Avainsana: Bangladesh

Julkaistu

Corporate social responsibility work – improve rather than dismiss

Sometimes I wonder why so many social campaigners choose to continuously attack the concrete work which is being done through corporate social responsibility schemes and initiatives to improve corporate behaviour in global supply chains. It is as if a business enterprise is bad per definition and incapable of getting things right. The worst of the pack are the large brands and retailers, the exception being those that make special efforts to nurture their relations with the campaigning non-governmental organisations, NGOs.

I am not referring here to concrete criticism, which is both needed and welcome. There is surely room for much improvement, and we have already seen many positive changes after the devastating factory disasters in Bangladesh and Pakistan.

I myself am regularly frustrated over how slowly and poorly code and standard contents are often applied at producer workplaces. Most leading brands and retailers are committed to decent supply chain conditions, but not all do enough for real remediation on the ground. When they do they seldom tell the world about it, information is quite obviously not their best skill.

This is not to say that nothing would be done on the ground. Much is going on to raise awareness and build competence in producer companies and their workplaces. International buyers as well as their corporate social responsibility schemes and initiatives are engaged in this work. Although the important building safety Accord and Alliance in Bangladesh are well funded, active and concrete, they are of course not alone in this field.

Social auditing is the main tool to find out about labour conditions and to identify where improvements are needed. I have much respect for the auditing industry and its auditors who approach their task seriously and skillfully. Not every supplier company is honest and straight-forward, and hiding or falsifying information is a serious problem in some regions. Advanced auditor skills and much experience are needed to see the reality behind these smokescreens.

Surely, there are also less serious auditors out there, and they should be weeded out by the industry itself. We deal with important issues for the workers concerned, and even one rotten egg in the auditor basket can destroy much.

Social auditing and corporate social responsibility CSR schemes and initiatives are a second best solution to supporting human rights and promoting decent work in global supply chains. Social dialogue and collective agreements between well organised workers and employers, supported by solid and actively enforced labour legislation, are of course the best. This is also what CSR work should aim at. But – we need to be realistic, this could still be a very distant goal in many regions and countries.

Social Accountability International SA800, the Ethical Trading Initiative ETI and the Business Social Compliance Initiative BSCI are some of the leading schemes and initiatives. The Global Social Compliance Programme GSCP is a broad business owned organisation with a strong civil society participation which drives upward convergence and mutual recognition between companies and their organisations to combat so-called audit fatigue and release resources to capacity building and remediation at workplaces.

Back to where I started. Having a life-long trade union background, I sometimes quietly shake my head when I see how CSR schemes and initiatives as well as the supply chain sustainability work of brands and retailers is just being summarily opposed instead of making concrete suggestions and demands for changes and improvements. These activities – driven by brands and retailers whether they are business or multi-stakeholder owned – are in many cases the only outside support for supply chain workers.

Yes they are often far from being sufficient and a lot remains to be done but the focus should be on improving rather than dismissing.

Julkaistu

Campaigner field days don’t help the launch of building and fire safety activities in Bangladesh which will require broad cooperation between all those involved

When the Business Social Compliance Initiative BSCI marked its 10th Anniversary last week in Brussels, the Clean Clothes Campaign ‘congratulated’ them with a veritable broadside attack in media.

Last weekend, just days before we expect to be informed about how concrete action will start to improve building and fire safety in the Bangladeshi garment industry, the International Labor Rights Forum ILRF in the US seems embarked on anti-capitalist campaigning and demonstrations against leading US retailers, for having chosen other approaches.

As such there is nothing wrong with this. Campaigning is acceptable and sometimes even important. Still, there are some question marks.

Very many of the European retailers and brands that signed up to the Bangladesh Building and Fire Safety Accord, if not most of them, are BSCI members and are actively engaged in this organisation. Many of them were in Brussels, and the CCC message was clearly badly received even if not publicly raised or commented. If the intention  is to prepare the ground for a concrete and efficient cooperation in Bangladesh, the CCC attack was both misguided and poorly timed.

