoped that by the end of training participants will be
that learning able to read a “spec sheet,” which is the written information provided to
the English a contractor by a manufacturer giving instructions regarding the assem-
bly of the garments, and that they will be able to recognize and use basic
language terms relevant to their work.
was a very Students are highly motivated to participate in the English lan-
guage training. English language skills are needed to become a sample
important maker or to get work in the factories that produce high-priced garments,
component where the pay is better. GIDC staff provide a list of all available ESL
classes in New York City for students at the end of the training in order
of the to encourage them to continue language studies. While GIDC does not
Super Sewers formally track how many students do continue, the ESL teachers com-
mented that they have seen their former GIDC students in other non-
program. GIDC classes that they teach. The small number of participants inter-
viewed for the purposes of this study all commented that learning the
English language was a very important component, if not the most
important component, of the Super Sewers program, and many com-
mented that their experience in the Super Sewers program encouraged
them to continue studying English. GIDC staff report having heard sim-
ilar comments from students.
Assessment: The ESL instructors do not do a post-test to assess
the degree of language improvement achieved by students in the class,
although teachers do give short written quizzes every week on the spe-
cific items covered. These tests generally involve matching words, or
words and pictures, and some fill in the blank, and are self-corrected by
the student. Students are encouraged to take responsibility for their
language learning, to ask questions when they have difficulty and to
discuss matters with the teacher if they feel the class is too difficult or
too easy for them.
Page 40
laws, ergonomics, and chemicals in fabric. By the end of training, par-
ticipants should have a greater understanding of how to protect their
health and avoid injury at the workplace and of their rights regarding a
healthy work environment.
Evaluation
At the end of the training cycle, the GIDC Training Manager administers
an evaluation of the training, requesting students’ numerical evaluations
and comments on the sewing skills, English language and health and
safety components. All students fill out these evaluation forms.
Unfortunately, the results of these surveys are not entered into a data-
base for analysis.
Placement
At the completion of the Super Sewers program, a dossier outlining the
accomplishments of each trainee is provided to one of the placement
officers, and each student has a brief face-to-face interview with the
placement officer. GIDC has three placement officers, all of whom are
retired union officials with experience in different segments of the
industry. They work one or two days per week for GIDC, collectively
providing a total of four days of time. In addition to providing place-
ment services for GIDC students, the placement officers often receive
frequent requests from UNITE to assist other laid off workers seeking
jobs. Thus, the GIDC placement officers actually place far more people
than GIDC trains. The downside of this arrangement is that these out-
side requests can distract the placement officers from focusing on the
specific needs of GIDC trainees and ensuring that they are placed in a
timely manner. On the other hand, the volume of people that the place-
ment officers work with raises the likelihood that they will know some-
one with the right skills who is available when an employer needs them,
encouraging employers to continue to call GIDC’s placement officers
when they are looking for employees.
Since Super Sewers was set up as a JTPA program, trainees
needed to be placed within 90 days of graduation, and the participants
were supposed to remain in the same job in which they were placed for
at least 90 days to satisfy the retention requirement in JTPA funding.
While historically GIDC has not had problems with placement, the
organization has always struggled with retention. GIDC staff feel that
Page 41
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Since its this is because of the nature of the garment industry. Given the indus-
try’s frequent spikes in activity and the highly specialized nature of
inception,
many contractors, it is not uncommon for operators to move from shop
GIDC’s Super to shop, depending upon who has work. Thus, at 90 days after place-
ment, a participant may be working for a different employer than the
Sewers
one with which she was originally placed, or she may be between jobs.
program has
Monitoring
trained more
GIDC has found that, while some participants may respond to letters,
than 1,075 accurate tracking of placement and retention requires follow-up phone
calls. In addition, the Super Sewers program offers trainees a modest
dislocated
bonus when they report their placement, and a second bonus at the 90-
sewing day retention mark. This incentive system also helps increase the rate of
reporting. For staff, however, the reliance on phone calls means that
machine
much of their work needs to be done in the evening after regular busi-
operators. ness hours, when it is possible to reach graduates by phone.
Since its inception, GIDC’s Super Sewers program has trained
more than 1,075 dislocated sewing machine operators. As the program
passes its 10-year mark, however, new challenges are emerging.
Placement, which had historically been around 80 percent, has become
more difficult lately. While a decline in the level of industry employ-
ment may explain part of this, probably the most important factor for
GIDC is the decline in the number of union sewing shops. While indus-
try employment seems to have stabilized in the last year or so, the num-
ber of union-affiliated sewing shops has continued to decline. Given
GIDC’s natural link to union shops and the fact that those shops offer
better benefits and working conditions than most non-union shops,
these employers are the main source GIDC looks to in placing trainees.
