Tchibo and IndustriALL continue to build industrial relations in the supply chain

The parties met in Hamburg, Germany at the beginning of April to review the work of the last two years and to develop plans for 2019 and 2020.  Participants from India, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Turkey and Myanmar attended the two-day workshop.

GFAs are negotiated at the global level between trade unions and companies. They establish the best possible standards on trade union rights, on health and safety, and on the labour relations principles adhered to by the company in its global operations, regardless of the standards existing in a particular country. For the agreement to be effective, national plans need to be developed between IndustriALL and its national affiliates, and Tchibo.

“IndustriALL national affiliates in production countries need to ensure that the GFAs are respected in the brands’ supply chain and the development of joint country plans between trade unions, brands and their suppliers are essential,”

added textile and garment director Christina Hajagos-Clausen.

Plans range from setting up Tchibo supplier meetings to raise awareness of the agreement to build capacity for factory trade union leaders and management to working on a series of freedom of association commitments. Further, participants shared struggles and successes since the signing of the agreement – for example the recently organized Tchibo supplier, Beks in Turkey.

ArcelorMittal unions aim for stronger global dialogue

Fifty leaders from unions at ArcelorMittal in 15 countries meeting on 8-9 April 2019 adopted a plan of action and called for IndustriALL Global Union to approach ArcelorMittal global management to begin discussions with the aim of achieving a Global Framework Agreement.

This was the second meeting of the ArcelorMittal Global Union Network, which was founded in Luxembourg in July 2018.

Participants discussed developments since the first meeting of the network. These include an improvement in ArcelorMittal management’s approach to industrial relations in Kazakhstan and Ukraine, from provoking conflict to supporting positive industrial relations.

Meschack Robertsons of NUMSA provided an update on the strike at ArcelorMittal in South Africa, where the union is demanding permanent jobs for contract workers and equal pay for work of equal value.

The meeting was shocked by a report from USW about resistance to attempts by workers at an ArcelorMittal joint venture in Calvert, Alabama, USA to organize with USW. The network unanimously passed a resolution condemning the anti-union campaign being waged by local management. The resolution urges ArcelorMittal global management to ensure that local management respects an agreement that ArcelorMittal will remain neutral when its workers attempt to organize with USW.

The network shows solidarity for ArcelorMittal workers in Alabama

ArcelorMittal head of human resources for South America Adriani Damazio spoke at the meeting and addressed questions and comments raised by participants. Damazio expressed the company’s commitment to working collaboratively with unions and reported on steps ArcelorMittal is taking to empower women and other historically underrepresented groups within the company.

Brazilian unions raised concern that ArcelorMittal has not collaborated with them to address challenges presented by the Brazilian government’s recent weakening of labour legislation and called on the company to take the high road in industrial relations and collective bargaining.

The network discussed opportunities and challenges presented by Industry 4.0. Participants concluded that ArcelorMittal must be more inclusive of unions in this change process.

The meeting also included a panel discussion about women’s participation in the network. The network decided to make gender equality an agenda item in all its meetings, to include gender issues on the agenda of dialog with the company, and to strive for more female participation in these meetings.

Stated IndustriALL assistant general secretary Kemal Özkan:

“We appreciate the participation and support provided by ArcelorMittal for this meeting, and we commend ArcelorMittal for its role in recent improvements in industrial relations in Ukraine and Kazakhstan. However, significant challenges remain. We believe that global social dialogue is essential to addressing those challenges, and that this can best be achieved through ArcelorMittal entering into a global framework agreement with IndustriALL Global Union.”

IndustriALL suspends global agreement with Volkswagen

At IndustriALL Global Union’s executive committee in December last year, there was a unanimous decision to suspend the global framework agreement, called the Declaration on Social Rights and Industrial Relations at Volkswagen, safeguarding workers’ rights, if the German car giant continued to refuse to allow workers at its plant in Chattanooga to join a union.

“We regret Volkswagen’s behaviour and as long as the company refuses to honour its 2002 commitment with IndustriALL we see no other alternative than to consider the agreement suspended as of today, while we consider further actions together with our affiliated unions,” says Valter Sanches, IndustriALL general secretary.

