Joint Initiative for Corporate Accountability and Workers

Transcript Joint Initiative for Corporate Accountability and Workers

Joint Initiative for Corporate Accountability and Workers Rights

Training Seminar Turkey 2006

Module 1 1

Why are we here?

Purpose of this seminar

• To inform local stakeholders about Jo In and its 6 member organizations • To encourage effective use of these systems to improve workplace conditions

Why are we here?

What the seminar provides

• Overview of the 6 international organizations that founded the

int

itiative (

Jo-In

) • Guidance for using complaints mechanisms • Information about the Jo-In project in Turkey

Contents: Module 1

• The global context • Specialized terminology used in this field • The 6 organizations • • • • • Membership and governance Approaches Code contents Auditing and remediation Disclosure and public reporting

Contents: Module 2

• Jo-In project in Turkey – how it works • Using complaints systems to address workplace violations • Imaginary scenarios to practice using these systems

How’s it work? Seminar ground rules

• Participate in two full days of seminar • Respect each others’ views • Respect time limits (including breaks!) • Questions are welcome • Share your experiences • There are no wrong answers

Testing our “reporting skills”

Getting to know one another

• Find someone you do not already know. Take

minutes

to exchange information with them regarding the following:  Name, organizational affiliation  Where the person is from  What they seek

to learn

in this seminar  A

single fact

they already know about one of the six organizations covered in this training • Introduce that person to the group in

less than one minute

The context in which we work In this section, we briefly review:

• International worker rights • How international standards were developed • International legal framework for enforcement • Challenges posed by globalization • Innovative responses to globalization to support worker rights

Basic worker rights

• Freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining • No forced labor • No discrimination • No child labor

Are universal human rights recognized by almost all countries worldwide.

Basic worker rights Are included in a host of international agreements, including:

• UN Human Rights Declaration (1948) • ILO’s Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (1998)

Recognized by more than 170 countries

Basic worker rights Are reconfirmed in various international agreements:

• UN Covenants • ILO Conventions • European Union Charter • OECD Guidelines • Regional human rights conventions

(e.g. European Convention on Human Rights – Turkey is a member)

Drafted and agreed by the international community over decades

International Labor Organization

ILO - The UN agency devoted to the world of work

The fundamentals:

• ILO Conventions are the primary international agreements codifying labor standards • ILO Conventions are treaties • Conventions focus on

government responsibility

In this context, the government of Turkey bears an international responsibility to ensure that workers rights are respected within its national boundaries.

Challenges

This model of government enforcement of worker rights has been challenged in recent decades

Globalization

• Transportation and communication costs are cheaper • Trade barriers (tariffs, quotas) are on the decline

In today’s global economy, more goods and capital are moving across national boundaries than ever before

In today’s global economy

• Toys, apparel, and footwear are made in workplaces around the world • Abundance of workers in many parts of the world • Often companies can opt to change where they produce in order to lower production costs

Workers, management, and governments are in competition to keep jobs and production from moving away.

In today’s global economy

• There are incentives to compete based on lower labor costs • Government regulation is more complicated with supply chains reaching across national boundaries • Nonetheless, the importance of government enforcement is no less real in today’s global economy

There is a call for international structures to bolster governments in upholding international labor standards

Responses to challenges Include:

• Building international organizations that take a standardized approach to enforcing worker rights • Using market forces, such as consumer demands for “sweatshop free” clothes, to ensure that goods are produced in fair conditions

Each of the 6 organizations participating in Jo-In seek to take one or both of these approaches to support the enforcement of worker rights around the world

Responses to challenges The 6 organizations in Jo-In

• Clean Clothes Campaign • Ethical Trading Initiative • Fair Labor Association • Fair Wear Foundation

Respond to challenges in global economy.

• Social Accountability International • Workers Rights Consortium

But DO NOT seek to replace government

Responses to challenges Group Discussion

What are various stakeholders * doing to respond to the international call for fair working conditions in today’s global economy?

E.g.: Consumers

– learn about poor workplace conditions internationally from the news media. They seek goods that are not made in sweatshops.

•

Workers

•

Major retailers, brands, etc

•

Governments

•

Factories

•

Trade Unions

•

NGOs (non-governmental organizations)

* Stakeholder = any individual or group affected by a particular entity/activity

Key terms

A brief review of some of the more specialized terms used in discussions about Code implementation. For example: Term used in this training

Alternative terms follow Stakeholder – Interested Party

: Any individual or group that is affected by an entity or activity, in this case, the operations of an enterprise.