These campaigners in the Netherlands should reflect on  how they can best contribute to a good start of project activities and try to control the temptation to continuously go after brands and retailers, giving the impression that one of the reasons is that they are brands and retailers, and represent big capital. This is not a good time for that kind of campaigning.

The ILRF campaigning against Wal-Mart and GAP – and now other retailers as well – has other motives and grounds of course, but is equally questionable as it is pulling the focus off practical project work in Bangladesh. If the aim is to build some kind of even minimal mutual confidence to enable cooperation and coordination on the ground in Bangladesh, then anti-imperialist field days like this just before the project launch will not help.

Yes I do of course strongly support the Accord that was finally introduced by IndustriALL. After all, I have been engaged myself in bringing the coalition and activities about.

This is not the same ‘Accord’ as some of these campaigner organisations were unsuccessfully pushing for since a few years back. It is a new creation, developed in cooperation with leading global retailers and brands, at the initiative of companies and stakeholders in Global Social Compliance Programme GSCP. When IndustriALL joined this process, facilitated by the German development authorities, a coalition started to form. Of course the 2011 campaigner driven project plan was one of the elements used when the Accord was created, but not more.

It is regrettable that a broad US brand and retailer participation fell on the clause on the Accord that deals with the possibility of litigation in courts. As I am not a US lawyer I cannot take a stand on whether the companies’ fears of campaigning through the courts are justified or not. Here the enterprises and the campaigners disagree. A reality is that most large US retailers and brands have stayed outside the Accord and launched their own initiative.

The next months and years will prove if this US approach is serious or not. The pressure on the companies involved to show that they can produce real results will be high, as it will also on the Accord.

It is a good sign that IndustriALL Global Union has continued to keep its sight set on what needs to be done to secure the success of the Accord. Without this organisation, a broad coalition like the one we see today would never have been possible.

Perhaps it is time for the unions to calm down their most eager NGO supporters, and help IndustriALL and the committed companies to get a good start for their activities. Nobody can afford internal strife in a situation where the challenges are as big as here, not the least in convincing the local players of the seriousness of the initiative.

Julkaistu

Historical Bangladesh Accord is a great achievement but much work still remains before the project is up and running

To build up the Accord on fire and building safety in Bangladesh and to mobilise an important group of leading global garment retailers to participate in the work is a great achievement. Many people, organisations and companies have worked hard on this historical project. Still, without the engament and skills of IndustriALL General Secretary Jyrki Raina and his team this would not have come about. Well done. Now the work will begin on translating the Accord to real and concrete action. This will not be an easy task, but the solid commitment of this broad alliance will surely help. The very recent interview in Financial Times with H&M CEO Karl-Johan Persson should help set the tone for this cooperation between parties that have often been and still often are engaged in mutual differences and conflicts on many other issues. This should not be allowed to weaken the joint efforts for the Bangladeshi workers. It is of course regrettable that world’s largest retailer Wal-Mart did not join the Bangladesh building and fire safety Accord, nor did most other US retailers, stating that they cannot accept the complaints resolution clause because they are afraid of getting drawn into court processes with stakeholders in the litigation-happy US. This may be so, or not, but I would believe that on this particular issue that the Accord deals with, the probability of such conflicts arising would be very small. Nobody has an interest to detract from the real job that has to be done, and if someone would, I am convinced that other partners would not accept that. Still, this should not lead to giving up – the world’s largest retailer itself declares that they are prepared to use the 45 day period which is foreseen in the Accord to try find solutions. I hope that a solution can be found through serious and concrete discussions. It is important to note that Wal-Mart’s statement is very much different from what the US retailer association said, which was outright negative, hardly hid their aversion against working with unions, and showed that the politicians of that organisation have not understood what is at issue. There is a job to do now, and focus should be on that. A good basis for discussions with Wal-Mart should be their public commitment to get 100 per cent their own supplier base in order through fire safety controls within six months, and their commitment to immediately go public about any factory where dangerous conditions are found. There is surely still a credibility issue, but this new announcement and the concrete follow up on the ground in Bangladesh should remove a lot of the uncertainties. With its huge resources, Wal-Mart would be an important partner in or at least to the Alliance, pulling with it other US retailers as well. If Wal-Mart would put its weight behind the proposal by the H&M CEO Karl-Johan Persson to make sure that minimum wages in Bangladesh would be raised and remain at decent levels, it would be really important. I hope that this is now a window of opportunity that will be used by all those involved, making this historical initiative work.