Skilled workers at Volkswagen’s plant in Chattanooga voted in December 2015 to join US union UAW. Not only has the democratic election result not been recognized in the workplace, Volkswagen is actively fighting it in court, trying to stop the workers from joining a union.

Volkswagen has appealed against a ruling of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in August 2016, which ruled in favour of the UAW, to stop the workers exercising their fundamental right of freedom of association.

In a letter to IndustriALL dated 15 January this year, the company states that it will accept the final ruling of the NLRB, but makes no reference to withdrawing its appeal from the NLRB’s previous ruling in favour of the UAW, which IndustriALL is demanding.

“We have good working relations with Volkswagen elsewhere in the world and suspending the GFA is unfortunate. But the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining is central to us,” Sanches continues.

“The vote held by the skilled workers at the Chattanooga plant is in accordance with ILO Convention No. 87 as well as US law, and Volkswagen must respect the right of the workers to freely choose their union.”

In a meeting in December, 2018 the World Works Council of Volkswagen Workers unanimously declared full solidarity with the VW workers in Chattanooga and defended their legitimate right to join the UAW.

FEATURE: Supply chain justice through binding global agreements

Text: Jenny Holdcroft

Even the notion of who their workers are has broken down, lost in the maze of multiple layers of global supply chain subcontracting, outsourcing and agencies, and all designed to allow corporations to evade responsibility for the workers who contribute to their profits.

It is no wonder that calls for more control and regulation of multinational corporations (MNCs) are growing stronger. Self-regulation, supported by company auditing on human rights performance, has lost all credibility, while the plethora of voluntary reporting mechanisms that support it are unable to convince that worker rights are respected.

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), endorsed by the UN Human Rights Council in 2011, provide the first UN backed framework for the responsibilities of MNCs. There is wide support for the UNGPs since they synthesize society’s expectations of MNCs, however they fall short of imposing any actual obligations on companies, regardless of whether they adopt or reject the UNGPs.

In response, 84 governments, supported by many civil society organisations, are proposing a binding legal instrument to protect people from human rights abuses by MNCs. In June 2014, the UN Human Rights Council agreed to set up an Intergovernmental Working Group to produce a draft treaty. The first draft of a ‘Legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises’ was released in July 2018. It focuses less on the obligations of MNCs and more on access to remedy and justice by victims of corporate abuse. It does not aim to create or recognize any direct human rights obligations for MNCs under international law, but it would create obligations for states to legislate or otherwise hold businesses legally accountable for abuses committed in their operations1. It contains some mandatory due diligence measures that would entail governments requiring MNCs to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their human rights impacts, but it is not clear how these obligations would be monitored and enforced by governments, particularly given the current weak enforcement of labour rights in many countries. Another potential pitfall is how companies will be held accountable for abuses in their supply chains. The language in the draft uses a broad definition of liability, including where a company ‘controls’ operations or has a ‘close relation’ with the entity in its supply chain, giving a strong incentive for MNCs to deny or avoid such connections2. We can expect strong opposition from MNCs to such a binding treaty, and the process has a long way yet to go.

In 2016, the International Labour Conference held a tripartite discussion on decent work in global supply chains. The resolution that emerged called on the ILO Governing Body to convene a tripartite or experts meeting to assess the failures that lead to decent work deficits in global supply chains, and to consider what guidance, programmes, measures, initiatives or standards are needed to address this. This meeting will take place in February 2019. Unions will continue to use this process to push for an ILO Convention on global supply chains, though support from employers and governments for a standard that requires binding regulation on MNCs will be difficult to achieve.

In the continuing absence of binding regulation, MNCs are nonetheless sensitive to issues that impact on their reputation. The outpouring of global outrage at the 2013 collapse of the Rana Plaza building in Bangladesh, which took the lives of more than 1,100 workers and injured many more, was felt throughout the textile and garment industry, and most acutely by those brands that were found to have been buying clothing made in the building. In the direct aftermath, sensitivity to having their brand associated with death and maiming drove more than 200 MNCs to sign a legally-binding agreement with IndustriALL and UNI Global Unions – the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh.