GIDC staff state that while there are always sewing jobs available, the
jobs available at non-union shops generally offer very low pay and no
benefits. GIDC is now seeking a full-time placement officer to re-direct
its placement strategy and to computerize its placement system.
Perhaps the most immediate challenge the Super Sewers pro-
gram faces is funding. GIDC recently lost JTPA support for the pro-
gram, since New York City revised its guidelines and now requires that
JTPA programs place participants in jobs paying at least $11.00 per hour.
For GIDC and other training providers who work with populations that
Page 42
face special barriers to employment, this requirement presents an im-
possible task. Even when the value of health benefits, estimated as 29
percent of wages, is added in, the total wage rate for a typical GIDC
placement only moves from $7 to $8 per hour to about $9 to $10.30 per
hour (the union minimum wage is $6.40 per hour, but since most shops
operate on a piece rate system, trained operators can often earn more).
It is possible however, that an exception in the JTPA requirements will
be made for organizations working with hard-to-place populations, at
which point GIDC may once again become eligible for support. In the
meantime, GIDC has sufficient resources to continue the program
through July 1999, while staff seek out other funding sources. During
this period, GIDC also plans to re-examine the program, which has been
shaped in a number of ways by JTPA requirements, and to consider
other options for meeting the needs of displaced garment industry
production workers.
15
Marker making is the technique through which patterns are adjusted to different sizes.
Pattern grading involves the layout of the pattern on material and should be done to
maximize the number of garments that can be made from the material while, at the
same time, taking into account properties of the material such as pattern or nap.
Page 43
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Page 44
Facilities
The opening of the Fashion Industry Modernization Center in
Chinatown in 1997 greatly expanded GIDC’s capacity for offering
evening classes because of the increased availability of classroom space.
The FIMC is equipped with the latest in production equipment, allow-
ing students to be trained on the newest technology. Since the equip-
ment is easily visible to everyone coming into and out of the center, hav-
ing the equipment in the FIMC exposes management to new technology,
even if their particular course may not involve using the equipment.
The use of the equipment was donated to GIDC, providing a marketing
benefit to the manufacturers as well as contributing to GIDC’s goals of
encouraging greater efficiency in production through training and the
use of new technology. GIDC also offers some Apparel Skills Courses in
the High School of Fashion Industries, using the space that is used by
the Super Sewers during the day.
Outreach
The FIMC gives GIDC a storefront presence in Chinatown, raising
GIDC’s profile in the community and serving as a means of promoting
its programs. In addition, GIDC recruits students to its Apparel Skills
Courses by sending flyers to sewing contractors and to UNITE, by
advertising in Chinese and Spanish language newspapers, and by con-
tacting former GIDC students who may have an interest in a particular
class. For example, students who did well in the Super Sewers class
may have an interest in taking pattern making in order to increase their
chances of becoming a sample maker. Staff also note that many students
hear about GIDC courses through word of mouth.
Screening
Individuals interested in the Apparel Skills Courses are asked to apply
to take a particular class. In reviewing applications, GIDC staff look for
someone who is in a position to use the skill being taught. For example,
supervisors are often trained in the Sewing Machine Maintenance and
Repair class, since it is their responsibility to keep things running
smoothly on the shop floor. This training has enabled companies to
avoid costly repairs and to decrease the amount of downtime of their
machines, decreasing costs and improving a factory’s ability to make on-
time deliveries consistently.
Page 45
THE TRAINING STRATEGY
Participants
Participants are often encouraged by their employers to take a class, but
some trainees are looking to upgrade their skills so that they can gain
access to better employment. Many participants have limited English
language skills, and most classes are offered in Spanish or Chinese, or
are taught in English with interpreters available.
Class sizes vary depending on the subject matter and equipment
available. For example, in the pattern making class no more than 10
participants are accepted, but up to 15 participants are accepted in pat-
Since classes are tern grading, and up to 20 for the computer classes.
held after
working hours
Zheng Yue Wan
and are not
Zheng Yue Wan emigrated to the United States from China in 1981
obligatory for
at the age of 18 and now lives with her husband, who is currently
any participants, unemployed, and three children. Mrs. Zheng was also
unemployed when she came to GIDC to take the Computerized
GIDC has found
Marking/Grading class, but she has since been re-hired by her
attendance to be previous employer as a pattern maker and earns $18 per hour. She
a good has never quit or been fired from a job since she started working in
1981, but she has been laid off twice. She says she learned of GIDC
barometer
through friends and came to the course to improve her skills.
of class
effectiveness.
