It is tough to see U.S. union workers passed over for a million dollar contract especially in a time of economic downturn. But, the Milwaukee ordinance does not call for U.S.-made uniforms. Instead, the city takes a longer-term and broader view by requiring workers everywhere to get a good deal—including wages that will raise them and their family out of poverty—if they make products for the city. The city’s goal is less to strengthen the local economy or the U.S. economy in the short-term than to help create a more fair global economy, which, long-term, also helps U.S. workers.

Now, if the city cannot award a contract to a company when it has evidence that the company or its suppliers violate the code of conduct, it probably should not now be purchasing the Chinese-made uniforms. The crux of the issue turns out to be standard of evidence. The city does not believe it has received adequate proof of violations, but just what would that be? We hope that the city considers off-site worker testimony, supplied by the monitors, to be at least as credible as factory records or management statements, supplied by the company. After all, factories in China have become increasingly adept at misleading auditors and falsifying records. This case shows that Milwaukee and probably other “sweatfree” cities would benefit from continued exploration and guidance on evaluating sources of evidence and thresholds of evidence needed to prove labor violations.

Alternatively, the city could give itself room to award a contract despite evidence code of conduct violations if the winning bidder also presented a compliance plan and committed to work with an independent monitor to verify implementation of the plan. That is the path the city should choose now. It should work with the winning bidder to further investigate and rectify violations and ensure that the workers do receive the non-poverty wage required by Milwaukee (approximately twice the legal minimum wage). The city should request its supplier to work with an independent monitor; the Worker Rights Consortium which conducted one of the preliminary investigations would be an excellent choice. The supplier should, for its part, facilitate independent factory inspections, and support the monitor’s recommendations for remediation. If Milwaukee’s code of conduct can be upheld in the factory in China, this contract will be a victory for workers after all.