Walmart, Gap Seek Separate Safety Standards for Bangladesh Factories

• by Carey L. Biron (washington)
• Friday, May 31, 2013
• Inter Press Service

The move comes after these companies, most prominently including Walmart and Gap, refused to sign on to a fire and safety standards agreement, announced weeks ago, that has received wide backing among European companies. Yet labour advocates are disparaging the new talks, suggesting the results will likely not be binding and thus will not be able to ensure worker safety.3

"Walmart is … undermining the constructive efforts of other companies," Jyrki Raina, general-secretary for IndustriALL Global Union, an umbrella of unions with 50 million worldwide members that has led the European agreement process, said Friday. "The kind of voluntary initiative being put forward by Walmart and Gap has failed in the past and will again fail to protect Bangladeshi garment workers."

The new discussions, announced Thursday, are being sponsored by the BipartisanPolicyCenter, a Washington think tank, and being co-chaired by two respected former U.S. senators, George Mitchell and Olympia Snowe. The negotiations also include several U.S. and Canadian trade associations.

"Over the next several weeks, we look forward to building on efforts … and seeking input from key stakeholders to forge an effective response," Jason Grumet, president of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC), said Thursday.

Currently, the process is aiming to come up with a final agreement on new standards for Bangladeshi contractor factories by July. (BPC did not respond to a request for comment for this story.)

"We are hopeful that … these discussions will result in a plan for long-lasting change for the garment industry in Bangladesh," Bill Chandler, vice-president of global corporate affairs for Gap, Inc. told IPS. "We believe the American alliance can be a powerful path forward to achieve lasting change in Bangladesh, and will build upon the work that is already underway."

A spokesperson for Target also confirmed the company's involvement in the BPC-facilitated talks process.

Contacted by IPS, a Walmart spokesperson emphasised that the company has already taken "a number of actions that meet or exceed other factory safety proposals". But he also noted Walmart's belief that "there is a need to partner with other stakeholders to improve the standards for workers across the industry".

Nonbinding "not good enough"

This interest in entering into the new negotiations appears to be motivated particularly by public pressure following the companies' refusal to sign on to the European Union accord, which now has more than 40 corporate backers, including three U.S. companies.

That agreement would include financing to upgrade factories as well as independent inspections. In addition to concerns over potential costs and the prospect of court litigation, a key sticking point for U.S. companies over the E.U. proposal has been that the agreement would be legally binding.

According to documents on Gap's corporate website, for instance, in mid-May the company was "ready to sign on today with a modification to a single area – how disputes are resolved … With this single change, this global, historic agreement can move forward with a group of all retailers, not just those based in Europe."

Yet it is because of this stance – reportedly repeated at a Gap shareholder meeting on May 21 – that observers are now sceptical that a company-led negotiations process will be able to result in strong, and legally enforceable, agreement.

"Forty retailers from all over the world … have agreed to a binding comprehensive safety plan for Bangladesh," the AFL-CIO, one of the largest labour unions in the United States, said Friday, noting its "deep concern" about the new BPC-led talks.

"No amount of bipartisan window dressing can change the fact that Walmart and the Gap have refused to take this important step. This is a matter of life or death. Quite simply, nonbinding is just not good enough."

Such concerns are heightened by the fact that, currently, no worker-rights organisation is included in the talks.

"This is the latest, and probably most sophisticated, in a series of industry public relations gambits designed to deflect attention from the real issue: the refusal of these companies to make a binding commitment to clean up their factories in Bangladesh," Scott Nova, executive director of the Worker Rights Consortium, an advocacy group, told IPS in an e-mail.

"This shows the pressure these corporations are under and their recognition that the failed inspection schemes they have been touting no longer have any public credibility. Unfortunately, their goal has not changed: they are still looking for political cover so they can preserve the very lucrative status quo."

Corporate-led process

Concerns over corporate-led international labour and safety programmes have received boosts from U.S. lawmakers in recent days, as well. Last week, Representative Sander Levin warned that the oversight process has "been left up to the retailers, suppliers and government all these years, and that hasn't worked."

On May 15, Levin and two dozen members of Congress wrote to Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, urging that her government put "the highest priority on aggressively enacting and enforcing comprehensive reforms … including the right to organize and form unions". The lawmakers also noted, "it is critical that all key stakeholders take action".

Reports in recent days have suggested that the U.S. State and Labour Departments are currently arguing over how hard to push the Bangladeshi government on these issues. Unions and some advocacy groups are pressuring the U.S. to revoke certain bilateral trade concessions given to Bangladesh, though critics say doing so would give up important leverage for change.

For now, Washington, seemingly led by the embassy in Dhaka, has chosen not to back the E.U. accord, although the U.S. State department says it is urging Bangladeshi officials to institute a suite of labour reforms.

"We need a lot more from the U.S. government – why the embassy has decided not to endorse the E.U. standards is beyond me," Charles Kernaghan, executive director of the Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights, a watchdog group, told IPS.

"Of course, we have to remember that even the E.U. accord hasn't put any emphasis on workers' right to organise. It's only workers themselves that can win their rights, and they can do so only once they have the right to organise and bargain collectively. The U.S. government needs to do far more on two issues: binding agreements on safety codes and the right to organise."

© Inter Press Service (2013) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Where next?

Advertisement