| Trade Unions: An overlooked right | | Print | |
Page 3 of 4 Top-down: how the brands see itThe companies we wrote to in this report were all at pains to emphasise their 'zero-tolerance' approach to abuses of the right to freedom of association. Where cases of union oppression were brought to their attention, they said, they made it clear to suppliers that this would not be tolerated (though the case history sometimes tells a different story, as Arcadia's reluctance to acknowledge the problems at the Cambodia Fortune factory demonstrates). Only a few companies seem to have recognised that freedom of association can actually help them to fulfil their commitments on workers' rights. Gap is one of them, telling us that, "We believe that a strong system of industrial relations can have a positive impact on both productivity and wages." As we outlined above, to access the right to freedom of association means more than just for it to exist in principle. Workers - and their managers - need to know that it is an internationally recognised, legally protected right. Some companies have realised this. For example, New Look said, "If neither workers nor management are aware of the benefits of freedom of association, these structures do not provide any real protection for workers." H&M agreed that, "The right to freedom of association is only of any value if workers and management understand the rights of workers and the various benefits they entail." So what are companies doing for the vast majority of workers that do not have access to their right to organise? Some companies told us that they believed the responsibility for this kind of education lies with factory management. For example, Asda said that, "Suppliers and factory managers have the obligation to inform their workers of their legal rights and to take the necessary steps that will facilitate such processes. It is also the responsibility of the suppliers and factory management to properly communicate and educate their factory workers." "We encourage our suppliers to promote an open dialogue between factory management and their workforce. This is monitored through risk evaluation reports." These kinds of responses surprised us, as the conflict of interest between supplier managements who are under pressure to reduce costs and lead times, and the interests of their workers, is evident. Training needs to be conducted by local trade unions and labour rights NGOs, not by factory managements or the brands themselves. Other companies were taking some active steps, and it is here that it becomes difficult to distinguish between the token and the substantive. Most of these efforts seem limited at present to training factory managers, and a few pilot projects for training workers. For example, Sainsbury's has, "Worked with trade unions directly in countries such as Cambodia to ensure that workers' rights in this area are known and protected." New Look 's response focused on its efforts in China, from where a large proportion of its products are sourced: "we are currently working with one of our biggest suppliers and a group of their factories on developing health & safety committees including worker representatives" Few companies had set a goal to establish training for all workers across their supplier base. One exception appears to be Next , who said that, "One of our key objectives is to build education and training programmes across our supplier base on rights in the workplace, and to maintain good relationships with trade unions." Instead, many believed that posting up their code of conduct in factories, and distributing booklets to workers, was sufficient. Pentland, for example, told us, "We are producing a series of booklets with the Guangdong Department of Labour for managers and worker on their rights and responsibilities. We participated in the Sri Lanka ETI project which produced booklets for workers." |
||||||
| Last Updated ( Monday, 18 September 2006 ) | ||||||
Supporters