All definitions are in the training workbook

Key terms – Actors

Stakeholder – Interested Party

: Any individual or group that is affected by an entity or activity, in this case, the operations of an enterprise.

Workers are key stakeholders in discussions about workplace conditions. Who are some other important stakeholders?

Key terms – Actors

MSI – Multi-stakeholder Initiative

: A project or organization that brings together various stakeholders (e.g. companies, trade unions, and/or NGOs) to address specific issues (e.g. effective implementation of Codes of Conduct).

Example: Most of the six organizations in Jo-In are MSIs.

Key terms – Actors

Brand – sourcing company – buyer – retailer:

Companies that buy goods through contracts with manufacturers.

For example:

•

In this project, Gap Inc. is referred to as a brand, a sourcing company to Factory X.

A brand (a sourcing company or retailer) may own one or more “brand names” (a word or name used by a company to identify its goods).

For example:

•

Gap Inc. is associated with several brand names

– Gap, Old •

Navy, Banana Republic.

Marks & Spencer is a retailer associated with brand names,

such as Blue Harbour or Autograph.

Key terms – Actors

Facility – manufacturer – supplier – vendor – contractor:

In this project, the term “facility” is used for any company that produces apparel through a contract with a sourcing company.

Example: There are approximately 6 facilities participating in this pilot project.

Note: The term

“workplace”

is often used interchangeably with “facility.” In this project, however, “workplace” has a broader meaning, covering home based and other subcontracted work.

Key terms – Actors

Subcontractor:

A company hired by the manufacturer/facility to carry out part of production.

In the context of this project, subcontractors can be identified if they do not have a contract with the brand.

Key terms – Actors

Licensee:

A company that is licensed to produce goods bearing another company’s (or university’s) brand name or logo through a contract with that company/university.

Example: Zephyr GrafX is licensed to produce goods that bear Columbia University’s name & logo.

Key terms – Actors

NGO

–

non-governmental organization:

Organizations that are not part of the government nor companies (for-profit organizations).

Used in this context for local or international organizations that are not trade unions but promote workers’ rights in some way.

Key terms – Activities

Social auditing – monitoring – verification

: Activities undertaken to assess workplace conditions of a given facility. These terms may also be used to describe a broader set of activities undertaken to assess a company’s (usually a brand’s) adherence to defined social standards in its supply chain.

Key terms - Activities

Remediation – corrective action

: Action taken to correct non-compliance with a labor standard. A

corrective action plan

is the program of action drawn up to resolve the code violation.

Remediation strategies are a main focus of the Turkey project and will be addressed later in the seminar.

Key terms

Complaint – appeal –

charges that the Code standards of a given organization are not being respected. A

complaints mechanism

is the system through which a complaint is received and processed.

Each of the six organizations has its own system for complaints and appeals, which will be reviewed in the second module. See workbook for other terms and definitions

  

Small group activity

Design the ideal, imaginary organization working to improve workplace conditions internationally. Imagine together:

  The organization’s approach -- rate the importance of the following activities (1-4)  Building the capacity of local actors in the countries where the organization works  Experimental projects that establish best practice for Code implementation  Auditing workplace conditions and company practices  Reporting on factory/brand performance The countries where it focuses its work and where it is based Who it is composed of (i.e. stakeholder groups) Identify challenges you imagine encountering in trying to establish this organization (e.g. balancing different interests, prioritizing work, funding, etc.) Name the organization

You have 20 minutes. Be prepared to report the reasons for your choices.

Who are “the 6”?

In this section we review the 6 organizations’

• General approach • Members and governance • Codes • Approaches to social auditing • Disclosure/reporting

We look at the many things they have in common and some of the key differences

“The 6” members of Jo-In are:

Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) -

Netherlands

Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) –

England

Fair Labor Association (FLA) –

USA

Fair Wear Foundation (FWF) -

Netherlands

Social Accountability International (SAI) –

USA

Workers Rights Consortium (WRC) –

USA

What the 6 have in common

They all work internationally to improve workplace conditions

Their purpose is to raise standards worldwide, rather than target any given country

What the 6 have in common A birds-eye view

• Founded between 1991-2000 in response to changes in global economy • All have a stated mission to improve workplace conditions around the world • All have drafted and adopted Codes of Conduct to achieve this goal • Want to cooperate in order to learn and become more effective in their work

Main differences arise in approaches taken to implement Codes… …and who’s involved in steering the organizations.