Association with major human rights violations can have a real impact on company sales and share value. Pressure is strongest on those companies that directly face consumers, but this is by no means a guarantee that they will respond to calls for change. In 2010, Apple was confronted with multiple suicides of workers making its iPhone at Foxconn in China, but despite the negative media and campaigning, its reputation among its consumers did not suffer (nor its sales) and it succeeded in riding out the storm of criticism. For the many MNCs in IndustriALL’s sectors that have lower brand recognition, there are fewer opportunities for public pressure to drive behavioural change. The demands of the market, investors and shareholders for increased profits will always win out if there is no countervailing pressure.

Confronting global capital

Collective bargaining has long been recognized as an essential tool for workers to use their collective strength to negotiate agreements with employers on their wages and working conditions, to regulate the employment relationship at national, sectoral or company level. These agreements work because they are enforceable.

ILO Convention 98 makes access to collective bargaining a right for all workers and protection of this right is a major priority of the global union movement. But this right does not extend to the global level. Despite clear evidence of centralized control over MNC employment policies in many countries, the primary tool used by unions to temper corporate power, through demands for a fair share for workers, cannot be used to deal with MNC global operations.

For many years now, global unions have been establishing relationships with MNCs at a global level, most effectively through the signing of Global Framework Agreements (GFAs). While the companies that IndustriALL works with are perfectly able to deal with enforceable collective agreements at national level in the countries where they operate, they are much more reluctant to enter into such agreements for their global operations. One notable exception is the Bangladesh Accord.

In the direct aftermath of the Rana Plaza collapse, companies were prepared to sign a legally-binding agreement. Once a number of companies had done so, this made it easier for more companies to accept the same terms. Eventually more than 220 MNCs signed up to being legally bound to their commitments. Clearly, resistance to legally binding global agreements can be overcome once they become more widespread and familiar to companies, in the same way that national agreements already are. As one company representative said during the negotiations for the 2018 Bangladesh Accord, ‘If we make an agreement, we intend to stick to it, so why would we worry about it being legally binding?’

The original 2013 Accord contained a dispute settling process with various stages for resolving issues between the global unions and the corporate signatories. It provided that if a resolution could not be reached, the parties may appeal to a final and binding arbitration process, under a process governed by the UNICTRAL Rules on International Commercial Arbitration. This was the first time that this system had been used to govern labour disputes, and the experience of taking cases under it has provided IndustriALL and UNI with some valuable lessons on its more general suitability as a mechanism for arbitrating global labour agreements.

Lessons learned

In July and October 2016, the two global unions filed arbitration cases against two Accord brand signatory companies with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague. The cases were subsequently joined and heard together. Both hinged on whether the global brands involved met the Accord requirements to require their suppliers to remediate facilities within the mandatory deadlines imposed by the Accord, and to negotiate commercial terms to make it financially feasible for their suppliers to cover the costs of remediation.

Since this was the first such arbitration, initial arguments centred on admissibility (whether the cases could be heard), choice of law (which country’s law should govern the dispute) and procedural matters such as document production. This turned out to be a very heavy and costly process. As no agreement could be reached on a single arbitrator to hear the cases, under the UNCITRAL Rules they went before a panel of three arbitrators, one chosen by the plaintiffs (the global unions), one chosen by the brands and a chair appointed by the PCA. The global unions were required to deposit €150,000 with the PCA to cover the fees and travel of the three arbitrators and the administrative costs of the PCA. For an enforcement mechanism for global agreements to be accessible to trade unions, a better system will need to be found for keeping the costs down.

In order to take these cases forward to arbitration, IndustriALL and UNI needed to find legal representation. This would have been prohibitively expensive and the cases could not have gone ahead without the pro bono representation provided by Covington & Burling. A huge amount of work went into preparing the cases and gathering witness and expert testimonies.

A first procedural hearing took place in March 2017 and established a timetable for the cases to be considered. It envisaged document exchange in October and November 2017, submissions in December 2017 and February 2018 and an oral hearing in March 2018, nearly two years after the original filing.

In September 2017 the Tribunal issued its order that the cases were admissible and could proceed.