Evaluation
Classes are nearly always full at the beginning of the session and per-
haps one or two people will drop out during the session because of out-
side circumstances. If a greater number of students stops participating
in a class, it is an automatic signal for GIDC staff that the class is not
meeting the needs of participants. Staff immediately seek to discover
what is not working in the class, and work to make the remainder of the
class more worthwhile. Since classes are held after working hours and
are not obligatory for any participants, GIDC has found attendance to be
Page 46
a good barometer of class effectiveness. Instructors for these classes
mentioned that students have often commented enthusiastically to them
about things from the class that they were able to use right away in their
work. Participants also fill out evaluations of the courses, which are
used primarily to provide feedback to the instructor and suggest possi-
ble areas for course modification.
Funding
Support for the Apparel Skills Courses comes from grants from New
York State, the U.S. Department of Labor, and the Consortium for
Worker Education. While New York State has been a long-standing fun-
der of these courses, the funding from DOL and CWE is more recent,
and has facilitated the recent expansion of GIDC’s course offerings.
With the exception of the computer classes, for which a $50 registration
fee is required, the classes are free to participants. By the end of 1998,
GIDC was training more than 170 participants in the various Apparel
Skills Courses per training cycle. There are roughly four cycles per year.
Grants in support of the program have mainly required the
tracking of attendance, but no monitoring of the effect on participants’
employment prospects or other outcome measures were required or
funded. In order to learn more about participant outcomes, however,
GIDC has chosen to become a member of the SEDLP evaluation (see box
on page 2), for which the income and employment experiences of a rep-
resentative sample of 144 trainees are being tracked over time. More
monitoring of the impact of participation in Apparel Skills Courses for
participants and their firms is something GIDC hopes to institute in the
near future. In addition, GIDC plans to embark on a skills standards ini-
tiative, involving job shadowing, to more accurately assess the specific
skills that are required in various positions. With this information, they
will reassess their curricula to determine how well the instruction is
meeting the current needs of the industry.
Page 47
C O S T S A N D
O U T C O M E S
Outcome Measures
IDC’s most demanding funding source in terms of outcome mon-
Super Sewers
FY 97-98 No. Percent
Participants 113
Graduates 105 93%
Placements 70 67%
Page 48
Outcome monitoring for GIDC’s other program areas tends to
be less stringent. For the Apparel Skills Courses, which are largely
funded by New York State contracts, only enrollment and completion
figures and basic demographic information on participants are needed
for reporting purposes. Information about participants pre- and post-
training employment situations is not required, but GIDC has recently
started collecting information on participants’ income levels. Currently
GIDC reports that they have a 97 percent completion rate among partici-
pants in the Apparel Skills Courses. GIDC tracks this completion rate
carefully, as this number is the primary indicator they rely on at present
for course quality. Given that the majority of course participants are
employed, often working long hours, and none are required to come to
these courses, GIDC feels that participation is an excellent indicator that
the course is of value. If GIDC staff see that a particular course is losing
participants, they jump in quickly to find out why the course is not
meeting participant expectations and to remedy the situation. GIDC is
also now reviewing these courses and developing more formal tools to
assess whether learning objectives have been met.
The on-site training provided to employers is part of GIDC’s
technical assistance activities, which are funded in part through annual
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) contracts. For MEP-funded
technical assistance, a follow-up questionnaire with the firm is required
to determine if the training, or other technical assistance activity, has
had an impact on the firm’s profitability, and whether the firm is satis-
fied with the service provided. However, MEP contracts with an inde-
pendent firm to conduct this follow-up evaluation and the information
is gathered to assess the performance of the MEP initiative, rather than
the performance of individual service providers. Thus GIDC does not
have access to information by which it might assess the impact of its
technical assistance efforts through this source. As part of individual
technical assistance efforts, GIDC staff assess that the objectives of the
technical assistance effort have been met. For example, to assess
whether the learning objectives in on-site training have been met, staff
generally conduct pre- and post-training time studies, measuring how
quickly an employee can perform a specific task. Since this type of
assessment is very firm specific, the information is not easily aggregated
to assess the impact of the technical assistance program as a whole.
Page 49
COSTS AND OUTCOMES
Training Costs
As is standard with non-profit organizations, GIDC employs a fund
accounting system in which expenses are matched against a particular
funding source. Costs for specific programs, however, are often covered
by contributions from several funds. Thus some calculations needed to
be made to estimate the true cost of specific programs. These estimates
were made in consultation with GIDC staff.
Page 50
While GIDC’s overall budget is close to $2 million, the focus of
this analysis is the training costs, which account for roughly one-quar-
ter of this amount. After training program costs were isolated from
other GIDC expenses, they were analyzed to determine three specific
ratios: cost per participant, cost per graduate and cost per placement.
A summary of the results of this ratio analysis is presented in the fol-
lowing table.