General approaches

•

CCC

Raises public awareness about worker rights through general

appeals

•

ETI

Learning good practice through pilot

projects

and forums •

FLA

Verifying

brand

compliance with standards •

FWF

•

SAI

Certifies

facilities

that implement SA8000; supports

brands

compliance efforts •

WRC

Investigates conditions in factories producing

university-licensed

apparel

Over time, the organizations have increasingly taken on similar activities.

Company membership

Those with brand members Organization Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI) Number of Examples of member companies companies

Gap, Marks & Spencer

ASDA, Chiquita, Levi & Strauss, Mothercare, Next, Pentland Group, Sainsbury’s, Tesco, Body Shop, Boots, WH Smith.

Fair Labor Association (FLA) Fair Wear Foundation (FWF)

28 > 1000 licensees 18

adidas, Nike, Patagonia, Puma

Eddie Bauer, H&M, Liz Claiborne, Nordstrom, PVH, Reebok Top of the World, Zephyr GrafX -- companies producing goods bearing the logo of FLA university members.

Hess Natur

Expresso, Faithful, Falcon International, Gsus, JSI-O’Neill, Mervin Marxx, Pama International

Social Accountability International (SAI)

12 763 certified factories

Gap

Cutter & Buck, Dole, Eileen Fisher, Timberland, Toys R Us. Yeşim and Topkapi are Turkey’s 2 certified apparel factories. See workbook for more.

Those without brand members Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) Workers Rights Consortium (WRC)

0 0 Has been engaged in pilot projects involving brands.

No brand membership. List of relevant university licensees (i.e. those producing for member universities) is provided online.

Members & decision-making

Organization Members

Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) Ethical Trading Initiative (ETI)

NGOs, trade unions Companies, trade unions, NGOs

Fair Labor Association (FLA)

Companies, universities, NGOs

Fair Wear Foundation (FWF) Social Accountability International (SAI)

Companies, trade unions, NGOs Companies, trade unions, NGOs, government

Workers Rights Consortium (WRC)

Universities, trade unions, NGOs

Decision-makers

Each national CCC coalition has its own Board, which contributes to the direction of the international CCC through regular regional meetings.

10-person Board: 3 NGOs; 3 trade unions; 3 companies; 1 chair.

Income/Funding

Grants from governments, non profits and foundations Company membership fees; government grants 16-person Board: 6 companies; 6 NGOs; 3 universities; 1 chair.

10-person Board: 4 business associations; 2 trade unions; 2 NGOs; 1 chair. 7-person Board, advised by Advisory Board. Both have equal representation between business and non-business representatives.

Company membership fees; university membership fees; foundation grants Company membership fees; trade union fees; grants from non-profits.

Company membership fees; training; auditor accreditation fees; foundation grants 15-person Board: 5 universities; 5 NGOs; 5 labor rights experts.

University membership fees; foundation and government grants

Members and decision-making Highlights

• All 6 have NGO membership • FLA and WRC have university members • Non-company members make up at least half of all 6 organizations’ Boards • CCC and WRC have no company members • FLA does not have trade union involvement in decision-making structures

Industry focus

The initiatives are distinguished by the industries where they work. While 3 specialize in apparel, 3 also work in other industries.

Only apparel

• CCC • FWF • WRC

Apparel and other industries

• ETI • FLA • SAI

Ways local stakeholders are involved At a glance

• Advisory boards and caucuses • Training and capacity building • Projects in different countries • Informal and formal consultations • Third party complaints mechanisms

“The 6” Group discussion

Have you been involved in any of these or other activities with any one of the 6? Which activity? How did the activity correspond to the organization’s mission and approach?

“The 6”

The six organizations in Jo-In

Codes and Social Auditing

Codes of Conduct 6 organizations – 6 codes

• CCC – Code of Labour Practices • ETI – Base Code • FLA – Workplace Code of Conduct • FWF – Code of Labour Practices • SAI – SA8000 Standard • WRC – Model Code of Conduct

Basic code provisions What they all cover

• Freedom of association • Collective bargaining • No forced labor • No child labor • No discrimination • Occupational health and safety • Hours of work • Wage provisions (from “minimum” to “dignified living wage”)

Basic code provisions Additional provisions

• A legal employment relationship (CCC, ETI, FWF) • Women’s rights (WRC) • Management systems (SAI) • No inhumane treatment (ETI)

• No harassment or abuse (FLA, SAI, WRC)

*The codes that do not contain a separate provision covering inhuman treatment or harassment and abuse fold these under health and safety provisions.