Julkaistu

Social campaigners should take a thinking time-out and seek cooperation with the CSR community instead of conflict

Last week saw two important campaigner statements that were highly distrustful and suspicious about business sector commitments and remarkably negative towards corporate social responsibility programmes and initiatives. Both referred to last year’s devastating factory fires in Pakistan and Bangladesh. The Clean Clothes Campaign CCC came out with a new booklet, and former International Labor Rights Forum ILRF Executive Director Bama Athreya expressed her opinions in a Huffington Post blog article.

Fatal Fashion is a Clean Clothes Campaign CCC publication that has been written together with SOMO, a research institute close to this Netherlands-based organisation. The booklet is not really a research report even if it contains much essential information on the two tragic factory fires and the follow up by buyers and different stakeholders. It is equally much a statement by the authors on how they would like to see the follow up.

It should be no surprise that global buyers are severely criticised in the CCC booklet, and there are surely valid reasons for that. Much of the factual criticism is correct, although a fundamental mistrust against business filters through also when some targeted companies have clearly shown that suppliers and agents have acted in ways which have been both unauthorised and hidden from the buyers.

To lay the blame for the fires on global buyers cannot be correct as the final responsibility is with factory owners and managers, and the government authorities. Another thing is then  that the setup of these business relations requires serious attention and probably some very fundamental changes to lower or even remove the risk for a future tragedies like these taking place. It is also fair to ask buyers to show the necessary solidarity by contributing in substantial ways to compensating victims and their families. We know that this has nomally been done although there may be discussion and differing opinions about amounts and modes of support.

As so often is the case, generalisations and conclusions are regrettably drawn with a free hand. Faults and even wrong behaviour in individual cases and by individual companies are turned into sweeping allegations. This moves too much focus to accusations and the many concrete and serious suggestions for improving factory conditions don’t get the attention that they should.

Of course, the global supply chains that provide cheap goods for consumers in developed markets are fundamentally problematic and frequently unfair. There is, however, no rolling back of this international trading, that would not even be the right thing to demand. What we need to work for is that the economic participation of less developed regions and countries comes with a clear and strong dimension of human rights and social well-being.

Much effort has gone into convincing business that this must be a serious concern in all supply chain activities. Social campaigners have been instrumental in bringing about this thinking. Important contributions have been made within many companies themselves, large and small, where ethically motivated managers and workers can take pride in their achievements. What starts to be mainstream thinking among world brands and retailers – with all shortcomings that still exist – has not been there for long.

Initiatives such as Social Accountability International SAI which was founded in 1997 have played an incredibly important role in raising awareness and providing business with the tools to protect and defend human rights and social conditions in their supply chains. This engagement by SAI president Alice Tepper Marlin and the SA8000 people has actually been there much longer, with the Council on Economic Priorities (CEP) founded already in 1969. The tone that some campaigners are using when referring to this leading multistakeholder initiative, where also trade unionists participate, tells more about themselves than about the issues that they want to raise.

No other organisation has addressed the shortcomings of CSR initiatives and supply chain social auditing as seriously as SAI and Social Accountability Accreditation Services SAAS have recently done. To bluntly reject the importance of the changes that are already on their way, without presenting any alternatives, is not a credible approach.