In the end, both cases were settled before the oral hearing, which would no doubt have entailed significant additional costs for both the global unions and the companies.

Each of the two brands agreed to pay significant amounts towards the renovation of the garment factories for which they were responsible under the Accord. Confidentiality provisions prevent the brands being identified and the terms of one of the settlements being made public. In the other settlement, the company agreed to pay $2 million towards remediation of more than 150 factories and to contribute a further US$300,000 into IndustriALL and UNI’s joint Supply Chain Worker Support Fund, established to support the work of the global unions to improve pay and conditions for workers in global supply chains. Speaking after the settlements, IndustriALL General Secretary, Valter Sanches, said ‘This settlement shows that the Bangladesh Accord works. It is proof that legally-binding mechanisms can hold multinational companies to account.’

These outcomes show how important it is for global unions to be able to make binding agreements with MNCs that they can subsequently enforce. But the experience also demonstrated the limitations of using existing mechanisms of international arbitration which are neither designed nor suitable for the settlement of industrial disputes.

Where to from here?

IndustriALL, together with UNI, is committed to pursuing genuine global industrial relations through binding agreements with multinational corporations with effective enforcement mechanisms.

While a growing number of agreements are being signed between MNCs and global unions, no mechanism yet exists through which disputes under the agreements can be resolved through conciliation and binding arbitration at global level. Some of these agreements refer to the ILO as a potential arbitrator in disputes, but the ILO has made clear that it is not able to take on this role. If the trade union movement is to achieve its ambition of signing binding global agreements, we must have access to a mechanism for enforcement that avoids the drawbacks of the UNCITRAL Rules process.

This mechanism needs to move much faster: workers cannot wait nearly two years for their case to be heard. It needs to be cheaper: paying for three arbitrators to hear the case is unnecessary. It should not require excessive amounts of documents to be produced: in the Accord cases, huge numbers of documents were exchanged which then needed to be read and analysed. Confidentiality provisions should not prevent global unions from being able to report to their executive bodies and the affected workers on the case. Finally, the mechanism must be directly accessible to trade unions. Global unions must be able to enforce their own agreements without having to depend on their ability to secure pro bono legal representation.

In other words, an enforcement mechanism for global labour agreements needs to be accessible, efficient and effective. For example, there could be one arbitrator chosen from a pre-selected panel; timely conciliation could be encouraged and facilitated to avoid arbitration; document submissions prior to hearing need not be required; timelines could be set that expedite finalisation of the case.

IndustriALL and UNI’s experience with enforcing the binding Bangladesh Accord has underlined the urgent need for the development of a mechanism that is specifically designed for the speedy and affordable resolution of labour disputes at global level, and that can be used to enforce not only the Accord, but any other binding agreements between global unions and MNCs.

The two global unions are using their joint Supply Chain Worker Support Fund to support the development of an international labour conciliation and arbitration mechanism for settling disputes between global unions and MNCs. This will involve analysing existing models of conciliation and arbitration currently used by unions, as well as other models of international arbitration, and extensive consultation with expert persons and organizations in the field.

The new 2018 Accord demonstrates that it is possible to sign binding global agreements with MNCs. The 192 companies which have so far signed the new Accord were not motivated into signing by a recent headline-grabbing disaster as they were after Rana Plaza. They also had five years of experience of a binding agreement. Beyond the two cases that ended up in arbitration, UNI and IndustriALL had taken action to enforce the Accord towards many more brands. Most tellingly, the two companies that found themselves in the arbitration process both signed the new Accord, complete with its legally binding provisions. Work is underway to streamline the Accord dispute settlement and arbitration mechanism to make it cheaper, quicker and more accessible. These changes could point the way towards a potential process that could be used in other agreements.

IndustriALL will continue to push for a binding UN treaty and an ILO Convention on supply chains, while at the same time working towards the development of a specific mechanism to enforce global labour agreements, designed to meet the needs of the global union movement in the pursuit of justice for supply chain workers.

IndustriALL unions negotiate global dispute resolution mechanism with H&M

The GFA with H&M is unique in that has a National Monitoring Committees made up of representatives from unions and H&M to implement workers’ rights under the terms of the GFA. The NMCs are active in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar and Turkey. 

