Remedies and Acc ccountability of the Private Sect ctor Klara - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Remedies and Acc ccountability

• f the Private Sect

ctor

Klara Skrivankova – Independent Business and Human Rights Specialist Brussels, May 29 2019

Bu Business and huma man ri rights regulation

• n

tim timelin eline

California Transparency in Supply Chains Act

EU Conflict Minerals Regulations

2 1 7 2 1

UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

2011 2014

• EU Non-

financial reporting directive

• US Trade

Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act

2015

• UK Modern

Slavery Act

• EU Council

Resolution

• n

Business and Human Rights

2 1 6

France Corporate Duty of Vigilance Law

2 1 8 2 1 9 2020+

• Australia

Modern Slavery Act

• Initiatives in:

Luxembourg, Norway, Sweden, Finland

• UK CSO

campaign

• EU Shadow

Action Plan

• Swiss

referendu m on Corporate Responsibi lity Initiative

• EU

legislation

• n

mandatory human rights due diligence

Finnis Finnish h Multi ulti-St Stakehol

• lder Ca

r Camp mpaign – in inclu ludes es maj ajor Fin Finnis ish busin ines esses es

Ot Other Companies s Supporting g Regu gulation

“Companies will support EU law on human rights due diligence, but want assurances that it will not expose them to increased risk of lawsuits” Virginie Mahin, global social sustainability & human rights lead, Mondelez International

Supported Australia Modern Slavery Act Supported Dutch Child Labour Law

2019: ME 2019: MEPs f for R

• r Respon
• nsible Bu

Business Con Conduct ct

Comp Company liability for

• r treatme

ment of

• f work
• rkers:

“the “the chi hicken en catcher hers’ case” e”

Galdikas & Ors v DJ Houghton Catching Services Ltd & Ors [2016] EWHC 1376 (QB) (10 June 2016) The judge found that:

• Workers were not paid according to

minimum wage requirements for agricultural workers.

• Houghton Defendants paid the men for

the number of chickens caught on farms, rather than paying for time worked at minimum rates including night rates and for time spent travelling.

• The Houghton Defendants have charged

prohibited fees, unlawfully withheld wages, and failed to ensure the workers had adequate facilities to wash, rest, eat and drink.

Comp Company liability for

• r treatme

ment of

• f work
• rkers:

“the “the chi hicken en catcher hers’ case” e”

• Antuzis & ors v DJ Houghton 2019 EWHC 843

QB 8.4.19

• Mr Justice Lane said:

“I am in no doubt whatsoever, having heard the evidence, that both of them [Darrell Houghton and Jackie Judge] “actually realised” that what they were doing involved causing [DJ Houghton Catching Services Ltd] to breach its contractual obligations towards the claimants. What they did was the means to an end. There is no iota of credible evidence that either defendants possessed an honest belief that what they were doing would not involve such a breach.”

Who Who is s respo sponsi nsibl ble for remedi dies? s?

Where the business has caused or contributed to violation – active engagement in remediation is expected (including in collaboration with others) Where the business is linked to violations, it may be expected to take a role.

Re Remediation for workers

Internal – within the company:

• What system of formal worker dialogue is available?
• Grievance mechanisms: Who can a worker report grievances to? How

are they logged and where do they go?

• Whistle-blowing – incentives, systems – how robust?
• Assessing your leverage to take action – identifying who to

collaborate and engage with

• Assessing impact on action for workers – how to ensure they are

protected from further victimisation, punishment and retaliation

• Compensation to workers (e.g. for fees paid, loss of wages, pain and

suffering)

9

Re Remediation for workers

External:

• Identifying worker representatives – trade union or others to

represent workers’ interests

• When to alert local authorities or police? How to ensure you do

not compromise their investigation and ability to prosecute ? What if they can’t or won’t respond? What’s the risk to the worker if authorities are alerted?

• Identifying NGOs, other worker or migrant representative bodies

able to provide support for victims, protection and services

10

Ty Types of remedies

MATERIAL NON-MATERIAL

F i n a n c i a l c

• m

p e n s a t i

• n

Reimburseme nt of lost earnings An apology P r

• v

i s i

• n
• f

t r e a t m e n t , c

• u

n s e l l i n g

PREVENTION

P r e v e n t i

• n
• f

f u t u r e

• c

c u r r e n c e ( i m p r

• v

e m e n t

• f

s y s t e m s ) R e

• i

n s t a t e m e n t

• f

w

• r

k e r / p r

• v

i s i

• n
• f

a l t e r n a t i v e e m p l

• y

m e n t

Gr Grie ievan ance ce mech chan anis ism cr crit iteria ia

• 1. Legitimate

Mechanism is fair (applies to all categories of workers) and trustworthy (workers have confidence in using it)

• 2. Accessible

It is known to all those who it is intended for (ensure that barriers to access are removed – e.g. ensure language assistance for migrant workers)

• 3. Predictable

It is clear what the process is, what the possible outcomes are and how long it will take

• 4. Equitable

All parties have reasonable access to necessary information, advice and expertise

• 5. Transparent

Keep complainants informed about progress and provide sufficient information about the mechanism performance to build confidence in the process

• 6. Rights compatible

Ensure that remedies and outcomes are compatible with international human rights law

• 8. Dialogue and engagement

Engage with the groups that the mechanism is intended for.

Ty Types of grievance mechanisms include:

• Mechanism where workers lodge grievances and these are addressed

through defined procedures;

• Complaints through committees constituted between workers and

management or through a trade union

• Complaint boxes; hotlines; apps

Examples of a grievance process: 7 principles approach

Grievance receive and register

Acknowledge Assess Investigate Remediation Appeal

Resolve successfully Follow-up and close

• ut

Expe Expectations ns regardi ding ng gr grievanc nce pr procedur dures

• Partners expect suppliers to put in place grievance procedures accessible for all workers,

report on the numbers and types of complaints and outcomes

• Good practice: partners working with suppliers to build capacity for handling worker

complaints and develop grievance procedures focused on the rights of workers M&S Global Sourcing principles:

• Workplace grievances:

Suppliers must provide a grievance mechanism for workers (and their organisations, where they exist) to raise workplace concerns. This grievance mechanism must involve an appropriate level of management and address concerns promptly, using an understandable and transparent process that provides timely feedback to those concerned, without any

• retribution. The mechanism must also allow for anonymous complaints to be raised and
• addressed. The existence and scope of this mechanism must be clearly communicated to

all workers and their representatives, and all workers must have equal access.” ACESS Facility – grievance mechanism database:

Br Brand-led led grie ievan ance e mec echan anis ism

TH THANK K YOU OU

klara.skrivankova@goal8.co.uk