I admit that I am concerned over how the tense labour relations in the United States affect the global scene as well. Bama Athreya, who used to lead the International Labor Rights Forum ILRF, wrote in a Huffington Post blog article last week :

” The numerous private monitoring and certification groups that have crowded this space in recent years need to get out of the way, and recognize that competing for brands’ business in Bangladesh will not help to solve the bigger challenges.  They need to cede the space to the US government here.  Consumer-facing advocacy groups need to provide consumers with information about which companies are following the leader, and which are refusing to play. “

Although it deals with the aftermath of the Pakistan and Bangladesh fire catastrophes, the pitch of this message cannot be misunderstood. Buying brands and retailers ” that have crowded this space in recent years need to get out of the way ” and make space for the U.S. Government and campaigner organisations to take care of the challenges.

It is interesting to note that neither CCC nor Ms Athreya pay much attention to the role of trade unions, which after all are the only legitimate representatives for workers when it comes to labour relations. If employers are removed from the scene to create space for governments and social campaigners, then also unions will lose an important part of their influence. This is not a new issue, there have always been some tension between advocacy and campaigner organisations, and trade unions, when these NGO’s have been tempted to take on union roles without being accountable to the workers.

There may be domestic reasons for referring to the U.S. Government, and of course it would be very positive if the Obama administration could give active and effective support for improving the factory fire safety situation in these and other countries.

We have good experiences of this from the time when President Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Labor Robert Reich committed the United States Government to helping end child labour in the production of footballs – soccer balls – in Pakistan’s Sialkot. Here it was UNI Global Union who asked for support, preparing for negotiations with the International Football Federation FIFA.

But still, suppliers and their management are the ones who need to make the concrete changes, and usually also change their approach to their workers. Without clear messages and often even pressure from the brands and retailers who buy and bring their products to the markets this will not happen.

Maybe the author is also unaware that brands and retailers are indeed cooperating when it comes to social supply chain conditions. This was among the main reasons for creating the Global Social Compliance Programme GSCP, and we also see it in the preparations for coordinated activities to address these fire safety issues.

Corporate social responsibility schemes and initiatives can never be a substitute for constructive and fair labour relations between employers and workers and their trade unions. Social audits can never play the role of freely negotiated collective agreements and supportive labour legislation, and proper government oversight. In fact, schemes and initiatives should even stronger than now encourage and promote the development of these internationally agreed ways of protecting workers human, economic and social rights.

There are important parts of the world where the employers and workers, for various reasons, have not been able to get together on these issues. Outside involvement – including a strong engagement of buying brands and retailers through their social responsibility approaches – continues to be needed.

Both global and national trade unions could make much more active use of the declared commitment of leading brands and retailers to require their suppliers to respect freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining. After all, these commitments are a result of a longstanding and continuing engagement by trade unionists in developing these codes, standards and activities.

Telling the global buyers that they are not serious and may as well forget codes, initiatives and capacity building activities among their suppliers would be irresponsible. I am sure that at the end of the day, only a small minority of the people engaged in campagn organisations would take this approach. That US-based SAI and its SA8000 Standard are now singled out also by some who continue their engamenet with often less stringent and more business dominated initiatives is surely related to domestic labour relations issues and not so much part of a broader campaign against CSR.

In a world where governments were unable to introduce even a modest social dimension into their world trade agreements it would be mistaken to think that they can now take over the responsibility. They can and even should increase their engagement, also to set a level playing field for business that requires and also allows for responsible behaviour, but voluntary activities will still remain the key element.

Cooperation is indeed necessary to achieve real change for the better. Business must accept to engage with trade unions and social campaigners, and these need to accept a pragmatic cooperation with business even when the situation at home may be difficult or hostile. To make disadvantaged supply chain workers and their families suffer from adversarial labour relations in developed countries is not acceptable.

Coming from the trade union movement myself, I cannot see any logic or benefit in rejecting voluntary commitments by global brands and retailers to contribute to the respect for  human rights and decent working conditions in supplier workplaces. Correctly applied this would even help union organising efforts. In developed economies where trade unions are sufficiently strong and well established and where tripartite cooperation brings together governments and social partners, this business driven approach to labour relations is of course not needed and should not be applied.