The NMCs met for a second global meeting in the Cambodian capital Phnom Penh from 10 to 12 December, and were also joined by participants from India and Pakistan, who will form NMCs in 2019.

The participants debated a set of dispute resolution recommendations and reached an agreement on a framework. Under this framework, they agreed many procedures to solve disputes over working conditions, occupational safety and health, trade union representation, prevention of conflicts, taking labour actions and negotiating in good faith starting from shop-floor-levelto factory level. 

“The recommendation of case handling procedure will be a useful tool for IndustriALL affiliates and H&M suppliers when dealing with disputes in a structured and result oriented process. It can be a constructive tool to solve issues as close as possible to where they occur and at the same time avoid unnecessary labour actions from the social partners. A successful implementation can, as well, be a step forward to promote the development of industrial relations and social dialogue. the challenge will be to make the recommendation well-known and accepted throughout the whole supply chain,” said Mats Svensson,International Secretary of Swedish affiliate IF Metall, which is a signatory to the GFA with H&M.

Christina Hajagos-Clausen, IndustriALL director for the textile and garment industry, and Lars-Åke Bergqvist, Global CSR Coordinator at H&M,welcomed participants to the meeting. Christina said:

“In 2018, the NMCs continued to work to establish well-functioning industrial relations along the H&M supply chain. Many disputes were resolved through agreed upon negotiated remedies between factory unions and H&M suppliers, and awareness building on the GFA continued globally. Clearly, the work of the NMCs is vital to ensure that the GFA is respected. We must continue this trend.”  

Ms. Maria Sargren, Swedish Ambassador to Cambodia addressed the National Monitoring Committees (NMC) on the opening day of their meeting adding that the NMCs are a positive way forward in the development of industrial relations along H&M’s supply chain. She further underscored the importance of ACT (which H&M is a member signatory) and industry-wide collective bargaining as a good example of social dialogue between the workers and employers. 

Athit Kong, sector co-chair of IndustriALL’s TGSL sector and a member of the Cambodian NMC, added:

“I have high hopes that this global collaboration will continue to turn into practice. So, now the NMC has started to exercise their role and responsibilities, especially with the new recommendations for dispute settlement. I do hope that we keep making progress which promotes better living conditions for workers and business growth for all. And, last but not least, trust and sharing are the foundations of finding solutions.”

Bangladesh government attempts to paralyze Accord and strip its independence

In its submission to the Court regarding the Accord’s appeal against an order that it cease operating in Bangladesh from 30 November, the government has stated that the Accord should only be allowed to continue operations in Bangladesh under a set of highly obstructive constraints which strip the globally-respected safety initiative of its ability to operate independently of government and employer control. The constraints include that this will be the last extension allowed to the Accord maintaining its office in Dhaka.

The government’s conditions, if accepted by the Supreme Court, would destroy the independence of the Accord by subjecting all Accord decisions to the approval of a government committee. Another condition prohibits Accord inspectors from identifying any new safety violations, effectively requiring them to ignore deadly hazards found during their inspections, such as faulty alarm systems, blocked fire exits, and cracks in structural columns. Yet another prevents the Accord from taking any action against factory owners who threaten or fire workers for raising safety complaints.

At a hearing on 6 December where the Accord’s response to the constraints on its operations was tabled, the government requested another hearing on 10 December to allow time to consider the response. Today, the Government has requested, and been granted, a further delay until 17 December. With no clear direction, the future of the Accord continues to hang in the balance.

The global union signatories to the Accord – IndustriALL and UNI – and the four witness signatories – Clean Clothes Campaign, International Labor Rights Forum, Maquila Solidarity Network, and Worker Rights Consortium – call on Bangladesh’s trading partners and global apparel brands to press the government of Bangladesh to refrain from imposing these shocking impediments to the Accord continuing its life-saving work.

The Accord has been instrumental in radically improving the safety of garment factories in Bangladesh since it was established in the wake of the Rana Plaza factory collapse in 2013 that claimed over a thousand lives. The Accord has identified more than 100,000 fire, building, and electrical hazards and the large majority have been rectified. Over two million workers have participated in safety training in over 1,000 factories.

