I was also told I could write to :
        The Walt Disney Company
        500 South Buena Vista Street
        Burbank, CA  91521

In my e-mail I asked :
    How Disney responded to the HKCIC's report
    Why steps weren't taken to improve the monitoring system
    Why workers weren't paid higher wages
    Why the names and addresses of their factories were not public information
    How were shareholders of Disney being informed, if at all, about these issues

The response I got was as follows, which seemed to me to be the general response e-mail to people who ask about Disney's labor practices overseas, since it didn't directly address many of my questions :

     Thank you for your e-mail to The Walt Disney Company.

     We understand and share your concern about working conditions in the world's poorer countries. Safe and fair labor practices remain a very important focus in our work with licensees and manufacturers around the world.

     During 1998, Disney continued to expand and develop its international labor standards compliance program under the auspices of the International Labor Standards Group, which includes senior executives from the company's corporate and business operations.  Key activities during the year included:

Regional meetings between the company's licensing and monitoring executives and more than 5,000 licensees and manufacturers in Asia, Latin America, Europe and the United States to review  the company's monitoring activities, and to develop action plans where appropriate to ensure compliance with the company's standards; individual meetings with the company's top 200 licensees to work directly with each of  them to develop specific programs for increased licensee involvement in the monitoring process; continued distribution of the company's Code of Conduct for Licensees and Manufacturers (translated into more than 50 languages) to all of the company's licensees and to each manufacturer engaged in the production of Disney-branded merchandise; and further expansion of the company's own monitoring program, including more than 6,600 manufacturer audits around the world (including follow-up reaudits where necessary) during 1998, conducted by independent professional firms as well as the company's internal auditors.

    These ongoing efforts - combining a focus on education, monitoring and cooperation with licensees and manufacturers to ensure compliance with the company's standards - reflect a continuing commitment to strengthening the labor practices of domestic and international licensees and manufacturers.

    The company continues to believe that its current approach to monitoring, which relies on both internal auditors and independent professional monitoring firms, is best suited to ensure consistency in compliance with its standards on a global basis.  While the company agrees that there may be a role for local nongovernmental organizations in special circumstances, there is neither an existing network of organizations to carry out such monitoring on a global basis nor a consensus on monitoring standards or methods.

    The company does not believe that calls for the implementation of "periodic wage adjustments" ensuring "adequate" purchasing power are feasible or realistic. Disney's Code of Conduct addresses this issue in the same manner as the Workplace Code of Conduct developed by the White House Apparel Industry Partnership, requiring licensees and manufacturers to recognize that wages are essential to meeting employees basic needs and to comply, at a minimum, with all applicable wage and hour laws and regulations.  The Code further states the company's expectation that, where local industry standards are higher than applicable legal requirements, manufacturers will meet the higher standards. This, too, is consistent with the Workplace Code  of Conduct.  The company expects all facilities engaged in the manufacture of Disney-branded merchandise to comply with local compensation laws and meet local industry standards, where higher, but does not believe it can realistically go beyond these requirements by attempting to determine and impose additional levels of compensation at each of the nearly 20,000 facilities that are engaged from time to time in the manufacture of Disney-branded (as well as non-Disney) merchandise.

    With respect to the call for regular public disclosure of contract supplier reviews, the company continues to believe that greater progress will be made in the improvement of international labor practices through a combination of education, cooperative efforts to improve standards and monitoring than through a system of public reporting.  The company recognizes its responsibility, however, to keep its shareholders informed on the status of its ongoing efforts, and will continue to do so.

Sincerely,

Shareholder Services

I responded to this e-mail (twice, once on 11/4/99 and once on 12/19/199) re-asking questions that weren't responded to, explaining I was working for a group at Stanford hoping that this would encourage a reply, and asking some new questions in response to points brought up in their e-mail, and my reply was as follows :
 

Hello, I was hoping you could provide me with some more information about Disney's factories in China.  I sent an e-mail asking about how Disney responded to the Hong Kong Industrial Committee report and received the e-mail which I attached to this message.  I replied to this e-mail, asking several questions in regards to points that were brought up by Disney, but I did not receive a response.

I am working with an organization at Stanford which is printing fact sheets on various corporations which have been known to have unfair labor practices or unsafe environmental practices.  These fact sheets will be available to students at the Career Center and on the web to help students make their job decisions and make sure they are informed about the issues.  I was hoping that in light of this, you would respond to my inquiries so as we could better present both sides of the issue.  If not, I will have to write that Disney had no comment when questioned on these issues :

1) You mentioned in your response that you have monitoring "which relies on both internal auditors and independent professional monitoring firms."  I have heard from multiple other sources that there was no such independent monitoring.  Could you please give me more information about exactly what kind of independent monitoring has been done and what their reports have shown as far as whether or not the factories are meeting the requirements of Disney's Code of Conduct.  An e-mail address or website of one of these independent monitors would be very useful for
our research.
  We try to have at least 2 independent sources back up each fact we write on our sheets.  Do you know where I could look to find such information backing up your claims on your monitoring procedures.  Many of the sources I got for doing my research on Disney were from objective parties.  Clearly, any information from Disney itself, while valuable, will be slanted towards Disney, so any information from an outside source, unaffiliated with Disney, that backs up some of your claims would give much more strength to these claims.

2)  I'm still unclear about why the names and locations of factories are kept private.  If Disney wants to improve working conditions, I don't see what there would be in being open with where their factories are located?  If the factories' names and
locations are indeed public information, could you please tell me where I could aquire this information?

3) I was speaking with a Disney employee at a recruiting session at Stanford and he mentioned to me that each year there is a vote where stockholders decide whether or not more needs to be done to enforce the Code of Conduct overseas - I was told that the stockholders see a report from Disney and a report from the HKCIC (Hong Kong Christian Industrial Committee) and that each year the stockholders vote against doing anything to take provisions to enforce the Code of Conduct.  I was told to e-mail Disney at this address for more information on this.  Any light you could shed on this would be helpful.

4) As to the issue of raising wages, in your e-mail it was stated that "the company does not believe that calls for the implementation of 'periodic wage adjustments' ensuring 'adequate' purchasing power are feasible or realistic."  I was wondering exactly why this would not be realistic (keep in mind, that the wage increases that independent groups are asking of Disney are on the order of raising wages from .30 an hour to .80 an hour which has been determined to be the lowest livable wage in China).  A financial report of the company would shed some light on this issue.

5) Finally, I was wondering about how many workers are there at one time making Disney products overseas.  You mentioned at one point that "nearly 20,000 facilities are engaged from time to time in the manufacture of Disney-branded (as well as non-Disney merchandise)"  But all of these factories are obviously not subcontracted at the same time
so this doesn't really give a clear picture of how many workers overseas are currently manufacturing Disney products.

Thank you very much for your time - I know these are a lot of questions to answer, but please realize that we are only asking these difficult questions so as to make sure the information we present is valid and presents Disney and its labor practices as truthfully and fairly as possible.

Sincerely,

Ned Tozun

I sent this e-mail on 12-19-99.  As of yet, I have received no response.  If I receive one, I will post it here.