FY97-98
Super Sewers
Total Program Cost $337,783.00
Cost per participant* 2,989.23
Cost per graduate* 3,216.98
Cost per placement* 4,825.47
* Cost per participant is calculated by dividing the total program cost by the number of
participants. Similarly, cost per graduate is the total program cost divided by the
number of graduates, and cost per placement is the total program cost divided by the
number of placements.
Page 51
COSTS AND OUTCOMES
Page 52
L E S S O N S A N D
C H A L L E N G E S
Page 53
LESSONS AND CHALLENGES
Changing the a made-in-New York label. This strategy is helpful to expanding the
market and stabilizing employment for some firms. GIDC has also
way managers helped firms develop the capacity to produce apparel products faster.
and owners This strategy helps firms compete for re-orders and other time-sensitive
orders that frequently arise in the fashion business. Another niche mar-
of garment ket that GIDC has just recently developed an initiative to target is public
industry firms procurement of apparel products, which includes some very large orders
such as uniforms for police. Thus while the industry when viewed as a
think about whole may not look very promising, breaking it down into its compo-
production nent markets and assessing local strengths reveals a few bright spots.
Page 54
of finding alternative employment options for the large population
concerned. After demonstrating some success at the local level, GIDC
worked on the state level, and with the assistance of UNITE, lobbied
for state support of its efforts. GIDC staff found gaining federal sup-
port to be a bigger challenge, since they encountered a more firmly
held belief at that level that the garment industry cannot be competi-
tive in the U.S., while at the same time the employment impact of the
garment industry, considered nationally, is not as great as at the local
or state level. By drawing on their considerable knowledge of the gar-
ment industry, GIDC was able to demonstrate the existence of viable
niches for the New York garment industry and earn federal support for
promoting their development. GIDC staff felt that working from the
local to the state to the federal level was a logical progression for pur-
suing public support for its work.
Implications of Becoming
an Industry Actor
GIDC has established a unique position for itself within New York’s gar-
ment industry, working closely with both labor and employer groups.
Page 55
LESSONS AND CHALLENGES
GIDC explicitly This position provides GIDC with a number of advantages that help the
organization fulfill its mission, such as ready access to its two primary
seeks to client groups — small firms and workers — financial and in-kind sup-
promote port from its constituents, and credibility in attracting public resources.
GIDC also has to maintain a balancing act between its diverse con-
“good” labor stituent groups. For example, GIDC works with both sewing contrac-
practices and tors and with manufacturers. Manufacturers are threatened by the
spread of private label products in retail outlets, while for contractors,
to place the production of private label goods can provide a needed source of
individuals in business. In linking contractors with agents looking to source private
label production, GIDC could run the risk of alienating manufacturers
“good” jobs, who view that action as working against their interests. Another exam-
but defining ple involves working with UNITE. UNITE has been a valuable support-
er of GIDC and in many ways their missions are congruent — both
“good” in a would like to see greater opportunities for workers. As the number of
concrete and union firms in New York City has rapidly declined, however, GIDC has
begun to consider how it might approach non-union firms, some of
verifiable way which pay relatively high wages.
becomes
Defining a “Good” Job
difficult. A particular example of the above arises in trying to define what a
“good” job in the garment industry looks like. GIDC explicitly seeks to
promote “good” labor practices and to place individuals in “good” jobs,
but defining “good” in a concrete and verifiable way becomes difficult.
UNITE officials generally will view a good job as a union job.
Employers on the other hand, favor a looser definition that may be
based more on following the laws regarding minimum wages and work-
ing conditions. GIDC may be amenable to a looser definition, but if they
are to certify that the employers in their database are “good” employers
based on their labor practices, how can that be verified? An employer
whose facility satisfies all the worker safety requirements one day, may
not meet them the next. Negotiating a definition of a “good” employer
that is acceptable to both employer and worker representatives and that
can be used to meaningfully distinguish among employers is a challenge
for anyone involved in the garment industry.
Page 56
In sum, GIDC must often balance the needs of its diverse con-
stituencies within the garment industry as the organization chooses its
path forward. By keeping in tune with the industry and constantly
updating and refining its understanding of industry trends, GIDC con-
tinues to provide services of value to its constituencies and to lead
industry actors toward more competitive practices. GIDC maintains a
holistic view of the industry, and thus while one may expect that worker
training is primarily for the benefit of the individuals who will then be
able to find jobs, GIDC will argue that it is also important for the firms
to have capable workers in order to adopt more efficient practices.
Similarly by facilitating export promotion and the exploitation of new
markets, GIDC not only brings more revenue to firms, but also creates
more jobs for workers. In continuing to view the industry from the mul-
tiple perspectives of the diverse actors that make up the industry, GIDC
can navigate the competing interests to find win-win initiatives that help
to push the industry as a whole forward.
Page 57
ONE DUPONT CIRCLE, NW
SUITE 700
WASHINGTON, DC 20036
99-036