Despite this progress, dangers remain and workers’ lives are still at risk. Over 50% of the factories still lack adequate fire alarm and detection systems and 40 per cent are still completing structural renovations.

The Government’s conditions would make it impossible for the Accord to identify and report on any new safety hazards, to support factories towards completing life-saving renovations, to respond to worker complaints about safety hazards, and to continue vital health and safety training for workers and managers. A permission to operate under such conditions is no permission at all.

If the government of Bangladesh does not urgently lift these constraints, in order to preserve the standard and independence of its operations, the Accord will have no other choice than to continue to operate from its Amsterdam headquarters, re-locating management of its inspection, remediation and training programs and engaging subcontractors for implementation. This will necessarily have implications for its capacity to support factories in remediation, leading to brands having to terminate their business relationships with more factories that are still not safe.

The Accord has long committed to handing over its functions to a suitable national regulatory body, however the government’s Remediation and Coordination Cell (RCC) is still in an early stage of development. There is broad consensus among stakeholders, including the International Labour Organization (ILO), Bangladesh’s major trading partners, and brands, that the RCC is not yet ready to perform the inspection tasks of the Accord and has no proven record of enforcing safety in the factories under its purview.

The Accord is committed to building up the capacity of the RCC and to cooperation with the government and its inspection bodies to ensure a smooth transition. It has already submitted a plan of how this can be done, but the government has so far failed to comment on it.

A genuine transition plan for factory inspections, safety trainings, and a worker complaint mechanism will need much more time and genuine engagement by the government. It will not be possible unless the Accord is able to continue its operations without restriction. The Accord is a private contract that will remain binding upon the signatory brands until 2021, or until the RCC is demonstrably ready.

The Bangladesh Accord is widely considered by brands, multi-stakeholder initiatives, trade unions, NGOs, investors, government representatives and politicians to be the only credible safeguard for factory safety in Bangladesh. International pressure mounted in the run-up to the court hearing for the Accord to be allowed to continue to operate in Bangladesh until such time as factory safety can be guaranteed by the government.

Bangladesh’s trading partners, including the EU, Canada and the US, want their brands to be able to rely on the Accord to ensure their supplier factories are safe, a position exemplified by a European Parliament resolution. The three funders of Bangladesh’s RCC – the Netherlands, Canada and the UK – should therefore urge the government of Bangladesh to lift any restrictions, report publicly on the progress of the inspection body, and stress the need for political will in Bangladesh to create a genuine transition plan that must also include safety trainings and a mechanism for worker complaints on safety hazards. If the government of Bangladesh does not allow the Accord to operate effectively and independently, trading partners will have to consider the impact this decision will have on their trade policy with Bangladesh overall. Unless the BGMEA and the Bangladesh government swiftly negotiate with the Accord a feasible way for its full operations to continue, the future prospects for favorable tariff treatment for Bangladeshi exports will be much dimmer.

If it wishes to avoid irreparable damage to Bangladesh’s reputation as an apparel exporter, rather than preventing the Accord from continuing its life-saving work, the government should focus on the development of a competent national regulatory body that can assure the safety of Bangladesh’s garment factories into the future.

Global framework agreements are strategic tools

IndustriALL Global Union currently has 49 global agreements, which are negotiated at a global level between trade unions and multinational companies, and serve to protect the interests of workers across a company’s supply chain. 

The GFA working group, which includes representatives from all continents and sectors, reviews IndustriALL’s proposed and current GFAs, and provides comments and recommendations on GFAs to the Secretariat and Executive.  

Claudia Rahman, co-chair of the working group, called for more pro-active implementation of the agreements which must have a local agenda. “A GFA should prevent violations of workers’ rights and not simply be a remedy to violations that have already happened,” she said. She called for GFAs “to be integrated into the operational activities of a multinational company and into the management system.”

IndustriALL’s general secretary, Valter Sanches, said company management and unions require training on GFA implementation, while unions must monitor GFAs.

