Workers must have a place at the table when working conditions are monitored and set by suppliers, buyers and CSR schemes
Are social audits credible when promoting decent work in global supply chains? This is surely a relevant question, often asked by unions and social campaigners, who may also harbour suspicions that they are used against unionisation.
The recent tragedies in Pakistan and Bangladesh, where devastating factory fires killed hundreds of apparel workers, have also raised questions about the reliability of audit based approaches in verifying and incluencing labour conditions, in these cases health and safety.
Let’s not forget that there are also those in the business world who do see audit based systems as something of a ‘paternalistic’ alternative to union involvement.
In large parts of the world, genuine freedom of association is not respected, or structured labour relations do not exist. The trade union movement, including global trade union federations, do support organising and union capacity building, but lack the resources and outreach to cover more than minor parts of the total labour markets in most producing countries.
Here, serious CSR schemes with stakeholder involvement and influence are still important. They are also far superior to home-made attempts to ‘certify’ supplier workplaces against codes and standards that have never been intended for this, inclusing ISO 26000.
Labour legislation and collective agreements remains the main approach to setting working conditions. CSR schemes must actively support this through worker empowerment. Normally, this is done through employers recognising trade unions and involving themselves in collective labour relations. It may also take place through other workplace or company structures such as worls councils, but also in this case the worker representation must be independent and not influenced by management.
Buyers must actively support training, capacity building and other concrete measures. The aim is that decent conditions which comply with ILO Standards are agreed by social partners, supported by proper legislation and effective government action.
From a passive acceptance of freedom of association, the CSR schemes and initiatives should consider moving forward towards more actively promoting social dialogue and organised labour relations built on mutual respect. Perhaps we should also rethink the prevailing approach to management systems and considerably strengthen social dialogue and worker participation dimensions? Too often proper conditions are not sustained between audits, as workers are not empowered to participate collectively.
Also brands and retailers need to be directly engaged. Receiving audit reports does not mean that they have done their part.
We need to see concrete results of CSR approaches through reliable reporting, remediation where it is needed, and active support for programmes in supplier countries.
Profit-driven commercial auditing companies and social auditors’ visits during a few days every year are not enough. Maybe the whole social audit system needs to be reviewed so that the engagement of auditors does not end when the audit report is issued?
Key to enabling any remediation and results is of course that brands and retailers give a chance and space for proper conditions through decent purchasing practices. At the end of the day, most of the serious flaws and shortcomings in working conditions that we see in so many supplier workplaces can not be corrected unless buying brands and retailers are prepared to accept that this is reflected also in their supplier contracts.