Let’s not forget Rana Plaza: Protect worker rights abroad
This past Monday marked the 10th anniversary of the Rana Plaza factory collapse in Dhaka, Bangladesh, which claimed the lives of more than 1,130 people. Some 2,500 others were injured in the disaster.
At least 29 global brands were found to be associated with the garment factories in the Rana Plaza building, including Benetton (Italy), the Children’s Place (U.S.), Mango (Spain) and Canada’s Joe Fresh.
Following the tragedy, a global movement emerged to improve standards in the fashion industry and respect the human rights of garment workers in Bangladesh and elsewhere.
As a result of these efforts, two accords were introduced; the Bangladesh Accord (which addressed building and fire safety in Bangladesh), and its successor, the International Accord for Health and Safety.
The latter is the gold standard in the fashion industry. It’s a legally binding agreement between 190 garment brands and global trade unions with a mission to ensure safe workplaces in the textile and garment industry.
“The agreement promotes worker safety through independent inspections, remediation and training programs and recognizes the rights of workers to organize, refuse unsafe work and raise health and safety concerns,” according to its website.
In a perfect world, all companies would have signed the accord. But the reality is that the fashion industry is extremely competitive, and international brands that seek the cheapest suppliers are reluctant to sign a legally binding agreement that could result in higher production costs.
Since its introduction, only 200 brands and organizations worldwide have signed it. Disappointingly, Canadian companies are completely absent from the list of signatories save one — Loblaw — whose Joe Fresh clothing tags were found amidst the Rana Plaza rubble.
Loblaw changed course, committed to better standards and even became an advocate for the accord.
Some Canadian companies, such as Canadian Tire and Hudson Bay, which participated in a temporary five-year alliance to improve worker safety in Bangladesh following the disaster, chose not to sign the international accord.
Others, including Gildan, Lululemon and MEC, have signed the Transparency Pledge — an initiative to disclose detailed information about factories, number of employees, types of products, etc., as a mechanism for better monitoring employment standards in the garment and footwear industry.
While important, those actions are not enough for Caren Weisbart, senior program officer at the Maquila Solidarity Network — a labour and women’s rights organization that advocates for improved wages and working conditions for employees.
“Rana Plaza is a perfect example of why voluntary mechanisms don’t work. There were a ton of them beforehand, but this huge collapse still happened, and people died,” she said.
“A voluntary mechanism is safer for companies,” she said. “It’s really window-dressing. Firms say, ‘Look, we’re committed to building and fire safety, but we’re not willing to sign anything that’s legally binding.’ ”
Minimal participation in the international accord means countries like Canada need to pass laws that guarantee that companies under their jurisdictions protect the workers in their global supply chains.
These so-called due diligence laws were already introduced in a few countries, including France, Norway and Germany.
Canada hasn’t introduced such a law yet.
One proposal under consideration is Bill S-211, yet some experts believe it’s insufficient since it is only a reporting bill. A stronger proposal, Bill C-262, sponsored by the NDP’s Peter Julian, doesn’t seem to have enough support in Parliament.
Weisbart highlights that Bill C-262 “won’t force companies to join the international accord. But by not joining it, companies will demonstrate that even though they’ve known about the lack of safety of buildings in the factories that they source from, and even though they’ve known that the accord specifically addresses that, they chose not to join this life-saving program. In such a case, a complaint could be filed against them.”
An example of how such a complaint would look can be found in Germany, where a due diligence law — the German Supply Chain Act — came into force in January 2023.
Earlier this week, garment workers in the Bangladeshi factories of three companies — Tom Tailor, Amazon and Ikea — filed the first complaint with the German Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control, arguing that the factories have not been adequately monitored, endangering workplace safety for employees.
The German law carries potential suctions including fines against enterprises who fail to comply with their legal obligations.
This is exactly the path that Canada should pursue.
Ten years after Rana Plaza, Canadian companies continue to violate the rights of workers in their global supply chains. It’s disappointing (if not embarrassing) that only one Canadian company has signed the International Accord for Health and Safety.
Beyond the fact that signing the accord is the right thing to do ethically, adopting it also has a business case.
It has been shown time and again that when employees are treated better, earn fair wages and feel safe in the workplace, companies do better.
And if businesses don’t get it, a new due diligence law like the one introduced in Germany will help them make the right choice.
A voluntary mechanism is safer for companies. It’s really windowdressing. Firms say, ‘Look, we’re committed to building and fire safety, but we’re not willing to sign anything that’s legally binding.’
CAREN WEISBART MAQUILA SOLIDARITY NETWORK