It does not take long to see that an important aim of the CCC publication is to solicit participation and and funding for their 2011  fire safety project. This initiative which also ILRF and some other North American campaigners are part of and that some key Global Union Federations are supporting has failed to attract enough commitments from buying companies. Only German retailer Tchibo and US garment group PVH have signed the project agreement with these campaigners.

I would hope that some additional buying companies could find it possible to back up the campaigner driven Bangladesh fire safety project, to ensure a broad stakeholder participation and to lay the ground for a constructive cooperation and united front of the global community. It would not be good to allow a competitive situation emerge on the ground.

I cannot see any major differences between the 2011 project developed by social campaigners and the work programme that should soon emerge from the cooperation between buyer brands and retailers. If everyone would take a pragmatic approach to these challenges and lay aside ideological motives or possible second agendas, a broad cooperation should be easy to achieve.

I hope that IndustriALL, the Global Union Federation which represents the workers directly concerned, and which has stepped in forcefully on their behalf, can play a convening role in bringing about this joint action.

After the two devastating garment factory fires in Pakistan and Bangladesh it is clear that much of the immediate focus will be on worker safety, without losing sight of the need for other improvements as well. Many buyers themselves as well as social responsibility initiatives such as WRAP, SAI and BSCI have already stepped up their existing awareness and capacity building activities. Companies such as French Carrefour and Swedish H&M have been among those who have already done much concrete work in this field and whose experiences will surely be very useful to draw on.

Structural changes and improvements must follow as soon as possible to make the physical conditions at workplaces safe. This is one of the most important tasks for the buying brands and retailers that are already working together with GIZ, the German Development Angency, to develop concrete action.

The Clean Clothes Campaign and other involved campaigners should seriously consider whether it would not be useful to work together with buying brands and retailers and seek cooperation rather than conflict. The challenges in Bangladesh and Pakistan are of such a magnitude that only a tripartite cooperation in the countries themselves with concrete and broad support from the outside can make a real difference.

Finally – let us not forget that the national partners in Pakistan and Bangladesh – governments, suppliers, unions and other stakeholders – need to play a leading role in all of this. In Bangladesh, a tripartite cooperation has already been set up. This has to be possible also on the international level.

Julkaistu

Brands and retailers should now disclose concrete measures for Bangladesh and Pakistan fire safety and respond positively to IndustriALL cooperation invite

Where are the real, concrete and visible commitments from brands and retailers to help deal with the factory fire safety problems in Bangladesh, Pakistan and other countries? Promises and declarations have been heard, but we are well into 2013 and now is the time for more concrete information.

A company that has shown how one can move fast also on big issues is world’s largest retailer Wal-Mart. It did not take long for them to change their own supply chain conditions, tightening up controls. Also other steps were announced, including support for factories that need to make changes in their fire safety setup. The rapid reaction raises expectations that we will soon see action on the ground.

To be fair, also some others have told the public on what they have been doing and intend to continue with. These include GAP, unfairly and incorrectly in the teeth of US activists because they have gone their own way instead of giving support to the campaigners and their project. H&M and Carrefour have already done much, training management and workers in hundreds of factories. Inditex is now joining IndustriALL in project cooperation.

Perhaps interestingly, when I was Head of UNI Commerce I did negotiate Global Framework Agreements with all three companies – H&M, Carrefour and Inditex, and have good experiences of the social dialogue and cooperation with all of them.

Of course, we need to see much more than training and awareness raising. Physical factory conditions will need to be considerably improved. There will be big implications all the way up to buying conditions and supply arrangements.

Others have been more quiet about their activities, plans and commitments, to say it mildly.

Still, there is much going on, particularly in the fields of training and awareness raising. Craig Moss of Social Fingerprint just came back from a session in Bangladesh, and we see how WRAP and others have been active as well. But where are the brands and retailers themselves, when it comes to telling about the support for the garment industry in problem countries to ensure wokplace safety?

A particular problem is Pakistan. We cannot allow that the country’s difficult security situation leads to less attention being paid to worker safety and other conditions at supplier sites. Although reliable social audits and certifications may be impossible to continue, solutions have to be found that guarantee decent conditions for working people.