Participants at the meeting recounted how the agreements are being used to assist organizing, with case studies on how to use GFAs in organizing in textile and garment sector in Bangladesh and Turkey as well as using the union power in auto companies in organizing campaigns in supply sectors. An example from Tunisia revealed how the GFA has helped to stop union busting at one particular factory and to improve the union structures, with the aid of German affiliate IG Metall.

The meeting held deep discussions on the strategic use of GFAs in reaching trade union objectives through buzz-groups. Involvement of host unions, organizing in supply chains through GFAs and roles of different actors in GFA processes were elaborated and some conclusions were drawn up.

On the second day of the meeting, officials from the International Labour Organization (ILO), gave presentations about the role of GFAs in social dialogue, which led to extensive debate.  It was obvious to all that without freedom of association, a key right, it is impossible to implement GFAs or basic ILO principles.

It was suggested GFAs could make use of strong language on due diligence, outlined in the ILO’s guidelines for multinational enterprises, and present it to companies as language that has already been agreed at the tripartite level. The working group was also called to think about how to better use ILO tools and mechanisms, smartly and politically, to get strong agreements.

The meeting also heard case studies of how GFAs are being used to improve workers’ rights, enable organizing and resolve disputes with examples including chemical company, Solvay, energy giant Total, global fashion brand H&M and German conglomerate, Siemens. 

“IndustriALL Global Union has made significant progress in its policies and practices with global framework agreements and the working group has played an important role,” said Kemal Özkan, IndustriALL’s assistant general secretary, who is in charge of the working group. 

“However, we still have long way to go in our global mission to advance the rights and working conditions of our members on the ground, particularly at multinational companies. IndustriALL will continue to be a champion in the development of global labour relations, particularly through global framework agreements.”

Improved cooperation means better conditions for 600,000 workers

A year ago the European Commission decided to support a 2-year industriAll Europe project in 2018-19 under the title “Strengthening the capacity of trade unions in South-East Europe to improve wages and working conditions in the garment and footwear sectors”. The project targets six countries in the region: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania and Serbia.

A mapping carried out as the first phase of the project earlier this year revealed that there are more than 600,000 garment and footwear workers in South-East Europe. Their unionisation levels are as low as 3-4%, there are few collective agreements, and workers’ salaries in some countries are around 200 euros per month, or only half of those for garment workers in China.

industriAll Europe and IndustriALL Global Union agreed to work closely together to address the problems and focus on achieving four important results in the years to come:

Growth of union membership through strategic organizing, training and capacity-building
Increase collective agreements (CBAs) at company level
Rebuild industry-level collective bargaining
Develop paths towards living wages through brand cooperation, minimum wage increases and CBAs

Interaction with the key garment and footwear brands sourcing from South-East Europe is important for facilitating progress on the central goals of the project. Therefore, IndustriALL Global Union and industriAll Europe met on 28 September in Istanbul with three leading brands that have signed global framework agreements (GFA) with IndustriALL Global Union, namely Inditex, H&M and ASOS.

The three brands confirmed their support for freedom of association and collective bargaining in South-East Europe, seeing it as part of their strategic cooperation with the global and European unions. Western European trade unions have committed to helping on contacts with other leading brands in Italy, Germany and other countries.

“We are looking for win-win solutions for the workers with good conditions, companies with sustainable business, and governments in the form of economic growth and more equal societies. South-East European countries need to create domestic demand through the payment of living wages”, said Luc Triangle, general secretary of industriAll Europe.

“We see this project and cooperation with the key brands as part of our global broader strategy to profoundly change the garment and footwear industry and make it sustainable worldwide. Global framework agreements and the ACT living wage initiative are essential tools in this process”, said Kemal Özkan, assistant general secretary of IndustriALL Global Union.

IndustriALL Global Union has signed GFAs with six garment and footwear brands, Inditex, H&M, ASOS, Tchibo, Esprit and Mizuno, covering millions of workers throughout the supply chains.  ACT is an expanding, ground-breaking agreement to achieve living wages for workers through industry-wide collective bargaining linked to the brands’ purchasing practices and freedom of association.

The project will now continue with six national seminars, with focus on capacity building, putting together action plans in each country, and interaction with other stakeholders such as employer associations and governments.