Content of code provisions Main divergence

• Wages • Hours of work • Freedom of association

Partially explains why the Jo-In project focuses on implementation of these 3 code provisions

Content of code provisions Wages

“Wages and benefits paid for a standard working week shall meet at least legal or industry minimum standards and always be sufficient to meet basic needs of workers and their families and to provide some discretionary income.” -- FWF Code of Labour Practice

• CCC, ETI, FWF, SAI codes have similar living wage texts • WRC code - “dignified living wage” - may differ from a “basic needs” wage • FLA code - “minimum wage” or “prevailing industry wage” whichever is higher

Content of code provisions Hours of work

Hours of work shall comply with applicable laws and industry standards. In any event, workers shall not on a regular basis be required to work in excess of 48 hours per week and shall be provided with at least one day off for every 7 day period. Overtime shall be voluntary, shall not exceed 12 hours per week, shall not be demanded on a regular basis and shall always be compensated at a premium rate. - CCC’s Code of Labour Practice

• CCC, ETI, FWF, SAI codes have similar text • WRC code - overtime must be voluntary, but no maximum (e.g. 60 hours) for overtime • FLA code - more than 60 hours allowed in peak periods; does not state overtime must be voluntary

Content of code provisions Freedom of association

2. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining Are Respected

2.1 Workers, without distinction, have the right to join or form trade unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively. 2.2 The employer adopts an open attitude towards the activities of trade unions and their organisational activities. 2.3 Workers representatives are not discriminated against and have access to carry out their representative functions in the workplace. -- ETI Base Code

• All codes – right to form/join trade unions of their choice; bargain collectively • ETI and CCC - “open” or “positive” attitude • FLA, SAI, WRC – against company interference (“neutral” attitude) • ETI, FWF, SAI – provision of parallel means where prohibited by law (China).

Content of code provisions Group discussion

Considering ways in which the codes differ, what approach would you recommend taking in the development of a

Common Code?

Would you opt to adopt one of the 6 codes? Would you adopt the highest standards across the codes? Would you start by trying to develop an entirely new code? We will review the contents of the Jo-In draft Code in Module 2

Social auditing – what’s it involve?

Social auditing Group discussion

What is the purpose of social auditing? What are some common observations about the ways that auditing is carried out today? What are your thoughts about how to make it effective?

Later in the seminar, compare whether your views correspond with approaches taken by these organizations.

Social auditing – monitoring – verification – investigations

Those who do it

FLA

“Independent external monitoring” in 3-5% of supply chains/year. Requires member companies to conduct internal audits of their entire supply chains by their 3 rd year of membership.

FWF SAI WRC

“External verification” in 10% of facilities/3 years. Member companies also supposed to conduct internal audits covering all supplier facilities by 3 rd year (like FLA).

“SA8000 audits” in facilities seeking SA8000 certification. Member companies may also conduct SA8000 audits in selected sourcing facilities. “Investigations” of factories producing university-licensed goods. Unlike others, WRC investigations are initiated without any company approval. The onsite approach also differs significantly.

Those who don’t

CCC ETI

Neither conducts social auditing of supply chains. But both have undertaken research and pilot projects to ascertain good practice in social auditing.

What it entails A general overview

Note: This process is more representative of FLA, FWF, and SAI than WRC, which takes a slightly different approach.

• • •

Preparation

• Background information collected (e.g. number of workers, languages spoken, etc.) • Consultations with trade unions (local & national, NGOs, labor experts)

Interviews

• Workers • Factory managers • Trade union and/or worker representatives • Supervisors

Onsite audit

• Records review (personnel records, hours, wages) • Facility inspection (health and safety, hygiene, etc.)

An audit typically takes 2-6 days, depending on factory size and which of the 3 organizations’ audit methodologies is used.

What it entails How methods differ

• WRC  in-depth, off-site interviews with workers and local experts. • WRC  spans weeks or months • FLA, WRC  always unannounced visits

SAI recommends it for surveillance audits

• FWF, WRC  worker interviews conducted off-site

SAI and FLA recommend it whenever possible

• SA8000 certification  involves several audits

pre-audit visits; certification audit; later surveillance

Who conducts the work?

•

FLA monitors

= 16 groups accredited by FLA for specified countries. •

FWF verification teams

= 3 people teams selected and trained by FWF for work in a single country. •

SA8000 certification bodies

= 13 groups trained and accredited by SAI, mostly to work globally.