Spain’s Inditex – mother company of Zara and other clothing brands – has joined the garment workers in IndustriALL Global Union in an effort to bring about positive change in Bangladesh. This is a welcome move by a responsible retailer, but we need fast follow up also from others.

When I took the initiative last autumn in both Social Accountability International SAI and the Global Social Compliance Programme GSCP to launch action in Pakistan and Bangladesh, an important objective was to build a large coalition where everyone can participate, both business and stakeholders. IndustriALL’s recent announcement shows a similar aim. This global union’s resolve to lift up also other sub-standard working conditions to levels of human decency should stop nobody from supporting and joining.

I know that many brands and retailers – and CSR schemes and initiatives – are discussing and planning concrete activities right now. It should not be difficult to combine these plans with the IndustriALL approach. Fast action is now needed.

I would like to see talks between these leading and responsible brands and retailers, and IndustriALL, to help find a common effective approach. This large global union federation reaches out in a constructive way and business must respond positively. Other conflicts of interest, which surely will continue, cannot be allowed to hinder strong common measures for the human rights of these vulnerable supply chain workers.

The public needs to know how the international business community and its stakeholders are standing up to their promises. I have worked since many years with large brands and retailers, and often been frustrated by what seems to be almost an obsession by many of them to avoid any kind of publicity.

Social media has changed the world of information and the old approach to be quiet and hope that things go away does not work anymore. If nothing else, companies should look at Wal-Mart’s fast reaction as a good example on how to make sure that information gets out and becomes part of the discussion that goes on.

If also European brands and retailers had been more active and alert, and read the situation correctly, parts of the European Parliament Resolution on Bangladesh Fire Safety could have looked different. Just to mention one example.

The brands and retailers and those who coordinate these fire safety programmes for them have to get their information activities in order. To keep the public informed is an important part of the job. Until now, they are underperforming.

The buying public has the right to know what is being done to help avoid disasters such as those that cost the lives of hundreds of Pakistani and Bangladeshi workers under appalling circumstances.

Julkaistu

IndustriALL General Secretary Jyrki Raina makes important opening for broad concrete fire safety cooperation in Bangladesh – brands and retailers should accept his invitation without delay

IndustriALL and its General Secretary Jyrki Raina are right when they are calling for broad cooperation to deal with the appalling fire risks in the Bangladesh garment industry.

On the IndustriALL Global Union Federation’s website, Jyrki Raina calls for “urgent and serious action to prevent further tragedies”.

“We invite all major international brands, national employers and the government of Bangladesh to start an urgent discussion with us on a concrete plan of action”, he says.

The brands and retailers who are sourcing and buying garments in global supply chains should welcome and accept IndustriALL’s invitation.

Recently, world’s largest retailer Wal-Mart published its new requirements for suppliers, which when applied should have an important and positive impact on factory fire safety. Also other leading brands and retailers are working on similar issues. They should already be prepared to move to concrete activities reasonably fast.

Immediately after the devastating Ali Enterprises fire in Pakistan in September I took the initiative for the Global Social Compliance Programme GSCP to make its convening power available so that major buyers can get together around joint project activities. This was indeed picked up rapidly by these multinational corporations and a coalition is now actively working on these issues, focusing on Bangladesh but also opening up possibilities to act in Pakistan.

Also from this point of view, the IndustriALL initiative is timely. If real change is to be achieved, as it must, a broad cooperation that includes all stakeholders is needed. Also corporate social responsibility schemes and initiatives such as Social Acccountability International SAI should make their experiences and know-how available, but above all listen carefully to any views on needs for changes.

It would be important that urgent discussions be held between the large buyer brands and retailers and IndustriALL Global Union which represents the Bangladesh garment workers, about how they will work together on the concrete challenges.

IndustriALL and its General Secretary Jyrki Raina have done an important service to all, and particularly to the workers in this Asian region, by reminding that the attention must now be focused on achieving real, significant and fast change.