Implementing global agreements with brands in the garment sector

The meeting, from 26 to 29 September 2018, was joined by IndustriALL Global Union affiliates in Bulgaria, who are currently using GFAs in their recruitment campaigns, as well as global brands that have signed GFAs with IndustriALL (Inditex, H&M, ASOS, Tchibo and Esprit). 

Participants evaluated the role of GFAs in developing strong industrial relations in the global supply chain. The sessions focused on the role of the GFAs in organizing, collective bargaining, and the elimination of gender-based violence in the workplace. 

Participants discussed how GFAs are becoming a stronger tool for improving labour relations in the supply chain, and there was a call for IndustriALL to negotiate agreements with more global brands.

Several organizing tactics were identified as important for enabling freedom of association.  These include setting up protocols that guarantee neutrality and access to the workplace between the supplier and the national union; brand support for social dialogue between unions and their suppliers; and joint brand, union and supplier training on freedom of association for both workers and management. 

Kemal Özkan, IndustriALL assistant general secretary, said:

“Global framework agreements are a very important tool for building union strength across supply chains. But they are not a magic wand. They are only effective when they are implemented and monitored. That is why it is so important for us to share our experiences.”

Unions from production countries also exchanged experiences on the best ways to monitor GFAs, and there was strong support for the continued development of national monitoring committees. IndustriALL affiliates said they played an integral part in ensuring that national unions can ensure GFAs are implemented in the global brands’ supplier factories.

There was a technical session on the OECD’s Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains in the Garment and Footwear Sector,followed by a discussion on how to use the recommendations on worker involvement in the due diligence process with global framework agreements. 

“The recommendations set forth in the guidance, such as jointly developing programmes that involve on-site assessments, development of corrective action plans, verification, validation and monitoring of impacts and design of operational-level grievance mechanisms are key components to stronger GFA implementation,” said Christina Hajagos-Clausen, IndustriALL’s textile and garment director.

The meeting is part of the IndustriALL programme on GFA implementation, which is supported by DGB Bildungswerk. 

IndustriALL and Esprit commit to working together to improve workers’ rights

The agreement covers 525,000 workers at more than 1,100 suppliers making textile, footwear and apparel products for Esprit in 27 countries.

In the agreement with IndustriALL, Esprit recognizes the crucial role that freedom of association and collective bargaining play in empowering workers and developing well-functioning industrial relations. Through the agreement, IndustriALL and Esprit will collaborate to set up mechanisms to make it easier for local trade unions to negotiate detailed collective agreements with all suppliers to Esprit at the national or local level.

Under the agreement, IndustriALL and Esprit will collaborate to ensure that fundamental International Labour Organization (ILO) standards are applied by their contractors, subcontractors and principle suppliers, including the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work as well as many other ILO Conventions and internationally recognized standards.

In conjunction with IndustriALL, Esprit commits to:

IndustriALL’s general secretary, Valter Sanches, says:

This is a big step forward for Esprit and for half a million people working in their global supply chain. Esprit recognizes that the best way to empower garment and textile workers is to create an environment where they are free to join a trade union and bargain collectively, while being protected by the highest international labour standards. We look forward to working with our affiliates and using this global agreement to help improve workers’ rights.

Esprit is excited about this collaboration. The Esprit Supplier  Code of Conduct has always included freedom of association. This agreement will give us new tools to uphold this commitment in a meaningful way,

says Lary Brown, VP Head of Global Social Compliance and Sustainability at Esprit.

Esprit has already partnered with IndustriALL as a member of the ACT (Action, Collaboration, Transformation) Initiative, which aims to implement a living wage in garment manufacturing regions by enabling industry collective bargaining in major producing countries.

It is also on the Steering Committee of the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, set up by IndustriALL and UNI Global Union to improve garment factory conditions after the Rana Plaza factory disaster in 2013.

Esprit, which is headquartered in Germany and Hong Kong sells clothing, footwear, accessories and homeware in 41 countries. All its products are made by suppliers with the majority of production carried out in Bangladesh and China. There is also sizeable production in Turkey, Vietnam, India and Pakistan.