•

WRC investigative teams

= members of local labor groups, academics, WRC staff member.

What follows Remediation - corrective action

•

FLA and FWF

– corrective action plan established by factory and brand, with MSI staff guidance.

•

SAI

– facility designs and implements corrective action plan after approval by SA8000 auditor. •

WRC

– recommends remedial action. Investigation continues until violation resolved.

Evidence of corrective action is required by all to be able to move forward.

What follows Remediation - corrective action

Root cause analysis: For example:

Inadequate planning Short lead times

Forced overtime 60

What follows Follow-up visits

• FLA conducts follow-up visits where serious violations occurred. • FWF conducts follow-up visits to all facilities to verify corrective actions.

• If a factory is certified, SAI conducts surveillance audits every 6-12 months for 3 years.

• WRC investigation is ongoing until the case is resolved.

Accessing the results

Who sees factory findings & remediation?

FLA FWF SAI WRC

Factory

     

MSI

 May access, if needed.

  

Brand Trade union in factory Workers in factory Local Partners Public Website

 Detailed report posted in 6 months   After first round of improve ments.

 General report only.

 Only if brand is authorized.

 Usually may access.

    

Social auditing, etc.

Partner work

Based on the approaches taken by “the 6,” work with the person next to you to develop a program for social auditing (or monitoring/verification/investigation)

• What is the purpose of your social auditing program? E.g. verifying brand compliance programs, factory certification, etc. • Which issues and activities do you focus on during the process (e.g. health & safety; interviews)? • What individuals/groups do you select to conduct the audits? Using what criteria? • How do you approach remediation? How do you confirm that remediation has been undertaken? • What is your policy on reporting outcomes of auditing and remediation?

Public Reporting and disclosure What’s disclosed and to whom?

CCC Factory names disclosed

Where workers have given permission, factory names are provided.

Factory conditions disclosed

All information accessible to public, especially workers and their representatives.

Brand performance disclosed

May publicly assess brands based on their supply chain performance.

ETI FLA FWF

N/A FLA monitoring reports do not use factory names. University licensees’ factory names accessed on web.

Are only shared with workers and workplace trade union representatives.

Companies send summarized reports on conditions in their supply chains to ETI secretariat.

Factory conditions in independently monitored facilities are publicly disclosed on FLA website, listing only the relevant brands.

Brief summaries of findings from FWF verification visits are covered in FWF’s annual report.

Company reports shared internally among ETI members. Through confidential process, members are rated and share “good practice”. Online annual report details brand activities to improve workplace conditions. Brands are publicly evaluated when they are “accredited” after 3 years. Annual report (available online) briefly reviews member brands’ compliance activities.

SAI

All certified factories and their addresses accessed on SAI website. Audit reports can be accessed by SAI staff.

WRC

All reports contain factory names. All factories that fall within WRC scope accessible on website database. All findings are made public and shared with workers and their representatives.

Brands’ programs evaluated internally. Brands opt to publicly report summary of this evaluation or percentage of supply chain SA8000 certified. N/A

Public Reporting and disclosure What’s disclosed and to whom?

Key points

• CCC and WRC – full public disclosure of all findings.

CCC discloses factory names only upon workers’ request.

• FLA – detailed public reporting on monitored factories & brands’ programs. • FWF – publishes summaries of brands’ performance.

• SAI – discloses names and addresses of certified facilities. Internal evaluation of brands’ performance. • ETI – internal evaluation of brands’ performance.

Most are still exploring best methods for effective public reporting.

Today we discussed:

• The global context • Specialized terminology used in this field • The 6 organizations • General approach • • Membership Codes • • Approaches to social auditing Disclosure/reporting

Small group activity Comparison with imagined organizations

Return to your small groups and together reflect on what was covered in Module 1. Identify which of the 6 organizations is most similar to your imaginary organization. What were the similarities? What were the differences? Identify ways in which your imaginary organizations would benefit from cooperation with any or all of the 6. List the kind of activities your organization would like to include in a joint project with the other organization(s). Where would you propose to host the project?

Hold onto notes from this discussion for use in Module 2.

Independent work Designing the Jo-In project

Module 2 will deal with 1) how the Jo-In project works, and 2) how complaints mechanisms work. To prepare for Module 2, review what you’ve learned today and consider how you would design the Jo-In project to achieve its two main goals: • To enhance cooperation among the 6 organizations • To learn from each other in order to be more effective in improving workplace conditions around the world.