Workers Manufacturing Headscarves for Saudi Arabia Strike Over Pay Dispute

Employees involved in the production of headscarves intended for the Saudi Arabian market have commenced industrial action regarding a pay disagreement. Personnel at Lappet Manufacturing, located in Carlisle, are engaged in a strike prompted by “low pay” and “punishing targets,” as stated by GMB regional officer Michael Hall. Mr. Hall conveyed that individuals were “extremely unhappy at the way things were at the moment.” Lappet Manufacturing asserted that it did not acknowledge Mr. Hall’s “inflammatory” statements and affirmed its dedication to resolving the disagreement “as soon as possible.” The employees initially began their strike on Wednesday, subsequently walking out on Thursday and throughout the weekend. An additional eight days of strikes have been declared, extending until mid-November, with the workers ready to continue industrial action for an extended period if necessary, Mr. Hall further noted. The Carlisle facility of Lappet Manufacturing produces high-end headscarves intended for the Saudi Arabian market, as per Mr. Hall. “Predominantly men downstairs work on the looms and the women, who do the weaving work, are upstairs,” he stated. He added, “These are highly skilled jobs.” He indicated that “there does not seem to be any structure to anybody’s wages,” and a significant number of the women were receiving “minimum wage.” “If the targets aren’t reached, they are basically excluded from doing any overtime,” he asserted. Lappet Manufacturing communicated that it “questioned the validity” of Mr. Hall’s assertions. The company stated that “punishing targets, adverse conditions or overtime criteria” had not been raised by the union throughout the preceding eight months of negotiations. A representative mentioned that personnel at its Carlisle facility had been granted over 12% in wage increases across 2022 and 2023, and that the company had proposed a 3.9% pay increase for 2024. “We believe this is in line with industry norms and within the constraints of the business,” the representative conveyed. Mr. Hall countered that the suggested pay increase was insufficient and that the personnel, including some with over 30 years of service at the facility, “deserved more.”